• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Economy Unemployment Rate Falls To 5.3 Percent, But For The Wrong Reason

Mr. Invisible

A Man Without A Country
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
5,517
Reaction score
3,927
Location
United States
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Unemployment Rate Falls To 5.3 Percent, But For The Wrong Reason : The Two-Way : NPR

The U.S. economy keeps adding jobs at a steady pace, but the Labor Department report for June shows more people are also leaving the labor force and that wages are not rising.


The economy added 223,000 jobs last month as unemployment fell to its lowest rate since 2008, the Labor Department said Thursday. The Jobless rate dipped to 5.3 percent from 5.5 percent in May.


However, the number of net new jobs added in May was revised down to 254,000 from 280,000 previously reported. April's job gains were also revised downward.
Retailers added about 33,000 jobs in June and manufacturing grew by 4,000 but construction jobs were unchanged, the report said.

From the BLS report on April and May job revisions: Employment Situation Summary

The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for April was revised from +221,000 to +187,000, and the change for May was revised from +280,000 to +254,000. With these revisions, employment gains in April and May combined were 60,000 lower than previously reported. Over the past 3 months, job gains have averaged 221,000 per month.

So it seems that the devil is in the details with regards to revisions in the numbers. Also, while the unemployment rate may be dropping, wages are still stagnant (as they have been for decades) which is a serious problem.
 
We have a record 94 million Americans of working age that aren't in the work force.

Funny how we constantly hear threats to social security or medicare funding, but you never hear threats to reduce welfare.
 
Unemployment Rate Falls To 5.3 Percent, But For The Wrong Reason : The Two-Way : NPR



From the BLS report on April and May job revisions: Employment Situation Summary



So it seems that the devil is in the details with regards to revisions in the numbers. Also, while the unemployment rate may be dropping, wages are still stagnant (as they have been for decades) which is a serious problem.

How does anyone expect wages ie ppp buying power to go up much with Euroland in recession, Russia out of the picture, China and Brazil stuttering and a number of domestic policies holding back the economy.
 
We have a record 94 million Americans of working age that aren't in the work force.

Funny how we constantly hear threats to social security or medicare funding, but you never hear threats to reduce welfare.

It would not be pc to demand taking away welfare and would stake out 94 million votes against you.
 
We have a record 94 million Americans of working age that aren't in the work force.

Funny how we constantly hear threats to social security or medicare funding, but you never hear threats to reduce welfare.
There are several reasons for that. The Baby Boomers are retiring; Automation; Most of the manufacturing we used to do, the jobs have been exported to every corner of the Earth and some are just too old and the companies don't want to hire them.
 
Statistics is a tricky thing. =) One can interpret it in many ways needed, but it's hard to understand for an average person what is actually going on.
In fact, I don't like these monthly reports. Economy is a big and slow process, and everything could be much different in long-term. As well as not that enthusiastic.
 
There are several reasons for that. The Baby Boomers are retiring; Automation; Most of the manufacturing we used to do, the jobs have been exported to every corner of the Earth and some are just too old and the companies don't want to hire them.

And we have an insane number of people addicted to living on the government teet.
 
We have a record 94 million Americans of working age that aren't in the work force.
"working age?" The age is 16 and older, no upper limit. 38 million of those 94 are age 65 and older. And 11 million disabled under 65.


And last month we had a record number of people IN the labor force.
 
Well, as per usual lately, the advertised numbers sound far better then the real situation is.

Sure, the unemployment rate dropped to 5.3...but that was primarily because of the largest drop in the labor force participation rate in over a year. I would hardly call that a success for the economy.

And, the headlines numbers are from the establishment survey and are influenced by the, IMO, highly subjective Birth/Death model adjustments.
The household survey paints a rather different picture.

According to the household survey:

- there were 56,000 LESS Americans employed last month
- there were 349,000(!) LESS Americans employed full time last month (with 111,000 more employed part time)

- average weekly earnings did not budge from May - thus wages did not keep pace with inflation in June
- and though the important 25-54 age range saw a rather paltry 111,000 more people employed - the highest average income 45-54 age range saw yet another drop (the fourth month in a row); this time of 49,000.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t09.htm

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.b.htm

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.a.htm


IMO, this was a lousy employment report.
 
Last edited:
Unemployment Rate Falls To 5.3 Percent, But For The Wrong Reason : The Two-Way : NPR



From the BLS report on April and May job revisions: Employment Situation Summary



So it seems that the devil is in the details with regards to revisions in the numbers. Also, while the unemployment rate may be dropping, wages are still stagnant (as they have been for decades) which is a serious problem.

They always "revise down". It really is a joke the way employment is "tracked".
 
"working age?" The age is 16 and older, no upper limit. 38 million of those 94 are age 65 and older. And 11 million disabled under 65.


And last month we had a record number of people IN the labor force.

According to the BLS, there were 432,000 less Americans in the labor force last month then in May.

Employment Situation Summary Table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted


I assume you meant 'May' when you said 'last month'?

But, of course, since today is July, then last month was June not May.

No biggie, but I'm just sayin'...
 
Last edited:
I did mean May when I said last month. I was going by published month, not actual. My bad.

No biggie...I have made TONS of mistakes on this stuff.
 
We just need more " stimulus to increase aggregate demand ", that's all !

I think Bernie Sanders is floating some good ideas to turn this economy around !

Borrow and spend more.

This President and his party are such a joke. A really really bad joke for Millions of Americans who are struggling to survive.
 
Is there a "biting my tongue" emoticon?

I was going to add...'as you know' to my above post...but I figured it was unnecessary.

Besides, you (claim to) work/worked at the BLS...I did not.

;)
 
Last edited:
We have a record 94 million Americans of working age that aren't in the work force.

Funny how we constantly hear threats to social security or medicare funding, but you never hear threats to reduce welfare.

This tired and misleading retort is introduced on only the second post..... Such nonsense deserves the typical tired and misleading response: not in the work force is comprised primarily of the retired, the student, the stay at home mom and the disabled. They are not in the work force because they don't want to be in the work force. The fact they don't have to work, when they do not want to work, is actually a sign of economic health.

You need to either stop being disingenuous or get better educated on economics if you want to post on such. If you don't like it, then pick outside you local assisted living and tell those deadbeats to get off their duff and get back to work.
 
Last edited:
This tired and misleading retort is introduced on only the second post..... Such nonsense deserves the typical tired and misleading response: not in the work force is comprised primarily of the retired, the student, the stay at home mom and the disabled. They are not in the work force because they don't want to be in the work force. The fact they don't have to work, when they do not want to work, is actually a sign of economic health.

You need to either stop being disingenuous or get better educated on economics if you want to post on such. If you don't like it, then pick outside you local assisted living and tell those deadbeats to get off their duff and get back to work.
And this tired lie is all too familiar and debunked. People are sucking the government welfare teet in record numbers. Fact.
 
And this tired lie is all too familiar and debunked. People are sucking the government welfare teet in record numbers. Fact.

You clearly do not understand what the Not in Work (or Labor) Force number is. Therefore, you really don't understand this whole issue.

The tired lie is the world in which you live thinking the Not in the Work Force is an inherently bad number. Its not. The largest component of Not in Work Force are retired persons, followed by students, disable and stay at home moms. Discouraged workers is in the number, but its a very small component of it (about 1-2%).

The people that are seeking work are actually considered to be in the work force. Therefore, they are not considered "Not in Work Force" and thus changes in unemployment rate do not affect the Labor Participation Rate (unemployment can climb or fall without affecting the Labor Participation Rate) as both the employed and unemployed are considered to be IN the workforce.


What is Not in Work/Labor Force?

How are the labor force components (i.e., civilian noninstitutional population, civilian labor force, employed, unemployed, and unemployment rate) defined?
BLS Glossary
Labor Force Participation Rate - What Does It Mean?

Significance of Labor Participation Rate

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/12/upshot/the-rise-of-men-who-dont-work-and-what-they-do-instead.html
https://businessincanada.com/2014/0...ing-up-dropping-out-greying-aging-population/
http://qz.com/286213/the-chart-obama-haters-love-most-and-the-truth-behind-it/

Moreover, being on welfare is irrelevant to this number as most people on welfare are in the Labor Force (with most actually working)...

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2015/04/13/get-a-job-most-welfare-recipients-already-have-one/

Sorry pal, the only "debunking" here is of your reality/command of this issue. I suggest you study up and try again.

PS - if you think this has been "debunked", let's see your evidence thereof so we can help understand its error. After all, we are all about the truth and not afraid of the facts, right?
 
Last edited:
You clearly do not understand what the Not in Work (or Labor) Force number is. Therefore, you really don't understand this whole issue.

The tired lie is the world in which you live thinking the Not in the Work Force is an inherently bad number. Its not. The largest component of Not in Work Force are retired persons, followed by students, disable and stay at home moms. Discouraged workers is in the number, but its a very small component of it (about 1-2%).

The people that are seeking work are actually considered to be in the work force. Therefore, they are not considered "Not in Work Force" and thus changes in unemployment rate do not affect the Labor Participation Rate (unemployment can climb or fall without affecting the Labor Participation Rate) as both the employed and unemployed are considered to be IN the workforce.


What is Not in Work/Labor Force?

How are the labor force components (i.e., civilian noninstitutional population, civilian labor force, employed, unemployed, and unemployment rate) defined?
BLS Glossary
Labor Force Participation Rate - What Does It Mean?

Significance of Labor Participation Rate

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/12/upshot/the-rise-of-men-who-dont-work-and-what-they-do-instead.html
https://businessincanada.com/2014/0...ing-up-dropping-out-greying-aging-population/
The chart Obama-haters love most

Moreover, being on welfare is irrelevant to this number as most people on welfare are in the Labor Force (with most actually working)...

Get a Job? Most Welfare Recipients Already Have One - Real Time Economics - WSJ

Sorry pal, the only "debunking" here is of your reality/command of this issue. I suggest you study up and try again.

PS - if you think this has been "debunked", let's see your evidence thereof so we can help understand its error. After all, we are all about the truth and not afraid of the facts, right?

Welfare up 24.9 percent, according to the census bureau.

One in Five Americans Participates in Government Assistance Programs Each Month | Washington Free Beacon

And the percentage of people OF WORKING AGE that are not working is the highest its been since the days women barely worked. But keep hiding in your dream world.
 
You clearly do not understand what the Not in Work (or Labor) Force number is. Therefore, you really don't understand this whole issue.

The tired lie is the world in which you live thinking the Not in the Work Force is an inherently bad number. Its not. The largest component of Not in Work Force are retired persons, followed by students, disable and stay at home moms. Discouraged workers is in the number, but its a very small component of it (about 1-2%).

The people that are seeking work are actually considered to be in the work force. Therefore, they are not considered "Not in Work Force" and thus changes in unemployment rate do not affect the Labor Participation Rate (unemployment can climb or fall without affecting the Labor Participation Rate) as both the employed and unemployed are considered to be IN the workforce.


What is Not in Work/Labor Force?

How are the labor force components (i.e., civilian noninstitutional population, civilian labor force, employed, unemployed, and unemployment rate) defined?
BLS Glossary
Labor Force Participation Rate - What Does It Mean?

Significance of Labor Participation Rate

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/12/upshot/the-rise-of-men-who-dont-work-and-what-they-do-instead.html
https://businessincanada.com/2014/0...ing-up-dropping-out-greying-aging-population/
The chart Obama-haters love most

Moreover, being on welfare is irrelevant to this number as most people on welfare are in the Labor Force (with most actually working)...

Get a Job? Most Welfare Recipients Already Have One - Real Time Economics - WSJ

Sorry pal, the only "debunking" here is of your reality/command of this issue. I suggest you study up and try again.

PS - if you think this has been "debunked", let's see your evidence thereof so we can help understand its error. After all, we are all about the truth and not afraid of the facts, right?

Where are you getting these highlighted figures from?
 
They always "revise down". It really is a joke the way employment is "tracked".

No, they don't always revise down. That's just an error with your primitive monkey brain pattern recognition. Don't feel bad. We all have it. It makes us as a species highly prone to all sorts of biases and mistakes.
 
And this tired lie is all too familiar and debunked. People are sucking the government welfare teet in record numbers. Fact.

That's what is supposed to happen when the economy tanks.

Run the math for me: if you fill every job opening in the country instantaneously, how much will unemployment drop?
 
Back
Top Bottom