Why you need to vote for a Republican President in November.
Tag Archives: unemployment
The Unemployment Numbers
The truth behind the unemployment numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics:
Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
What The Republican Debates Should Really Be About
This chart is from the website of the House Ways and Means Committee
America Before President Obama Took Office and Now
| Before | Now | Change | |
| Number of Unemployed1 | 12.0 Million | 13.1 Million | +9% |
| Long-Term Unemployed2 | 2.7 Million | 5.6 Million | +107% |
| Unemployment Rate3 | 7.8% | 8.5% | +9% |
| “High Unemployment” States4 | 22 | 43 | +95% |
| Misery Index5 | 7.83 | 11.46 | +46% |
| Price of Gas6 | $1.85 | $3.39 | +83% |
| “Typical” Monthly Family Food Cost7 | $974 | $1,013 | +4% |
| Median Value of Single-Family Home8 | $196,600 | $169,100 | -14% |
| Rate of Mortgage Delinquencies9 | 6.62% | 10.23% | +55% |
| U.S. National Debt10 | $10.6 Trillion | $15.2 Trillion | +43% |
1 Number of unemployed in January 2009 and December 2011. http://www.bls.gov/data/#unemployment.
2 “Long-term unemployed” means for over 26 weeks; data for January 2009 and December 2011. http://www.bls.gov/data/#unemployment.
3 Unemployment rates in January 2009 and December 2011. http://www.bls.gov/data/#unemployment.
4 “High unemployment” means having a 3-month average unemployment rate of 6% or higher. From the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ “Extended Benefits Trigger Notice” for January 18, 2009 and January 22, 2012. http://www.ows.doleta.gov/unemploy/trigger/2009/trig_011809.html and http://ows.doleta.gov/unemploy/euc_trigger/2012/euc_012212.html.
5 The “Misery Index” equals unemployment plus inflation. For January 2009 and December 2012. http://www.miseryindex.us/indexbymonth.asp.
6 Average retail price per gallon, January 2009 week 3 and January 2012 week 4. http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=EMM_EPMR_PTE_NUS_DPG&f=W.
7 U.S. Department of Agriculture, values represent monthly “moderate” cost per family of four for January 2009 and November 2011. http://www.cnpp.usda.gov/USDAFoodCost-Home.htm.
8 U.S. median sales price of existing single-family homes for metropolitan areas for 2008 and 2011 Q3. http://www.realtor.org/research/research/metroprice.
9 Residential mortgage delinquencies (real estate loans) for 2008 Q4 and 2011 Q3. http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/chargeoff/default.htm.
10 Values for January 21, 2009 and January 23, 2012. http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/BPDLogin?application=np.
This is where the focus of the debates should be.
The Ever-Shrinking Labor Force
Yesterday Jim Geraghty posted an article at National Review Online about the unemployment numbers released this week and the media’s celebration that unemployment is going down.
This is the chart from the Bureau of Labor Statistics:
As you can see, the civilian labor force is not increasing. In January 2006, there were 150,214,000 Americans in the labor force. In December 2008, there were 154,626,000 Americans in the labor force. That is an increase of 4,412,000.
The article reports:
We’re still down 349,000 from the size of the labor force when Obama’s term began. The labor force hit its lowest point during that time in January 2011, at 153,250,000.
The economy may actually improve slightly this year, and the economy should not be the only issue in deciding who to support in November’s election. There are other issues (some of which affect the economy) such as national defense, Obamacare, government spending, tax policies, and over-regulation.. This will be an important election, we owe it to ourselves to consider carefully how we vote.
A Few Things To Add To The Unemployment Picture
Ed Morrissey at Hot Air posted an article today on the unemployment numbers released today. Everything is not quite what we are told it is.
Mr. Morrissey reports that the numbers are slowly going down–we are now at 8.5 percent. There is, however, a bit more to the story.
The article points out:
The civilian population participation rate hasn’t changed at all from the 64.0% of last month, which remains the lowest level since the Reagan years and which keeps the jobless rate artificially low. The civilian labor force — all the employed and all those seeking employment — actually declined by 50,000 people since November. However, the U-6 measure of “real” unemployment dropped from 15.6% in November to 15.2% in December, which is the lowest in three years.
The economy is improving very slowly. It would improve much more quickly if we began to remove some of the choking regulations from businesses and if we revised our tax code down to one or two pages that were easily understood by average Americans. Hopefully, this year’s elections will give us leadership that will do that.
Received In My E-Mail This Morning
This article was also published in the Worcester Telegram and Gazette this morning. It was also sent out by the author, Len Mead. I received it in my e-mail this morning.
The economic truth hurts
Did you think Republicans would “raise your payroll taxes” starting in January if no deal had been reached? Do you think unemployment just dropped to only 8.6 percent?
If you answered “yes” to these questions, the Main Street media has succeeded in deceiving you — and most other busy readers and viewers. Like our economy, truthful journalism has sunk to lows unseen in our lifetimes.
Fortunately, dear reader, you have me to help you correct these misconceptions. Let me guide you — through truth — to understand what’s really happening as we celebrate what blessings we have left this Christmas and Hanukkah.
Let’s start with the bogus “payroll tax reduction” issue. You’ve been told if the current reduced amount isn’t “extended,” 140 million plus workers will have taxes raised over $1,000 next year. The truth is this payroll withholding is simply not a tax. It is an amount fortunate working people have set aside for their own retirement to fund Social Security.
So, when it was “cut” last year, it just further short-changed funding for promised Social Security payments which, not surprisingly, were insufficient to cover pay-outs last year for the first time in history.
The truth is that payroll withholdings for Social Security was never a tax, and it never should have been reduced, because now 40 cents of each federal dollar paid to existing Social Security retirees has to be borrowed.
When you buy groceries, do you borrow 40 cents of each dollar for food? That’s the truthful state our current retirement system has fallen to.
Real tax cuts are federal income tax rate reductions implemented by presidents like John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan and George Bush.
These real tax rate reductions all resulted in sharply higher tax revenues collected by the government due to a growing economy, with more jobs and more people being hired to pay taxes.
One could argue that the so-called payroll tax cut reduction implemented in the past was an intentional destabilizing effort by Democrats to make citizens further dependent on government — similar to now bankrupt Europe. But hey, we’re bankrupt, too, with a national debt topping — hold your breath — $15 trillion (see usdebtclock.org). Not ready to pay this debt bill? Well, surely your children and grandchildren are, eh?
The Main Street media is criminally negligent in not reporting this serious truth to us.
Moving on to the bogus reported “reduction” in unemployment: Folks, it just ain’t so.
True unemployment is rising — horribly. The “official unemployment rate” of 8.6 percent reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics does not include desperate citizens who have given up looking for full-time work after months or years of failure. For example, if the same number of people were looking for work today as were looking for work when Barack Obama took office, the unemployment rate would be 11 percent.
But the true unemployment figure is even worse.
The more accurate Labor Department unemployment figure is not the “U-3” 8.6 percent figure but really 15.6 percent, which includes “total unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force.”
Estimates of the number of unemployed by this measure exceed 25 million desperate people in the U.S. out of about 153 million working. Again, the Main Street media seems criminally unwilling to report this truth to us, or to report the possible solutions for improving our economy and thus the number of available jobs people wanting to work could seek.
Fortunately, many sources for these truths exist for curious, open-minded citizens anxious for real solutions to the problems of our economy.
Solutions include real reductions in government spending and regulations, lower and certain taxes for the future, and the repeal of Obamacare, which is a cancer on businesses who simply cannot hire anybody without knowing what future real costs will exist with each new hire.
When these steps are taken, our great free economy will again explode upward — with new jobs, new tax revenues for public needs, and real new hope for the future. Our still-free republic is still our greatest blessing now at year’s end.
Len Mead can be reached at mead1720@gmail.com
This Kind Of Logic Makes My Head Hurt
CNS News reported yesterday that former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi has stated that extending unemployment benefits would add “600,000 jobs to our economy.”
Now let me get this straight. Extending unemployment beneifts (which have already been extended to almost two years) would add jobs to our economy.
The article further reports:
Although Senate Democrats indicated they would support dropping the millionaire surtax to pay for extending a payroll tax cut and unemployment benefits after a White House meeting on Wednesday, they adamantly oppose several provisions of the Republican bill, such as forcing a quick administration response on the Keystone XL oil pipeline, and reforms to long-term benefits for the jobless.
It is going to be interesting to see what the payroll tax extension bill looks like by the time it is passed.
Looking Behind The Unemployment Numbers
Bloomberg.com posted a story today on the unemployment numbers released today. The unemployment rate has dropped to 8.6 percent from 9 percent. That sounds good until you realize that in order to create that unemployment number, the American labor force had to be reduced considerably.
The article reports:
The unemployment rate, derived from a separate survey of households, was forecast to hold at 9 percent. The decrease in the jobless rate reflected a 278,000 gain in employment at the same time 315,000 Americans left the labor force.
“You’d like to see the unemployment rate coming down when people are coming into the job market, not disappearing,” James Glassman, senior economist at JP Morgan Chase & Co. in New York, said in a radio interview on “Bloomberg Surveillance” with Tom Keene.
So 278,000 people got jobs, 315,000 people gave up on finding jobs, and the unemployment rate went down. Somehow I don’t think that is the way you are supposed to lower unemployment. I don’t know if all administrations cook the numbers this way, but obviously this one does. I strongly suggest that whoever the Republican presidential candidate is, we elect him. Maybe then we will get honest numbers.
If You Really Want Companies To Hire New Employees Don’t Put Obstacles In Their Way !
Yesterday Ed Morrissey at Hot Air posted an article noting that the jobs bill proposed by President Obama has a provision that would make it illegal for businesses to discriminate against the already-unemployed while making hiring decisions. No wonder lawyers love this President!
The article reports:
The proposed language is found in a section of the bill titled “Prohibition of Discrimination in Employment on the Basis of an Individual’s Status as Unemployed.” That section would also make it illegal for employers to request that employment agencies take into account a person’s unemployed status.
It would also allow aggrieved job-seekers to seek damages if they have been discriminated against. This provision in particular prompted Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) to argue that Obama’s proposal is aimed at creating a new, special class of people who can sue companies.
“So if you’re unemployed, and you go to apply for a job and you’re not hired for that job, see a lawyer,” Gohmert said on the House floor. “You might be able to file a claim because you got discriminated against because you’re unemployed.”
If you can’t make a living by becoming employed, you may be able to make a living by suing anyone who doesn’t hire you when you apply for a job.
The article concludes:
All this provision does is give those who don’t get the position a big invitation to file a lawsuit, especially against the deep-pocketed companies we’re hoping to convince to hire people now. That will certainly benefit the lawyers who take these cases in order to get a piece of the shakedown money they can get out of these companies, but all that does is heighten the risk of hiring for businesses enormously. If a company has a position that attracts 20 applicants, they have to consider the possibility that the new hire will cost them compensation for one employee and settlements for 19 non-employees, unless the business goes out of their way to hire the person who has been unemployed the very longest and therefore doesn’t have the same market value for their labor or for the company.
If you want to see the economy grow, we need to cut regulations, not add more. This is another headache for any company that is considering hiring a new employee. This regulation hinders job creation–it does not encourage it. The biggest thing we can do to grow the economy is cut
Overlooking The Obvious In Dealing With High Unemployment
Image via Wikipedia
John HInderaker at Power Line posted an article yesterday about a simple solution to the high unemployment numbers we currently have in America. Developing America’s domestic energy sources would not only employ people, it would have many other positive side effects on the economy. This is one of the charts from the article:
The increased employment that would result from developing America’s domestic energy resources would result in more taxpayers paying taxes. Developing domestic energy sources would also result in lower energy costs to Americans, allowing Americans to spend more money on other things, thus stimulating economic growth. Developing domestic oil resources would also help America become energy independent, rather than sending billions of dollars to people who hate us. It’s a winning situation for the country for many reasons.
One Explanation For The High Unemployment Numbers
Image via Wikipedia
The Offshore Marine Service Association (OSMA) has posted a video at YouTube explaining the impact of the ‘permatorium’ the Obama administration has on American drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.
The Washington Examiner posted a short story on the impact of the ‘permatorium’ which included this statement:
But other than pointing to staggering unemployment figures and gas prices that remain nearly double what they were when the president took office in 2009, it’s difficult to convey the magnitude of the Obama energy crisis in the Gulf of Mexico. The consequences of this crisis far exceed in terms of human and economic losses those occasioned by the Deepwater Horizon disaster that was used to justify the Permatorium in the first place.
Lifting this ‘permatorium’ would help unemployment and also bring down the cost of gasoline which would help all Americans.
How To Use Washington Politics To Discourage Economic Growth
Image via Wikipedia
According the the U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, in July 2011 the unemployment rate in North Dakota was 3.3 percent. Why does North Dakota have such a low unemployment level?Oil production. However, Washington has just attempted to slow that industry down in the state.
Yahoo News reported on Friday that seven oil companies have been charged in federal court with killing migratory birds that died after allegedly landing in oil waste pits in western North Dakota. Between May 6 and June 20, 28 birds were discovered in oil waste pits.
The article reports:
The so-called reserve pits are used during oil and gas drilling operations. Once a well is completed, companies are required to clean up the pit, and it must be covered with netting if it’s open for more than 90 days. None of the pits referenced in the charges were netted, but it’s unclear how many of them were open beyond three months, documents show.
The increasing number of dead birds has state officials debating whether to ban waste oil pits and require companies to recycle liquid drilling waste.
Authorities say a dozen dead birds were found in Slawson pits, including three mallards, two gadwalls, two blue-winged teal, one redhead, one common golden eye, one northern pintail and two birds of indeterminate species.
The death of the birds is unfortunate, but it pales in comparison to the number of birds killed by windmills on a regular basis. In September of 2009, the Wall Street Journal reported:
A July 2008 study of the wind farm at Altamont Pass, Calif., estimated that its turbines kill an average of 80 golden eagles per year. The study, funded by the Alameda County Community Development Agency, also estimated that about 10,000 birds—nearly all protected by the migratory bird act—are being whacked every year at Altamont.
Windmills are being encouraged by the Obama Administration. Many of the President’s biggest campaign donors are involved with ‘green energy’ and any ‘green energy’ production is being encouraged and its negatives overlooked.
Right now the oil production in North Dakota is helping that state’s economy, as well as providing a domestic source of energy. The Obama Administration might do well to keep its hands off success and go find someone else to harass.
The Government Does Not Create Jobs
Image via Wikipedia
The government does not create jobs. If the government is working well, it creates an environment where the private sector can create jobs.
However, some of the rhetoric coming out of Congress right now is amazing. Howie Carr at the Boston Herald posted an article today on some recent statements by Representative Nancy Pelosi on the economy. The article reports some of her statements:
Late last month, at a fund-raiser in her hometown of San Francisco, she discussed those wonderful days of 2007, when the Democrats retook control of the House and raised the minimum wage. It hadn’t been increased for a decade.
“It was kept down for the purpose that people would not be able to live on that. They’d have to borrow against home-equity loans, against their mortgages.”
“They’d have to live on credit cards, and what are they doing when they’re doing that? They’re paying fees to the banks.”
“You wonder, do their children breathe? Do they drink water? Why do they not care? But they don’t. But they don’t.”
“Imagine that they are protecting the tax cuts for top 2 percent, it’s really more higher than that, lower than that, I mean a higher number — percentage of people excluded for who they’re looking out for.”
“And it’s a stunning thing because it’s a few people amassing money that doesn’t really make a difference in their quality of life.”
“What more do they want? They have enough homes, the yacht, ya-da-da-da, the tall masts, the whole thing, they have museum-quality art.”
“They want immortality. They want so much money . . . for prestige they could never get any other way.”
Ms. Pelosi made additional comments today on why the unemployment numbers are low. The Hill reports:
“We cannot afford another 241 days of Republican refusal to pass jobs legislation,” Pelosi said in a statement. “The only plans offered by Republicans have not only failed to create jobs — they actually have destroyed them.”
I don’t like to confuse things with facts, but the Democrats controlled the House and the Senate up until January of this year. The Democrats still control the Senate and the Republicans do not have the numbers to block any legislation. The Republicans in the House have passed budget and plans for the deficit. The only budget suggested by the Democrats was suggested by the President an voted down unanimously.
