Highest Unemployment ever?

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Paul Bedard in the Washington Examiner: Wall Street Adviser: Actual Unemployment is 37.2%.

Wall Street adviser: Actual unemployment is 37.2%, 'misery index' worst in 40 years | WashingtonExaminer.com

"Don't believe the happy talk coming out of the White House, Federal Reserve and Treasury Department when it comes to the real unemployment rate and the true “Misery Index.” Because, according to an influential Wall Street advisor, the figures are a fraud.

In a memo to clients provided to Secrets, David John Marotta calculates the actual unemployment rate of those not working at a sky-high 37.2 percent, not the 6.7 percent advertised by the Fed, and the Misery Index at over 14, not the 8 claimed by the government."

 

[skookerasbil]

We are heading to a Jonestown!!! All the economic numbers peddled by the government and msm are bogus >>>


If ever a chart provided unequivocal proof the economic recovery storyline is a fraud, the one below is the smoking gun. November and December retail sales account for 20% to 40% of annual retail sales for most retailers. The number of visits to retail stores has plummeted by 50% since 2010. Please note this was during a supposed economic recovery. Also note consumer spending accounts for 70% of GDP. Also note credit card debt outstanding is 7% lower than its level in 2010 and 16% below its peak in 2008. Retailers like J.C. Penney, Best Buy, Sears, Radio Shack and Barnes & Noble continue to report appalling sales and profit results, along with listings of store closings. Even the heavyweights like Wal-Mart and Target continue to report negative comp store sales. How can the government and mainstream media be reporting an economic recovery when the industry that accounts for 70% of GDP is in free fall? The answer is that 99% of America has not had an economic recovery. Only Bernanke’s 1% owner class have benefited from his QE/ZIRP induced stock market levitation.




Eyeball popping stuff >>>

The Retail Death Rattle | Zero Hedge





People need to prepare.

 

[SteadyMercury]

He is counting homemakers and retired folks who have no intention or need to look for work as part of an unemployment rate. While that can be done, it is utterly useless in attempting to measure anything useful.

 

[SteadyMercury]

The number of visits to retail stores has plummeted by 50% since 2010.

Why try to draw conclusions about consumer spending from data on visits derived from tracking devices, when you can just look at consumer spending?

Is that the consumer spending "free fall" you are referring to?

 

[SteadyMercury]

I found the article on WSJ your foot traffic graph came from, the gist wasn't reduced consumer spending as your source implies, it was a shift towards more browsing and purchasing online affecting brick and mortar.

Stores Confront New World With Less Foot Traffic - WSJ.com

Online sales increased by more than double the rate of brick-and-mortar sales this holiday season. Shoppers don't seem to be using physical stores to browse as much, either. Instead, they seem to be figuring out what they want online then making targeted trips to pick it up from retailers that offer the best price. While shoppers visited an average five stores per mall trip in 2007, today they only visit three, ShopperTrak's data shows.

 

[skookerasbil]

What a stupid fuck........yep, the recovery is going awesome!!!



From today's YahooFinance >>>


A 'tsunami' of store closings seen hitting retail - Yahoo Finance

 

[SteadyMercury]

What a stupid fuck........yep, the recovery is going awesome!!!

I didn't say that, I believe the economic continues to be both weak and fragile.

So instead of attempting to support your last flawed post implying less retail food traffic meant consumer spending free fall, you are just putting words in my mouth. Weak.

From today's YahooFinance >>>

A 'tsunami' of store closings seen hitting retail - Yahoo Finance

Yep, another article about how the continuing shift to e-commerce will affect overbuilt brick-and-mortar store chains. Are you thinking this article instead supports your end-of-days stuff about consumer spending?

Again, just go to consumer spending instead of making an ass of yourself drawing stupid conclusions:

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Paul Bedard in the Washington Examiner: Wall Street Adviser: Actual Unemployment is 37.2%.

Wall Street adviser: Actual unemployment is 37.2%, 'misery index' worst in 40 years | WashingtonExaminer.com

"Don't believe the happy talk coming out of the White House, Federal Reserve and Treasury Department when it comes to the real unemployment rate and the true “Misery Index.” Because, according to an influential Wall Street advisor, the figures are a fraud.

In a memo to clients provided to Secrets, David John Marotta calculates the actual unemployment rate of those not working at a sky-high 37.2 percent, not the 6.7 percent advertised by the Fed, and the Misery Index at over 14, not the 8 claimed by the government."

Unemployment numbers are meaningless. A more useful metric would be figuring out how much all the employed people earn year by year. For example (simplified for math): 100M Americans are employed (rest being too young, retired, or unemployed,) earning a total of 1 trillion dollars. If next year, adjusted for differences in population, the dollar amount goes down, then we know the job market is taking a hit. The reason would likely be high-skill jobs being outsourced to cheaper labor markets. The totaly number employed might be roughly identical, but if it's only because of more low wage jobs as higher-wage ones go overseas, that'd be a much more useful measure of what's going on.

 

[skookerasbil]

Hey what can I say? Some see things being rosey and hunky dorey. Not me.

Conventional retail establishment sales account for about 4.5 trillion in annual sales.......e commerce 165 billion annually ( 2011 numbers ). To marginalize a severe collapse in foot traffic in retail stores is gay.

Pardon me if Im not on the recovery bandwagon!!!

 

[itfitzme]

Paul Bedard in the Washington Examiner: Wall Street Adviser: Actual Unemployment is 37.2%.

Wall Street adviser: Actual unemployment is 37.2%, 'misery index' worst in 40 years | WashingtonExaminer.com

"Don't believe the happy talk coming out of the White House, Federal Reserve and Treasury Department when it comes to the real unemployment rate and the true “Misery Index.” Because, according to an influential Wall Street advisor, the figures are a fraud.

In a memo to clients provided to Secrets, David John Marotta calculates the actual unemployment rate of those not working at a sky-high 37.2 percent, not the 6.7 percent advertised by the Fed, and the Misery Index at over 14, not the 8 claimed by the government."

All he's saying is that he can read peoples minds and knows better than they do regarding what they want. If someone is asked, "if you were offered a job now, would you take it?" and they say no, then that's the answer.

The six measures of unemployment, easily found here

Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization

U-6 is currently 13.1%SA, 14.4%NSA It is

Total unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force

There is also the employment rate which includes everyone not working, including children and the elderly.

Then there is the labor force participation rate. It is about 62.8% SA. It is readily available at

Link:Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

Then there is the employment to population ratio which is at about 58.6% SA. It can be found at

Link:Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

That numer is 100-[the labor force participation rate]. It has been available since, like forever. It has been falling since 2000. It is significant, no doubt. It began falling when China joined the global market as an exporter of goods.

It isn't any secret. And the statement "Actual Unemployment is 37.2%" is simply nonsense that assumes people are either stupid, lying, or confused when they respond to the current population surveys. Sure, perhaps Paul Bedard, David John Marotta & Megan Russell are because they seem to believe that they have some special knowledge about the people who answered the current population survey questions. And they haven't explained why both the employment to population ratio and the labor force participation rate began to decline in 2000.

 

[itfitzme]

Paul Bedard in the Washington Examiner: Wall Street Adviser: Actual Unemployment is 37.2%.

Wall Street adviser: Actual unemployment is 37.2%, 'misery index' worst in 40 years | WashingtonExaminer.com

"Don't believe the happy talk coming out of the White House, Federal Reserve and Treasury Department when it comes to the real unemployment rate and the true “Misery Index.” Because, according to an influential Wall Street advisor, the figures are a fraud.

In a memo to clients provided to Secrets, David John Marotta calculates the actual unemployment rate of those not working at a sky-high 37.2 percent, not the 6.7 percent advertised by the Fed, and the Misery Index at over 14, not the 8 claimed by the government."

Unemployment numbers are meaningless. A more useful metric would be figuring out how much all the employed people earn year by year. For example (simplified for math): 100M Americans are employed (rest being too young, retired, or unemployed,) earning a total of 1 trillion dollars. If next year, adjusted for differences in population, the dollar amount goes down, then we know the job market is taking a hit. The reason would likely be high-skill jobs being outsourced to cheaper labor markets. The totaly number employed might be roughly identical, but if it's only because of more low wage jobs as higher-wage ones go overseas, that'd be a much more useful measure of what's going on.

Better, the real dollar gdp divided by the employment level and the RDGP divided by population.

The RGDP per employee has returned to a steady upward trend. The RGDP per capita has returned to a steady upward trend.

The RGDP per employee level never really fell. The recession had very little impact on efficiency.

The RGDP per capita took a heavy impact. Average standard of living did fall and has just recently returned to it's prerecession level.

It would be nice if total number of households were counted to give RGDP per household.

Both sets of data are available at FRED Graph - FRED - St. Louis Fed

It will do the calculations for you.

Another good one is real disposable income per capita. It is up, exceeding 2009 levels.

RGDP per household is the one I would really like to see. Or, RDI per household.

 

[RandomVariable]

Since 1974? Seriously?

 

[SteadyMercury]

Hey what can I say? Some see things being rosey and hunky dorey. Not me.

Hah hah second time in the thread you've tried this... unable to support your argument so you're creating one nobody has expressed to mock. Nobody has claimed things are "rosey" and you know it.

Pardon me if Im not on the recovery bandwagon!!!

Since you invented it, you can do whatever you want with it.

 

[pinqy]

The funny part is that he doesn't actually include any unemployed in his 37.2%. All he did was take the percent of the population not in the labor force, but the labor force is employed plus unemployed. The actual number he was going for, percent of adult civilian non-institutional population not working is 41.4%

Of course the number is nonsense since he's including retirees, full time students, disabled, and others who can't or don't want to work

 

[Iceman]

Actually, the real unemployment rate , including short term discouraged workers, long term discouraged workers, and part time workers looking for full time work, on top of the commonly cited U3 unemployment measure, is around 23%. This is called the seasonally-adjusted SGS Alternate Unemployment Rate. It was used until 1994 under Clinton.

Alternate Unemployment Charts

 

[Politico]

Secret? This has never been a secret.

 

[itfitzme]

Actually, the real unemployment rate , including short term discouraged workers, long term discouraged workers, and part time workers looking for full time work, on top of the commonly cited U3 unemployment measure, is around 23%. This is called the seasonally-adjusted SGS Alternate Unemployment Rate. It was used until 1994 under Clinton.

Alternate Unemployment Charts

Shadow Stats is complete bullshit. It is nothing but a constant added to the published BLS numbers and without any reason what so ever. Shadow Stats does not do it's own population survey.

 

[itfitzme]

The funny part is that he doesn't actually include any unemployed in his 37.2%. All he did was take the percent of the population not in the labor force, but the labor force is employed plus unemployed. The actual number he was going for, percent of adult civilian non-institutional population not working is 41.4%

Of course the number is nonsense since he's including retirees, full time students, disabled, and others who can't or don't want to work

Yeah, that is the thing. He doesn't evern include the unemployeed.

Even going for "percent of adult civilian non-institutional population not working is 41.4%", it assumes that they ever would be working. At no time in the history of employment has everyone wanted a job.

 

[SteadyMercury]

Yup, it is absurd. Something you'd expect from an attention whore self-proclaimed expert who caters to the economiccollapseblog crowd.

 

[auditor0007]

This is all bullshit. We all know the real unemployment rate is 87%.