The Numbers Behind The Numbers

The Stock Market climbed and the media rejoiced–the unemployment rate dropped to 7.5% in March–down 0.4 percentage points since January. At least it did not go up.

The New York Times reported yesterday that in spite of the fact that unemployment decreased and the economy added jobs, that since 2010 the number of Americans with jobs has stayed between 58.2 percent and 58.7 percent. Hot Air reported yesterday that the civilian workforce participation rate remained at a 34-year low of 63.3%.

Hot Air also reported:

…the number of people not in the workforce declined slightly in the Household data from March by 31,000. It’s still 632,000 higher than in February. Discouraged workers rose by 32,000 and marginally-attached workers rose by 21,000, both of which are relatively narrow shifts.

The New York Times reported:

Baby boomers are aging into retirement. Even before the recession, the government projected in 2007 that participation would decline to 65.5 percent by 2016, from 66 percent. But the April rate of 63.3 percent means the labor force has lost roughly five million additional workers.

Furthermore, the projections were wrong. Participation has actually risen among people older than 55. The decline is entirely driven by younger dropouts.

It is good that the unemployment number is down to 7.5%; however, we have a long way to go before we actually have a healthy economy. The two biggest challenges to the economy in the coming months will be the implementation of ObamaCare and the increased taxes that go with that implementation. We won’t really understand the financial impact of ObamaCare until late this year when people begin to plan for the tax rates of 2013 and when people begin to see ObamaCare directly affect their health insurance and health insurance premiums.

The article at Hot Air quotes Reuters:

Still, details of the report remained consistent with a slowdown in economic activity. Construction employment fell for the first time since May, while manufacturing payrolls were flat. The average workweek pulled off a nine-month high, but average hourly earnings rose four cents[.]

The New York Times article concludes:

There is always some unemployment. Millions of Americans are out of work at any given moment even in the best of times. But the economy is still roughly 10 million jobs short of returning to normal levels of unemployment and labor force participation. That’s a lot of missing jobs.

Some of those losses may be permanent. The number of Americans receiving disability benefits has increased by 1.8 million since the recession began, and people on disability rarely return to the work force, even if they would have preferred to keep working in the first place.

And as the economy improves, it is likely that labor force participation among older workers will finally begin to decline.

But the evidence suggests that the majority of the 10 million are just waiting for a decent chance.

Enhanced by Zemanta

There Were Some Things Left Out In The Unemployment Numbers

Yesterday Breitbart posted some of the facts the media seems to have missed in reporting on the jobless numbers this week. The article quotes James Pethokoukis at the American Enterprise Institute (AEI):

The labor force participation rate fell again as potential workers stopped looking for work.  … [I]f the LFP rate was where it was in January 2009, the unemployment rate would be 10.8%. …

The share of the unemployed out of work for 27 weeks or longer increased to 40.2% from 38.1% in January.

The employment-population ratio is exactly where it was a year ago, at an almost rock-bottom 58.6%.

This really doesn’t look like much of an economic recovery to me.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Both Sets Of Jobs Numbers For January 2013

Yesterday CNS News reported that the number of Americans not in the labor force grew by 169,000 in January. Meanwhile, aol.com reports that 157,000 new jobs were added in January 2013.

The article at aol.com reported:

Federal Reserve officials said on Wednesday that economic activity had “paused,” but they signaled optimism the recovery would regain speed with continued monetary policy support. The Fed left in place a monthly $85 billion bond-buying stimulus plan. Economists polled by Reuters had expected employers to add 160,000 jobs and the unemployment rate to hold steady at 7.8 percent last month.

…Job growth in 2012 averaged 181,000 a month, but not enough to significantly reduce unemployment. Economists say employment gains in excess of 250,000 a month over a sustained period are needed.

We are losing jobs as fast as we are gaining them. This really does not look like a strong economic recovery.

A Picture Of The Latest Jobs Report

This chart was posted  yesterday at The Weekly Standard:

The article reports:

“For Every 1 Person Added To Labor Force Since January 2009,” the chart reads, “10 People Added To Those Not In Labor Force.”

Please remember this chart when President Obama tells all of us in the debate tonight how many jobs he has created since he took office.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The U-6 Unemployment Number

The U-6 unemployment number was up to 15 percent in July. The overall unemployment number is currently at 8.3 percent.

The DRUDGE REPORT posted the following links today:

THEY BOTH CANT BE RIGHT:

Reuters: Labor market slowed sharply after strong gains in winter, spelling trouble for Obama…

AP: Stronger job creation could help Obama’s re-election hopes…

The unemployment number announced today is 8.3 percent, but that number only includes those people who are currently looking for work. If every unemployed worker stopped looking for work, the number would drop to 0 percent–which logically makes absolutely no sense.

CNBC posted a story today about the U-6 number, which includes discouraged potential employees who have quit looking, and those who are underemployed — wanting to work full-time but forced to work part-time. The U-6 numbers in various states are alarming.

The article at CNBC reports:

Consider: Nevada‘s U-6 rate is 22.1 percent, up from just 7.6 percent in 2007. Economically troubled California has a 20.3 percent real rate, while Rhode Island is at 18.3 percent, more than double its 8.3 percent rate in 2007.

Those numbers compare especially unfavorably to the national rate, high in itself at 14.9 percent though off its record peak of 17.2 percent in October 2009.

Only three states — Nebraska (9.1 percent), South Dakota (8.6 percent) and North Dakota (6.1 percent) — have U-6 rates under 10 percent, according to research from RBC Capital Markets.

Note that the states with the low U-6 rates are the states involved in developing America’s energy resources contained in the Bakken Shale Oil Formation. That might be a clue as to what we need to do to turn around America’s economy.

Meanwhile, the bottom line is simple–the current recovery is as bad, if not worse, than the recession. It’s time to change the people in charge.

Investors.com reports today:

Looked at another way, the labor force participation rate fell to 63.7% in July. That’s down from 65.7% in June 2009, and it’s just above the lowest since January 1982. Back then the economy was in the midst of a deep 16-month recession and the share of women in the work force was still significantly lower.

This continues a trend set since the economic recovery officially started in June 2009. Sluggish job growth has failed to keep pace with population growth, creating an ever larger pool of people who either don’t have jobs or have given up looking for one.

In fact, since June 2009, the number of people in the labor force has climbed just 283,000, while the number of people not in the labor force has exploded by 7.5 million.

This is not a recovery.

So why is the stock market going up today? I suspect it is factoring in the fact that these numbers will make it more difficult for President Obama to be re-elected. Governor Romney is an experienced businessman. If anyone can turn this mess around, he can.

 

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

The Unemployment Numbers

The truth behind the unemployment numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey

 

The bottom line here is simple. The only reason the unemployment number is below 9 percent is that the number of people in the labor force is less than it has been. There are two ways to lower the unemployment rate–employ more people or remove people from the labor force so that the percentage of unemployed people is lower. As you can see, the number of people in the labor force is decreasing–not increasing. We are moving in the wrong direction.
Enhanced by Zemanta

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.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

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.

Enhanced by Zemanta

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.

Enhanced by Zemanta