Our economy went from manufacturing to financials . People lost jobs but financiers made big money on rents and crooked investments a la Donald Trump. What's needed is Keynesian approach to end austerity, invest in infrastructure , a jobs programs etc.
3
As an Australian, I would question what the definition of employment actually is in America and whether, for so many, it is even valid to call it such.
With 50% of Americans unable to meet an unforeseen cost of as little as $400 above their usual expenses one has to question the benefits of employment that makes this possible.
Of the minimum wage jobs that so many hold or even those that work two...yet cannot afford to live and often require food stamps and other help to make do, despite working more than 80 hours a week , in some cases.
Of the millions of Americans who despite their own wishes are forced to work Part Time so that Employers are not required to support Employees with ANY of the benefits of full time employment few that there might be.
Of Jobs that are as secure as the whims or reasons not given when Employers can fire an Employee at will, immediately.
In a job Market where a majority of workers do not get paid sick leave, paid maternity leave, rising wages, Paid Vacation leave (or if they do, a paltry 2 weeks and usually not all at once) and unemployment payments for a limited time based on the funds you have paid into the scheme whilst employed.
The above just a few of the many things lacking that Employment in America fails to provide.
At least 45% of Americans employed in the labor market don't meet the definition of Employment that Australia considers either Acceptable or Legal and which no Australian has ever worked under for over 60 years or more.
With 50% of Americans unable to meet an unforeseen cost of as little as $400 above their usual expenses one has to question the benefits of employment that makes this possible.
Of the minimum wage jobs that so many hold or even those that work two...yet cannot afford to live and often require food stamps and other help to make do, despite working more than 80 hours a week , in some cases.
Of the millions of Americans who despite their own wishes are forced to work Part Time so that Employers are not required to support Employees with ANY of the benefits of full time employment few that there might be.
Of Jobs that are as secure as the whims or reasons not given when Employers can fire an Employee at will, immediately.
In a job Market where a majority of workers do not get paid sick leave, paid maternity leave, rising wages, Paid Vacation leave (or if they do, a paltry 2 weeks and usually not all at once) and unemployment payments for a limited time based on the funds you have paid into the scheme whilst employed.
The above just a few of the many things lacking that Employment in America fails to provide.
At least 45% of Americans employed in the labor market don't meet the definition of Employment that Australia considers either Acceptable or Legal and which no Australian has ever worked under for over 60 years or more.
5
Good afternoon from Capitol Hill.
The same federal government that knows everything about all of us all of the time, produces jobs stats that do not count EVERY unemployed person.
Let me repeat that.
The easiest way to get reliable unemployment figures? A head count.
The federal government attaches strings to unemployment benefits distributed to the states. One of those strings are records. So what does that mean? It means the federal government, if it wanted to, could get plain, simple head counts of every unemployed person living in every state.
But they don't.
Instead we get manipulated "surveys" from employers with a vested interest in responding in ways that make them look good. It is human nature, whether it be political polls, surveys or grading your own quiz paper in elementary school to accentuate the positive.
We have the infrastructure and the ability to identify and count every unemployed person in America. But for some reason we don't.
Why is that?
The same federal government that knows everything about all of us all of the time, produces jobs stats that do not count EVERY unemployed person.
Let me repeat that.
The easiest way to get reliable unemployment figures? A head count.
The federal government attaches strings to unemployment benefits distributed to the states. One of those strings are records. So what does that mean? It means the federal government, if it wanted to, could get plain, simple head counts of every unemployed person living in every state.
But they don't.
Instead we get manipulated "surveys" from employers with a vested interest in responding in ways that make them look good. It is human nature, whether it be political polls, surveys or grading your own quiz paper in elementary school to accentuate the positive.
We have the infrastructure and the ability to identify and count every unemployed person in America. But for some reason we don't.
Why is that?
3
Not every unemployed person get benefits.
However, we do have the infrastructure to identify EVERY unemployed person, but that would be both costly and time-consuming. It would be doing the census every month.
However, we do have the infrastructure to identify EVERY unemployed person, but that would be both costly and time-consuming. It would be doing the census every month.
1
Your idea would count those receiving unemployment compensation, not all those unemployed. A simply solution is to use the social security database, if you were employed and are now not employed and not receiving social security they you are unemployed. This would be better but not perfect. Many who are "retired" would like a job if one was available. and thus are unemployed.
2
Who needs statistics to determine that the economy for working people is in trouble? We have candidate Trump as a prime indicator.
The US has become a banana republic where the wealthy control the government and workers are squeezed. We delude ourselves that we live in a democracy, while for the last generation the wishes of the donor class have taken precedence over the preferences of voters.
Despite calls for repudiating trade agreements, the US economy will not truly recover until the consumer once again has money to spend. That will not happen until employees have more bargaining power versus employers.
If conservatives wish to revisit the past, they should revisit the economy of the Eisenhower administration when the government enraged in huge infrastructure projects (Interstate highway system) and sent large numbers of people to college for free (GI Bill).
The US has become a banana republic where the wealthy control the government and workers are squeezed. We delude ourselves that we live in a democracy, while for the last generation the wishes of the donor class have taken precedence over the preferences of voters.
Despite calls for repudiating trade agreements, the US economy will not truly recover until the consumer once again has money to spend. That will not happen until employees have more bargaining power versus employers.
If conservatives wish to revisit the past, they should revisit the economy of the Eisenhower administration when the government enraged in huge infrastructure projects (Interstate highway system) and sent large numbers of people to college for free (GI Bill).
12
Jobs Americans won't do. Creative destructionism. Brothers in the hood can't find jobs cause the Masters of the Universe sent them to Mexico, China etc. Can't outsource some jobs so import cheap labor. Don't forget all this too.
6
How about the Federal government do some mass hiring and training of immigration inspectors? And then deploy them to audit E-verify in the workplace? And audit the H1b users.
4
I always find economic reports a very strange roller coaster ride. Even the same story can garner upbeat headlines from one news source and a grim outlook from another. I constantly feel as if I have whiplash.
Consumer confidence is up one month :-) and down the next :-(
The unemployment rate is quoted; then the bears tell me that the "real" rate is way, way, way higher - really.
The stock market seems to love it when the economy is doing poorly (the Fed won't raise rates - yay), but also hates it when the economy is doing poorly (companies are cutting back on orders - boo). A wise old banker and securities analyst used to tell me, "No one really knows why the market does what it does. The "experts" on TV have to give an explanation and so they give reasons, but no one really knows." More and more I think he was onto something.
Consumer confidence is up one month :-) and down the next :-(
The unemployment rate is quoted; then the bears tell me that the "real" rate is way, way, way higher - really.
The stock market seems to love it when the economy is doing poorly (the Fed won't raise rates - yay), but also hates it when the economy is doing poorly (companies are cutting back on orders - boo). A wise old banker and securities analyst used to tell me, "No one really knows why the market does what it does. The "experts" on TV have to give an explanation and so they give reasons, but no one really knows." More and more I think he was onto something.
4
Considering the news that 40% of American families would not be able to easily discharge a $400 emergency says that purchasing power, which might actually be the real measure of our economic health, is quite low and approaching the need for life-support.
We forget that "A business only exists in the perception of a customer." While more and more businesses reward the executives with huge compensation packages, transfer work to other nations and make a lot of their cash from speculative investments, we have to wonder where tomorrows customers are coming from.
While Wall Street and the executive suite are doing quite well, Main Street and the family budget aren't doing well at all. Consumption is down to the essentials with nothing left for non-essentials or emergencies. That does not indicate a healthy economy, nor does it bode well for the corporations and their executives in the long term. But, who cares about the long term? We should, but we don't.
We forget that "A business only exists in the perception of a customer." While more and more businesses reward the executives with huge compensation packages, transfer work to other nations and make a lot of their cash from speculative investments, we have to wonder where tomorrows customers are coming from.
While Wall Street and the executive suite are doing quite well, Main Street and the family budget aren't doing well at all. Consumption is down to the essentials with nothing left for non-essentials or emergencies. That does not indicate a healthy economy, nor does it bode well for the corporations and their executives in the long term. But, who cares about the long term? We should, but we don't.
9
There are always so-called jobs going. Shock, horror — many of them are unfilled. The question is, why would anyone want to stick at such jobs for very long, when the pay is paltry and the working conditions hazardous?
Look, here's an example to explain. If I don't have a job, then I can create easily my own job, say picking up litter in the street that nobody else, including the paid street cleaners, can be bothered to collect regularly.
The problem with the job I have created for myself is, of course, that it's unpaid. In terms of the theory of contract law, there's no consideration. I'm also not learning or practising new skills. Nor am I making useful business contacts for down the track.
So, I'm working ten hours a day, say, I'm doing something socially useful, but apart from perhaps the occasional word of encouragement from a few passers-by, I gain little from the job except the sense of satisfaction that comes from looking after the environment.
This should show the importance of making clear for any job the hourly pay rate, the total hours worked in an average week or month including any overtime at a higher rate, and the working conditions.
Because if the effective income, after expenses such as travel and child care, say, mean that the income is so low it might as well be zero, then the job is not really a job at all.
Look, here's an example to explain. If I don't have a job, then I can create easily my own job, say picking up litter in the street that nobody else, including the paid street cleaners, can be bothered to collect regularly.
The problem with the job I have created for myself is, of course, that it's unpaid. In terms of the theory of contract law, there's no consideration. I'm also not learning or practising new skills. Nor am I making useful business contacts for down the track.
So, I'm working ten hours a day, say, I'm doing something socially useful, but apart from perhaps the occasional word of encouragement from a few passers-by, I gain little from the job except the sense of satisfaction that comes from looking after the environment.
This should show the importance of making clear for any job the hourly pay rate, the total hours worked in an average week or month including any overtime at a higher rate, and the working conditions.
Because if the effective income, after expenses such as travel and child care, say, mean that the income is so low it might as well be zero, then the job is not really a job at all.
8
Perhaps a better metric would be a measure of earnings vs those in the age range 18-65 measured in constant dollars. This would capture trends toward fewer folks working and those that are, earning less. It is crude, and should only be viewed over time. As many posters have noted, the unemployment rate fails to capture those who have given up trying to find a job, and it, too, is only useful as a longitudinal measure. I would be happier if it were reported alongside the raw number of folks working vs the number of folks potentially in the labor pool. What really matters is how many people want work and can't find it.
6
With so much information now available online to be crunched, how about a report on full full-time employment at wages higher than what were paid in 1968 as a minimum wage, with inflation factored in. That would be $10.90 today ($1.60 in 1968).
So ... how many U.S. workers are employed 35 to 40 hours a week with benefits and a pension plan and being paid at least $10.90 an hour? Show us that dismal number for your next report to compare to what the feds trot out as an "employment" rate.
And meanwhile, dear local NYT readers. On behalf of the rest of us who don't live in NYC, the next time you stroll past 740 Park Ave., throw a rotten egg at the building, It won't have much effect on those rich, sheltered destroyers of our economy who live inside the building, but you'd put a smile on our faces.
So ... how many U.S. workers are employed 35 to 40 hours a week with benefits and a pension plan and being paid at least $10.90 an hour? Show us that dismal number for your next report to compare to what the feds trot out as an "employment" rate.
And meanwhile, dear local NYT readers. On behalf of the rest of us who don't live in NYC, the next time you stroll past 740 Park Ave., throw a rotten egg at the building, It won't have much effect on those rich, sheltered destroyers of our economy who live inside the building, but you'd put a smile on our faces.
16
Jeez, what's a pension?
4
The data is not contradictory.
In a recession most unemployment is considered cyclical unemployment.
Cyclical unemployment is the result of an economic downturn.
More accommodative monetary policy can help stabilize capital market prices and reduce the savings rate to incentivize capital to move out the risk curve and encourage more business investment, aggregate demand and hiring.
Outside of a cyclical downturn, most unemployment is structural.
Structural unemployment results from a mismatch in the skill set employers need and the unemployed have.
Monetary policy cannot address structural unemployment.
Fiscal policy can close the skill gap through vocational and higher educational training for the unemployed.
The Fed is stating clearly in the text of their statements that the unemployment remaining in the economy is largely structural.
The JOLT survey measures unfilled open positions posted by employers. It is at record levels, with nearly 6 million jobs unfilled.
Jobless claims are near 4 decade lows.
Payroll growth has averaged 225,000 per month over the last year.
The economy only needs about 85-90k jobs per month to keep up with population growth.
The fact that payroll growth appears to be slowing (one month of data is meaningless given the seasonal smoothing applied to the raw data dwarfs it) is normal as the economy reaches full employment.
We are below every Fed and private estimate of NAIRU at 4.7%.
The policy prescription needs to change now.
In a recession most unemployment is considered cyclical unemployment.
Cyclical unemployment is the result of an economic downturn.
More accommodative monetary policy can help stabilize capital market prices and reduce the savings rate to incentivize capital to move out the risk curve and encourage more business investment, aggregate demand and hiring.
Outside of a cyclical downturn, most unemployment is structural.
Structural unemployment results from a mismatch in the skill set employers need and the unemployed have.
Monetary policy cannot address structural unemployment.
Fiscal policy can close the skill gap through vocational and higher educational training for the unemployed.
The Fed is stating clearly in the text of their statements that the unemployment remaining in the economy is largely structural.
The JOLT survey measures unfilled open positions posted by employers. It is at record levels, with nearly 6 million jobs unfilled.
Jobless claims are near 4 decade lows.
Payroll growth has averaged 225,000 per month over the last year.
The economy only needs about 85-90k jobs per month to keep up with population growth.
The fact that payroll growth appears to be slowing (one month of data is meaningless given the seasonal smoothing applied to the raw data dwarfs it) is normal as the economy reaches full employment.
We are below every Fed and private estimate of NAIRU at 4.7%.
The policy prescription needs to change now.
4
The skill set employers need is the ability of their employees to live on substandard wages. The wholesale replacement of US IT workers with H1B Visa holders employed by Indian contractors is not because Americans lack the skill sets necessary to perform in their jobs. It's just corporate greed and shortsightedness.
9
Skill gap, my Aunt Fanny. Jobs going unfilled here are picker packer at Amazon and similar warehouses. Grueling job, cruel treatment of workers (would you like to go to the bathroom? sorry, not for four more hours). They've relaxed drug testing standards - marijuana is ok - so they can get people. They're even willing to pay $10 an hour. But who can or would do this very long? ex-cons, students who see a light at the end of the tunnel, people with few other choices....
5
It costs nothing to post a job to replace an American with a low cost imported worker. Your job listings metric is an indication of cost control, not real growth, in most markets.
4
"So there you have it." pretty much explains it all: data for Labor is lame and the media think that's good enough.
In truth, we don't know more about labor because we don't really effectively measure it. It isn't because it's not in the interest of business. They've gotten away with stealing the profits from significant productivity created by workers using technology from those workers for 30 years and desperate to avoid having to give it back. Nor do they want to use the cash wisely, preferring to manipulate investments rather than conduct business. Now that productivity is slowing business blames labor for that too. A similarity to the con of the GOP figures large here.
If keeping an eye on labor was as important to business as for instance, the value of corner office compensation, you can bet the stats will be slapped on the table PDQ.
Business manages to report any little drab of compensated work as a job whether it's for a day or a full-time hire. The one hired for a day counts just as much as a job created as the full-time with benefits.
This year I got counted as taking 3 newly created jobs AND rolling off the back of unemployment at the SAME TIME! That's how good our numbers are! If one of the LMCI 19 factors is the Conference Board projections, they're forecasting people are going to have to work more and longer than before because, wait for it, productivity is down.
Labor Stats? It would be nice to actually have some. Right now, we don't.
In truth, we don't know more about labor because we don't really effectively measure it. It isn't because it's not in the interest of business. They've gotten away with stealing the profits from significant productivity created by workers using technology from those workers for 30 years and desperate to avoid having to give it back. Nor do they want to use the cash wisely, preferring to manipulate investments rather than conduct business. Now that productivity is slowing business blames labor for that too. A similarity to the con of the GOP figures large here.
If keeping an eye on labor was as important to business as for instance, the value of corner office compensation, you can bet the stats will be slapped on the table PDQ.
Business manages to report any little drab of compensated work as a job whether it's for a day or a full-time hire. The one hired for a day counts just as much as a job created as the full-time with benefits.
This year I got counted as taking 3 newly created jobs AND rolling off the back of unemployment at the SAME TIME! That's how good our numbers are! If one of the LMCI 19 factors is the Conference Board projections, they're forecasting people are going to have to work more and longer than before because, wait for it, productivity is down.
Labor Stats? It would be nice to actually have some. Right now, we don't.
8
I have the best barometer as to how the economy is doing, it’s called my telephone.It just isn’t ringing, so I’m doubling down on canvasing for business, & there are very few manufacturers looking to add or change vendors.I’m barely making a living, but the recession was 10 times as bad, so, I am grateful for what I’m receiving.
6
The answer is none, they are all so bad that it is worthless.
3
I'll believe Dean Baker, the most unbiased source in Washington!
1
One factor hurting employment is the lack of start up businesses. Normally some who lose jobs with established companies start their own businesses and those that are successful, create real jobs. It's a difficult environment for someone to risk starting a business today with the layer on layer of regulations, etc. Hopefully Hillary (and Bill) recognize this and can move us forward.
3
What is NOT considered is population and proportion as well as trend. So each year as population increases, there maybe increase in jobs but not quite proportionally to the added population-especially given the skills and/or work desired by the population. People less wish menial tedious laborious work but also they don't wish excruciatingly specific narrow work where 12 years of preparation is needed for it. So when this trend, nature of the work is considered the picture becomes so bleak as to see the trend eventually be that only 20% of the population is meaninfullly employed!! -
4
Population IS accounted for in the sense that UE is measured in percentages.
2
I am neither an economist nor a statistician but the only metric that seems to begin to reflect reality is the BLS's U-6. A year ago in May 2015 it stood at 10.7% seasonally adjusted. In May 2016 it is 9.7%.
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm
Even 9.7% may be really optimistic for various segments of the population -- young, male, blacks, those over 40 of any color, etc.
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm
Even 9.7% may be really optimistic for various segments of the population -- young, male, blacks, those over 40 of any color, etc.
7
But the historical average for U6 is 11.7, so 9.7 is 2 points better than normal.
There are two realities; one is real and visible, all across the United States; that reality indicates the working class, the poor and the middle class, are barely existing, buried ever deeper in debt, lower wages, less benefits, poor, costly, and often non-existent medical coverage, made even more difficult by a type of so called "affordable" care that turned out to be a lie, developed by Big Insurance and government to garner more revenue, requiring by law that everyone be covered, providing coverage with costly premiums, only after deductibles that are as high as $10,000, insuring that millions can never afford to get past the deductible to use the plan.
Add to this rising food and housing costs, never-ending inflation, and myriad other expenses, all designed to beggar the people, and create a worldwide labor force of economic slaves.
And the other reality, the one that mainstream media disseminates for our corporate owned government, the one we all know to be noting but lies, keeps being touted, presuming the long subjugated populace will bend further under the yoke; my advice to the masters of mankind is simple, wake up lest the people wake you up, with a vengeance.
Add to this rising food and housing costs, never-ending inflation, and myriad other expenses, all designed to beggar the people, and create a worldwide labor force of economic slaves.
And the other reality, the one that mainstream media disseminates for our corporate owned government, the one we all know to be noting but lies, keeps being touted, presuming the long subjugated populace will bend further under the yoke; my advice to the masters of mankind is simple, wake up lest the people wake you up, with a vengeance.
18
There is a song lyric "who do you believe, me or your own lying eyes". There are so many highly skilled people who are looking for work or are "consultants" or even driving Uber that I believe the worst. In Conn if it can be outsourced it will be outsourced, and any opening(even by death) is highly scrutinized before it is replaced. Technology, outsourcing, fear (which I have with 2 kids in college) make people more productive. One facet little covered is that about 15% are employed in government/public ed which has union protection. For example in my town we have gone from 15000 to 8000 students with a workforce of 800(no losses0 and a fire dept of 110(making 90-100k) where most I know have never even viewed a fire. That means all the disruption and trouble is isolated to the 85% in private sector. Not good
13
[ most I know have never even viewed a fire.]
But we like them to be there if one happens.
But we like them to be there if one happens.
Is it me, or is this pretty simple. We are all working cheaper. After the recession jobs and salaries never came back the way they were. Employers found cheaper ways of doing tasks and many employers just got greedy and took advantage of people out of work.
14
Mike,
It's not you.
Its the New World Order, you know the one Bush coined, I think it was him; in any event, the idea, the plan, and now the reality, was very simple, and easy to deploy.
It went something like this - Create a worldwide financial crisis, open the free money faucet for Big Business, (bailouts and zero interest rate Fed money, taxpayer funded, you and me), eliminate millions of jobs, reduce benefits and medical coverage, reduce workweek, demand and get higher productivity from remaining workers, increase prices on everything the consumer needs (American economy is 70% reliant on the consumer), displace millions through foreclosures, all of which createed fear in the labor force, making them easier to manipulate and manage. And if all of that didn't make you a docile citizen, there is always worldwide terrorism to keep you on your toes, and dependant on the largess and security of our corporate owned government; so darn lucky, aren't we fortunate.
Almost forgot the latest and greatest "American Presidential Reality Show", the circus part of the Bread and Circuses fare that our oh so caring government is trying so very hard to keep attention anywhere and everywhere, to stop the tiresome populace from waking up.
It's not you.
Its the New World Order, you know the one Bush coined, I think it was him; in any event, the idea, the plan, and now the reality, was very simple, and easy to deploy.
It went something like this - Create a worldwide financial crisis, open the free money faucet for Big Business, (bailouts and zero interest rate Fed money, taxpayer funded, you and me), eliminate millions of jobs, reduce benefits and medical coverage, reduce workweek, demand and get higher productivity from remaining workers, increase prices on everything the consumer needs (American economy is 70% reliant on the consumer), displace millions through foreclosures, all of which createed fear in the labor force, making them easier to manipulate and manage. And if all of that didn't make you a docile citizen, there is always worldwide terrorism to keep you on your toes, and dependant on the largess and security of our corporate owned government; so darn lucky, aren't we fortunate.
Almost forgot the latest and greatest "American Presidential Reality Show", the circus part of the Bread and Circuses fare that our oh so caring government is trying so very hard to keep attention anywhere and everywhere, to stop the tiresome populace from waking up.
12
No we are not all working cheaper. But your observation that unskilled labor is being replaced by either automation or cheap foreign labor is very true.
6
The only labor index I want to see is the one that tells us just how many jobs are being displaced each month by software and brilliant machines.
4
I doubt we're at full employment but I still wonder why everyone thinks U-6 is a secret instead of a static that's been tracked & published for over 25 years?
While U-3 has been going down, so has U-6 & its also hit/matched it's lowest level since the recession.
U--6 was 9.7% in 05-96 when U-3 wash 5.6% & that was not a bad year. It was 9.7% 11-02 with a U-3 of 5.9 & rising after the dot.com bust & 9.7% on 10-04 with a U-3 of 5.5% and falling.
It best ever was 6.9% in 04-00 with a also historic low of 3.8% U-3 in the dot. com frenzy which was probably way beyond a sustainable full employmment.
The numbers compare our current economy to similar times where things were pretty mediocre. Nothing cheer about but not times to lament that it couldn't be worse.
While U-3 has been going down, so has U-6 & its also hit/matched it's lowest level since the recession.
U--6 was 9.7% in 05-96 when U-3 wash 5.6% & that was not a bad year. It was 9.7% 11-02 with a U-3 of 5.9 & rising after the dot.com bust & 9.7% on 10-04 with a U-3 of 5.5% and falling.
It best ever was 6.9% in 04-00 with a also historic low of 3.8% U-3 in the dot. com frenzy which was probably way beyond a sustainable full employmment.
The numbers compare our current economy to similar times where things were pretty mediocre. Nothing cheer about but not times to lament that it couldn't be worse.
I was around and working in 1996, and I can you that the economy was 100% different then -- just 20 years ago -- it's like remembering some lost, golden land that only exists in memory.
I remember when I lost a job back then, the newspaper classified section was thick and full of jobs. I could easily send out 10-12 resumes a week. Today, it is 1.5 pages. And no, it's no better or different online. Many of the jobs are "fake", just come-ons from employment agencies.
I know far too many skilled, college-degreed adults who are unemployed -- especially over 50 -- to believe this malarkey. The stats are cooked.
I remember when I lost a job back then, the newspaper classified section was thick and full of jobs. I could easily send out 10-12 resumes a week. Today, it is 1.5 pages. And no, it's no better or different online. Many of the jobs are "fake", just come-ons from employment agencies.
I know far too many skilled, college-degreed adults who are unemployed -- especially over 50 -- to believe this malarkey. The stats are cooked.
2
And it will be worse. Work for a software company and watch how fast we automate people out of a job, a white collar job no less. Ten on my project two years ago, five more this year. Software is eating the labor world.
2
Outsourcing of jobs coupled with tech hiring fewer people than industry means that the US economy is not growing very fast. Nothing will change that fact. The Feds money printing papers over this fact plus puts large amounts of free money in the hands of the Wall Street Casino and the Silicon Valley tulip funders. The Feds money printing has not helped the real economy much which is basically flat-lined. All the Fed has done is create a massive stock and local real estate booms which will eventually crash destabilizing the economy again and causing further job losses on Wall St.
9
There is something really wrong -- really, really wrong -- and perhaps beyond the ken of "statistics" such as U-3 and U-6 -- when Wall Street and real estate are booming, but ordinary people cannot find decent full-time jobs.
Something was irretrievably broken in the last recession, and Obama policies made it worse -- not better.
Something was irretrievably broken in the last recession, and Obama policies made it worse -- not better.
1
There is little to argue with in this column because it simply distinguishes between on one this may be good and on the other it may be bad. Most of the views of the readers seems to be that they confuse macroeconomics with microeconomics and they throw in their political ideas as solutions regardless of anything to do with this column. This is a macroeconomic column. The answers lie in that there is not enough opportunity in the USA. The answers require goals and objectives. One of the goals should be to create a bigger pie before trying to cut a larger slice simply because there are any many formulas to cut the pie as there are people. You can't please everybody so how about putting the USA first. Both opportunity and lack of opportunity abound.
4
The advent of the unregulated global economy created the perfect petrie dish for the worldwide development of crony capitalism by the corporatists and the capitalist moneylenders. From the 1970s forward, the corporatists were keenly interested in increasing their profitability at the expense of the American workers. They formulated plans for the near destruction of the unions in the US, which had been for many years the only bulwark against unfettered crony capitalism.
Along came the unregulated global economy which provided the opportunity for corporatists to do away with American jobs by moving manufacturing overseas to take advantage of near-slave wages in Third World countries. The opportunity for the flow of capital around the world to avoid taxes and hide corporate money was the final shot for the demise of the middle class and its workers.
Playing with underemployment by the Fed did not do justice to the real problem, which was corporate greed by the multinational corporatists and their worldwide financiers.
The American multinational corporations saw the opportunity to throw labor under the bus and to choose new partners to share the profits, towit Wall Street. In the end, to make this all possible, the above entities bought American politicians to legislate unfair policies. Unless this greed is stemmed by the majority of the world population, there will be a worldwide revolution, more immense than that envisioned by Bernie Sanders.
Along came the unregulated global economy which provided the opportunity for corporatists to do away with American jobs by moving manufacturing overseas to take advantage of near-slave wages in Third World countries. The opportunity for the flow of capital around the world to avoid taxes and hide corporate money was the final shot for the demise of the middle class and its workers.
Playing with underemployment by the Fed did not do justice to the real problem, which was corporate greed by the multinational corporatists and their worldwide financiers.
The American multinational corporations saw the opportunity to throw labor under the bus and to choose new partners to share the profits, towit Wall Street. In the end, to make this all possible, the above entities bought American politicians to legislate unfair policies. Unless this greed is stemmed by the majority of the world population, there will be a worldwide revolution, more immense than that envisioned by Bernie Sanders.
8
How about another possibility? technological innovation has accelerated to the point where there is a permanent lag-time between the destruction of jobs and the creation of new ones- even possibly a permanent state of lessening need for human workers.
That is a scenario that completely aligns with what I'm seeing and hearing. People don't need much help from people to shop any more- How much do you suppose Amazon has streamlined the need for workers per product distributed compared to buying at the Mall you used to shop at?
How many secretaries do lawyers need- receptionists, phone operators........
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/515926/how-technology-is-destroying-j...
When a computer does the work of a human- where does that salary money go- a lot of it to people with investments in technology. Those greedy investors!
That is a scenario that completely aligns with what I'm seeing and hearing. People don't need much help from people to shop any more- How much do you suppose Amazon has streamlined the need for workers per product distributed compared to buying at the Mall you used to shop at?
How many secretaries do lawyers need- receptionists, phone operators........
https://www.technologyreview.com/s/515926/how-technology-is-destroying-j...
When a computer does the work of a human- where does that salary money go- a lot of it to people with investments in technology. Those greedy investors!
6
Lower and lower labor participation rates are expected to occur with ongoing long-term demographic transitions. The Bureau of Labor Statistics published (back Oct. 2012) long-term labor force projections (out to 2050) based on: a) the rate Baby Boomers will age out; and b) lower participation rates for both the 16-24 and the 25-54 year old cohorts. Whereas the overall labor force participation rate "peaked at 67.1 percent from 1997 to 2000," it is expected to slip to "58.5 percent by 2050."
Toosi, M. 2012. "Projections of the labor force to 2050: a visual essay." Monthly Labor Review. Available online at: http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2012/10/art1full.pdf
Toosi, M. 2012. "Projections of the labor force to 2050: a visual essay." Monthly Labor Review. Available online at: http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2012/10/art1full.pdf
4
Expected but I know that many older individuals would be happy to apply their skills if appropriate opportunities existed. They don't.
4
Our economy requires drastic revision in order to resume providing the widespread prosperity available until the Reagan era. Not only is the percentage of available Americans actually participating in the labor market at a historic low, but wages continue to stagnate and our economy is only producing low wage jobs in the service sectors.
10
"It doesnt tell you how many of them would like a better job at higher pay." My guess is that's close to 100% of the work force. I think you meant to say something like "It doesn't tell you how many of them, given their education and skills and employment history, are under-employed."
14
My favorite index is total federal tax receipts at a fixed tax rate. The tax receipts goes up with either increase in wages or increase in employment or both.
5
"Now, roughly 85 percent of such men are working."
.............
NOT in our town they're not. We have nearly bumper to bumper traffic all day long, and they can't all be self-employed. There is something wrong somewhere.
data is computer driven so it should be very easy to just count all the social security numbers that are now "live" tax numbers. employers pay payroll tax, so it should be fairly easy to determine give or take a few thou how many people are actually "working": I suspect there is a lot of "underground labor" like porn cams, drug dealing, car washing, lawn mowing etc that is not counted and those people may be "working" but probably not on the books. What we need is TRUTH out of DC, not opinions or samples.
.............
NOT in our town they're not. We have nearly bumper to bumper traffic all day long, and they can't all be self-employed. There is something wrong somewhere.
data is computer driven so it should be very easy to just count all the social security numbers that are now "live" tax numbers. employers pay payroll tax, so it should be fairly easy to determine give or take a few thou how many people are actually "working": I suspect there is a lot of "underground labor" like porn cams, drug dealing, car washing, lawn mowing etc that is not counted and those people may be "working" but probably not on the books. What we need is TRUTH out of DC, not opinions or samples.
7
"Truth out of DC"
That's a good one; you and I will be dust in the wind, long before that occurs.
That's a good one; you and I will be dust in the wind, long before that occurs.
3
A couple of weeks ago, the NYTimes had an article about the rising rate of suicide. The notion that economic hardship had something to do with this was posited by the author. My reaction: "Well, d-u-h!"
I expect it will continue to rise for those in the slave state where life is not worth living.
I expect it will continue to rise for those in the slave state where life is not worth living.
10
The unemployment figures are cooked!
My family has been in the manufacturing/ importing business for over 100 years -- we (as in USA) don't make what we once did. This may come as a shock to many -- That $5 shirt from Walmart ... nope .. not made in the USA. Very little in Walmart is made in the USA. The $10 an hour worker can only buy the $5 shirt from Walmart.. maybe if they made $15 they could buy something made in the USA .. and someone would get a job making it.
No .... better to send it all to China and India. This did not happen overnight -- it's a slow steady process.
We also don't as a country buy our own products (we did at one time). Can you imagine the French buying a LV bag made in China or theItalians buying a Fendi bag from India -- everything from Coach and R. Lauren is made overseas.
The problem is in the mirror.
My family has been in the manufacturing/ importing business for over 100 years -- we (as in USA) don't make what we once did. This may come as a shock to many -- That $5 shirt from Walmart ... nope .. not made in the USA. Very little in Walmart is made in the USA. The $10 an hour worker can only buy the $5 shirt from Walmart.. maybe if they made $15 they could buy something made in the USA .. and someone would get a job making it.
No .... better to send it all to China and India. This did not happen overnight -- it's a slow steady process.
We also don't as a country buy our own products (we did at one time). Can you imagine the French buying a LV bag made in China or theItalians buying a Fendi bag from India -- everything from Coach and R. Lauren is made overseas.
The problem is in the mirror.
17
When someone buys a shirt at a good price, they should ask themselves, "Who was abused to make this shirt?" Or that $60 bicycle. Or that clock-radio. Or that winter peach.
We buy products from countries with no child-labor laws. No worker safety laws. No environmental laws. No workman's compensations. We are buying the products of economic slavery.
We in the U.S. no longer have African slaves toiling in the fields of Dixie, but we have Asian, African and Latin American slaves toiling in our factories and farms (which only grow crops for export) around the world. Is a few cents a day for labor a wage? It's still slavery, and they have to provide their own food and shelter. The 'workers' have no choice as we've taken their options away by removing viable opportunities.
And people wonder why they hate us.
We buy products from countries with no child-labor laws. No worker safety laws. No environmental laws. No workman's compensations. We are buying the products of economic slavery.
We in the U.S. no longer have African slaves toiling in the fields of Dixie, but we have Asian, African and Latin American slaves toiling in our factories and farms (which only grow crops for export) around the world. Is a few cents a day for labor a wage? It's still slavery, and they have to provide their own food and shelter. The 'workers' have no choice as we've taken their options away by removing viable opportunities.
And people wonder why they hate us.
14
Wages should be compared based on purchase power parity (PPP). No one in any country with or without labor laws would work if they can't live with the wages they are earning.
1
"And people wonder why they hate us."
I don't wonder, I know. Russians, for example, hate us, because we stay in their way of exploiting and dominating other nations. Low income Mexicans hate for not letting them in freely to use our free care, education, and other opportunities. Muslims, around the world and homegrown, hate us for the living evidence that a free-enterprise competition-based non-ideological society is stronger than a dictatorial hierarchy.
Some hate us out of envy that they can't have what we do. This group, interestingly enough, does not direct their hate toward their own elites, who are much wealthier than most Americans. That tells me that buying a pair of shoes in Walmart has nothing to do with their hatred.
Besides, Allen, what do you suggest? That we slow our economy down in order to let the Chinese exploit those people more freely as well as our people down the historic road?
I don't wonder, I know. Russians, for example, hate us, because we stay in their way of exploiting and dominating other nations. Low income Mexicans hate for not letting them in freely to use our free care, education, and other opportunities. Muslims, around the world and homegrown, hate us for the living evidence that a free-enterprise competition-based non-ideological society is stronger than a dictatorial hierarchy.
Some hate us out of envy that they can't have what we do. This group, interestingly enough, does not direct their hate toward their own elites, who are much wealthier than most Americans. That tells me that buying a pair of shoes in Walmart has nothing to do with their hatred.
Besides, Allen, what do you suggest? That we slow our economy down in order to let the Chinese exploit those people more freely as well as our people down the historic road?
7
We have the economy we voted for. Americans have given up looking for work, while immigration (both legal and illegal) booms. We spend more and more money taking care of the unemployed, those who have given up looking for work, those who don't want to work and those with no job skills. The GDP increases under Obama have been the worst of any President in American history. But we have higher taxes, more regulation and more penalties on employers. We tax employers who provide health care to workers and we tax employers who don't provide health care, and then we wonder why employers only want non-employee contractors. Hillary wants to increase unemployment in coal producing areas, and Obama wants to kill jobs in the oil production and transport sectors of the economy. Hillary will protect the 1% and Wall Street banksters who have bought her off, while the people who voted for her seem content to not work for a living.
8
As when you replied to my first comment, Tony, you can't lay the blame at the feet of Obama. I am 64 years old. Trust me. This is 40 years in the making. Reagan got away with murder because we were still able to leverage our prior invested success. Every administration has been kicking the can down the road. So, yes, we got the economy we voted for,..... over and over again,.... cumulatively.
14
Tony,
Actually, the GDP increases under Republicans Herbert Hoover and GW Bush have been the worst of any Presidents in American history. It took Democrats FDR and Barack Obama to fix those inherited economic problems.
And Republican Nixon caused the massive stagflation of the 1970's, which was prolonged and increased by Republican Jerry Ford. Democrat Jimmy Carter fixed those problems by appointing Paul Volcker as Chair of the Fed Reserve. Ronald Reagan than took credit for the good that Carter had done, while blaming Carter for the damage that Nixon and Ford had done.
One commonality, regarding the damage by Nixon was due to his Price Wage Czar Donald Rumsfeld, a dangerous fool who also greatly damaged Reagan's and GW Bush's administrations.
Tony, your perspective is typical of Republicans and Conservatives, which is that you blame the victims and those who fix the economy, while you congratulate the perpetrators and those who actually damage our economy and society.
Actually, the GDP increases under Republicans Herbert Hoover and GW Bush have been the worst of any Presidents in American history. It took Democrats FDR and Barack Obama to fix those inherited economic problems.
And Republican Nixon caused the massive stagflation of the 1970's, which was prolonged and increased by Republican Jerry Ford. Democrat Jimmy Carter fixed those problems by appointing Paul Volcker as Chair of the Fed Reserve. Ronald Reagan than took credit for the good that Carter had done, while blaming Carter for the damage that Nixon and Ford had done.
One commonality, regarding the damage by Nixon was due to his Price Wage Czar Donald Rumsfeld, a dangerous fool who also greatly damaged Reagan's and GW Bush's administrations.
Tony, your perspective is typical of Republicans and Conservatives, which is that you blame the victims and those who fix the economy, while you congratulate the perpetrators and those who actually damage our economy and society.
15
Tony, Not mentioning the 2008 Dubya-caused meltdown shows massive flaws in your argument. In addition, the problem with coal is caused by natural gas, not Obama/Hillary. As to health care, the US must pay for ER visits, somehow, because of Reagan's initiative on this matter. Somehow the US needs to come to terms with healthcare and guns. Trump & the GOP are no help in either matter--they just repeat mindless, stale and useless talking points from 1993. I remember "Harry and Harriet" arguing against government intervention in health care from then. The costs are much higher and "the magic of the marketplace" is not effective in holding down prices.
4
Lowering the age of Full Social Security, back to 65, where it belongs, would open many job opportunities for Millennials, and job advancements for those between the ages of 18-60.
It would decrease unemployment figures, while increasing employment. it would allow younger adults to accumulate greater retirement funds, and peace of mind.
Meanwhile, the current economic sluggishness is also due to this year's Presidential Election and the unpopularity of both Hillary and Donald.
But in particular, there is great fear among the Educated, Middle Class and Wealthy, that the ignorant, bigoted, horrifying Donald Trump can possibly be elected President. If Trump is elected, the USA's and World's Stock Markets will crash the next day.
Hillary Clinton is no bargain, either, but at least she is rational, experienced and a lot safer for the USA's and World's economies, and for the American people, than the poorly informed, erratic, fascist Donald Trump.
It would decrease unemployment figures, while increasing employment. it would allow younger adults to accumulate greater retirement funds, and peace of mind.
Meanwhile, the current economic sluggishness is also due to this year's Presidential Election and the unpopularity of both Hillary and Donald.
But in particular, there is great fear among the Educated, Middle Class and Wealthy, that the ignorant, bigoted, horrifying Donald Trump can possibly be elected President. If Trump is elected, the USA's and World's Stock Markets will crash the next day.
Hillary Clinton is no bargain, either, but at least she is rational, experienced and a lot safer for the USA's and World's economies, and for the American people, than the poorly informed, erratic, fascist Donald Trump.
12
Had a conversation a conservative that doesn't believe any of the good numbers but agrees 100% with the bad ones. I had to admit it was a great way to insure you never lose an argument.
6
The 54 year olds in 2007 are now 63! and eligible for Social Security.
4
And the 17 year olds of 2007 are now 26 and looking for work.
10
If the GOP congress passes a bill to fix bridges and highways, the 26 year old's would have work!
5
If congress would increase the fuel tax to pay for it I would support it. They also need to eliminate the union labor requirement and most of the regulations that cause projects to not be shovel ready. Surely you learned this from the president. And many 26 year old individuals don't want to build roads.
2
"About as good as it gets" under a self-serving Fed that boosts Wall Street at the expense of jobs. By transferring trillions of tax dollars and lost interest on savings from the middle class and seniors to Wall Street during the past 7+, the Fed has suppressed spending, labor participation, and wages for all but the wealthy, while simultaneously increasing income inequality. Along with the effect of the Reagan tax rate cuts, that's the real "labor market"l story.
13
Reagan tax cuts .. RR was elected 36 years ago! Give it up!
5
Give it up? so Reagan's tax cuts were repealed WHEN? I must have been off planet.
2
@TinMan - RR cut the maximum tax rate to 28%. Bush I raised it to 35%, and Clinton raised it to 39.6%. Bush II cut it to 35%, then Obama raised it to 39.6% again. So we've been all over the place.
4
Just imagine what the economy would look like had we had a "functioning" congress. The gains we've made have been miraculous given the one sided advances. Republicans are opportunist long before they're humanist. A failing economy is their nirvana. People before profits. Vote them out.
15
The immutable law of supply and demand.
Since 2008, the US economy has added four million jobs. In that same time period, we allowed in eight million *legal* immigrants, one million every year, not including a few million more refugees, illegal aliens, and H1B visa workers.
We have been doing this for more than four decades, while wages for working and middle class Americans have (inflation-adjusted) declined and jobs have disappeared, but to even voice a concern means to be tarred a 'racist' and 'xenophobe'.
https://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/lpr_fr_2011.pdf
http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2012/jun/20/marco-rubio/mar...
Since 2008, the US economy has added four million jobs. In that same time period, we allowed in eight million *legal* immigrants, one million every year, not including a few million more refugees, illegal aliens, and H1B visa workers.
We have been doing this for more than four decades, while wages for working and middle class Americans have (inflation-adjusted) declined and jobs have disappeared, but to even voice a concern means to be tarred a 'racist' and 'xenophobe'.
https://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/publications/lpr_fr_2011.pdf
http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2012/jun/20/marco-rubio/mar...
8
"The economy isn’t great. The economy isn’t terrible. We’re just chugging along, and apparently that’s about as good as it gets."
We don't have to accept this defeatist attitude, which only serves to preserve our relative comfort at the expense of having American misery increase with every generation to come.
Given the political will, we can restructure our labor force to make it a FORCE through taxation.
Incentivize every $ earned off a product (either manufactured or invented, patented, discovered, created) and tax mercilessly every $ earned off unproductive "business" such as financial transactions, courts, consultations, media, ads, etc.
Incentivize every $ earned off export, and tax mercilessly every $ earned off import. Incentivize any charity in the US and tax any one going overseas.
In addition, keep welfare only for those who can't work and do away with the fraudulent "disability." Reinstall forced labor for the 2mln inmates, let them earn freedom rather than sitting out.
Squish the mentality "I won't work for this wage, gimme free stuff or else." Make starvation the "else."
Should we implement the above measures, we'll be the most competitive people in the world, and will be able to leave our children the same great America we've inherited.
We don't have to accept this defeatist attitude, which only serves to preserve our relative comfort at the expense of having American misery increase with every generation to come.
Given the political will, we can restructure our labor force to make it a FORCE through taxation.
Incentivize every $ earned off a product (either manufactured or invented, patented, discovered, created) and tax mercilessly every $ earned off unproductive "business" such as financial transactions, courts, consultations, media, ads, etc.
Incentivize every $ earned off export, and tax mercilessly every $ earned off import. Incentivize any charity in the US and tax any one going overseas.
In addition, keep welfare only for those who can't work and do away with the fraudulent "disability." Reinstall forced labor for the 2mln inmates, let them earn freedom rather than sitting out.
Squish the mentality "I won't work for this wage, gimme free stuff or else." Make starvation the "else."
Should we implement the above measures, we'll be the most competitive people in the world, and will be able to leave our children the same great America we've inherited.
4
As a contract engineer for 40 years, I just took early retirement last year. Beginning 2008, employers were just too abusive and the jobs were few and far between. Request to do illegal acts were just too much, add to the dropping wadges. It never really paid well, now it's worse.
Today, you are drug tested and give away all your rights from law suites to intellectual property.
I found out my hiring was a coordinated effort between two managers at two different aerospace companies. Employee control between companies is most abused in the defense industry. How do I know. The managers told me
Today, you are drug tested and give away all your rights from law suites to intellectual property.
I found out my hiring was a coordinated effort between two managers at two different aerospace companies. Employee control between companies is most abused in the defense industry. How do I know. The managers told me
17
It's very difficult to believe anything that the FED has to say. It function is to help corporate America, not Americans. The FED will say anything necessary to keep rates artificially low. No one is complaining because over-compensated corporate executives make profits for more indecent bonuses; profits, which they quickly move overseas and don't have to be taxed; and a bubble stock market, where they get bubbled share value. And, let's not forget that wages have been stagnant for decades.
So, what your writing about is a country where it's citizens are so focused on misinformation and false 1984-styled fearful outside threats that they can never focus on their own misery.
So, what your writing about is a country where it's citizens are so focused on misinformation and false 1984-styled fearful outside threats that they can never focus on their own misery.
6
The systematic destruction of the American way of life is happening all around us, and yet most people have no idea what is happening. Once upon a time in America, if you were responsible and hard working you could get a good paying job that could support a middle class lifestyle for an entire family even if you only had a high school education. Things weren’t perfect, but generally almost everyone in the entire country was able to take care of themselves without government assistance. We worked hard, we played hard, and our seemingly boundless prosperity was the envy of the entire planet. But over the past several decades things have completely changed. We consumed far more wealth than we produced, we shipped millions of good paying jobs overseas, we piled up the biggest mountain of debt in the history of the world, and we kept electing politicians that had absolutely no concern for the long-term future of this nation whatsoever. So now good jobs are in very short supply, we are drowning in an ocean of red ink, the middle class is rapidly shrinking and dependence on the government is at an all-time high. Even as we stand at the precipice of the next great economic crisis, we continue to make the same mistakes. In the end, all of us are going to pay a very great price for decades of incredibly foolish decisions.
10
That is the problem with technology and technological progress. To paraphrase Obama, the 1950's want their economy back. Good factory jobs. No competition from overseas, Europe was still rebuilding from WWII, the Communists in Europe and Asia were building crap, if they built anything at all and selling it only to their people and their client states. No internet, no smart phones, no computers, little technology, no foreign cars, a nice simple time. Breath in the smog from the coal.
6
"Which Labor Market Data Should You Believe?"
NONE OF IT!
"Our" government has changed the formula so many times, over so many years, to meet so many agendas of so many politicians that it would make your head spin.
Under the circumstances (unfortunately), a Solipsist approach serves us all best. Look around you and the people you know FIRST HAND. How many are unemployed? Underemployed? Given up even looking? How many are happy whilst gainfully employed? Continue to be optimistic? Continue to "move up the ladder"? Are happy with their pay raises in regards to how much and how frequent? Are they falling behind? Just keeping up? Prospering? (now there's a word you hardly EVER see or hear anymore).
I would venture a bet that when most of us answer these questions....
The prognosis is a considerably less than healthy working population in quantity, quality, efficiency, productivity, or any other attribute that you might care to analyze.
Time for everyone to reread Al Franken's book....
Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them.
There within lies your answers (pun intended).
NONE OF IT!
"Our" government has changed the formula so many times, over so many years, to meet so many agendas of so many politicians that it would make your head spin.
Under the circumstances (unfortunately), a Solipsist approach serves us all best. Look around you and the people you know FIRST HAND. How many are unemployed? Underemployed? Given up even looking? How many are happy whilst gainfully employed? Continue to be optimistic? Continue to "move up the ladder"? Are happy with their pay raises in regards to how much and how frequent? Are they falling behind? Just keeping up? Prospering? (now there's a word you hardly EVER see or hear anymore).
I would venture a bet that when most of us answer these questions....
The prognosis is a considerably less than healthy working population in quantity, quality, efficiency, productivity, or any other attribute that you might care to analyze.
Time for everyone to reread Al Franken's book....
Lies and the Lying Liars Who Tell Them.
There within lies your answers (pun intended).
6
"It [the Labor Market Conditions Index] doesn’t tell you how many full-time workers would like a better job at higher pay."
I believe that that number is 100%.
I believe that that number is 100%.
4
" It doesn’t tell you how many full-time workers would like a better job at higher pay." I'm pretty sure that number 100%, no?
13
In the IT industry, hordes of H1Bs, L1s, and GCs are killing the native workforce, while billionaires like Gates and Zuckerberg claim shortages. Stop the importation of cheap, pliant labor and we will see improvements in the employment rate and wages.
15
Sanders had been irrelevant for decades while in the House & Senate, was soundly trounced in the primaries, and is now simply irrelevant again. Buh-bye.
2
And all this bad employment news is why the stock market will push relentlessly on to greater heights. Jobs don't matter. Companies don't need customers who can buy their wares. They just need the Fed. Bad news is good news in this Orwellian economic dystopia.
8
Big surprise the fraction of the population working is at record lows and yet immigration remains unchanged at the highest levels in the world because employers are too cheap to pay Americans especially since they can buy congress for much less.
15
In conclusion: If the economy isn't great - it's terrible! We need GREAT! Dead end jobs, underemployment, depressed and stagnant wages, and unaffordable housing - where is the good news?
20
If there were a realistic, true tally of the unemployed and disenfranchised they'd go and visit the local pawn shops and payday loan businesses, which are usually located next to one another.
Another good indicator is how many children receive or qualify for free school lunches. It is above the 50% mark. People may be employed but can't afford to eat.
Another good indicator is how many children receive or qualify for free school lunches. It is above the 50% mark. People may be employed but can't afford to eat.
9
The problem is that we no longer have an economy based on the production and consumption of goods and services. The dogma that the exclusive purpose of a corporation is to increase shareholder wealth has shifted the focus of "business" to purely financial transactions. That includes mergers, acquisitions, stock buybacks, spinoffs, and similar acts that create "value" for investors and bankers without producing anything that benefits anyone else.
Since "creating value" also includes reducing or eliminating expenses that divert money from shareholders, corporate executives are constantly seeking ways to reduce or eliminate labor expenses. That means layoffs, wage theft, outsourcing, replacing older workers with younger workers, outsourcing, "just-in-time" contractors, and every other possible way to reduce what executives and investors consider gratuitous theft from shareholders' pockets. Thus, the focus on financial transactions means corporate executives and investors are pillaging the "traditional" economy in a massive transfer of wealth to investors (along with the rentiers who collect fees on these transfers).
The metrics used by economists and the Fed apparently haven't kept up with this major change. They're still measuring the "old economy" that is being dug up and strip-mined to extract shareholder value. That's why the metrics are so confusing, and why the Fed cannot devise coherent policy for managing an economy in the process of active destruction.
Since "creating value" also includes reducing or eliminating expenses that divert money from shareholders, corporate executives are constantly seeking ways to reduce or eliminate labor expenses. That means layoffs, wage theft, outsourcing, replacing older workers with younger workers, outsourcing, "just-in-time" contractors, and every other possible way to reduce what executives and investors consider gratuitous theft from shareholders' pockets. Thus, the focus on financial transactions means corporate executives and investors are pillaging the "traditional" economy in a massive transfer of wealth to investors (along with the rentiers who collect fees on these transfers).
The metrics used by economists and the Fed apparently haven't kept up with this major change. They're still measuring the "old economy" that is being dug up and strip-mined to extract shareholder value. That's why the metrics are so confusing, and why the Fed cannot devise coherent policy for managing an economy in the process of active destruction.
25
Shareholders are the big losers when the government finds criminal wrongdoing by management.
3
Good thing it's so rare that enforcement ever finds any wrongdoing by management.
4
Yes, both indices are imperfect and don't capture all the nuances of American labor force evolution (rather devolution). However, the fact that Labor Market Conditions (according to the included graph) have not been great (either so-so or poor) since 1985 is very telling. Combine this with the fact that the share of the middle class has been steadily decreasing since 2000 and you'll wake up to the bitter smell of coffee du jour.
"The economy isn’t great. The economy isn’t terrible. We’re just chugging along, and apparently that’s about as good as it gets."
True as it may be, this sentiment misses the point.
The point is: should we just accept the European style stagnation and degeneration, letting the rising powers (China, India, Brazil, Russia) eclipse us and call the shots, or should we once again use our creativity, imagination, and determination to reinvent ourselves and the world?
In other words, should we meekly try to slow down our devolution or revolt and take the destiny in our hands? For the latter we would need to re-awaken the powerful demons of nationalism, warts and all. Count me in!
"The economy isn’t great. The economy isn’t terrible. We’re just chugging along, and apparently that’s about as good as it gets."
True as it may be, this sentiment misses the point.
The point is: should we just accept the European style stagnation and degeneration, letting the rising powers (China, India, Brazil, Russia) eclipse us and call the shots, or should we once again use our creativity, imagination, and determination to reinvent ourselves and the world?
In other words, should we meekly try to slow down our devolution or revolt and take the destiny in our hands? For the latter we would need to re-awaken the powerful demons of nationalism, warts and all. Count me in!
13
There is nothing controversial about the question posed in the headline - the official unemployment rate is a joke, only useful for propaganda purposes. If you want to know the real rate, double the official rate. The only people who find 10% unemployment acceptable are Democratic politicians when a Democratic administration is in office, and Republicans when a Republican administration is in office.
The official unemployment rate won't go away, though. As both parties preside over the deliberate thinning out of the middle class, propaganda is essential.
The official unemployment rate won't go away, though. As both parties preside over the deliberate thinning out of the middle class, propaganda is essential.
14
"the official unemployment rate is a joke,"....Except for the fact that that is the way it has always been calculated. Unless you use the present method any reference comparison is meaningless.
4
Any measure of something so complicated as economics and employment is bound to be imperfect. That is especially true when the measure is used for political purposes. In any case if the economy is just "chugging along", it should be obvious to everyone that both the economy and employment are in much better shape than they were seven years ago.
4
"...Why they have not rejoined the labor force as the economy has improved since 2009 is the issue. There are a number of reasons why people have not rejoined the official labor force. However, either due to political correctness or a true lack of understanding, many have not focused on the "elephant in the room" reason for why many prime-working-age men have left the labor force. That reason being that they have taken up the fastest growing occupation in the USA. That is making dubious and fraudulent disability claims.
In retrospect, not extending unemployment insurance after the 99-week benefit period provisions expired may have been a mistake. Many of those who benefits were exhausted responded to the multitude of advertisements by lawyers urging them to apply for what essentially were dubious and fraudulent disability claims...."
http://seekingalpha.com/article/3342635
"...Dubious and fraudulent disability claims have vastly increased the number of those collecting disability with commensurate decreases in labor force participation and the unemployment rate. A segment on CBS "60 Minutes" last season quoted employees of the Social Security Administration and administrative law judges who asserted that lawyers are recruiting millions of people to make fraudulent disability claims. One such judge said "if the American public knew what was going on in our system half would be outraged and the other half would apply for benefits"...."
http://seekingalpha.com/article/3227066
In retrospect, not extending unemployment insurance after the 99-week benefit period provisions expired may have been a mistake. Many of those who benefits were exhausted responded to the multitude of advertisements by lawyers urging them to apply for what essentially were dubious and fraudulent disability claims...."
http://seekingalpha.com/article/3342635
"...Dubious and fraudulent disability claims have vastly increased the number of those collecting disability with commensurate decreases in labor force participation and the unemployment rate. A segment on CBS "60 Minutes" last season quoted employees of the Social Security Administration and administrative law judges who asserted that lawyers are recruiting millions of people to make fraudulent disability claims. One such judge said "if the American public knew what was going on in our system half would be outraged and the other half would apply for benefits"...."
http://seekingalpha.com/article/3227066
5
Your source is junk.
1
If the criteria is a number in the spreadsheet made by the administration, one can always optimize to look better. But the important thing is what really fills the pocket. So saying that somebody is not unemployed having just few coins for few hours is just to deceive ourself. Not very practical (even) in the election year.
Coming from an accounting world, 'scubbing data' doesn't work for me. Sorry, the government manipulates the data for 'political reasons' - I know it sounds crazy, but it's true. Now that unemployment is down, the Fed is using 'labor statistics' to justify artificially holding down interest rates. It's political now - I believe it's tied to the interest on our national debt - if rates go up, we will not have sufficient money in our budget to pay the interest. The Fed is working with the White House to prevent a major financial catastrophe from occurring - maybe Donald Trump was crazy for stating we should 'restructure' our debt - however, the day of reckoning for our borrowing may be coming sooner than we think. We're leveraged as much as we should or could be; forgot labor statistics - keeping rates low isn't going to create jobs.
1
Did i miss something? Where Did the article mention Wage stagnation? In the so-called real world, when demand exceeds supply, the price rises. Data on participation rates would indicate that supply is not growing relative to demand, which usually indicates workers are too discouraged even to look for work.
Moreover, for those who haven't had the benefit of eCON. 101, the definition of "employed" is working 15 hours a week. (That is why many have to work 2-3 jobs to make ends meet.) So if you work 15 hours a week, you are employed, and if you were too discouraged after looking for months - or years - and just stopped looking, you are no longer counted as part of the labour force.
The data are designed to make the economy look better for investors and for politicians. Look at trends in hourly compensation and average hours worked per week. Stagnation in both means stagnation.
Moreover, for those who haven't had the benefit of eCON. 101, the definition of "employed" is working 15 hours a week. (That is why many have to work 2-3 jobs to make ends meet.) So if you work 15 hours a week, you are employed, and if you were too discouraged after looking for months - or years - and just stopped looking, you are no longer counted as part of the labour force.
The data are designed to make the economy look better for investors and for politicians. Look at trends in hourly compensation and average hours worked per week. Stagnation in both means stagnation.
5
The 4.7% rate is pure garbage as an indicator of economic health. The real number your reporters should dig for is the number of "employed" workers from 25 to 54 who hold part time jobs. A subset of that figure to discern would be the number of PT workers who took the job because FT work at required salary was not available.
Looking forward to reading how wonderful the economy is as Mrs Clinton embraces this Administration's record of "success".
Looking forward to reading how wonderful the economy is as Mrs Clinton embraces this Administration's record of "success".
7
When an unemployed American worker uses up his or her unemployment benefits, cannot find a job, and drops out of the labor force, they are no longer considered unemployed according to the federal government. They are, in essence, invisible. The farcical Labor Department unemployment rate of 4.7% is a useless statistic. In it's place the Labor Department needs to track the labor participation rate, which is currently at its lowest point since the Carter malaise years of the late 1970's. More employable Americans under age 65 are unemployed than at any time since the Carter presidency. That is the real Obama legacy.
12
It's the GOP legacy since they didn't want to work with Obama to implement any of his ideas. Let's put the blame for this where it belongs: on the shoulders of the Republicants who didn't want to do anything Obama suggested.
7
The labor participation rate is a terrible gauge of employment. If our Country had an actual real unemployment rate of 0% the statistic called labor participation rate would continue to decrease as the percentage of those who are retired versus those who are older than 16 continues to increase. I also believe that the labor participation rate number is very inaccurate in that it does not count full time house wives as being non-participants of the labor force. If you counted full time house wives as participants in the labor force you would probably increase the labor participation rate by at least 10%-20%.
Here is a simpler explanation, based on simple math, for why 'only' 85% of the 24-54 year olds are working vs. 88% in the past:
The population of workers in that bracket has increased markedly, but the jobs provided by the economy for those in that demographic have remained static and in many cases are in a planned decline. Thus 85% is the new 88%.
In order for the Magic Market of capitalism to work, it requires constant growth in the number of consumers with money to spend (the "market"). Thanks to the increasing popularity of sex, sheer numbers of people has not been a problem; population of the country has exploded in the last 60 years, nearly triple what it was at the end of WWII. But during that 60 years -- unprecedented in the nation's history -- U.S. employers have been shipping jobs to other countries at a far faster rate than jobs are being created in this country for the exploding population. This has a compounding effect in that as more workers compete for fewer jobs (in relative terms vs the population), wages are driven down, meaning workers that remain have less to spend and thus the market which capitalism requires to sustain itself is shriveling.
Improving that percentage from 85 to 88 must focus on both sides of the math equation: (a) Stop outsourcing jobs and (b) condoms.
The population of workers in that bracket has increased markedly, but the jobs provided by the economy for those in that demographic have remained static and in many cases are in a planned decline. Thus 85% is the new 88%.
In order for the Magic Market of capitalism to work, it requires constant growth in the number of consumers with money to spend (the "market"). Thanks to the increasing popularity of sex, sheer numbers of people has not been a problem; population of the country has exploded in the last 60 years, nearly triple what it was at the end of WWII. But during that 60 years -- unprecedented in the nation's history -- U.S. employers have been shipping jobs to other countries at a far faster rate than jobs are being created in this country for the exploding population. This has a compounding effect in that as more workers compete for fewer jobs (in relative terms vs the population), wages are driven down, meaning workers that remain have less to spend and thus the market which capitalism requires to sustain itself is shriveling.
Improving that percentage from 85 to 88 must focus on both sides of the math equation: (a) Stop outsourcing jobs and (b) condoms.
9
Could someone please look into who the two million men are that could work but aren't looking? and perhaps the parallel group of women? This information might enrich the discussion.
3
The men are probably mostly full-time students of some sort. The women could be married to an employed husband, and taking care of small children at home.
Of course, you will find many others. Some of them will be surprising busy making money without actually having an official job.
Of course, you will find many others. Some of them will be surprising busy making money without actually having an official job.
Well, a lot of those are the older IT workers who were replaced by H1b visa holders. People like my brother-in-law. A former co-worker down the street... It's really a case of "there, but for the grace of God, go I".
The bias against older IT workers is so strong many can't get jobs even after re-training and rarely near the same pay.
These are also the people stuck getting early Social Security.
It makes recent attempts at immigration reform and TTIP and TPP look like just a few more twists of the knife in the back of the American STEM worker.
The bias against older IT workers is so strong many can't get jobs even after re-training and rarely near the same pay.
These are also the people stuck getting early Social Security.
It makes recent attempts at immigration reform and TTIP and TPP look like just a few more twists of the knife in the back of the American STEM worker.
1
I am one of those IT workers, I was a mid level manager and I have experience working/living in the US, Asia and Europe. I have software development skills as well. I am 55 and a woman. I lost a corporate job in 2008 and have not worked more than a 12 month stretch since then.. I've been let go due to budgetary concerns and a few times replaced by overseas folks. I'm am a disposable employee.
I've lost everything... House, retirement... I can not find even gigs at this point, so I am a professional job hunter, most job listings are very specific and unmatchable.
I've tried starting a business as a consultant, but that has turned out to be busy work - few takers.
I am not counted in any of the statistics.
So I feel that the corporate drive to respond quarterly to Wall Street has created this mess, laws makers have colluded by creating the visas to support this and blinding listening to the tech CEOs that the skills don't exist in the US.
The driver money as the only measurement and resulting behavior has slid into health care and many other areas of the economy - to our detriment and not just jobs lost.
Empathy for fellow citizens and the environment is nonexistent.
Peter Block "believes service (including corporate) is only truly realized when it is "authentic" and when the following characteristics are present: there is a balance of power; the primary commitment is to the larger community; and there is a balanced and equitable distribution of rewards." Wiki.
I've lost everything... House, retirement... I can not find even gigs at this point, so I am a professional job hunter, most job listings are very specific and unmatchable.
I've tried starting a business as a consultant, but that has turned out to be busy work - few takers.
I am not counted in any of the statistics.
So I feel that the corporate drive to respond quarterly to Wall Street has created this mess, laws makers have colluded by creating the visas to support this and blinding listening to the tech CEOs that the skills don't exist in the US.
The driver money as the only measurement and resulting behavior has slid into health care and many other areas of the economy - to our detriment and not just jobs lost.
Empathy for fellow citizens and the environment is nonexistent.
Peter Block "believes service (including corporate) is only truly realized when it is "authentic" and when the following characteristics are present: there is a balance of power; the primary commitment is to the larger community; and there is a balanced and equitable distribution of rewards." Wiki.
So an acquaintance was unemployed for a long time but he couldn't get unemployment because he would take jobs as an independent contractor from time to time. No benefits, no vacation or paid sick days, no health insurance. He stopped looking for a "job" because there aren't any...just gigs. Here today go tomorrow. When the gig is over, no unemployment even though he has to pay all those taxes from the money he earns working 10, 12, 14 or more hours. So he lives his life on the edge. He works everything for fear that there won't be anything. No stopping. I'm sorry WE ARE NOT JUST CHUGGING ALONG, People are suffering and struggling. Health care is eating them alive! CEOs are doing very very well and the stock market is doing well but that isn't the humans who live here.
"Experts" need to get in touch with reality!
"Experts" need to get in touch with reality!
26
There is another powerful metric that could be used to distinguish between the current validity of these two employment indices: Is there wage inflation going on? I don't think so. Can the NYtimes dig up these numbers? Wage inflation would indicated that we indeed have low voluntary unemployment. Lack of wage inflation would indicate otherwise.
6
You can find 3 interesting charts at https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/trafficandcommuting/in-a-ghastly-we...
Since I can't post them, here are the headings:
Nominal wage growth has been far below target in the recovery:
Year-over-year change in private-sector nominal average hourly earnings, 2007-2016
Mind the wage gap:
Cumulative nominal average hourly earnings, actual and hypothetical if they had grown at 3.5% since the recession began, 2007-2016. (Note: 3.5% wage growth is consistent with 2% inflation. The gap is $2.86 am hour.)
Workers’ share of corporate income hasn’t recovered:
Share of corporate-sector income received by workers over recent business cycles, 1979–2016
Since I can't post them, here are the headings:
Nominal wage growth has been far below target in the recovery:
Year-over-year change in private-sector nominal average hourly earnings, 2007-2016
Mind the wage gap:
Cumulative nominal average hourly earnings, actual and hypothetical if they had grown at 3.5% since the recession began, 2007-2016. (Note: 3.5% wage growth is consistent with 2% inflation. The gap is $2.86 am hour.)
Workers’ share of corporate income hasn’t recovered:
Share of corporate-sector income received by workers over recent business cycles, 1979–2016
4
Exactly right. Can't imagine there will be any wage pressure ever again. We are are flat flat labor market the world around.
There are waves of IT layoffs coming - IBM has already made large cuts this year (with apparently no end in sight), as have others, and the HPE merger is likely to bring many also. These are (were) better-than-manufacturing jobs, and will put some serious hurt on the middle class in particular. The only thing fueling the economy right now is the upper middle class, who are the only people seeing gains and also willing to spend them. But that's not enough to absorb what's coming.
14
Between 1993 and 2013 the U.S. census bureau reported that the top 10 percent of the countries workers, after accounting for inflation, had a 78 percent increase in their overall wealth. The remaining 90 percent reported a DECREASE in wealth, after accounting for inflation, of between 17 percent down to as low as 78 percent less for the lowest paid workers.
Regardless of the unemployment rate and what it may or may not mean, this is just another confirmation who has continually been receiving the benefits of that so-called economic recovery, to the vast majority, it means absolutely nothing.
Regardless of the unemployment rate and what it may or may not mean, this is just another confirmation who has continually been receiving the benefits of that so-called economic recovery, to the vast majority, it means absolutely nothing.
9
All depends upon whose ox is being gored. If you work\worked in manufacturing things are not great. Your job has been moved oversea or is about to and/or your hours cut.
The political parties are in the hands of the business interests and no one cares or can do anything about the fact that you have become redundant and not needed in the marketplace.
Neoliberal multiculturalists -- comfortably established in the academy are demonizing, or othering, not Muslims, Mexicans, or African Americans, but working-class whites (the quintessential Trump proletariat) All you have is your vote to counter the fact that the government is now in the hands of the oligarchs.
The political parties are in the hands of the business interests and no one cares or can do anything about the fact that you have become redundant and not needed in the marketplace.
Neoliberal multiculturalists -- comfortably established in the academy are demonizing, or othering, not Muslims, Mexicans, or African Americans, but working-class whites (the quintessential Trump proletariat) All you have is your vote to counter the fact that the government is now in the hands of the oligarchs.
7
We tried. We voted for Bernie Sanders.
2
The most important measure of the economy is the percentage of public school children who qualify for free school lunches. It is over 25%. That's the true measure of what government control by the 0.001% has done to Americans. That's what we need to change.
12
Well said.
2
You are so right. Thank you so much for offering such a simple, compelling counter to the claims that things are okay. Thank you!
If people who have run out of unemployment benefits aren't counted even though they cannot find a job, and there are plenty of them around, how does the unemployment rate come to mean so much? If someone is employed for part of the year as a contractor and cannot collect unemployment benefits when the contract is over, and it doesn't count in the unemployment figures, what does that mean? And if your employer fires you, lies about why they fired you so they don't have to pay unemployment on you and you can't fight it, it's one more thing that doesn't show up.
In addition, the jobs that have been created are not paying as well as the jobs many have been fired from or lost for no reason other than the company's desire to save money. When the new job doesn't pay enough to keep body and soul together it's not always a good job. And if we have family or a house to sell we can't just pick up and move for 6 months for a temporary job. The "gig" model of employment only works for some people and others, who have commitments, cannot do it. Perhaps companies need to look at what they are doing to hurt the economy since they need us to buy their products. And, a better, more accurate way of measuring unemployment and the types of jobs created would help as well.
In addition, the jobs that have been created are not paying as well as the jobs many have been fired from or lost for no reason other than the company's desire to save money. When the new job doesn't pay enough to keep body and soul together it's not always a good job. And if we have family or a house to sell we can't just pick up and move for 6 months for a temporary job. The "gig" model of employment only works for some people and others, who have commitments, cannot do it. Perhaps companies need to look at what they are doing to hurt the economy since they need us to buy their products. And, a better, more accurate way of measuring unemployment and the types of jobs created would help as well.
23
What you say is not correct. The unemployment rate is based on a BLS survey of random households in each census bloc. If you do not have a job, and have taken any action whatsoever in the past 4 weeks to find a job, you are counted as unemployed. It doesn't matter if you've never worked and are not eligible for unemployment compensation.
See the web page in which the BLS explains their methodology:
http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm
See the web page in which the BLS explains their methodology:
http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm
1
You don't understand the unemployment rate. People can still be counted as unemployed even though they don't receive benefits. They just have to answer the Household Survey questions that they aren't working and have looked for a job in the last month.
In May, 7,436,000 people were counted as unemployed. Only 2,152,000 were receiving unemployment benefits.
In May, 7,436,000 people were counted as unemployed. Only 2,152,000 were receiving unemployment benefits.
1
Our economic "recovery" has largely been an artificial one, driven on the back of Fed monetary policy with QE and ZIR. The financial sector that crashed the economy in 2008 was bailed out, they benefited mightily from these policies, and they've received the overwhelming majority of economic recovery.
If you look at median individual and household incomes adjusted for inflation pre-Recession, Americans as a whole, specifically the working poor and middle class, are making less than they have been in quite some time. And while things like fuel costs are down, student loans, credit card debt, and rising rent costs have put significant strains on those already making less than they used to. Factor in the number of people underemployed and those who have flat out left the job market, and the situation looks that much more bleak.
You can only put so much blame on the current administration with the amount of Congressional opposition he received, but nominating a Chair who continued the Fed's heavy handed monetary policy certainly hasn't helped. I still believe we're looking at a second crash in the near future, but at minimum the next president will almost definitely preside over another recession of some sort. Its significance will likely be dependent on the state of the Asian and European economies at that time (and neither are in a great place at present).
If you look at median individual and household incomes adjusted for inflation pre-Recession, Americans as a whole, specifically the working poor and middle class, are making less than they have been in quite some time. And while things like fuel costs are down, student loans, credit card debt, and rising rent costs have put significant strains on those already making less than they used to. Factor in the number of people underemployed and those who have flat out left the job market, and the situation looks that much more bleak.
You can only put so much blame on the current administration with the amount of Congressional opposition he received, but nominating a Chair who continued the Fed's heavy handed monetary policy certainly hasn't helped. I still believe we're looking at a second crash in the near future, but at minimum the next president will almost definitely preside over another recession of some sort. Its significance will likely be dependent on the state of the Asian and European economies at that time (and neither are in a great place at present).
6
What would you have done?
For one thing, I would have done infrastructure spending rather than tax cuts for the stimulus.
For one thing, I would have done infrastructure spending rather than tax cuts for the stimulus.
6
Yes. Tax cuts have no multiplier. Infrastructure spending has a large multiplier. Also good would have been generous benefits to people who spend it (unemployment, food stamps). Many people took disability who would not have otherwise; that was stimulus. The problem really came in with quantitative easing, sending money to banks so they would - poor boo boo banks - start lending again. That didn't happen. We would have been better off setting baskets of free money on every street corner, or paying everyone to dig holes and fill them in again.
5
Muddying the waters seems to be the first concern of Obama apologists like The Upshot. The only reason to wander beyond objective data like the labor force participation rate and median income (including the unemployed) is to hide the awful truth, which is that life has become a lot harder for almost everyone since Great Recession.
Lets be honest. There are many Americans that have given up finding a full time decent job so they are working part time odd jobs here and there that do not even register. The truth is we are still deeply hurting from Bush's "Great Recession" that started in 2008. The Fed has only raised interest rates .25% in the last eight years and is still hesitant to do so because of the pressure from Wall Street, or corporate America if you please. Corporate America has taken full advantage of the recession by cutting their work forces and taking advantage of those they decided to keep making them work long hours with no pay raises. This long recession and corporate America shows how workers will be treated even when the economy is better if they do not organize and get union representation. Bush set workers rights back into the 1930's and you can be assured everything that has happened under his presidency was well planned and applauded by the 1%. When he said, "mission accomplished" most never knew what that really meant.
11
Total industrial capacity utilization (link below) captures in a single chart what has occurred in the US economy since the 1960s and the impact on the labor force.
https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/TCU
Anyone who has been around manufacturing for a long time can tell you that dramatic changes have occurred in every aspect from product design to supply chain management to shop floor layout. The same is true in retail, construction, banking, airlines and many other sectors of the economy (health care is an exception).
It takes a small fraction of labor and capital input it once did per unit of economic activity, which has generated vast wealth for owners and investors.
It has also created a huge divergence in the labor market between well paid workers with specialized skills and the rest, scrambling to stay afloat in the gig economy.
A recent NYT interactive asked readers to guess the unemployment rate of college grads between 25 and 34. The vast majority guessed much higher than the actual 2.4% rate.
We should raise the unconscionably low minimum wage, pay workers for OT, eliminate gender inequity and prosecute violations of current labor law.
But we are also falling far short of the number of skilled workers we need for the economy of the future.
https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/TCU
Anyone who has been around manufacturing for a long time can tell you that dramatic changes have occurred in every aspect from product design to supply chain management to shop floor layout. The same is true in retail, construction, banking, airlines and many other sectors of the economy (health care is an exception).
It takes a small fraction of labor and capital input it once did per unit of economic activity, which has generated vast wealth for owners and investors.
It has also created a huge divergence in the labor market between well paid workers with specialized skills and the rest, scrambling to stay afloat in the gig economy.
A recent NYT interactive asked readers to guess the unemployment rate of college grads between 25 and 34. The vast majority guessed much higher than the actual 2.4% rate.
We should raise the unconscionably low minimum wage, pay workers for OT, eliminate gender inequity and prosecute violations of current labor law.
But we are also falling far short of the number of skilled workers we need for the economy of the future.
8
We live in a global economy where most of the jobs Americans have can be done overseas in lower wage and less regulated countries. That is why so many jobs have disappeared over the last twenty years, not because of anything any President did.
Raising the cost of employment for employers is going to lead to fewer jobs, not more. Your prescription is for more of the same. It makes no sense.
Raising the cost of employment for employers is going to lead to fewer jobs, not more. Your prescription is for more of the same. It makes no sense.
3
Well, we just need to export all the dummies and import the brightest in the rest of the world. Or maybe we could figure out a way to get money to those of our citizens who will never be rocket surgeons.
1
Then how do you explain in Europe especially Germany whose wages and benefits are among the highest in the world yet, continually have a thriving manufacturing economy? The idea that continually driving down American wages to solve the employment problem is ludicrous, it will not. This is the attitude of the plutocrats who want no regulation, do what they want while continually driving down the American standard of living. It is happening already and by the way, in your system, who is going to be left to be able to afford to buy the goods that are now being manufactured overseas with cheap labor?
Perhaps, when your job is affected, you might change your tune.
Perhaps, when your job is affected, you might change your tune.
9
Trump: I Really, Really Like Women
We have two million fewer "men" working but what about women. It seems women regained all of their losses rather quickly after the last recession and affirmative action has never been stronger. Some men don't want to work in a "girl's job" for a "girl's pay" and would rather sit home drinking beer in their (or their parent's) basement. Only a Hillary supporter would intentionally under value a man's labor. Only a Trump supporter (and perhaps Janet Yellen) understands that there are real men behind the numbers and real families that have been destroyed (or never started). A man shouldn't have to work for or report to a woman boss. It's unnatural for a woman to be on top because sooner or later she has to stay home with her babies or abort them because she thinks her job is more important.
The progressive movement has changed the economy faster than some men are willing or able to accept. There are enough men willing to act like boys or even girls to fill the jobs. Sexual perceptions have not been measured because the truth about affirmative action and reverse discrimination is political dynamite. It is only by pretending that there is no difference between men’s and women’s jobs or men and women period, that the “labor market index” and rate of unemployment come to opposite conclusions. Real differences still exist in what most men and women are good at.
We have two million fewer "men" working but what about women. It seems women regained all of their losses rather quickly after the last recession and affirmative action has never been stronger. Some men don't want to work in a "girl's job" for a "girl's pay" and would rather sit home drinking beer in their (or their parent's) basement. Only a Hillary supporter would intentionally under value a man's labor. Only a Trump supporter (and perhaps Janet Yellen) understands that there are real men behind the numbers and real families that have been destroyed (or never started). A man shouldn't have to work for or report to a woman boss. It's unnatural for a woman to be on top because sooner or later she has to stay home with her babies or abort them because she thinks her job is more important.
The progressive movement has changed the economy faster than some men are willing or able to accept. There are enough men willing to act like boys or even girls to fill the jobs. Sexual perceptions have not been measured because the truth about affirmative action and reverse discrimination is political dynamite. It is only by pretending that there is no difference between men’s and women’s jobs or men and women period, that the “labor market index” and rate of unemployment come to opposite conclusions. Real differences still exist in what most men and women are good at.
1
We are hiring computer programmers from India and China on H-1B visas.
Why didn't all the laid off factory workers go back to school and become computer programmers?
Why didn't all the laid off factory workers go back to school and become computer programmers?
Independent - companies are laying off computer programmers and replacing them with H1b visa holders.
We do NOT have a shortage of computer programmers. We have a shortage of computer programmers who will work for low wages. Companies will NOT hire Americans at the same rate as they hire H1b programmers.
We do NOT have a shortage of computer programmers. We have a shortage of computer programmers who will work for low wages. Companies will NOT hire Americans at the same rate as they hire H1b programmers.
1
These numbers have become much less relevant over time and do not reflect the structural changes to our economy. Mainly the outsourcing of white collar jobs to China and India and the use of contractors and part timers to replace basically anyone over 40 making a decent wage with benefits. I can't tell you how many people I meet in my networking group that are now forced to become consultants (LinkedIn is full of them) and are making half of what they used to; and using whatever saved pension/401k they saved to make it until they can figure out how to retire (and not the retire what we are used to). I expect this is being done in every major industry.
23
Join any software meetup and you'll find these poor ghosts haunting around looking for employment or gigs.
4
You are so spot on.
2
Time for a change in the United States. We need greater public investment. With greater public investment we increase our future economic activity, we create millions of new jobs right now, we increase tax receipts both now and in the future, we reduce government handouts, and we become more competitive in international markets. Higher tax rates on the uber wealthy with fewer loopholes and a reduction in the means to hide income, a more consistent business tax code, and more investment in the enforcement and collection activities at the IRS are necessary to effect the change, but are not the only requirements. We need to make a massive infrastructure investment and now is the time to do so; interest rates are low, the economy is slowing, and we have plenty of slack in the employment market. The way we need to affect these changes is to vote the Republicans out of office. Support your local, non-Republican candidate in the election this year. Let us bring much needed change to the United States.
16
Some observations:
The unemployment rate or the labor market conditions index are essentially pointless if they continue to exclude those people who have stopped looking for work. Sure, some of those not looking for work can be in that group of people structurally unemployed. But I would suggest that the larger number of those who have stopped looking for work have done so because they simply cannot find a job.
No index is going to capture the "sense" of the labor market, the insecurity, the "gig" market, the seasonally unemployed, or the underemployed.
There are probably stats noting the minimum or low wage employed, those workers who can't sustain themselves on their wages and have to turn to government resources. Let's call it like it is. These people may be working, but they are most definitely not fully integrated into the economy.
The unemployment rate or the labor market conditions index are essentially pointless if they continue to exclude those people who have stopped looking for work. Sure, some of those not looking for work can be in that group of people structurally unemployed. But I would suggest that the larger number of those who have stopped looking for work have done so because they simply cannot find a job.
No index is going to capture the "sense" of the labor market, the insecurity, the "gig" market, the seasonally unemployed, or the underemployed.
There are probably stats noting the minimum or low wage employed, those workers who can't sustain themselves on their wages and have to turn to government resources. Let's call it like it is. These people may be working, but they are most definitely not fully integrated into the economy.
27
This is the third reason:
"In short, particularly in the aftermath of the Great Recession, the unemployment rate has improved much more quickly than the actual labor market."
Many people are working part time or temporary jobs. They are competing with foreign nationals being brought in to replace American workers; or, their job is being sent overseas. Did the write of this article, bother to read the article about people forced to retrain H1Bs so they can get severance pay this weekend, ran by The New York Times?
Worker wages are stagnant. Older workers are facing rampant wage discrimination to get any job. Good paying blue collar and white collar jobs are vanishing. Those trying to better their lives are being saddled with six digit student debt; which will translate into less people buying homes in the long term.
In other words, while Wall Street and corporate profits show a booming economy; none of this has trickled down to Main Street. Not to to wage earners and not to small business. And small business is supposed to be the biggest job creators.
The US economy is in as bad shape as Europe and China, and only Wall Street, and a quickly growing housing bubble, makes it look otherwise.
"In short, particularly in the aftermath of the Great Recession, the unemployment rate has improved much more quickly than the actual labor market."
Many people are working part time or temporary jobs. They are competing with foreign nationals being brought in to replace American workers; or, their job is being sent overseas. Did the write of this article, bother to read the article about people forced to retrain H1Bs so they can get severance pay this weekend, ran by The New York Times?
Worker wages are stagnant. Older workers are facing rampant wage discrimination to get any job. Good paying blue collar and white collar jobs are vanishing. Those trying to better their lives are being saddled with six digit student debt; which will translate into less people buying homes in the long term.
In other words, while Wall Street and corporate profits show a booming economy; none of this has trickled down to Main Street. Not to to wage earners and not to small business. And small business is supposed to be the biggest job creators.
The US economy is in as bad shape as Europe and China, and only Wall Street, and a quickly growing housing bubble, makes it look otherwise.
46
In my experience, people are doing more work for less money. They are "employed" but they cannot spend very much.
This puts a huge drag on the consumer economy, and leads yield-seeking investors to seek even more cost-saving to keep profit margins up (which are not). It's recipe for a spiral down to an economic crash-and-burn. It's a feature of capitalism -- not a bug. Absent government intervention, anyway.
This puts a huge drag on the consumer economy, and leads yield-seeking investors to seek even more cost-saving to keep profit margins up (which are not). It's recipe for a spiral down to an economic crash-and-burn. It's a feature of capitalism -- not a bug. Absent government intervention, anyway.
52
I hope one day the powers-that-be realize that managing trade (including goods, services as well as labor) is not protectionism but one of the several levers a country should be able to deploy to steer its economy, much like fiscal stimulus and monetary policy. The inability to keep decently paying jobs in America is no different than Greece's inability to devalue its currency.
Corporations have an obligation to maximize their profits but governments have an obligation to maintain a healthy economy for its people. It should be a thoughtful balancing act that is currently lacking due to our free market dogma. Maybe demand has to collapse all together to learn our lesson.
Corporations have an obligation to maximize their profits but governments have an obligation to maintain a healthy economy for its people. It should be a thoughtful balancing act that is currently lacking due to our free market dogma. Maybe demand has to collapse all together to learn our lesson.
29
Yes.
I seem to remember something in the Declaration or the Constitution about "providing for the public weal (well-being)."
I seem to remember something in the Declaration or the Constitution about "providing for the public weal (well-being)."
4
I don't understand the logic of tightening money, which is what a Fed interest rate means, when the 10-year Bond is at 1.75% and the labor market is weakening. Apparently, the FED thinks its "credibility" is at stake if it does not get to the Funds rate to near 1% by the end of the year. I don't know if its credibility is going be much enhanced when it descends back down to ZIRP as the result of a completely unnecessary recession Yellen's FED will have triggered by the end of the year.
3
@Joe Sabin: Your and other readers assumption that a government can go into ever increasing debt without consequence is wrong. You need to learn about debt. Many in America have been fooled into thinking that higher levels of government debt and deficits will lead to good things as your source of information is Paul Krugman. Krugman suggest that America would be better off had it followed the economic model of Greece and Puerto Rico. I suggest you and others need to read history and other newspapers, and you will find out what happens when politicians tell you that government debt has no negative consequence.
5
Many of us aren't recommending a lot of new debt.
We're recommending higher taxes on the upper-classes.
Those who benefit most from the national economy should pay significantly more.
Simple, really.
We're recommending higher taxes on the upper-classes.
Those who benefit most from the national economy should pay significantly more.
Simple, really.
5
The top 10% of wage earners pay 70% of all income taxes collected. This number was about 50% in 1980.
How much more should the highest 10% of wage earners pay? 90%? 100%?
How much more should the highest 10% of wage earners pay? 90%? 100%?
1
Why just focus on income tax? Is it because it gives you the number that you want to show?
Try factoring the other taxes which are also paid by the rest of us: Property tax, sales tax, school tax, the various taxes associated with being employed: unemployment tax, workman's compensation, payroll tax, FICA, med. tax, etc.
You'd get a lot different number.
And keep in mind that a lot of people in the bottom 90% are seniors who primarily live on social security. How much income tax should they pay?
Try factoring the other taxes which are also paid by the rest of us: Property tax, sales tax, school tax, the various taxes associated with being employed: unemployment tax, workman's compensation, payroll tax, FICA, med. tax, etc.
You'd get a lot different number.
And keep in mind that a lot of people in the bottom 90% are seniors who primarily live on social security. How much income tax should they pay?
1
Isn't your point that the economic model used to produce the unemployment figures does not reflect the economic reality. That's why its called the "Dismal Science."
Modelling reality is tough, just notice the physical sciences as more and more particles are found and then there is always the issue of "dark matter." I would suppose that there's plenty of "dark matter" unaccounted for by the current economic models.
You still have to go on making economic decisions on incomplete knowledge.
Modelling reality is tough, just notice the physical sciences as more and more particles are found and then there is always the issue of "dark matter." I would suppose that there's plenty of "dark matter" unaccounted for by the current economic models.
You still have to go on making economic decisions on incomplete knowledge.
2
What the numbers don't show are the new 21st century standards of treating workers as disposable commodities with scarcely more consideration than robots. High anxiety work places and instability so that we can make these trade deals work for the top 1%. And the government (Dem. or Rep.) is never on our side. A state of affairs resulting from a numbed populace that never demands anything and so corporations do the shaping for them.
46
I agree. Not only are workers disposable, but salaries have gone down, even in the last year with Bernie Sanders raising everyone's consciousness about such things. I was laid off in January, 2015, and found that salaries for what I do were at the same level as four years earlier when I took that job. Since then, I'd received raises, so these salaries represented a cut for me. Ultimately, I took a contract position at a good rate, also hard to find, and when it ended last winter, learned that salaries for what I do have deteriorated even further. They are now at the level I was at nine years ago, and even lower in some cases. I've looked into contract work as well, and whereas hourly rates used to be high because benefits weren't included, they are now lower than the salaries. They're computed on an annual salary divided by 50 weeks and then 40 hours. Since most of us work about 47 - 48 weeks a year including holidays, vacation, sick time, etc. these rates represent yet another cut. It is very discouraging to find that you are a mere widget worth only whatever crumbs are thrown to you.
31
Even the new index is too simplified as it doesn't stratify the different populations in the workforce. Job polarization is a phenomenon few seem to be discussing, and it's a serious problem around the world because of technology. Even among college-educated people, there is no accounting for those with digital and new technology skills and those who don't. Numerous studies have pointed to the threat of automation of jobs consisting of routine tasks. The key for our workforce is reskilling workers with competencies relevant in the 21st Century. Unfortunately for some men over 50 who are machinists or equipment operators or even office professionals, teaching them java script or other high tech skills may be too late. Hence, the angry electorate this year. It's all connected.
5
In the 1960s, at the height of the US manufacturing-based economy, about 25% of workers had good jobs in the manufacturing industry. Those largely were men with only a high-school education.
Today almost the entire manufacturing sector has been shipped to China, with India claiming another group of jobs, in the tech field, call centers, and back-office legal work, etc.
As a result, our current service-based economy has about 25% fewer jobs. What is more, about 25% of men, with little education, have few prospects for steady work.
That is why our country has, and always will have an underclass of more or less permanently unemployed me.
As a result, it would be appropriate to discount the discouraged workers, when the Fed judges whether we are at full employment.
Today almost the entire manufacturing sector has been shipped to China, with India claiming another group of jobs, in the tech field, call centers, and back-office legal work, etc.
As a result, our current service-based economy has about 25% fewer jobs. What is more, about 25% of men, with little education, have few prospects for steady work.
That is why our country has, and always will have an underclass of more or less permanently unemployed me.
As a result, it would be appropriate to discount the discouraged workers, when the Fed judges whether we are at full employment.
7
AIG, remember them, has been sending jobs to India.
1
The number of underemployed and miserly compensated must be huge in this age of sustained corporate power and low-wage capitalism. It follows that the economy will continue to "chug" along while companies grab a greater share of profits and create economic activity by buying and sell things amongst themselves. It is past time for a governmental redistribution of wealth.
38
Since business leaders started getting their education at the college B-school instead working their way up the ladder from the "mail room" to the executive suite they have lost empathy with the workers in their corporations. When I was young the business owner knew his people rewarded them for increased productivity. The present generation of CEO's consider worker just cog in the machine and all the rewards go to the shareholders. We need an increased awareness that workers are STAKEHOLDERS in a business and deserve equal treatment with the shareholders.
5
An intuitive explanation to me is that the rise in income inequality is behind the soft economy. Think of much economic stimulation $1 billion would create if spread among 100 million people vs being tucked away in the (overpriced?) stock market or some offshore account. I think in 5-10 years we'll be reading articles like this that will be saying in effect "wow, income inequality really *is* a big factor in broad-based prosperity".
24
This is so obvious to me I don't understand why it is not discussed further. Also, tax policy and supply side economics that favors the very rich. It is so clear that if our tax policy put money into the hands of those who will spend it you will see the economy take off. What am I missing?
The economy never really picked up steam. The recovery was anemic and the slack from the recession never really went away. We just pushed it around a bit. Thank our narrowly constructed fiscal stimulus and austerity legislators. Monetary policy took the brunt of the burden and still can't manage to unclog our liquidity.
There were obviously some winners but mostly we're experiencing a decade-long hangover. Labor clearly had to take the uber home. Now we're told the expansion is about to end. Great...
There were obviously some winners but mostly we're experiencing a decade-long hangover. Labor clearly had to take the uber home. Now we're told the expansion is about to end. Great...
11
The bigwigs like it like this.
They want everybody who is working to be grateful beyond belief that they have a job. That way, they won't be demanding silliness like raises, benefits, overtime pay, and an end to wage theft (a crime so common that according to studies it amounts to more than all other kinds of robberies and thefts put together), which by the definitions of modern management are considered "inefficiency". And unions to protect the workers from any of this? Not a chance!
They want everybody who is working to be grateful beyond belief that they have a job. That way, they won't be demanding silliness like raises, benefits, overtime pay, and an end to wage theft (a crime so common that according to studies it amounts to more than all other kinds of robberies and thefts put together), which by the definitions of modern management are considered "inefficiency". And unions to protect the workers from any of this? Not a chance!
100
Don't believe the govt's data. They have cured the fever by re-calibrating the thermometer. The patient is still deathly ill. Labor participation rate is 66%. That means 34% are unemployed. Even more are under-employed,part time or working off the books.
We have low/no growth, rising deficits, hordes of dangerous job-robbing and resource-hogging illegals, the wet blanket of 0BamaCare, stifling amounts of regulation and the some of highest corporate taxes in the world. What could possibly go wrong?
We have low/no growth, rising deficits, hordes of dangerous job-robbing and resource-hogging illegals, the wet blanket of 0BamaCare, stifling amounts of regulation and the some of highest corporate taxes in the world. What could possibly go wrong?
14
And the fact that even when we're creating 250,000 jobs a month, we have no idea how many of them are minimum wage walmart-type jobs vs something you'd want your son or daughter to work in. This isn't a priority for the 1%, so this isn't going to change for a very long time.
16
That 34% includes full-time college and graduate students, women taking care of small children at home, early retirees with plenty of money, etc, etc. Not everyone between age 16 and 65 wants a job.
2
As a diagnostic indicator, labor market data is of limited value. The Federal Reserve reports that nearly half of all Americans could not cover the expense of a $400 emergency without borrowing or selling something. Full employment is meaningless unless wage levels permit the average American to have an emergency fund and sufficient funds for retirement.
65
I noticed that Mr. Appelbaum cited the percentage of men working but not women. What if fewer men are working in part (at least) because more women are working and the men are taking on the non-traditional role of house-husband? No statistic was cited that will give insight into this phenomenon.
As for the issue of families not saving for emergencies and credit card debt, our society has become too focused on instant gratification. Even though I became disabled over 22 years ago, I have no credit card debt, a hefty savings account, a decent paid-for home and a new paid-for car. No one else paid for these things. I learned to discriminate what purchases are necessary and which are not and don't buy the latter. I live on 1/3 of what I earned in 1988. I don't feel I am lacking anything important.
If more people lived this way, we might have a more stable middle class and a more robust economy. There would be fewer bankruptcies and a lot more financial stability.
As for the issue of families not saving for emergencies and credit card debt, our society has become too focused on instant gratification. Even though I became disabled over 22 years ago, I have no credit card debt, a hefty savings account, a decent paid-for home and a new paid-for car. No one else paid for these things. I learned to discriminate what purchases are necessary and which are not and don't buy the latter. I live on 1/3 of what I earned in 1988. I don't feel I am lacking anything important.
If more people lived this way, we might have a more stable middle class and a more robust economy. There would be fewer bankruptcies and a lot more financial stability.
1
Does this factor in the people who want full time work but can't pass a drug test to get it?
3
It also doesn't factor in people who are unknowingly discriminated against by race, class, religion, and gender.
6
Picker packer jobs are still drug testing, but they discount marijuana results, in order to get enough people to do this horrible job. Check out the New Yorker article on how people are treated in these Amazon, etc warehouses.
4
Nor age discrimination.
The truth is that able bodied adults in the United States need to work to pay the rent or put food on the table. Your severance runs out in weeks and unemployment checks in months. Survey after survey show Americans have no savings. Circumstances will force you to take whatever job is available if you don't want to end up on the street. The economy has created no jobs that can support a family since the year 2000. Since 2000, Fed policy has created a series of bubbles starting with Dot-Com and then Housing being the main ones but lot of smaller ones like Student Loans, Commercial Real Estate, Farmland, Biotech, Blue Chip, Bitcoin, Commodities etc etc. When a bubble is being inflated, there is short term employment generation but when it bursts, it leaves everybody poorer. The unemployment rate and job creation are just numbers. To add meaning to the numbers, you have to understand what jobs, where and what they pay. You have to go beyond the numbers and understand the stories of the decimated middle class to see why Trump and Sanders are popular and the media does not get it.
65
This appears to be entirely speculation. Its possible that these statistical measures of employment are largely meaningless in terms of the general condition of the economy or its likely future path.
In the current environment, investments in technology can be used to increase production in response to increase demand with no corresponding increase in employment. A large portion of that increased productivity ends up in the hands of investors rather than consumers who would drive demand. That may explain why we have negative interest rates and are awash in capital looking for a better return.
In the current environment, investments in technology can be used to increase production in response to increase demand with no corresponding increase in employment. A large portion of that increased productivity ends up in the hands of investors rather than consumers who would drive demand. That may explain why we have negative interest rates and are awash in capital looking for a better return.
6
And productivity is not increasing as it should. Part time, out-sourced workers are not as productive.
2
Technology can be misused.
Computers can create all kinds of fancy reports and charts that no one would bother with if there were no computers. Technology can create ridiculous financial products that add nothing to the actual good and services produced, but allow investors to make unwise bets.
Technology can allow companies to eliminate support staff, so middle managers making $150K can type in their own reports, book their own travel, and handle their own calendars....in their spare time, of course.
Does any of this make any sense? Only if you're a corporate accountant.
Computers can create all kinds of fancy reports and charts that no one would bother with if there were no computers. Technology can create ridiculous financial products that add nothing to the actual good and services produced, but allow investors to make unwise bets.
Technology can allow companies to eliminate support staff, so middle managers making $150K can type in their own reports, book their own travel, and handle their own calendars....in their spare time, of course.
Does any of this make any sense? Only if you're a corporate accountant.
1
Some possible assumptions and events that need to be checked: 1. the economy is not a coherent monolith, but a complex set of regions. Even within regions, 50 miles outside metro areas are rural areas that appear to be in deep trouble (in a larger context, compare the Bay Area of CA to the San Joaquin Valley). 2. December is also when major retrenchments began in oil and gas drilling with oil services and supplies hit as well as home office staff - can that be checked? 3. Education - college educated tend to be doing well and some high skills; but HS and especially no HS degree appear to be hurting and still mired. Finally, like the Conditions Index - how do these and other factors interact and maybe amplify?
7
Instead of believing this or that government labor statistic, Mr. Trump has a simpler method: He asks for a show of hands. As Trump likes to point out, the responses he gets belie the rosy government statistics.
2
Job openings are, according to an article in the Times just last week, at an all time high. At my work place there are job openings. Is it lack of skills or an unwillingness to move for a new job that is keeping these positions open?
4
No one will work cheaply enough to fill them. No worries. People will get desperate and take a job at half the pay of their old one soon enough. Or your company will hire some Indians or Mexicans, whichever is appropriate for the job.
4
Lack of skills. I was a chemist but my job has been off-shored. Now there are openings, but not as many as my former company laid off, in other fields which would take a few years to train for. It is hard to say if there will still be those jobs available once a person trains for them.
2
HR likes to stay busy. That doesn't mean they actually intend to hire. Now that they no longer pay by the word for want ads they amuse themselves by making longer and longer lists of requirements that no one person can match up to.
3
Like bond traders, ordinary Americans are well aware of this conflicting data. They are told by the Obama Administration, which, understandably, likes to use the dropping unemployment figure, that things are improving but they know that the "participation rate" has dropped.
They also hear claims like "slowest recovery" and have a pretty good sense of global competition (only intensifying) so they realize there are no employment surges coming any time soon.
It's not hard to see how Americans would be willing to gamble on candidates who promise to shake things up. They are willing to risk it for a better future. It's in their DNA.
They also hear claims like "slowest recovery" and have a pretty good sense of global competition (only intensifying) so they realize there are no employment surges coming any time soon.
It's not hard to see how Americans would be willing to gamble on candidates who promise to shake things up. They are willing to risk it for a better future. It's in their DNA.
7
Why would anyone believe an analysis of data by Goldman Sachs?? They are the definition of self interested....to an extent that one might call criminal and immoral.
US Government statistics are an attempt to provide a reasonable data picture by an organization under attack by the very constitutes it seeks to serve.
Yes, it is Bizzaro world come to be considered reality.
US Government statistics are an attempt to provide a reasonable data picture by an organization under attack by the very constitutes it seeks to serve.
Yes, it is Bizzaro world come to be considered reality.
15
They say that if you took all the economists in the U.S. and placed them end to end, they still wouldn't reach a consensus.
8
Tech and healthcare are keeping this economy going and not everyone is capable of these left brain vocations. Many people have several part-time jobs for benefits and income. I am blessed to not be one of them.
7
This whole story seems to miss the real issue:
What is happening to human beings in this nation that
claims that "all men are created equal"?
What is happening to millions of children whose parents
can't find a job that pays enough for them to afford a place to
live, clothes to wear and food to eat?
And what role does government have in preventing a relative
handful of Americans from living like kings and queens while
while so many barely live at all?
Http://HumaneCom.com
What is happening to human beings in this nation that
claims that "all men are created equal"?
What is happening to millions of children whose parents
can't find a job that pays enough for them to afford a place to
live, clothes to wear and food to eat?
And what role does government have in preventing a relative
handful of Americans from living like kings and queens while
while so many barely live at all?
Http://HumaneCom.com
36
No, the economy does not have to just chug along. It's only chugging along because Congress refuses to do anything to help the citizens who pay their salaries & benefits. Congress will not use fiscal policy to help the economy because it might benefit the other party. There is a civil war going on in this country - but it's a financial civil war. Disgraceful.
106
One poor month of job creation and the sky is falling? Work force participation is declining? News flash: the baby boomers have started retiring. Frankly a great stimulus would be to raise the minimum wage but the Republicans won't allow it with a Democrat in the White House simply because it would help the economy. The major brake on the economy has been those red state governors firing public employees, cutting taxes and spending look no further than Kansas or New Jersey.
16
No, the majority of job growth has been those baby-boomers going back to work part-time because their retirement savings were wiped out. Dig deeper in the unemployment numbers and don't accept the headlines. Job growth is in people over 50, retail, and less than 30 hours.
8
...and their college educated children have moved back home to live with mom and dad while they hunt for a job that can sustain loan debt payments, etc, etc...
2
We are not retiring. We are being forced out. Too old = too high a salary; just begin bad performance reviews after 30 years of a spotless record. 401K wiped out in 2008? Need to keep working past 67, but only poor paying jobs = working until you drop. We wish we could retire, believe me. The workplace is a humiliation every day.
8
Change the metrics!
Weight and volume for goods are dropping with prices remaining stable, this is not measured at all, workforce measurement is leaving off millions who drop out, find some self employment, or work off book
When general wages stay the same and owner profit increases 20 fold over a 50 year time span, something is a miss.......
Weight and volume for goods are dropping with prices remaining stable, this is not measured at all, workforce measurement is leaving off millions who drop out, find some self employment, or work off book
When general wages stay the same and owner profit increases 20 fold over a 50 year time span, something is a miss.......
12
No matter what the measure, the top 1% will grab all the profits from any productivity gains, as they have done since Reagan restructured the economy to be more of an oligarchy. We are in a class war, and need to know our enemy well: the 1% must be destroyed. Which means we need to dump our elected officials and restructure the tax system to "claw back" all the money the Super Rich have stolen from the Common People. And throw some of these bankers and off shore wealth hiders in jail for decades!
67
Peoples wages and living standards have plumbed new lows for 40 years. Job opportunities, in terms of the wages they pay, are as abysmal now as they have been in my lifetime. I am doing well despite that. Many of my peers are not. The causes of wage declines are primarily labor diversification, world trade and sponsored, employer-friendly and employee-hostile human migration. Yes, I understand that world trade makes the rich, like me, richer, hopefully. That alone does not justify the gigantic harm it has done, in various ways, to our working class.
Now that the data are so unambiguous about broad-based wage declines, I hope that economists can begin to speak more freely about the devastating harms of the world trade consensus.
Now that the data are so unambiguous about broad-based wage declines, I hope that economists can begin to speak more freely about the devastating harms of the world trade consensus.
16
So why are labor markets across the country tightening? We're effectively at full employment.
1
I'll believe that when I see wage pressure leading to price inflation. Not going to happen. We don't make things here. Prices stay low because things are made wherever people continue to work for peanuts. Meantime, I'm not leaving my $70K job for the equivalent $35K jobs until they push me out.
5
Read the latest reports, industries are just not wishing to hire at least, in the same manner as before in similar times. This economy has even the economists befuddled, that is why there are so many different opinions on what is actually happening.
1
I would also suggest one look at the data over time. http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cps_charts.pdf and http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm. Things to note are the labor force participation rate peaked in the late 90's and have declined ever since. The job market and the job types are always changing. It is not the same job market today as it was 20 years ago.
13
The Labor Department publishes at least six different measures of the unemployment rate, so you can take your pick or calculate your own. The headline U1 rate is useful because we have comparable data that goes back quite far. It only counts those who are actively looking for work because those who are not looking are not in the market. They are retired, or full-time students, or homemakers, or doing volunteer work, or something else, but they are not part of the labor market supply.
6
We never recovered from the recession catalyzed by the implosion of the housing market. That was the beginning of the "new normal" and now we are eight years into that different state of being.
The banks waited patiently and then gave us too-easy credit to purchase automobiles and have fueled a commercial building explosion that is about to come to and end. No lessons were learned other than to be more circumspect about duping the American public.
The employment figures we are seeing now are no surprise and consistent with that new normal. Gee, was anyone watching?
The banks waited patiently and then gave us too-easy credit to purchase automobiles and have fueled a commercial building explosion that is about to come to and end. No lessons were learned other than to be more circumspect about duping the American public.
The employment figures we are seeing now are no surprise and consistent with that new normal. Gee, was anyone watching?
9
@RMAN Boston
Boston
There hasn't been a commercial building explosion. Housing prices and sales volume are about back to where they were pre-recession and inventory is short in many parts of the country which has fuelled the recovery in starts. Gee, do you know what you're talking about?
Boston
There hasn't been a commercial building explosion. Housing prices and sales volume are about back to where they were pre-recession and inventory is short in many parts of the country which has fuelled the recovery in starts. Gee, do you know what you're talking about?
4
Notice you don't rebut the bubble in auto loans...
2
After every unemployment report, the Obama administration sends out it minions to promote the Orwellian idea that the economy is doing great because of Obama's policies which saved the world from economic collapse. Many in the press go along withe lie because they believe it is their job to promote the lie. However, the truth cannot be hidden forever. Even the readers of this newspaper may question why the reporting differs from what they know to be true. Reality check: Obama doubled the national debt which means he borrowed money from our children to sustain the lifestyle of the parents and grandparents. Low interest rates are the only thing propping up the bubble in the housing market and car sales. This will end badly.as Obama has mortgaged the future not unlike the person in debt who takes a home equity or reverse mortgage to maintain their spending.
11
And there goes the old tired story about mortgaging the future. The government isn't like a family. Either learn how public debt works, or don't. But you are not correct in your statement. Also, btw, Reagan increased the public debt by three times. So what's your point anyway?
48
Mr. Sabin, Money is money. Debt is debt. The government gets its money from the people. When the government takes on debt, the people of the country who pay taxes pay the interest and the principal. The delusion that the government can borrow without consequence is ignorant. Have you not read about Greece or Puerto Rico? Use your brain. Does it really make sense that a government can borrow without consequence? If you are right, why should the government even have a budget? It is so sad to read comments like yours and that others agree with you. It explains the decline in America.
4
We are the world's currency. The world would not be able to function if we did not carry debt. Macro economics is more complicated than your kitchen table economics, and even at your kitchen table, I suspect you are ok with an auto loan or two and a mortgage - essentially necessary debt.
1
My father used to tell this joke: "Know the difference between a recession and a depression? A recession is when your neighbor is out of work, a depression is when you are out of work."
36
The article writer doesnt get it: Both data are cooked.
The actual goal by these govt entities is to tow the line every 30 days and show in PR blurbs "small but positive improvement in the state of the USA economy." The 30 day news cycle for PR releases from the Fed Bank during the Great Recession made that practice clear. I finally caught on to this.
Quite simply the recession is not over for most working Americans. The Fed Bank is pretending otherwise because it has to appease the markets and banks and make whoever the current president is look good. The Fed bank is barely nudging the market rate up after being basically zero percent for years -- it doesnt mean anything substantive when they nudge it. Status quo is the goal.
22
True enough, but real progress has been made. We just don't have memory for the painful events. I was a small store owner during the great recession, and the smaller recession post 9/11. Overnight all business ceased in my shop. I went from sales of 30,000 per month to virtually nothing. Literally, no one came in. This is not an exaggeration. I could no longer afford staff, advertising, or merchandise. Venders were in the same boat and so we muddled thru this mess for 3 years before we saw any genuine steam back. Our economy has restructured, but when I closed the shop in 2015 we were busy, and I had a new successful career in real estate. The way we shop has changed, our lifestyles, and our expectations. But we are not in a recession and if we have one the economy is strong enough to pull us out quickly. Do people in our economy deserve better pay and fewer hours worked? Absolutely. Businesses used the recession to "restructure" and reduce pay. Even I went from 6 employees to just me and as I rehired I was careful. Workers do need to fight back. I think this is the next battle coming and this is behind Bernie's popularity.
6
The Fed's chart shows that whenever the index dips below zero, a recession follows shortly (and the Fed then eases rates). Looks like we're heading there, whatever the economic or monetary reasons. Bond traders got it right, time to place bearish bets ala Soros, at least until the Fed stops the tightening cycle.
3
Since the 2000 tech bust the gig economy has harbored millions who were formerly employed but are now sole proprietors or independent consultants. They don't show up in the unemployment statistics though they are frequently out of work. The economy is squishy and millions of people hang by a thread.
143
I personally know a lot of people who "claim" to be consultants and freelancers....but they get a job once in a while, and it rarely pays well. Sometimes their costs to get this little freelance or consulting work (gasoline, parking, materials like paper and postage) EXCEED what they are paid!
I've done it myself, in fact. You are force to, in order to keep your resume "live" and be able to say you are working. Having to say you are not working for six months or a year or longer is the kiss of death.
But those people are rarely getting by. Some are supported by spouses or parents. Some have another source of outside income. But they are not supported by a good job with benefits -- not any more.
This is far, far more common than most people realize. I know several people who work for Uber or TaskRabbit or similar "gig" jobs -- that pay miserably and the work is infrequent, and they must use their OWN cars and gasoline, for which they are not fairly compensated.
Many of these people are a very short distance from total financial collapse.
I've done it myself, in fact. You are force to, in order to keep your resume "live" and be able to say you are working. Having to say you are not working for six months or a year or longer is the kiss of death.
But those people are rarely getting by. Some are supported by spouses or parents. Some have another source of outside income. But they are not supported by a good job with benefits -- not any more.
This is far, far more common than most people realize. I know several people who work for Uber or TaskRabbit or similar "gig" jobs -- that pay miserably and the work is infrequent, and they must use their OWN cars and gasoline, for which they are not fairly compensated.
Many of these people are a very short distance from total financial collapse.
O, for heaven's sake. Look at inflation. There is none. If we were at full employment we'd start seeing wage pressure driven price inflation. People are hiding in those cracks they've fallen through. If there were to be even a tiny hint of demand roaring so greatly that the US couldn't find enough workers to make all the supply, there is always the entire rest of the world ready to step in and make stuff for a pittance. Which already happens. Until the entire world of labor is working for free, i.e., enslaved, this process is not going to stop. Without a paradigm shift away from labor for wages, there will be no demand. Ever again.
34
There IS inflation in consumable goods and groceries. Any standard consumer knows that when they see food net weight go down and the price stay the same. The data for that is not captured well.
68
Nope. Incorrect. The Consumer Price Index published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics takes food net weight into consideration when calculating price changes.
10
Zachary no. That is what we all have been told since the 1970s. I spent some time looking at the raw data because it was obvious that something wasnt right. The raw data is all there on the internet if you want to look. Some items are obvious like gas prices and easy to track reliably. But with groceries, you can tell the folks making the data are in trouble once you get past simple things to measure like "eggs" or a bag of potatoes or broccoli by net weight.
BUT What happens with the broad and multi-various food category "cookies" or "cereal"? Now do you see the problem? Net weight doesnt work for an enormous number of foods that Americans buy. You can keep believing in the CPI if you want to though.
Basically -- the CPI fails to address inflation with almost anything in a grocery stare that is processed food.
BUT What happens with the broad and multi-various food category "cookies" or "cereal"? Now do you see the problem? Net weight doesnt work for an enormous number of foods that Americans buy. You can keep believing in the CPI if you want to though.
Basically -- the CPI fails to address inflation with almost anything in a grocery stare that is processed food.
7
I would like to see calculations of this index for past periods of both recession and growth. How well does it show what was happening during such periods compared to other indices? That might give us some further information on what is happening now.
3
The metrics used are wrong. Instead of counting jobs, they should count equivalent jobs - that is jobs that are normalized based on what they pay.
A job at $50/hr is not the same as a job at $10/hr in its effect on the economy.
Also simply using GDP as the metric does not give a good measure of distribution and how much goes to consumers. Median earnings would give better indication of economic health.
A job at $50/hr is not the same as a job at $10/hr in its effect on the economy.
Also simply using GDP as the metric does not give a good measure of distribution and how much goes to consumers. Median earnings would give better indication of economic health.
86
There are separate indexes that look at wages which are reported regularly. The data you want exists and is published.
2
When one is retired one gets to know many people who have to take early retirement because they were pushed out of the work force even though they would like to work. Many are then forced to work for minimum wage, that is if they can find a job. Congress is talking of raising the retirement age to 70? In my book that means that people will first have to use up their savings, if they are lucky enough to save some $ until reaching age 62 when they will get about 30% less SS than if they took it at age 67 or better wait till age 70? Yes and even if one has just one day work one is counted as employed? The statistics are grossly over inflated in favor of big business/corporations. Yet on the opposite of the spectrum, I see many second and third very expensive vacation homes built. Now I think that is fine, no problem. But this should not be on the backs of the very struggling working/middle class and young people coming out of universities with loans they can hardly repay, because salaries have gone down. Why should workers not get part of the profit the corporations are making? Do CEO's, Bankers and Stockholders have to make huge profits without having to pay there share of taxes? Should they not pay some taxes on inheritance, trust funds, real estate? Should the worker not get a part of their profits? Yes some people love their independence, but many need the security of a fairly steady living wage income. I am not an economist, but US firms should be held accountable.
134
At the time the SSA was signed, life expectancy was below the age of retirement. Today, it's above by almost 15 years. Even just comparing life expectancy for those who reach adulthood or the 65+ population per capita leaves us with significantly more people eligible to receive Social Security. Factor in the wave of Baby Boomers reaching retirement age and the number of people receiving SSA benefits for other reasons, and that will only further complicate things.
I'm not saying raising retirement age will fix the economy -- there are many things we should address first, as you noted -- but Social Security, as it works today, is not sustainable, and the program won't be solvent in the coming decades without raising the retirement age.
I'm not saying raising retirement age will fix the economy -- there are many things we should address first, as you noted -- but Social Security, as it works today, is not sustainable, and the program won't be solvent in the coming decades without raising the retirement age.
2
@ghost867: but you can't raise the retirement age, because it is nearly impossible for most people find work after 60 -- even if they WANT to work. Companies practice rampant age discrimination, and it is nearly impossible to prove this or sue them. It can be very subtle. Companies profit more if they get rid of "costly" older employees, who have more health care needs and high salaries.
Your plan would basically plunge such people into permanent poverty, waiting for their SS to kick in at 70....meaning, they will hit retirement with almost no savings, and require supplemental SSI or food stamps or other benefits. We do not gain as a society every time an impoverished senior ends up in a Medicaid nursing home, for $10,000 a month.
If SS is not solvent at the present rate of taxation...then it is the TAX which is too low. Not the retirement age. We need to bite the bullet and figure out what rate of taxation is realistic and fair, and work from there.
NOTE: people do live slightly longer today. But they do not STAY YOUNG longer. They get just as old as previous generations -- with illness and disability. All we've done medically is extend the time people are OLD -- not extend YOUTH.
Your plan would basically plunge such people into permanent poverty, waiting for their SS to kick in at 70....meaning, they will hit retirement with almost no savings, and require supplemental SSI or food stamps or other benefits. We do not gain as a society every time an impoverished senior ends up in a Medicaid nursing home, for $10,000 a month.
If SS is not solvent at the present rate of taxation...then it is the TAX which is too low. Not the retirement age. We need to bite the bullet and figure out what rate of taxation is realistic and fair, and work from there.
NOTE: people do live slightly longer today. But they do not STAY YOUNG longer. They get just as old as previous generations -- with illness and disability. All we've done medically is extend the time people are OLD -- not extend YOUTH.
1
I am sure most people like rapid economic growth, but personally I find steady better than boom and bust. A long term sustainable growth rate is just fine with me. Given the size of our economy, even a modest growth rate generates some pretty large numbers. In terms of the job market, I wonder why we think part-time workers want full time jobs. I imagine some do, but there are also some who are quite happy working part-time.
3
Many would love a part time job, but no one can afford it for $10/hour.
2
The economy may be chugging along, but we are in an employment crisis that is only going to get worse unless we make substantive changes in our social contract. Automation and globalization will continue to eliminate occupations for the next generations. We must effectively educate our entire workforce and guarantee employment at a living wage for all adults. http://alltogethernow.org.
56
"Automation and globalization will continue to eliminate occupations for the next generations."
And so will the growing number of H!-B visa that Obama repeatedly endorsed.
Read yesterday' article re American workers speaking out against corporate threat tactics of severance loss if a laid off worker tells what's really going on in our American corprotocracy.
High paying, skilled IT jobs that Americans have trained for, held and pursued are now being given to low paid Indian and Asian employees of gigantic "consulting" companies like Infosys and Cognizant.
This will eventually stop .
Madame DeFarge still knitting.
And so will the growing number of H!-B visa that Obama repeatedly endorsed.
Read yesterday' article re American workers speaking out against corporate threat tactics of severance loss if a laid off worker tells what's really going on in our American corprotocracy.
High paying, skilled IT jobs that Americans have trained for, held and pursued are now being given to low paid Indian and Asian employees of gigantic "consulting" companies like Infosys and Cognizant.
This will eventually stop .
Madame DeFarge still knitting.
69
Educate our entire workforce? In what?
We would have been better off addressing population growth versus job shrinkage for at least the last decade.
I feel the living wage concept is a Catch 22 scenario. Wages go up. Prices go up. People spend less on items that keep them employed.
Yes, I concur that the heads of corporations are over compensated, as well as those at the top of any number of professions... It doesn't seem to cause anyone to do anything other than complain and hope they step into those shoes some day.
We would have been better off addressing population growth versus job shrinkage for at least the last decade.
I feel the living wage concept is a Catch 22 scenario. Wages go up. Prices go up. People spend less on items that keep them employed.
Yes, I concur that the heads of corporations are over compensated, as well as those at the top of any number of professions... It doesn't seem to cause anyone to do anything other than complain and hope they step into those shoes some day.
6
As technology began rapidly entering the workplace in the 1950s, instead of decreasing worker-hours and maintaining the workforce at the same level with the same level of compensation, employers used the savings from technology to keep worker-hours and salaries the same, but reduced the size of the workforce. Greater productivity was translated into greater profits for the owners. The benefits did not trickle down.
With the decline of unions and the failure of the government to shorten the work-week as they had done in the early part of the 20th century, the work-week stayed about the same, with fewer employees required. At the beginning of the 21st century, worker compensation had remained relatively stable for the past 50 years while the compensation of owners has increased twenty-fold.
The answer is not to encourage Americans to 'Buy American', but to demand that employees benefit from technology as do employers: Fewer hours for employees with a commensurate increase in compensation so that the level of employment remains the same having more workers working fewer hours and all Americans benefiting from the fruits of technology, not just the employers.
Legislation reducing the work-week from 40 hours to 30, then 20 will dramatically increase employment while giving more leisure time to Americans and restoring the worker-owner incomes to a more traditional ratio of 10 or 20:1 rather than the current 200:1.
With the decline of unions and the failure of the government to shorten the work-week as they had done in the early part of the 20th century, the work-week stayed about the same, with fewer employees required. At the beginning of the 21st century, worker compensation had remained relatively stable for the past 50 years while the compensation of owners has increased twenty-fold.
The answer is not to encourage Americans to 'Buy American', but to demand that employees benefit from technology as do employers: Fewer hours for employees with a commensurate increase in compensation so that the level of employment remains the same having more workers working fewer hours and all Americans benefiting from the fruits of technology, not just the employers.
Legislation reducing the work-week from 40 hours to 30, then 20 will dramatically increase employment while giving more leisure time to Americans and restoring the worker-owner incomes to a more traditional ratio of 10 or 20:1 rather than the current 200:1.
204
"Legislation reducing the work-week from 40 hours to 30"
What would induce congress to do that? You might as well ask for money to rain from the sky. There's simply no impetus to make that happen and companies want staff to work more not work less.
What would induce congress to do that? You might as well ask for money to rain from the sky. There's simply no impetus to make that happen and companies want staff to work more not work less.
6
As an example, the introduction of ATMs gave banks the opportunity to reduce the number of tellers while increasing profits. While the number of employees fell as the hours of the fewer employees remained the same, employee compensation as a percentage of income fell and profits surged.
12
Companies will never have enough. That doesn't mean we should stop progress. Should we return to 6 day work weeks, 14 hour days? Child labor? Triangle Waist death traps? No. We need to take our government back from corporations and tax and regulate the living daylights out of them. There's a lot of fat to trim there before it hurts the economy.
12