4.5% is considered "full employment".
Since the U.S. recovery began in 2009, total employment
rose from 138 million to 154 million by the end of 2017.
The number of unemployed has shrunk to fewer than 7 million from 15 million.
Full Employment
So much for "full-employment"!
Strange then where did the 16 million additional employed come from even considering that the number of unemployed shrunk by 8 million? I mean the definition of "full employment"
seems hollow then if there were evidently MORE people that weren't working that could have been working.
And are cognizant of what it means to have 16 million more people working?
Assuming the Average salary is Median household income in the U.S. rose to an estimated
$59,055 in January 2018, an increase of nearly 0.4% from our December 2017 estimate of
$58,829.Mar 1, 2018
16 million at $50,000 generates $800 billion a year in additional income and more importantly nearly $200 billion in payroll taxes and individual income taxes.
Finally where did you get the assumed figure of 4.5% as
full-employment?
My source says:
let us assume that the agreed upon natural unemployment rate is 5%. The consensus among policymakers today is that the full employment rate of unemployment is roughly 4.5%
Principles of Macroeconomics, Section 5: Full-Employment
Economists, including the Fed’s policy makers, are divided about how close the economy is to full employment. To discourage inflation, some think that short-term interest rates should rise again soon and that plans to reduce the central bank’s holdings of bonds should be
sped up. Others think that rates should be
held lower, not least because inflation is still below the
Fed’s target. Some economists think that the official rate of unemployment can fall further — say, to
4 percent — before inflation concerns need to be addressed. Others say that changes in wages may be a clearer indicator of labor-market conditions than the post-crash unemployment rate. Wages are showing only
hesitant signs of faster growth. The Fed’s big concern: It’s possible that we won’t know what full employment means until inflation takes off.
Full Employment
"Consensus" is NOT a fact! Evidently with the projected GDP at 4.1% and with "full-employment"... hmmm what does that mean for wage increases as there are apparently more jobs than people to fill them?
https://www.frbatlanta.org/-/media/documents/cqer/researchcq/gdpnow/RealGDPTrackingSlides.pdf