Unemployment in the U.S. in April 2010. Increased to 9,9%

[froggy]

Unemployment in the U.S. in April 2010. increased to 9,9% :: Ukrainian Globalist


The unemployment rate in the U.S. in April 2010 compared to the previous month increased by 0.2 percentage points - up 9.9% or 15.3 million people, announced today the Ministry of Labour of the country. Prior to that, for three months, the unemployment rate held at around 9.7%.

 

[Skull Pilot]

If we use liberal terminology the headline should read

Unemployment Skyrockets to 9.9%

 

[Mr Natural]

With more and more people and fewer and fewer jobs, we should be thankful unemployment is only 10%.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The obvious solution is to get rid of some people.

 

[JW Frogen]

I do not live in the US now, but I do not want to live in a world where the US is not the land of opportunity, because if she is not, there probably will be little free opportunity for the rest of us.

Come on now, you can pull out of this.

 

[JW Frogen]

Australia does quite well selling China a lot of expensive rocks, but I really would rather prefer any USS ship pulling into our harbors than a ship with a red flag and stars that do not shine, with a crew that has no idea of what it means to be a free human being.

The free world needs you America.

 

[pinqy]

Umm the April figures came out 2 weeks ago and were discussed then. Why bring it up now?

Employment and jobs also went up, and most of the new unemployed were people entering or re-entering the labor force.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Umm the April figures came out 2 weeks ago and were discussed then. Why bring it up now?

Employment and jobs also went up, and most of the new unemployed were people entering or re-entering the labor force.

So they weren't unemployed before the entered or reentered the work force?

 

[Neubarth]

With more and more people and fewer and fewer jobs, we should be thankful unemployment is only 10%.

Actual unemployment for people who want full time jobs but can not find them is running about 22 to 24%

All of those millions who have been dropped from the Labor Force numbers by Labor Secretary Hilda Solis are still out there wanting to work, but there is no work for them.

Hilda says they are not actually in the work force. I say they are. We are in a Depression, but we are close to getting out. When we start creating millions of jobs in the Service Sector, THEN we will be in RECOVERY. Not until then.

 

[JWBooth]

Isn't supposed to read:

April Unemployment Unexpectedly Rose to 9.9%?

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Unemployment in the U.S. in April 2010. increased to 9,9% :: Ukrainian Globalist


The unemployment rate in the U.S. in April 2010 compared to the previous month increased by 0.2 percentage points - up 9.9% or 15.3 million people, announced today the Ministry of Labour of the country. Prior to that, for three months, the unemployment rate held at around 9.7%.

Considering that hundreds of thousands of people's unemployment insurance expired and they came off the unemployed rolls as a result this is a scary number.

I remember the powers that be promising us that if we passed the stimulus unemployment would not exceed 8%.....can we trust their other promises?

 

[Neubarth]

The 9.9 number is outrageous government propaganda. It is what they want the sheeple to believe.

Go to Oakland, Los Angeles, Detroit, Chicago, Philadelphia or a major city of your choosing and ask the people about jobs. Millions and millions of people in these cities are out of work and have no hope of finding any. There are no ads in the newspapers that describe jobs that they are qualified for, so if they were asked, have you applied for a job in the past week, they would have to answer, NO.

If you answer no, Hilda Solis drops you from the ranks of the Labor Force because you are not actively "looking" for work. The sad thing is that they ARE looking for work. They just can not apply because they are not qualified for the few jobs that are listed.

I still have not run across one American who has been called by Hilda and asked if they were working or looking for work. You'd think that after thirty years of searching for one American who has been polled in the DOL survey I would have found one. Hummmmmm????

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

The 9.9 number is outrageous government propaganda. It is what they want the sheeple to believe.

Go to Oakland, Los Angeles, Detroit, Chicago, Philadelphia or a major city of your choosing and ask the people about jobs. Millions and millions of people in these cities are out of work and have no hope of finding any. There are no ads in the newspapers that describe jobs that they are qualified for, so if they were asked, have you applied for a job in the past week, they would have to answer, NO.

If you answer no, Hilda Solis drops you from the ranks of the Labor Force because you are not actively "looking" for work. The sad thing is that they ARE looking for work. They just can not apply because they are not qualified for the few jobs that are listed.

I still have not run across one American who has been called by Hilda and asked if they were working or looking for work. You'd think that after thirty years of searching for one American who has been polled in the DOL survey I would have found one. Hummmmmm????

Those are the people that have been unemployed so long they are no longer eligible for unemployment so are not counted in the numbers any longer.

They aren't working but also aren't collecting so they aren't counted.

 

[pinqy]

Those are the people that have been unemployed so long they are no longer eligible for unemployment so are not counted in the numbers any longer.

They aren't working but also aren't collecting so they aren't counted.

For the billionth time, the Unemployment level and rate have NOTHING to do with whether or not someone has ever been eligible for or collected Unemployment Insurance.

It's a household survey and people are asked if they worked (employed), if they looked for work (unemployed) or if they didn't work and didn't look for work (Not in the Labor Force). They are not asked about Unemployment benefits.

 

[pinqy]

Umm the April figures came out 2 weeks ago and were discussed then. Why bring it up now?

Employment and jobs also went up, and most of the new unemployed were people entering or re-entering the labor force.

So they weren't unemployed before the entered or reentered the work force?

Right. They weren't working (so not employed) and not looking for work (so not unemployed). Surely you don't consider retirees, stay at home spouses, full time students, etc to be unemployed just because they're not working? So there has to be a third category: People not working and not looking for work...Not in the Labor Force.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Those are the people that have been unemployed so long they are no longer eligible for unemployment so are not counted in the numbers any longer.

They aren't working but also aren't collecting so they aren't counted.

For the billionth time, the Unemployment level and rate have NOTHING to do with whether or not someone has ever been eligible for or collected Unemployment Insurance.

It's a household survey and people are asked if they worked (employed), if they looked for work (unemployed) or if they didn't work and didn't look for work (Not in the Labor Force). They are not asked about Unemployment benefits.

ITs a BLS statistic derived from the number of claims by employable citizens as a percentage of the total workforce.

When people's unemployment runs out and they no longer file claims they are no longer considered part of the labor force and unemployed, they are not counted in the numbers any longer.

Here read this How the Government Measures Unemployment

Early each month, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) of the U.S. Department of Labor announces the total number of employed and unemployed persons in the United States for the previous month, along with many characteristics of such persons. These figures, particularly the unemployment rate—which tells you the percent of the labor force that is unemployed—receive wide coverage in the media.

Some people think that to get these figures on unemployment, the Government uses the number of persons filing claims for unemployment insurance (UI) benefits under State or Federal Government programs. But some people are still jobless when their benefits run out, and many more are not eligible at all or delay or never apply for benefits. So, quite clearly, UI information cannot be used as a source for complete information on the number of unemployed.

Other people think that the Government counts every unemployed person each month. To do this, every home in the country would have to be contacted—just as in the population census every 10 years. This procedure would cost way too much and take far too long. Besides, people would soon grow tired of having a census taker come to their homes every month, year after year, to ask about job-related activities.

Because unemployment insurance records relate only to persons who have applied for such benefits, and since it is impractical to actually count every unemployed person each month, the Government conducts a monthly sample survey called the Current Population Survey (CPS) to measure the extent of unemployment in the country. The CPS has been conducted in the United States every month since 1940, when it began as a Work Projects Administration project. It has been expanded and modified several times since then. For instance, beginning in 1994, the CPS estimates reflect the results of a major redesign of the survey. (For more information on the CPS redesign, see Chapter 1, "Labor Force Data Derived from the Current Population Survey," in the BLS Handbook of Methods.)

 

[Zander]

Obama will get you a job!! Along with a chicken in every pot, 40 acres and a mule, to each according to his need and from each according to his ability. He's gonna fix everything by spreading the wealth around.

PS- If you disagree you're a racist!

 

[pinqy]

ITs a BLS statistic derived from the number of claims by employable citizens as a percentage of the total workforce.

Read it again....Claims have NOTHING TO DO WITH IT... There is ABSOLUTELY NOTHING in the link you gave that says it has anything to do with the number of claims. The list of questions is even given and UI benefits are not asked.

When people's unemployment runs out and they no longer file claims they are no longer considered part of the labor force and unemployed, they are not counted in the numbers any longer.[/uqote]Wrong, wrong, wrong. The ONLY criteria is whether or not someone is LOOKING for work.

Here read this How the Government Metasures Unemployment

Read it? I know the people who wrote it. You read it and show me where it says that the rate is based on people making UI claims and that they're "dropped" when they don't receive benefits. It's not in there. The part you quoted says the opposite of what you're claiming.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

They do it by a combination of how many people file for benefits and surveys of the general populace.

re-read it or just read the 4 paragraphs I quoted.

 

[pinqy]

They do it by a combination of how many people file for benefits and surveys of the general populace.

re-read it or just read the 4 paragraphs I quoted.

It does NOT say they measure how many people file for benefits and use that in combination. It says they DON"T use benefits because it doesn't give a full picture. From your link:

Unemployed persons are:

All persons who did not have a job at all during the survey reference week, made at least one specific active effort to find a job during the prior 4 weeks, and were available for work (unless temporarily ill).
All persons who were not working and were waiting to be called back to a job from which they had been laid off (they need not be looking for work to be classified as unemployed).

Note: Nothing about benefits. You stated that people who were no longer collecting benefits were not counted as unemployed, but it does NOT say or imply that at all in the article.

And from the Employment Situation Technical Note

People are classified as unemployed if they meet all of the following criteria: they had no employment during the reference week; they were available for work at that time; and they made specific efforts to find employment sometime during the 4-week period ending with the reference week. Persons laid off from a job and expecting recall need not be looking for work to be counted as unemployed. The unemployment data derived from the household survey in no way depend upon the eli
gibility for or receipt of unemployment insurance benefits.

Bolding mine. That explicitly contradicts your claim that people who are no longer collecting benefits aren't counted.

For State, County, and Metropolitan Unemployment data, UI claims are used as part of the calculations because the National sample size doesn't work at the state/county level, so the National sample is adjusted some based off of UI claims, but even then it doesn't matter if benefits have run out, UI claims aren't the basis, just an adjustment factor.