• 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!

Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass Sen

Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

I've always contended that these unemployment numbers are meaningless and this just supports my theory.

OTOH, I was listening to the radio on my way around today and they were discussing how millions of people are pressuring the states to legalize online gaming wit only one major player fighting it - Sheldon Adelson, who can't abide the thought of anyone making money except his own selfish-prick billionaire self. And it made me think that if millions are worried about this form of wasting money - how bad can things be really?

I don't think the employment picture is all that pretty but apparently plenty of people have good enough jobs to even care about online gaming. I suppose only a Nevadan would fully grok this, but you should see what I'm referring to.

Thanks for the intelligent and logical response to my original question.

You're welcome. It's also worth pointing out that the majority of the jobs "recovery" over the last 5 years has been early retirees and people who dropped out. We are at record low labor participation rate right while those exiting the workforce are being removed from the denominator in the U3 unemployment calculation.

Part of this is the beginning of the big baby boom retirement, but some of it is simply people giving up and moving from productive members of society to simple consumers.
 
Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

Where on earth did you come up with that nonsense? I'm honestly curious what source you used, because that is about the strangest, and most off the wall claim I've ever heard.

It is strange, yes. It is also off the wall. But it is true, nonetheless.

See: BLS Table A-15 "Alternative Measures of Unemployment" to see what they count in U3 "Official" numbers versus the U6 complete list.

I'll leave it to you to look up what all those categories mean, it's all there on that site.

Also, before you attempt the AH HAH! Moment and claim that U6, though higher, is falling fatser than U3, take heed of the Labor Participation rate. The U6 numbers of falling because of people dropping out of the labor force "not in labor force" jumped by 500,000 in December while adding only 74,000 jobs. That 500,000 jump in "not in lbor force" is almost entirely responsible for the 0.3% decline in the U3 number while the U6 number remained the same.
 
Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

Another interesting observation I'll throw out there is that the number of working age Americans increases by roughly 140,000 per month. So to simply keep up with the population each month we need 140,000 new jobs.

So "growth" in the job market can be described as the number of jobs created OVER the bare minimum of 140,000. Anything less than that is a net loss.

I decided to take the monthly BLS jobs numbers and adjust them all downward by 140,000 just to see what the "growth" has looked like for the last 7 years ("growth" I have defined as jobs created above meeting population growth):

BeCyG_VCQAAIBkf.jpg

... stunning... :roll:
 
Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

False. BLS tracks UNEMPLOYMENT by the total number of people registered in unemployment programs who can therefor be tracked as looking for work. If those people stop participating in an unemployment program they drop off the U3 statistic, so they are not counted as unemployed in the official unemployment number. They do show up on U6, though.
That is, once again, completely inaccurate. The total number of those unemployed is not tracked through unemployment compensation, and those who fail to receive benefits may still be counted as unemployed. Straight from the source:

Because unemployment insurance records relate only to persons who have applied for such benefits, and since it is impractical to actually count every unemployed person each month, the Government conducts a monthly sample survey called the Current Population Survey (CPS) to measure the extent of unemployment in the country.

How the Government Measures Unemployment
 
Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

In my opinion Reid did exactly that, he sabotaged his own bill. He had 61 votes for the 3 month extension and if he stayed with it the bill was a fore gone conclusion or a sure thing the unemployment benefits would be extended. But he added a bunch of stuff to it, said he would allow no amendments from Republicans and basically made the new version so offensive to the Republicans that they couldn't except. Not even Collins.

So the unemployed do not get their benefits, but more important to Senator Reid than peoples lives, he has a campaign issue to use in hopes that his democratic party can retain control of the senate and Reid keep his job as majority leader. He will blame the Republicans for not passing the unemployment benefits when it was Reid himself who was responsible.

I would expect nothing less out of Senator Reid.

That is precisely what just happened.
 
Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

It is strange, yes. It is also off the wall. But it is true, nonetheless.

I'll leave it to you to look up what all those categories mean, it's all there on that site.

I'm curious how you suggest I read what the categories mean, when you clearly have not when you say nonsensical things such as
You don't. You fall out when you stop getting them. If BLS can't track you through a government unemployment program or tax data then you don't count in the U3 Unemployment statistic.
Which is completely untrue. BLS doesn't get the info for the Employment Situation from UI records. There's a monthly survey and the national figures are extrapolated from the results. Unemployed is defined as did not work during the survey reference week, wants to work, could have started work during the reference week, and actively looked for work in the 4 weeks ending with the reference week. Those on temporary layoff need not have looked for work.

That was from memory, by the way. I don't need to look up the definitions.

I would guess what Zero Hedge is talking about is the very real phenomenon where people dropping out of Unemployment programs are no longer counted as employed. They are "discouraged workers" and only get counted in U6 Unemployment figures.
Discouraged are included in the U4, and as part of the Marginally Attached in the U5 and U6. Discouraged workers are those who want to work, are available for work, looked for work in the previous 12 months but not the previous 4 weeks and who is not looking because s/he believes there is no work available, they don't have the right skills/education, or believes they would suffer discrimination.

So if you have 3 out of 10 people unemployed but enrolled in a jobs program then U3 would show 7/10 employed and a 30% unemployment. If those 1 of those people drops out of the unemployment program, even though they never found a job, the U3 number is 7/9 or 23% unemployment. It looks like unemployment is dropping when in fact it isn't.
No, the UE rate is unemployed divided by the labor force, which is employed plus unemployed. If someone is no longer trying to work, they are no longer part of the labor force (the basic concept of the labor force is those available for work. Someone not trying to get a job is obviously not available to be hired).

What we will see, more than likely, is a precipitous drop in the U3 unemployment with a far smaller or non-existent drop in U6 unemployment.
We've never seen such a thing before. They tend to move in the same direction at about the same rate of change. Oh, and U6 is NOT a measure of unemployment as it includes many employed in the numerator.
 
Last edited:
Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

That is, once again, completely inaccurate. The total number of those unemployed is not tracked through unemployment compensation, and those who fail to receive benefits may still be counted as unemployed. Straight from the source:


How the Government Measures Unemployment

Yep, you're right. Thank you for the correction.
 
Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

Why are you starting with the U6 and U5 instead of just using the number from the report?

Thank you for pointing this out. I was not aware the Fed's database contained all BLS data.

But do you see how someone might think from your post that the U6 did measure that in some way?

Yes, but let me assure you it was not my intent.

Yes it can and no it doesn't
You just have to take the series "Part time for economic reasons all industries, put it on the s as me line as Labor Force (or employed, depending on what base you want) and divide.
fredgraph.png

It does provide a more accurate metric than simply subtracting ratios.

fredgraph.png
 
Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

We've never seen such a thing before. They tend to move in the same direction at about the same rate of change. Oh, and U6 is NOT a measure of unemployment as it includes many employed in the numerator.


Yes, U6 measures unemployment and under employment. But no, they don't always move in the same direction and at the same rate. Just this past month U3 dropped 0.3% while U6 remained steady. The month prior the U6 declined at 3 times the rate of U3. And before that U6 increased while U3 remained steady, and so on.

Also, those who stop looking for work to show up in U6 but drop out of U3.
 
Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

That is precisely what just happened.

Reid is one sly devil who will do anything and everything to remain the majority leader. Nothing else matters to him even if the million plus unemployed goes without benefits.
 
Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

Reid is one sly devil who will do anything and everything to remain the majority leader. Nothing else matters to him even if the million plus unemployed goes without benefits.

Yup. The funny thing is, this is actually good policy, just done for evil reasons and so one can make spiteful arguments. Republicans are going to have to be pretty fast on the ball to point out how he killed this bill to the point where it will actually sink in; because that's a fine point that I'm thinking is beyond the capability of the general public to really delve into. Kind of a weird black-flag op, really.
 
Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

Yup. The funny thing is, this is actually good policy, just done for evil reasons and so one can make spiteful arguments. Republicans are going to have to be pretty fast on the ball to point out how he killed this bill to the point where it will actually sink in; because that's a fine point that I'm thinking is beyond the capability of the general public to really delve into. Kind of a weird black-flag op, really.

The general public do not pay any attention to the inner workings of the senate. Right now most of the reporting is not on the agreed bill between Reid and the 6 Republicans that would have passed and extended the benefits, it is now on how the republicans are preventing extension of unemployment benefits with the latest vote.

Nothing is being said of Reid changing the agreed bill to something totally different after he had an agreement. It will be very hard to get the truth out on this one.
 
Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

The general public do not pay any attention to the inner workings of the senate. Right now most of the reporting is not on the agreed bill between Reid and the 6 Republicans that would have passed and extended the benefits, it is now on how the republicans are preventing extension of unemployment benefits with the latest vote.

Nothing is being said of Reid changing the agreed bill to something totally different after he had an agreement. It will be very hard to get the truth out on this one.

Yup. This is one of those things where it's all about Optics > Reality.
 
Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

Absolutely untrue. There is no maximum time As long as you're trying to find work, you're classified as unemployed.
A-35. Unemployed total and full-time workers by duration of unemployment shows over 2.5 million unemployed over a year.

Then how do they differentiate between people who...

Return to school
Retire early
start their own business but it's not off the ground yet
crap I haven't thought of...

These are all people who are "unemployed" in one form or another.
 
Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

Yes, U6 measures unemployment and under employment.
The BLS term is "Labor Underutilization.

But no, they don't always move in the same direction and at the same rate. Just this past month U3 dropped 0.3% while U6 remained steady. The month prior the U6 declined at 3 times the rate of U3. And before that U6 increased while U3 remained steady, and so on.
Good thing for me I didn't say "always," isn't it? i said "tends to"
fredgraph.png



Also, those who stop looking for work to show up in U6 but drop out of U3.
Not necessarily. The U6 and U5 both include the Marginally Attached: Those who want to work, are available to work, and who looked for work in the previous 12 months but not previous 4 weeks. So someone could "drop out" but not be available or no longer want a job and therefore would not be marginally attached. Note too, that most of the marginally attached aren't looking for personal reasons such as care of family, going back to school, illness/injury, etc. The discouraged are are seen in the U4.

Besides...why do you think someone who is not trying to work should be considered unemployed?
 
Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

Yup. This is one of those things where it's all about Optics > Reality.

I call it perception, it is how the electorate perceives it to be. Reality does not need to apply, perception means everything.
 
Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

Then how do they differentiate between people who...

Return to school
They ask. If the person is still looking for work, s/he is unemployed, otherwise, they're not in the labor force...not competing for work.
Retire early
They don't ask about "early." And why would you consider them unemployed..especially if it's pure choice. But again, if they look for work, they're unemployed...if not, then they're not in the labor force...not competing for work.
start their own business but it's not off the ground yet
This one, I'm a little shakier on, but if I understand it correctly, then if the business is not yet in place and operational, then it is not yet a business. So the person isn't working or running a business with the intent of profit, nor is s/he looking for work. So s/he wouldn't be in the labor force that month.

Keep in mind what is being measured...the percent of people available for work that month who weren't working. If someone isn't looking, then they're not available. He doesn't know about any work, and no employer knows about him. We look at discouraged and marginally attached, because they're likely to start looking soon, so it's helpful to see how many there are.
crap I haven't thought of...

These are all people who are "unemployed" in one form or another.[/QUOTE]
 
Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

reinoe said:
Re hiring: some of those jobs are simply fake. As in companies post jobs with no intention of ever filling them. I saw that happen at where I used to work. They had about many job openings and were never filled. I know several qualified people who applied for them and recommended some others. And I don't mean not filled by the people I know I mean not filled at all ever. I'm not sure why companies do this sort of thing.

I can help with this. In some cases, it's simply a fishing expedition. In some cases, a department head or officer will have a genuine desire for a new position, but then will be contradicted by their boss, or reorganization will occur and the position won't be needed. Still other times, more often than many people would probably think, there are tax incentives for companies that can make plausible claims to be hiring.
 
Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

They don't ask about "early." And why would you consider them unemployed..especially if it's pure choice. But again, if they look for work, they're unemployed...if not, then they're not in the labor force...not competing for work.

They should ask because I guarantee you there are a heck of a lot of premature retirees that were forced into that situation because they could not find work.

If a laid off 39 year old has trouble finding a job (and many obviously are)...how easy will it be for a 59 year old looking in the same field?


More Than 1 Million Baby Boomers Are Secretly Unemployed

'Early Retirees Were Kicked Out Of The Workforce

How many Americans are forced into retirement because they couldn't find work? At the request of AOL Jobs, Matthew Rutledge, an economist at the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College, attempted to estimate the size of this group that remains invisible to the BLS. What he found: At the height of the recession, as many as 53,000 extra Americans were retiring early each month. In total, the recession has driven around 1.4 million additional Americans to collect Social Security early.'


More Than 1 Million Baby Boomers Are Secretly Unemployed - Careers Articles


Btw - if this number is accurate for today (if these people were counted - and they should be, imo), then the unemployment rate is really 7.5% (by my calculations).
 
Last edited:
Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

Interesting perspective. Just for giggles I pulled up my local small town paper and looked at the classified. 2 pages. Anything from wait staff and cooks for Huddle House, hotel desk and cleaning staff, entry level manufacturing, several levels of nursing positions for hospital, in home and retirement facilities, tax preparation and sales positions. Seems there are some jobs available, and at various levels of skill and pay.

Of those jobs, hotel desk and cleaning staff require no training or education. You just dont go from making cars to being a nurse at a hospital, or to preparing taxes. And that is my point.
 
Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

I didn't quote your entire response - just reading it gave me a headache and a distinct desire to punch a wall it was so obtuse.

The above part I did quote simply because my original comment that you did quote and respond to said very clearly to anyone with passing knowledge of the English language that I agreed with Rand Paul who said that any extension of unemployment insurance benefits had to be paid for and had to include a job training component.

Personally in every country, I would have a rule that says.. first 6 to 12 months you get unemployment payment.. after that period you get retraining payments for a period and are put in retraining course.
 
Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

Unemployment is meant for short term compensation while you try and find another job it isn't a long term lifestyle. if you can't find some kind of work any kind of work in 2 years you have issues.

A middle class person use to a certain income will not go get a burger flipping job that pays 1/10 of his/her former income. That is what people on the right are telling people to do... just not realistic. Unemployment is meant to be temporary, I agree, but you have to factor in the health of the economy and availability of good paying jobs that people can live off. It is no use in removing unemployment payouts if you have not successfully recuperated the lost jobs and started at least to retrain the unemployed into the areas where there are jobs. Sadly this takes longer than 2 years.
 
Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

They are already out of the labor force in reality.

Frankly no one but children and handicapped, homemaking parents and the retired should be out of the labour force. The way the US does it, totally distorts the unemployment numbers and reality and has been since the start of this practice. It underestimates the actual unemployment. Just because you have not been able to find a job for 2 years, does not mean you cant work... and that is the key difference... can work, vs want to work.. That is why I always get pissed about US vs European unemployment numbers on TV, because most European numbers have a labour force based on "can work", not on "want to work", which means European unemployment numbers are always relatively higher vs US.
 
Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

Sure cut them off, and remove them from the labour force for being lazy.... but that does not mean that there are jobs for them to get and that is the problem. All it does, is increase the poverty levels.. and I guess that is the strategy of the GOP these days.
Taxing the hell out of productive people to keep unproductive people reliant on Government for Votes is the DNC way... and that just keeps people chained in a cycle of poverty.

The GOP believes YOU will do what it in your best interest when faced with adversity, where as people like yourself believe that without Government people will just die in the streets.
 
Re: Unemployment Rate Set To Plunge As Bill To Restore Jobless Benefits Fails To Pass

Ya know, when I left the Navy, I had a high paying job lined up. The day of the interview a Hurricane hit Houston. The company I was going to work for their building was damaged and the company folded. I got stuck, on family land in San Antonio. I went on unemployment, for 3 weeks. I couldn't tolerate those checks. I took a base level position with Best Buy. I actually made LESS on that then I did my unemployment check, but I was earning it. I quit that job after landing a better job, and kept looking for better opportunities.

It's been almost 9 years since I got out of the Navy, my wife and I started out making at or just above Min wage, today, we're doing much much better. We had nothing, now we have something. We are planning to buy a house this year. We went without lots of nice things, we went pay check to pay check. We worked our asses off. I have rich relatives, I could have leaned on them for money, but I didn't. I could have lived on their land, living off unemployment and all kinds of welfare for years, but I refused to be a leech.

I have little pity for people that refuse to work hard, sacrifice to get ahead. I have compassion for people in need who strive to improve.

Life ain't fair, wallowing in self pity or believing you're owed something isn't right.
 
Back
Top Bottom