Unemployment Rate Falls To 8.1 Percent As People Give Up On Looking For Work

[GHook93]

July unemployment rate comes out usually the first week of August, so all we have is June. See below it's 8.2%! I actually think with the sky high new jobless claims for July, the Unemployment rate for July is going to tick up to 8.3%!

Note: For signs of recovery that Payroll addition number needed to be around 150K (not 80K) and for solid growth we need in the 200Ks!!!

United States Department of Labor
Unemployment Insurance Initial Claims: 386,000 as of July 14, 2012

Unemployment Rate: 8.2% in June 2012

Consumer Price Index: Unchanged in June 2012

Payroll Employment: +80,000(p) in June 2012

Average Hourly Earnings: +$0.06(p) in June 2012

Producer Price Index: +0.1%(p) in June 2012

No need to guess, Gallup has a daily UE tracking survey and it has never been as high as 8.3% for July so far. It has ranged between 7.9% and 8.1% the entire month. 8.3% is just wishful thinking on your part.

Gallup Daily: U.S. Employment

Wishfull thinking? Any person that wishes for higher unemployment rate is foolish!!!

We will see! Also gallup is off the market for June by 0.01%, so I willl judge by the DOL number!

 

[Rozman]

I think it's one thing if people are leaving the work force because it's their time.
It's the age that is the reason.
Quite another when people just get fed up in this suck ass Obama economy
and just pack it in.

 

[Widdekind]

in 2012 it's worse now than it was in 2008 and the recession was supposed to have ended in july 2009, but things still got worse even with the recession being over in 2009.

what "it" and "things" are you talking about ?

Since Pres. Obama took office in 2009:

• the employment level has increased by +5 million ("workers" in jobs)
• the unemployment level has decreased by -3 million ("lookers" wanting jobs)
• the "not in the labor force" level has increased by +9 million ("quitters" staying home)

Millions of Americans have "left the labor force" (quit looking), reducing the official "unemployment rate" (which only considers "workers" & "lookers", not "quitters"). More than a million of the "quitters" have been teenagers, whose jobs were eliminated amidst rising Federal minimum wages.

Prima facie, under Pres. Obama, the US economy stabilized, but has not fully recovered. More Americans have quit looking for work, than have found work. The quickest way of getting some money, to many Americans, would be to eliminate minimum wage barriers, outlawing low-pay jobs.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

in 2012 it's worse now than it was in 2008 and the recession was supposed to have ended in july 2009, but things still got worse even with the recession being over in 2009.

what "it" and "things" are you talking about ?

Since Pres. Obama took office in 2009:

• the employment level has increased by +5 million ("workers" in jobs)
• the unemployment level has decreased by -3 million ("lookers" wanting jobs)
• the "not in the labor force" level has increased by +9 million ("quitters" staying home)

Millions of Americans have "left the labor force" (quit looking), reducing the official "unemployment rate" (which only considers "workers" & "lookers", not "quitters"). More than a million of the "quitters" have been teenagers, whose jobs were eliminated amidst rising Federal minimum wages.

Prima facie, under Pres. Obama, the US economy stabilized, but has not fully recovered. More Americans have quit looking for work, than have found work. The quickest way of getting some money, to many Americans, would be to eliminate minimum wage barriers, outlawing low-pay jobs.

For starters we have a recorded number of people on food stamps, the rise happened when people lost their jobs.

Making 9 Million Jobless "Vanish": How The Government Manipulates Unemployment Statistics

Making 9 Million Jobless Vanish: How The Government Manipulates Unemployment Statistics

 

[bigrebnc1775]

 

[Rozman]

And the WH is pleased with this news.
They are proud that the President's policies are having an impact.

 

[Widdekind]

Most of the (estimated) "missing jobs", in 2012, vs. 2008, affect the youngest workers (teens & twenty-somethings). Especially so, as a rate, relative to the total number of people, in the "age cohort". Younger workers are more likely to work minimum wage jobs. Plausibly, "missing jobs" amongst younger workers results from raising the minimum wage, several times, during the 2008 recession. Raising the minimum wage (may have) actually eliminated millions of (low-pay) jobs, forcing teens & minorities out of work, from which they have since quit the workforce, for Public assistance. That Rev. Jesse Jackson can publicly advocate raising the minimum wage again, "straight to everybody's faces on the streets of Chicago", seems "outlandish". i guess workers do not (have not been advised to) think like employers, and so do not recognize, that raising minimum wages, eliminates their jobs, as much as they themselves would refuse to hire taxi-cabs drivers or repairmen, who suddenly started charging them more. (i didn't know, that US politicians could raise the US Federal minimum wage, on April Fools Day 1990, causing the 1990 recession; and then raise the minimum wage again, exactly one year later, making the recession worse.)

 

[Widdekind]

Making 9 Million Jobless "Vanish": How The Government Manipulates Unemployment Statistics

Making 9 Million Jobless Vanish: How The Government Manipulates Unemployment Statistics

government unemployment statistics are mis-leading; are not (necessarily) manipulated. In economics, prices of any product (good or service, widget or labor) reflect the ratio of demand to supply. Wages are the price of labor (a service). So they reflect the ratio of demand (number of workers businesses hire) to supply (number of people who applied). The official employment rate is exactly that ratio. The official un-employment rate, then, is 100% less the employment rate; and embodies the same information.

The supply of labor only includes those who applied and were hired (workers in jobs), and those who applied and were turned down (actively looking). Businesses are "oblivious" to "discouraged workers" who never knock on their doors. Thus, government (un-)employment statistics convey valuable labor-market information (demand for vs. supply of labor), affecting wages (price of labor). Those statistics are not (necessarily) manipulated; presumably, businesses would want to know about demand & supply, in the labor market, from which they would hire people. For example, if the E rate increased (UE rate decreased), then businesses would know, that available workers were in relatively short supply; and that they would have to pay more to hire new people.

Yet, without (full) explanation, the same statistics (may be) misleading, as your article describes in detail. 9 million Americans have quit looking for jobs. Sadly, they are non-relevant to the "active" labor market, affecting the wages, of everybody else. But, they do require welfare; and they are part of society; which ('ought-and-should') affects policies, politics, and elections. Official government UE statistics represent the "economic perspective"; they do not represent the full "social perspective", as your article describes in detail. Said statistics may be misleading, socially & politically, even without being misleading economically, or actually "manipulated", mathematically. (Some subjectivity is involved in official government definitions; evidently, businesses are content with those particular choices of definitions.)

 

[pinqy]

in 2012 it's worse now than it was in 2008 and the recession was supposed to have ended in july 2009, but things still got worse even with the recession being over in 2009.

what "it" and "things" are you talking about ?

Since Pres. Obama took office in 2009:

• the employment level has increased by +5 million ("workers" in jobs)
• the unemployment level has decreased by -3 million ("lookers" wanting jobs)
• the "not in the labor force" level has increased by +9 million ("quitters" staying home)

Not in the Labor Force is NOT "quitters." It is simply people neither working nor looking for work. That is NOT the same as "was looking and quit." Many of the Not in the Labor Force have never held a job. You're classifying 16 year old high school students who never worked as "quitters." Stay home moms (or dads) as quitters. Retirees, disabled, independently wealthy, etc. These are not "quitters."

Millions of Americans have "left the labor force" (quit looking), reducing the official "unemployment rate" (which only considers "workers" & "lookers", not "quitters").

Again, you're mischaracterizing leaving the labor force. Someone retires, they've left the labor force. Someone goes back to school full time, someone who gets married and decides they don't need a job, someone who quits to raise children, etc. These are not "quit looking."

From May to June, 3,712,000 people went from Employed to Not in the Labor Force. These would be retirements, going back to school, no longer want/need work, and/or people who just haven't started looking for work after losing/leaving their jobs.
2,660,000 went from Unemployed to Not in the Labor Force, but again, many of these decided they didn't really need a job, or had other responsibilities/issues where they couldn't or wouldn't work right now.
And 307,000 people ENTERED the Population as "Not in the Labor Force."

It's disingenuous to refer to Not in the Labor Force as "quitters" or imply that all or even most "quit looking" for work.

 

[GHook93]

So are you saying the over 55ers are going back to the work force and the younger workers are leaving the work force!?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

So are you saying the over 55ers are going back to the work force and the younger workers are leaving the work force!?

I'm not saying one way or the other, I just posted the chart with the link.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Making 9 Million Jobless "Vanish": How The Government Manipulates Unemployment Statistics

Making 9 Million Jobless Vanish: How The Government Manipulates Unemployment Statistics

government unemployment statistics are mis-leading; are not (necessarily) manipulated. In economics, prices of any product (good or service, widget or labor) reflect the ratio of demand to supply. Wages are the price of labor (a service). So they reflect the ratio of demand (number of workers businesses hire) to supply (number of people who applied). The official employment rate is exactly that ratio. The official un-employment rate, then, is 100% less the employment rate; and embodies the same information.

The supply of labor only includes those who applied and were hired (workers in jobs), and those who applied and were turned down (actively looking). Businesses are "oblivious" to "discouraged workers" who never knock on their doors. Thus, government (un-)employment statistics convey valuable labor-market information (demand for vs. supply of labor), affecting wages (price of labor). Those statistics are not (necessarily) manipulated; presumably, businesses would want to know about demand & supply, in the labor market, from which they would hire people. For example, if the E rate increased (UE rate decreased), then businesses would know, that available workers were in relatively short supply; and that they would have to pay more to hire new people.

Yet, without (full) explanation, the same statistics (may be) misleading, as your article describes in detail. 9 million Americans have quit looking for jobs. Sadly, they are non-relevant to the "active" labor market, affecting the wages, of everybody else. But, they do require welfare; and they are part of society; which ('ought-and-should') affects policies, politics, and elections. Official government UE statistics represent the "economic perspective"; they do not represent the full "social perspective", as your article describes in detail. Said statistics may be misleading, socially & politically, even without being misleading economically, or actually "manipulated", mathematically. (Some subjectivity is involved in official government definitions; evidently, businesses are content with those particular choices of definitions.)

Sorry misleading would also be manipulated. You have to remember the people who do these reports are the high paid experts and should not be making misleading mistakes.

 

[pinqy]

Sorry misleading would also be manipulated. You have to remember the people who do these reports are the high paid experts and should not be making misleading mistakes.

What mistakes are you claiming are being made? The surveys measure what they're supposed to measure. That people have a misconstrued idea of what they should be measuring has nothing to do with the people reporting the information. I've always found it odd that people who have never studied and don't understand the concepts or the methodology behind the data accuse the data of being misleading.

 

[edthecynic]

Making 9 Million Jobless "Vanish": How The Government Manipulates Unemployment Statistics

Making 9 Million Jobless Vanish: How The Government Manipulates Unemployment Statistics

government unemployment statistics are mis-leading; are not (necessarily) manipulated. In economics, prices of any product (good or service, widget or labor) reflect the ratio of demand to supply. Wages are the price of labor (a service). So they reflect the ratio of demand (number of workers businesses hire) to supply (number of people who applied). The official employment rate is exactly that ratio. The official un-employment rate, then, is 100% less the employment rate; and embodies the same information.

The supply of labor only includes those who applied and were hired (workers in jobs), and those who applied and were turned down (actively looking). Businesses are "oblivious" to "discouraged workers" who never knock on their doors. Thus, government (un-)employment statistics convey valuable labor-market information (demand for vs. supply of labor), affecting wages (price of labor). Those statistics are not (necessarily) manipulated; presumably, businesses would want to know about demand & supply, in the labor market, from which they would hire people. For example, if the E rate increased (UE rate decreased), then businesses would know, that available workers were in relatively short supply; and that they would have to pay more to hire new people.

Yet, without (full) explanation, the same statistics (may be) misleading, as your article describes in detail. 9 million Americans have quit looking for jobs. Sadly, they are non-relevant to the "active" labor market, affecting the wages, of everybody else. But, they do require welfare; and they are part of society; which ('ought-and-should') affects policies, politics, and elections. Official government UE statistics represent the "economic perspective"; they do not represent the full "social perspective", as your article describes in detail. Said statistics may be misleading, socially & politically, even without being misleading economically, or actually "manipulated", mathematically. (Some subjectivity is involved in official government definitions; evidently, businesses are content with those particular choices of definitions.)

Sorry misleading would also be manipulated. You have to remember the people who do these reports are the high paid experts and should not be making misleading mistakes.

There is nothing misleading or mistaken in the reports. Worthless lying CON$ervoFascist scum deliberately make up shit, like in the title of the OP "as people give up on looking for work" to deceive mindless morons like you. The BLS actually publishes the total of people who have "given up looking for work" And the lying scum you use as sources deliberately ignore those easily understandable reports, and just make up lies you want to hear. They know you will not bother to look at the reports on discouraged workers and when exposed to their existence, like now, you will simply ignor them so you can parrot the lies you like to believe.

There are less than 1 million people who have given up looking for work and the number is DOWN from last year. There were 982,000 in June 2011 and 821,000 in June 2012.

Table A-16. Persons not in the labor force and multiple jobholders by sex, not seasonally adjusted

 

[bigrebnc1775]

government unemployment statistics are mis-leading; are not (necessarily) manipulated. In economics, prices of any product (good or service, widget or labor) reflect the ratio of demand to supply. Wages are the price of labor (a service). So they reflect the ratio of demand (number of workers businesses hire) to supply (number of people who applied). The official employment rate is exactly that ratio. The official un-employment rate, then, is 100% less the employment rate; and embodies the same information.

The supply of labor only includes those who applied and were hired (workers in jobs), and those who applied and were turned down (actively looking). Businesses are "oblivious" to "discouraged workers" who never knock on their doors. Thus, government (un-)employment statistics convey valuable labor-market information (demand for vs. supply of labor), affecting wages (price of labor). Those statistics are not (necessarily) manipulated; presumably, businesses would want to know about demand & supply, in the labor market, from which they would hire people. For example, if the E rate increased (UE rate decreased), then businesses would know, that available workers were in relatively short supply; and that they would have to pay more to hire new people.

Yet, without (full) explanation, the same statistics (may be) misleading, as your article describes in detail. 9 million Americans have quit looking for jobs. Sadly, they are non-relevant to the "active" labor market, affecting the wages, of everybody else. But, they do require welfare; and they are part of society; which ('ought-and-should') affects policies, politics, and elections. Official government UE statistics represent the "economic perspective"; they do not represent the full "social perspective", as your article describes in detail. Said statistics may be misleading, socially & politically, even without being misleading economically, or actually "manipulated", mathematically. (Some subjectivity is involved in official government definitions; evidently, businesses are content with those particular choices of definitions.)

Sorry misleading would also be manipulated. You have to remember the people who do these reports are the high paid experts and should not be making misleading mistakes.

There is nothing misleading or mistaken in the reports. Worthless lying CON$ervoFascist scum deliberately make up shit, like in the title of the OP "as people give up on looking for work" to deceive mindless morons like you. The BLS actually publishes the total of people who have "given up looking for work" And the lying scum you use as sources deliberately ignore those easily understandable reports, and just make up lies you want to hear. They know you will not bother to look at the reports on discouraged workers and when exposed to their existence, like now, you will simply ignor them so you can parrot the lies you like to believe.

There are less than 1 million people who have given up looking for work and the number is DOWN from last year. There were 982,000 in June 2011 and 821,000 in June 2012.

Table A-16. Persons not in the labor force and multiple jobholders by sex, not seasonally adjusted

blather blather blather blather. I no longer read your lies blather blather blather blather......

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Sorry misleading would also be manipulated. You have to remember the people who do these reports are the high paid experts and should not be making misleading mistakes.

What mistakes are you claiming are being made? The surveys measure what they're supposed to measure. That people have a misconstrued idea of what they should be measuring has nothing to do with the people reporting the information. I've always found it odd that people who have never studied and don't understand the concepts or the methodology behind the data accuse the data of being misleading.

Making 9 Million Jobless "Vanish": How The Government Manipulates Unemployment Statistics

Making 9 Million Jobless Vanish: How The Government Manipulates Unemployment Statistics

 

[edthecynic]

Sorry misleading would also be manipulated. You have to remember the people who do these reports are the high paid experts and should not be making misleading mistakes.

There is nothing misleading or mistaken in the reports. Worthless lying CON$ervoFascist scum deliberately make up shit, like in the title of the OP "as people give up on looking for work" to deceive mindless morons like you. The BLS actually publishes the total of people who have "given up looking for work" And the lying scum you use as sources deliberately ignore those easily understandable reports, and just make up lies you want to hear. They know you will not bother to look at the reports on discouraged workers and when exposed to their existence, like now, you will simply ignor them so you can parrot the lies you like to believe.

There are less than 1 million people who have given up looking for work and the number is DOWN from last year. There were 982,000 in June 2011 and 821,000 in June 2012.

Table A-16. Persons not in the labor force and multiple jobholders by sex, not seasonally adjusted

blather blather blather blather. I no longer read your lies blather blather blather blather......

Thank you for proving me right.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Sorry misleading would also be manipulated. You have to remember the people who do these reports are the high paid experts and should not be making misleading mistakes.

What mistakes are you claiming are being made? The surveys measure what they're supposed to measure. That people have a misconstrued idea of what they should be measuring has nothing to do with the people reporting the information. I've always found it odd that people who have never studied and don't understand the concepts or the methodology behind the data accuse the data of being misleading.

Making 9 Million Jobless "Vanish": How The Government Manipulates Unemployment Statistics

Making 9 Million Jobless Vanish: How The Government Manipulates Unemployment Statistics

Yeah...............sure..............a right wing blog site is gonna have better statistics on what is really going on than the GBO.

 

[Moonglow]

Obama and the morons that support him think this is great. The more people that are dependent upon government the better. Can they create enough dependents before November?

Just think of all those repubs he paid off to vote for him

 

[Wiseacre]

First of all, the 8.1% change in the UE rate was for APRIL, not June. June's UE rate was and still remains 8.2%. We'll see what happens with the July number, if it drops it'll be because more people quit looking.