Unemployment falls to 8.3%

[pinqy]

Series Id: LNS11300000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Labor Force Participation Rate
Labor force status: Civilian labor force participation rate
Type of data: Percent or rate
Age: 16 years and over

Really?

Yes. I said LEVEL. And you show Ratio. There's a difference

You are in denial. Sad.

There's not a difference between level and ratio? Interesting. Now go back and pull the chart for Labor Force Level and post that graph. You won't. (though I did make one mistake...in April 2010 the LF did go up higher than it is now.

No, it's not going up as much as change in population, especially since Census just added 1.8 million to the population for January, most of whom are over 55 and under 24 so that 1.2 million were added to Not in the Labor Force. But Labor Force went up as well.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

2.5 million jobs lost so the BLS looks and says ""Well, we think 1.2 million have just decided to give up looking for work so we won't count half of them, just to make things more accurate."

Huh? 1.2M have not given up looking for work.

The figures they released are a fraud. Government is lying to make Obama look good.

That's because the main stream media overall supports Obama, so they simply throw the 8.3% unemployment rate without much "detail" as to why the recent drop. Those that don't do the research are simply "gullible" enough to accept such a figure without much thought (like just throwing up a simple graph without able to provide much else behind it). However if they went beyong simply accepting things at face value and do a little further digging, they might LEARN something about the unemployment rate figures and the REALITY of this economy.



Figures like:
34.2% of people between the age of 16 and 19 are actually still IN the workforce earning a living. Many have simply given up looking with only a small few choosing to persue an added educational degree instead

71.7% of those between 20 and 24 are currently employed

For Black teens (16-19), unemployment was 42.1% (an increase from 39.6% in November).
For Black female teens, unemployment stood at 34.6% (a decrease from 36.8% in November).
For Black male teens, unemployment was 48.3% (an increase from 42.7% in November)

Then there's the baby boomer generation that have chosen to retire all together over trying to look for work.

All these individuals listed above that are no longer working (or quit looking for work) are no longer IN the unemployment system, so "naturally" there would be a drop in unemployment, it doesn't take that much intelligence to connect the dots and put it all together.



Then there's these facts on the so called economic recovery:

There's the duration of those unemployed 27 weeks and over (seasonly adjusted)
Jan 2011 43.9%
Dec 2011 42.5%
Jan 2012 42.9%

Underemployment rate (those that are earning less than they have previously, settling for part time over full time employment)

Jan 2 - 19.0%
Dec 2 - 18.20%
Dec 28 - 18.20%
Jan 2 - 18.20%
Feb 2 - 18.70%

So the left can gloat all they want over these "maipulated", misleading, and vague unemployment figures. Perhaps they are simply unable to handle all the above information being thrown at them all at once?


SOURCES:
Table A-12. Unemployed persons by duration of unemployment
http://ycharts.com/indicators/underemployment_rate
http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/blackworkers/monthly/bwreport_2012-01-06_43.pdf
Jobless rate has fallen because of dropouts - Washington Times

 

[NYcarbineer]

It' at its highest level since feb 2009.

Until the numbers get revised...

And they always do...downward. Media refuses to report it.

The November and December jobs numbers were revised upward.

"The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for November was
revised from +100,000 to +157,000, and the change for December was
revised from +200,000 to +203,000."

Employment Situation Summary

So, no, they do NOT always get revised downward.

 

[Neotrotsky]

People are in needs of jobs, yes.

People are doing better than in the last two to three years, yes.

Maybe/maybe not.....

Not that I think Obama has much to do with it either way....I just get sick of seeing Chris come all over his keyboard everytime the unemployment numbers drop a tenth of a percentage point (because it means government might keep getting bigger and he will be selling more houses to government lackeys who will be using our tax dollars to pay for them).

What people really need is HOPE. And that comes from a strong leader. That was what Reagan provided...backbone (he wasn't all that super conservative).

Obama is spineless and he instills little in the way of confidence in people. Sadly neither do any of the GOP potentials.

Lot of truth to that. The far rw also wets itself every time the rate goes up. I mean The T starts hyperventilating!

Whoever is elected needs to lead strongly.

And you hyperventilate anytime something or someone speaks well in Republican favor
so I guess that makes you even


Speaking of

your choice Romney says about the recent job numbers:
“This president has not helped the process; he’s hurt it,”

The economy “has taken a lot longer than it should have to come back, in part because of the policies of this administration,”
Romney said. “For that, the president deserves the blame that he’ll receive in this campaign.”

Sounds just like the T
Funny how that works


Do you agree with your candidate. Romney?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Maybe/maybe not.....

Not that I think Obama has much to do with it either way....I just get sick of seeing Chris come all over his keyboard everytime the unemployment numbers drop a tenth of a percentage point (because it means government might keep getting bigger and he will be selling more houses to government lackeys who will be using our tax dollars to pay for them).

What people really need is HOPE. And that comes from a strong leader. That was what Reagan provided...backbone (he wasn't all that super conservative).

Obama is spineless and he instills little in the way of confidence in people. Sadly neither do any of the GOP potentials.

Lot of truth to that. The far rw also wets itself every time the rate goes up. I mean The T starts hyperventilating!

Whoever is elected needs to lead strongly.

And you hyperventilate anytime something or someone speaks well in Republican favor
so I guess that makes you even Speaking of
your choice Romney says about the recent job numbers: “This president has not helped the process; he’s hurt it,” The economy “has taken a lot longer than it should have to come back, in part because of the policies of this administration,” Romney said. “For that, the president deserves the blame that he’ll receive in this campaign.” Sounds just like the T Funny how that works Do you agree with your candidate. Romney?

Read in full what I wrote above, sparky. I agreed that BHO has not led well. I also believe much of the problem is from a far right wing set of GOP in Congress (to compliment a far group of lefties) that are about power, not the American people.

Which describes you perfectly: you don't give a darn about the American people, you want power only. Romney, on the other hand, will have to step up his leadership.

 

[Neotrotsky]

So you don't agree with Romney

 

[Full-Auto]

So you don't agree with Romney

Maybe you could help me out net?

Should I cast my vote to BIG GOVERNMENT

Or to the BIG GOVERNMENT that saves us from BIG GOVERNMENT.

Its all so confusing

 

[pinqy]

I like how you'll deny there are actually more people in need of a job pinqy. How dare we rip the mask off huh?

Most of these folks need two jobs and they still will have a lower standard of living.

More people than when? What time frame do you mean? Than last month? Employment went up and undmployment went down
The adjustments only strongly affected the not in the labor force.

I certainly haven't said we've fully recovered.

 

[pinqy]

Series Id: LNS11300000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Labor Force Participation Rate
Labor force status: Civilian labor force participation rate
Type of data: Percent or rate
Age: 16 years and over

Really?

Yes. I said LEVEL. And you show Ratio. There's a difference

How about not playing games at all and post net job numbers................ Not surveys or guestimates. Hard employment numbers.

OK. What sources would you accept? Who do you even think has "hard numbers"?

 

[Full-Auto]

Yes. I said LEVEL. And you show Ratio. There's a difference

How about not playing games at all and post net job numbers................ Not surveys or guestimates. Hard employment numbers.

OK. What sources would you accept? Who do you even think has "hard numbers"?

The dept of labor in the end has payroll numbers. One good indicator is watching ADP numbers.

But I am talking net number of jobs. The dept Of labor has them, it just cant get them out in a monthly fashion.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Neo confesses to lying because he knows I am voting for Romney.

Is Neo voting for Romney is the ?

 

[Toro]

pinqy --> professional economist and statistician

everyone arguing with pinqy --> partisan ideologues who probably think "standard deviation" is what Cruella1200 does in her spare time.



Outstanding.

 

[Full-Auto]

Neo confesses to lying because he knows I am voting for Romney.

Is Neo voting for Romney is the ?

As a Romney supporter, how much debt do you expect him to add to his term if he should be elected?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Neo confesses to lying because he knows I am voting for Romney.

Is Neo voting for Romney is the ?

As a Romney supporter, how much debt do you expect him to add to his term if he should be elected?

I expect him to add less than a Newt presidency. How much do you think Newt would add?

 

[pinqy]

How about not playing games at all and post net job numbers................ Not surveys or guestimates. Hard employment numbers.

OK. What sources would you accept? Who do you even think has "hard numbers"?

The dept of labor in the end has payroll numbers.

Nope. Full count is only done in March and not ready for publication until jan.

One good indicator is watching ADP numbers.

which is only their clients, therefore only a guesstimate for the market as a whole.

But I am talking net number of jobs. The dept Of labor has them, it just cant get them out in a monthly fashion.

Again, a full count is only done for March, no other month.

In short, you were asking for data you knew doesn't exist.

 

[Flopper]

Point is...the workforce has shrunk.

It' at its highest level since feb 2009.

Series Id: LNS11300000
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Labor Force Participation Rate
Labor force status: Civilian labor force participation rate
Type of data: Percent or rate
Age: 16 years and over

Really?

To put things in perspective, look at the long term history of the labor participation rate. The blue line is male. The red line is female. The black is male and female. 50 years ago the index stood at about 59%. It rose rather steadily, probably due to the number of women entering the workplace and peaked at about 68 around 2000 and has fallen to about 63.

I believe the assumption that the fall in workforce participation over the last 12 years is due entirely to discouraged workers is erroneous for several reason. Young people are entering the workforce at an older age because more of them are going to college. Secondly, the number of people retiring each year has been increasing, particular since the baby boomers have reached retirement age. During the latter part of the 20th century tens of millions of women entered the workplace. Between 1960 and 2000, women's participation had doubled. This trend peaked in late 1990's and has undoubtedly had it's effect.

Labor force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[KissMy]

To put things in perspective, look at the long term history of the labor participation rate. The blue line is male. The red line is female. The black is male and female. 50 years ago the index stood at about 59%. It rose rather steadily, probably due to the number of women entering the workplace and peaked at about 68 around 2000 and has fallen to about 63.

I believe the assumption that the fall in workforce participation over the last 12 years is due entirely to discouraged workers is erroneous for several reason. Young people are entering the workforce at an older age because more of them are going to college. Secondly, the number of people retiring each year has been increasing, particular since the baby boomers have reached retirement age. During the latter part of the 20th century tens of millions of women entered the workplace. Between 1960 and 2000, women's participation had doubled. This trend peaked in late 1990's and has undoubtedly had it's effect.

Labor force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

SPIN - SPIN - SPIN

 

[Vast LWC]

To put things in perspective, look at the long term history of the labor participation rate. The blue line is male. The red line is female. The black is male and female. 50 years ago the index stood at about 59%. It rose rather steadily, probably due to the number of women entering the workplace and peaked at about 68 around 2000 and has fallen to about 63.

I believe the assumption that the fall in workforce participation over the last 12 years is due entirely to discouraged workers is erroneous for several reason. Young people are entering the workforce at an older age because more of them are going to college. Secondly, the number of people retiring each year has been increasing, particular since the baby boomers have reached retirement age. During the latter part of the 20th century tens of millions of women entered the workplace. Between 1960 and 2000, women's participation had doubled. This trend peaked in late 1990's and has undoubtedly had it's effect.

Labor force - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Exactly.

And did anyone stop to think that maybe people have started to realize that having a parent at home to take care of the kids was always a good thing, and this whole 2 parent working thing has been causing some issues?

I know my wife and I have been discussing one of us stopping working just for this very reason. We're waiting until we get ourselves a nice cushion before taking such a drastic step, but in the end we're thinking it would be worth it, to be able to raise our own kids, instead of sending them off to daycare every day.

 

[paulitician]

Bush 4% Unemployment/Record High Stock Markets.

 

[NYcarbineer]

How about not playing games at all and post net job numbers................ Not surveys or guestimates. Hard employment numbers.

OK. What sources would you accept? Who do you even think has "hard numbers"?

The dept of labor in the end has payroll numbers. One good indicator is watching ADP numbers.

But I am talking net number of jobs. The dept Of labor has them, it just cant get them out in a monthly fashion.

The BLS are net numbers, that's why you see job losses in some sectors every month.