The “Labor Participation Rate” is What Counts

[longknife]

So Obama and his minions trumpet the economic upturn and great jobs numbers. But, it's all the usual Liberal smoke and mirrors. What really matters is this:


For all the economic indicators that are looking up, the fact that the labor participation rate is at its lowest since the Carter administration is incredibly discouraging. And with more and more baby boomers hitting retirement age, the participation rate will continue hitting record lows for at least a decade.


And wages aren't getting any better either! Read the full story @ EDITORIAL Labor participation rate tells true economic story Las Vegas Review-Journal

 

[Moonglow]

If you look at the last GOP man in da house you will see numbers that twas close...

 

[longknife]

If you look at the last GOP man in da house you will see numbers that twas close...

Am I gonna have to put you on the Ignore list?

 

[pinqy]

So, if it's the LFPR that's important, you must believe our labor market is better than anytime before 1979

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

So Obama and his minions trumpet the economic upturn and great jobs numbers. But, it's all the usual Liberal smoke and mirrors. What really matters is this:


For all the economic indicators that are looking up, the fact that the labor participation rate is at its lowest since the Carter administration is incredibly discouraging. And with more and more baby boomers hitting retirement age, the participation rate will continue hitting record lows for at least a decade.


And wages aren't getting any better either! Read the full story @ EDITORIAL Labor participation rate tells true economic story Las Vegas Review-Journal

With 10,000 folks retiring each day that's 10,000 new jobs a day without Obama lifting a finger and real unemployment is still 10.5%

That's why this is the worst recovery since FDR's Great Depression

 

[waltky]

School, Retirement and 'Safety Net' Explain 94,333,000 Not in Labor Force...

BLS Chief: School, Retirement and 'Safety Net' Explain 94,333,000 Not in Labor Force
August 11, 2016 | Students and retirees are "an important part of what's going on" with the labor force participation rate, the head of the Labor Department's Bureau of Labor Statistics on Thursday.

But Erica Groshen also said the nation's taxpayer-funded social safety net is another factor that explains the 94 million Americans who are not in the labor force. "In older, tougher times, we didn't have as much of a safety net, so some of the people who are not participating are people who we, as a society, have decided we are going to support in some other way," she told CSPAN. The safety net includes the SNAP (food stamp) and Social Security disability programs, both of which have ballooned in the Obama years. As CNSNews.com previously reported, there were 17.3 million people on food stamps when President George W. Bush took office in 2001. That number grew to 28.2 million in 2008, a 63 percent increase over eight years.

During the recession that took hold in Obama's first term, the number of people on food stamps went from an average of 33,490,00 in fiscal 2009 to an average 47,636,000 in fiscal 2013. It has drifted down since then, to an estimated 43,478,196 in May 2016, the latest month for which numbers are available. At the same time, the Social Security disability rolls have swelled, from around 9,296,490 when Obama took office to 10,664,290 in July 2016. (The number includes spouses and children of disabled workers.)

In July 2016, 94,333,000 Americans were not in the labor force. The labor force participation rate -- 62.8 percent in July -- measures the percentage of people in the civilian noninstitutionalized population, age 16 or older, who are either working or actively seeking work. July's 62.8 percent rate remains near the 39-year low of 62.4 percent. "So what are the people who are out of the labor force doing?" Groshen asked rhetorically on Thursday. "Many of them...are in school but not working," she said. She called it "an important part of what's going on." "And we're seeing actually that fewer students are working than used to in previous years, so that's some part of the decline in participation, is that our young people are staying in school longer and less likely to work while they're...more focused on their school work. "The other trends that we have are...the baby boomers who are a huge demographic bulge, are now retiring, and as we reach retirement age....that means that a larger share of our population is going to be retired. So that's a very important part of the demographic story that underlies the decrease in labor force participation."

According to the U.S. Census Burean, around 75.4 million Baby Boomers were born between 1946 and 1964. They began turning 65, retirement age, five years ago in 2011, and the retirement pace is expected to accelerate in the years ahead.

BLS Chief: School, Retirement and 'Safety Net' Explain 94,333,000 Not in Labor Force

 

[Rshermr]

So Obama and his minions trumpet the economic upturn and great jobs numbers. But, it's all the usual Liberal smoke and mirrors. What really matters is this:


For all the economic indicators that are looking up, the fact that the labor participation rate is at its lowest since the Carter administration is incredibly discouraging. And with more and more baby boomers hitting retirement age, the participation rate will continue hitting record lows for at least a decade.


And wages aren't getting any better either! Read the full story @ EDITORIAL Labor participation rate tells true economic story Las Vegas Review-Journal

With 10,000 folks retiring each day that's 10,000 new jobs a day without Obama lifting a finger and real unemployment is still 10.5%

That's why this is the worst recovery since FDR's Great Depression What that is, me poor ignorant con troll, is 10,000 more that go into the non participating umbers. They are, me boy, happy and retired. Dipshit.
The recovery was done without republicans passing a single jobs bill. Obama got over 9 million new and saved jobs, while republicans got Zero. Zero to over 9 million is really bad on the republican side. Dipshit.

 

[Rshermr]

So Obama and his minions trumpet the economic upturn and great jobs numbers. But, it's all the usual Liberal smoke and mirrors. What really matters is this:


For all the economic indicators that are looking up, the fact that the labor participation rate is at its lowest since the Carter administration is incredibly discouraging. And with more and more baby boomers hitting retirement age, the participation rate will continue hitting record lows for at least a decade.


And wages aren't getting any better either! Read the full story @ EDITORIAL Labor participation rate tells true economic story Las Vegas Review-Journal

thanks again for proving you are irrelevant, me boy. Using the well known bat shit crazy opinion section of the RJ shows you do not care for impartial opinions. The fact is the labor participation rate tells you nothing other than a few people do not feel the need to work. Try looking at impartial sources some time, should you want to find truth. The labor participation rate has been between 58.1 and 67.3 over the past 65 years, and is currently at 62.8.
United States Labor Force Participation Rate | 1950-2016 | Data | Chart

The fact is, it has been predicted to do exactly as it has been doing as it becomes easier to retire and as the baby boomers reach the retirement age. And it is expected to continue for decades. But it has become the most lied about statistic relative to employment as the unemployment rate gets better and better. Con sources like CNS news have article after article misrepresenting the issues of the employment participation rate. And cons just believe it, as they are told to do.

 

[Rshermr]

And wages aren't getting any better either! Read the full story @ EDITORIAL Labor participation rate tells true economic story Las Vegas Review-Journal[/QUOTE] [/QUOTE]

With 10,000 folks retiring each day that's 10,000 new jobs a day without Obama lifting a finger and real unemployment is still 10.5%

That's why this is the worst recovery since FDR's Great Depression What that is, me poor ignorant con troll, is 10,000 more that go into the non participating umbers. They are, me boy, happy and retired. Dipshit.
The recovery was done without republicans passing a single jobs bill. Obama got over 9 million new and saved jobs, while republicans got Zero. Zero to over 9 million is really bad on the republican side. Dipshit.[

 

[Rshermr]

So Obama and his minions trumpet the economic upturn and great jobs numbers. But, it's all the usual Liberal smoke and mirrors. What really matters is this:


For all the economic indicators that are looking up, the fact that the labor participation rate is at its lowest since the Carter administration is incredibly discouraging. And with more and more baby boomers hitting retirement age, the participation rate will continue hitting record lows for at least a decade.


And wages aren't getting any better either! Read the full story @ EDITORIAL Labor participation rate tells true economic story Las Vegas Review-Journal

So, rather than a bat shit crazy con source, how about we look at a well respected impartial source that examined the issues in detail:
"CBO estimated that between the end of 2007 (a year before Obama took office) and the end of 2013, about half of the decline in participation rates could be pegged to long-term demographic trends, about a third to “temporary weakness in employment prospects and wages,” and about a sixth to “unusual aspects of the slow recovery.”

CBO, November 2014: Of the 3 percentage-point decline in participation between the end of 2007 and the end of 2013, CBO estimates, about 1½ percentage points was the result of long-term trends, about 1 percentage point arose from temporary weakness in employment prospects and wages, and about one-half of a percentage point was attributable to unusual aspects of the slow recovery.

Similar conclusions were reached by the Federal Reserve Board, which wrote in September 2014 that “much – but not all – of the decline in the labor force participation rate since 2007 is structural in nature.”

A report from Shigeru Fujita at the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia on Feb. 6, 2014, also sought to tease out the relative impact of various causes for the declining labor force participation rate. Fujita concluded that about 65 percent of the decline between 2000 and the final quarter of 2013 was due to retirement and an increase in disability.

Fujita, Feb. 6, 2014: The increase in nonparticipation due to retirement has occurred only after around 2010, while nonparticipation due to disability has been steadily increasing over the past 13 years. Similarly, nonparticipation due to schooling has been steadily increasing and has been another major contributor to the secular decline in the participation rate since 2000.

The number of those who did not look for a job (thus being out of the labor force) even though they wanted a job increased significantly between the fourth quarter of 2007 and the end of 2011. This group of “discouraged workers” explains roughly 30 percent of the total decline (around 2 percentage points) in the participation rate over the same period. Between the first quarter of 2012 and the fourth quarter of 2013, the participation rate of this group has been roughly flat.
However, Fujita concluded, “Almost all of the decline (80 percent) in the participation rate since the first quarter of 2012 is accounted for by the increase in nonparticipation due to retirement. This implies that the decline in the unemployment rate since 2012 is not due to more discouraged workers dropping out of the labor force.”
In a speech on Aug. 22, 2014, Federal Reserve Chair Janet Yellen concluded that “the labor market has improved significantly over the past year,” but said that metrics, including 19 labor market indicators,
suggest “that the decline in the unemployment rate over this period somewhat overstates the improvement in overall labor market conditions.”

Still, Priebus’ comment, tying the entirety of the drop in the labor force participation rate to “the Obama economy,” ignores some of the demographic and structural forces that have been driving the participation rate down for more than a decade, and that are expected to continue to drive the rate down for decades to come."
Declining Labor Participation Rates

 

[rightwinger]

My mother is 85 and is not in the labor force. Neither are 45 million Americans over the age of 65

This is why the Labor Participation Rate is useless in evaluating the employment rate

 

[ScienceRocks]

The labor participation rate started going down when Reagan took off in the early 1980s. The deregulations and unenforcing of our anti-trust laws have done a good job at killing our middle class and moving all wealth into the hands of the 1-2%.

Be very careful talking about it. Good luck starting a successful business and have it be successful when the big boys have all the cards.

 

[Rshermr]

The labor participation rate started going down when Reagan took off in the early 1980s. The deregulations and unenforcing of our anti-trust laws have done a good job at killing our middle class and moving all wealth into the hands of the 1-2%.

Be very careful talking about it. Good luck starting a successful business and have it be successful when the big boys have all the cards.

Thing is, if you are a con you follow what you are told to believe. The thing is, every single con source in the world will tell you that one of the two or three most important problems in the world is that there is too much regulation of business, and that it needs to be eliminated. There is not any impartial expert source that I have found that suggests that what they are saying is true.
But, corporations do not like regulation, and they pay republicans to get what they want. So, those republicans like being paid, and are pushing corporate desires. In the interim, the voting population of the world believes they need to regulate corporations and business in general for a number of very valid reasons. So, the battle goes on. Problem is the corporations have the money, in the form of millions of dollars, working to convince weak minded cons to support their desires.
Now, the rational mind suggests that it would be a good idea to consider this on an impartial way. What specific regulations are actually causing business a real problem, and doing no good. And those that are looking at it in such a way are continually coming to the conclusion that while there are a few questionable regulations, they do not in fact make a real difference in business as a whole. And that regulations are on balance are needed and good things. And that without them, it will be a dangerous world.
Personally, I do not want to trust my ability to breath clean air, drink clean water, eat safe foods, drive safe cars, and on and on, to corporate desires. Corporations by definition want to make their board of directors happy, and keep their huge benefits coming. we want safety, they want to be hugely rich and much more powerful. And cons support whatever those corporations which pay their politicians want. Proof and truth be damned.

 

[AntonToo]

The “Labor Participation Rate” is What Counts... when all the other counting points to recovered economy and conservatives are getting desperate as Obama's 8 years in office come to close and none of their economic predictions came true.

LFPR will continue to decline well into 2030s right on schedule due to aging population and more time spent in school, not economic cycle. It means bad economy today, no more than it's growth meant good economy in recessionary periods before 2000.

 

[waltky]

Uncle Ferd not inna labor force `cause he can't find a job to his liking...

Record 95,102,000 Americans Not in Labor Force; Number Grew 18% Since Obama Took Office in 2009
January 6, 2017 | Barack Obama's presidency began with a record number of Americans not in the labor force, and it's ending the same way.

The final jobs report of the Obama presidency, released Friday, shows that the number of Americans not in the labor force has increased by 14,573,000 (18.09 percent) since January 2009, when Obama took office, continuing a long-term trend that began well before Obama was sworn in. In December, according to the Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics, a record 95,102,000 Americans were not in the labor force, 47,000 more than in November; and the labor force participation rate was 62.7 percent, a tenth of a point higher than in November. The participation rate dropped to a 38-year low of 62.4 percent on Obama's watch, in September 2015. It was only 3-tenths of a point higher than that last month. People over age 16 who are no longer working or even looking for work, for whatever reason (retirement, school, personal preference, or gave up), are counted as not participating in the labor force.

When President Obama took office in January 2009, 80,529,000 Americans were not in the labor force, the highest number on record. That number rose steadily during his two terms, reaching a record 95,055,000 in November 2016, then setting another record (95,102,000) in December. BLS said the December unemployment rate increased a tenth of a point to 4.7 percent, well below the Obama-era high of 10 percent. Last month, a record 152,111,000 Americans were counted as employed, up 63,000 from November; and the number of unemployed stood at 7,529,000, an increase of 120,000 from the prior month. But people who stop looking for a job are no longer counted as unemployed.

In an interview with a Chicago reporter yesterday, Obama said he has done "an enormous amount" to create greater economic opportunity for Americans. "I took an economy that was about to go into a Great Depression, and we've now had a little over six years of straight economic job growth, an unemployment rate that's down below 5 percent, and incomes that have gone up and poverty that has gone down." Obama also conceded that "there are still folks out there who struggle and communities that are still depressed." He called it an "ongoing battle." "We have to continue to work to make sure that kids are getting the best education they can, that jobs are being located so that people in need can access them, and that's going to be something that I suspect we'll all be working on, and folks will still be working on after I'm gone."

During Obama’s two terms in office, the number of employed Americans reached its lowest point – 138,013,000 – in December 2009. Eight years later, in December 2017, 14,098,000 Americans have been added to the employment rolls. The government collects payroll taxes from Americans who work, and some of that money is spent on government programs that support people who do not work. So the more who work, the better for the economy. In December, the nation’s civilian noninstitutionalized population, consisting of all people age 16 or older who were not in the military or an institution, reached 254,742,000. Of those, 159,640,000 participated in the labor force by either holding a job or actively seeking one.

The 159,640,000 who participated in the labor force equaled 67.3 percent of the 254,742,000 civilian noninstitutionalized population. According to BLS, total nonfarm payroll employment rose by a lackluster 156,000 in December. Over the past 3 months, job gains have averaged 165,000 per month. Among the major worker groups, the unemployment rates for adult men (4.4 percent), adult women (4.3 percent), teenagers (14.7 percent), Whites (4.3 percent), Blacks (7.8 percent), Asians (2.6 percent), and Hispanics (5.9 percent) showed little change in December. The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks or more) was essentially unchanged at 1.8 million in December and accounted for 24.2 percent of the unemployed. In 2016, the number of long-term unemployed declined by 263,000.

Record 95,102,000 Americans Not in Labor Force; Number Grew 18% Since Obama Took Office in 2009

Uncle Ferd wants one o' dem cushy gubmint jobs ya can't get fired from...

Manufacturing Jobs Declined by 45,000 in 2016; Government Jobs Increased by 183,000--Now Outnumber Manufacturing by 9,948,000
January 6, 2017 | Jobs in manufacturing in the United States increased by 17,000 in December—the first post-election month—climbing from 12,258,000 in November to 12,275,000 in December, according to data released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Even so, over all of 2016, manufacturing jobs declined by 45,000--dropping from 12,320,000 in December 2015 to 12,275,000 in December 2016. At the same time, jobs in federal, state and local government increased not only from November to December, but over the course of the entire year. From November to December, government jobs climbed from from 22,211,000 to 22,223,000, an increase of 12,000. From December 2015 to December 2016, government jobs climbed from 22,040,000 to 22,223,000--an increase of 183,000.

Last December, government jobs in the United States outnumbered manufacturing jobs by 9,720,000. This December, government jobs outnumbered manufacturing jobs by 9,948,000. The BLS has published seasonally-adjusted month-by-month employment data for both government and manufacturing going back to January 1939. According to this data, manufacturing employees in the United States of America outnumbered government employees every month for more than half a century. Then, in August 1989, government employees slipped ahead of manufacturing employees for the first time—taking a slim lead of 17,989,000 to 17,964,000.

Since then, government has pulled dramatically ahead of manufacturing as an employer in the United States. The 22,223,000 who now work for federal, state or local government in this country, according to the BLS, is more than ever worked in manufacturing. Manufacturing employment peaked in June 1979 at 19,553,000. Since then, manufacturing employment has declined by 7,278,000—or 37.2 percent—to its current level of 12,275,000.

Manufacturing Jobs Declined by 45,000 in 2016; Government Jobs Increased by 183,000--Now Outnumber Manufacturing by 9,948,000

See also:

Real Unemployment 9.3%
January 6, 2017 | Although the national unemployment rate for December was 4.7%, the real or total unemplyment rate -- people who work part-time because of the economy and other marginally attached workers -- was 9.2%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). The last time it was as low as 9.2% was in April 2008, more than eight years ago.

As Gallup explains, "Widely reported unemployment metrics in the U.S. do not accurately represent the reality of joblessness in America. For example, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) does not count a person who desires work as unemployed if he or she is not working and has stopped looking for work over the past four weeks." "Similarly, the BLS does not count someone as unemployed if he or she is, for instance, an out-of-work engineer, construction worker or retail manager who performs a minimum of one hour of work a week and receives at least $20 in compensation," said Gallup.

That's where the Total Unemployment, or U-6, rate comes in. Although provided by the BLS in its monthly data, it is not often reported by the mainstream media. It is reported by Gallup every month. While the total unemployment rate in December was 9.2%, it was 9.3% in November and 9.5% in October. Between June 2008 and September 2015, the total unemployment rate in the United States was in double digits, reaching a high of 17.1% in October, November, December 2009 and in March and April 2010.

The total unemployment rate (U-6) as explained by the BLS refers to "total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of all civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers," 16 years old and over, seasonally adjusted.

Real Unemployment 9.3%

Related:

White Unemployment, 4.3% -- Black Unemployment, 7.8% -- Asian Unemployment, 2.6%
January 6, 2017 | Among Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians, Black workers had the highest unemployment rate in December, 7.8%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Asians had the lowest at 2.6%.

According to the U.S. Census Bureau, Whites comprise 77.1% of the population. Blacks make up 13.3%; Hispanics, 17.6%; and Asians, 5.6%.

Asian American students graduate from Cardiff Metropolitan University.​

Asians make up the smallest percentage of the population (not counting American Indians or Pacific Islanders) and yet have the lowest unemployment in the nation.

For Whites, 16 and older, the unemployment rate was 4.3%. For Hispanics, 16 and older, the unemployment rate was 5.9% in December.

White Unemployment, 4.3% -- Black Unemployment, 7.8% -- Asian Unemployment, 2.6%

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

for whatever reason (retirement, school, personal preference, or gave up), are counted as not participating in the labor force.

I don't get it. With an aging population, more wealth, more women working, more in school for longer, we should expect less participation-right? It seems to me U6 is the better measure and it is down to 9.2% which is in line with history.l

 

[Moonglow]

What with automation taking over many jobs, the rate will not recede...

 

[waltky]

Good point...

... how are those being replaced by automation...

... supposed to earn any money to live on?

 

[rightwinger]

So Obama and his minions trumpet the economic upturn and great jobs numbers. But, it's all the usual Liberal smoke and mirrors. What really matters is this:


For all the economic indicators that are looking up, the fact that the labor participation rate is at its lowest since the Carter administration is incredibly discouraging. And with more and more baby boomers hitting retirement age, the participation rate will continue hitting record lows for at least a decade.


And wages aren't getting any better either! Read the full story @ EDITORIAL Labor participation rate tells true economic story Las Vegas Review-Journal

The Labor Participation Rate is all I care about anymore

As a public service, I will report it every month under Trump

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Good point...

... how are those being replaced by automation...

... supposed to earn any money to live on?

Its like asking how did the 99% of the human race who were replaced by modern farm
equipment earn money to live on. Ans: they got different jobs.
supply equal demand thats why after 2500 years of new inventions replacing people unemployment is still only 5%. Now do you understand?