Higher unemployment rate on the horizon

[The Northerner]

Unemployment is likely to surge above 10 percent over the next few months as millions of “missing” workers return to the labor market.

This will pose a huge challenge for the Obama administration and congressional Democrats, who want to run in 2010 on the back of a strengthening economy.

Economist Mark Zandi expects the unemployment rate to float above 10 percent during the next few months as workers look to take advantage of improving opportunities.

“The increase in unemployment is a sign of a stronger job market, but it is also a sign of how weak the job market still is and vulnerable the recovery is to anything that might go wrong,” Zandi wrote in an e-mail to The Hill.

“Missing workers” are unemployed people who have stopped collecting benefits and stopped looking for work — thereby dropping off the radar. When they start looking for work again, they get counted as unemployed.

As many as 2.4 million of these workers have yet to return to the labor market, estimates Heidi Shierholz of the Economic Policy Institute. As those workers start searching for jobs, the unemployment rate is likely to tick higher.

Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/97635-higher-unemployment-on-horizon

[ipaint]

1. “missing” workers- no such thing

They are unemployed people the government doesn't count in the "official" much publicized U3 to make the numbers look as good as possible.


The BLS's U-6 number, which is sometimes called the "real" unemployment rate because it takes into discouraged workers who aren't looking for work ticked up in April from 16.9% to 17.1%.

http://www.businessinsider.com/the-real-unemployment-rate-jumps-to-171-2010-5#ixzz0npAErBzs

[AllentownJake]

2. Funny thing is those "missing workers" are probably collecting benefits as well

Which is the most ridiculous part about the BLS nonsense report and is inaccurate based on this reporting. There is no connection to collecting or not collecting benefits in the BLS report. It is are you actively looking or are you not and why.

Is you will count someone as discouraged and not in the labor pool as they collect benefits based on their survey response.

Also the U6 doesn't count them either, that counts part-time workers and under-employed workers. Not discouraged workers.

At the end of the day that report is so confusing from 7 Presidents playing games with it to make themselves look better during economic downturns that the report is almost meaningless unless you have 2 college level courses in statistics and a keen bullshit detector for government nonsense.

[ipaint]

6. The "marginally attached" hocus pocus baloney

U-6- 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

Persons marginally attached to the labor force are those who currently are neither working nor looking for work but indicate that they want and are available for a job and have looked for work sometime in the past 12 months. Discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached, have given a job-market related reason for not currently looking for work. Persons employed part time for economic reasons are those who want and are available for full-time work but have had to settle for a part-time schedule.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm

The whole thing is an exercise in how not to report an honest number that includes everyone. I don't think over 20% unemployed as the official number would be good politically for any politician in washington or the mega investment banks that rule.

[AllentownJake]

10. Shadow Stats is a good website

They tear this stuff apart nicely. I'm not a subscriber but my economic forums love them.

[ipaint]

Yes, he puts the U3, U6 and his number including everyone up every month.

22% including everyone (long-term discouraged workers, who were defined out of official existence in 1994.)

http://www.shadowstats.com/

[whopis01]

3. So this is a good sign then. n/t

[AllentownJake]

4. Possibly

It is only a good sign if the discouraged workers find jobs. If you were actively looking you just got new competition.

If anything the adequacy of this report and ability to report information to the public accurately should be questioned.

[ipaint]

9. Not really.

100's of thousands of uncounted unemployed were just added to a pool of millions of counted unemployed looking for work based on the pr campaign being waged by the economic elite to convince folks that "green shoots" are appearing everywhere.
Currently there is nothing being created business wise that can sustain a recovery. Very little lending especially to small businesses, the supposed engine for job creation.

[whattheidonot]

16. Republican takeover.

the Republicans takeover with 10% unemployment. It will hit the fan then and that might not be a bad thing long term. Our whole economic structure is going to have to be changed to have any kind of democracy and economy. Millions more will be unemployed, testing the free market. If the Republican fail the blow back could be historic. The free market frees up money for wealth creation and as little as possible for wages and jobs. We will need all sorts of programs the Republicans usually do not like.

[Kat45]

5. How do they know if someone is looking for work if they're not collecting unemployment?

I've been out of work for a long time but not collecting. How would they know about me? They have no way of knowing if I send a resume out. I don't understand how they can say they count everyone who is looking. Everyone collecting, sure. But everyone looking?

[proudohioan]

8. Same with me.....

are we counted? I wonder the same thing.

:shrug:

[AllentownJake]

21. Not unless you are called

It is a poll of 50,000 people selected by the BLS.

[proudohioan]

22. Wow! Talk about 'random sampling'......

50,000 huh!

No, I already know that I'm not counted. I have managed to avoid being completely unemployed since late 2005 by taking low paying service sector jobs and temp assignments. At first, these damn jobs paid about the same as unemployment would have, and I kept telling myself that at least 'I was working'. I kept telling myself that it was 'temporary', and things would 'pick up'. I was constantly looking for a 'real' job during this time, convincing myself to be 'patient'.

Well, needless to say, after three and a half years of that shit, things never did pick up, and I found myself working as a cashier in some really grimy 'discount' store, averaging $768 per month and knew I was trapped. There was simply nothing else out there! Since I had already 'doubled up' with a very dear friend, I did the sensible thing and quit.

That was in June 09. Since that time, I have applied for exactly one job. Didn't even get an interview there were so many applicants.

I am beyond a discouraged job seeker - I am officially a disgusted former job seeker.

[AllentownJake]

11. The BLS has nothing to do with unemployment benefits in their calculations

It is a telephone survey of 50,000 people. All data in the report is derived from this.

[Egnever]

13. I would like to know this as well

How is it possible for them to know these numbers.

[AllentownJake]

15. I just did an OP explaining what this report is nt.

[whattheidonot]

17. don't know

They have no way of knowing and then you now have all these part-time jobs and weird Internet jobs that you are not quite sure are legit. how do they keep track of that.

[AllentownJake]

20. It is a telephone survey nt.

[tcaudilllg]

7. It's a great sign

The people aren't stupid. They will read about the jobs being added in the papers.

The key is to observe that the conservatives are trying to manipulate what they see as an ignorant electorate, and call them out of it. Let evil destroy itself.

[conspirator]

12. but but ... I thought obama would be strong in the economy n/t

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TexasObserver]

18. More anti Democratic nonsense.

[AllentownJake]

19. Blame the way they measure things

If they counted people differently, this statistical anomoly wouldn't happen.