Real Unemployment at 16.4%

[G_j]

http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2009/06/05-0

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 5, 2009
9:53 AM

CONTACT: Americans for Democratic Action
David Card 202-785-5980

Real Unemployment at 16.4%
WASHINGTON - June 5 - The real unemployment rate released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics is 16.4%, 7 points higher than the officially reported rate.

The real rate includes marginally attached workers which the BLS reports “are neither working nor looking for work but indicate that they want and are available for a job and have looked for work sometime in the recent past. Discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached, have given a job-market related reason for not looking currently for a job. Persons employed part time for economic reasons are those who want and are available for full-time work but have had to settle for a part-time schedule.”

Seven million people have lost their jobs since December 2007. There are currently 14.5 million unemployed workers.

The number of layoffs in May declined for the fourth straight month indicating President Obama’s economic recovery plan is having some effect but underscores the urgent need to put more government dollars to work motivating the private sector to begin hiring laid-off workers.

ADA National Director, Amy Isaacs, said: “We must move faster to stop further job loss by investing Federal dollars in infrastructure, renewable energy projects and education. We welcome the apparent, small steps toward economic recovery. True recovery will not occur, however, until Americans are fully employed.”

###
ADA is America's most experienced independent liberal lobbying organization. In the spirit of the New Deal and ADA founders Eleanor Roosevelt, renowned economist John Kenneth Galbraith, and former Senator and Vice President Hubert Humphrey we lobby through coalition partnerships, through direct advocacy, and through the media.

[midnight]

1. True recovery will not occur, however, until Americans are fully employed.”

“We must move faster to stop further job loss by investing Federal dollars in infrastructure, renewable energy projects and education. We welcome the apparent, small steps toward economic recovery. True recovery will not occur, however, until Americans are fully employed.” This is what should be going on.

[Coyote_Bandit]

2. Those lost jobs

are not going to be replaced anytime soon. For that to happen spending will have to return to previous levels. We have fewer people spending and many who are spending are spending less.

Too bad our stimulus didn't include some real assistance for new and small business - because many of those unemployed folks are going to be left with little choice but to hang out their own shingle and try to bring in some bucks doing whatever they can.

[gmoney]

3. when will the "private sector" step up?

Rush and his ilk keep talking about how the government solutions are bad and that we need private sector action to solve the economic problems. They act as if Obama's mild tax increases on the very wealthy is preventing that from happening.

Of course, this is bullshit.

The private sector got us into this mess, and has no clue how to do anything anymore except downsize and outsource, both the exact OPPOSITE of what we need.

For years, the only real research is government funded, directly or indirectly, then provided to the public. We had a client that was paid many millions to develop aeronautic systems for the military, and you know all the R&D was part of their contract, probably "cost plus" -- then, once a viable system had been designed and was being delivered, the "private sector" arm of that company was able to sell a civilian version of the system and keep all the profits and proceeds, and acted like they were some sort of fucking genius entrepreneurs.

Government directives for green energy and infrastructure and such are going to be necessary to kick-start the motor, and all that public money is going to have to blaze the trail for the tenderfoot "entrepreneurs" to come along and reap the benefits, and maybe, just maybe, create a few US jobs in the process.

[Vidar]

4. Sounds realistic for a change.

[sarcasmo]

5. The true number.

[snot]

6. it would be helpful to know

what segments were included in the unemployment numbers during the Great Depression?

[TheWatcher]

7. "Doesn't Exist," "Bernanke Said Recession Is Over", "Recovery In Full Swing" "Banks Are Profitable"

"Propaganda is Fact", "Geithner is Christ", "You're Just jealous of the President", "You Want The Economy To Fail", "You're a Debbie Downer", "Things are GREAT in my area", "If you keep talking down the economy, it will only aid the Republicans and we will end up with an even worse dictatorship", "Be happy with the crumbs you have", "The Government loves you, this is just Right Wing Spin designed to destroy my confidence", "I feel good about all the Happy talk I'm hearing and I won't let your thinly veiled Right Wing Rhetoric blow my high", "Common Dreams isn't a reliable source now that it's not telling me what I want to hear", "These are skewed numbers made to look worse than they really are...."

THERE, We Go.

All the "True Believer" Talking Points and responses in ONE easy Post, so they don't have to show up and pollute the discussion.

As you were. :)

[tritsofme]

8. Yes yes, I know how it works with these people. The biggest and most scary number just must

be the correct one.

U3 is the "real unemployment rate"

U6 is simply an alternate measure of the labor force.

[TheWatcher]

9. Aaaaaaaand They're HERE!

Thank God you showed up to inject some sanity into this sensationalist, reactionary terrorism. ::Sigh Of Relief::

While you're at it, here's more evil conspiracy nonsense you can debunk.

SOMEONE is trying to make us all believe our righteous and honorable Banks didn't actually HAVE those "Record Profits" they were reporting in the 1st Quarter.

They NEVER lie to us, you know.

You need to get over there and tell those Fringe Bastards that Mark-To-Make-Believe Accounting is REAL and GOOD, and that they need to stop talking all this nonsense so we can continue to enjoy the Fake "Recovery".

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=alC3LxSjomZ8

[Hannah Bell]

10. u-6 isn't an "alternative measure of the labor force," it's a measure of unemployment & under-

employment.

U1: Percentage of labor force unemployed 15 weeks or longer.

U2: Percentage of labor force who lost jobs or completed temporary work.

U3: Official unemployment rate per ILO definition.

U4: U3 + "discouraged workers", or those who have stopped looking for work because current economic conditions make them believe that no work is available for them.

U5: U4 + other "marginally attached workers", or those who "would like" and are able to work, but have not looked for work recently.

U6: U5 + Part time workers who want to work full time, but can not due to economic reasons

Note: "Marginally attached workers" are added to the total labor force for unemployment rate calculation for U4, U5, and U6. The BLS revised the CPS in 1994 and among the changes the measure representing the official unemployment rate was renamed U3 instead of U5.<35>

As defined by the International Labour Organization, "unemployed workers" are those who are currently not working but are willing and able to work for pay, currently available to work, and have actively searched for work.<26> Many countries such as the UK and Sweden have begun counting more people as disabled, reducing their unemployment figures.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unemployment

[TheWatcher]

11. Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!! Hannah, What The Hell Are You Doing?

I had it cleverly distracted!

Now it's going to come back and subject us to more "It Doesn't Exist" platitudes.

Work with me here. :)

[Hannah Bell]

15. ??? i missed that bit. but there sure are a lot of folks at du trying to convince me

the multiple laid-off people on my street, & the multiple people i know on short-time & talking salary cuts aren't real.

this is the worst downturn since reagans, which was the worst in my lifetime.

since the latest numbers don't include the gm/chrysler bankuptcy layoffs, i'd bet good money it's going to be the *worst* in my lifetime fairly quickly.


on edit: i checked your earlier post - what does the happy-talk contingent say doesn't exist?

[TheWatcher]

18. The usual. U6 isn't real. The Recovery Is Here. The Recession is over. Things are on the mend.

Banks are Profitable. The Worst is Over. We have to trust what Obabma's people tell us. Blah, Blah, blah.

Basically it boils down to this for them:

If you try to inject ANY Reality at all in the discussion that runs counter to the Propaganda coming from The White House, The Treasury, or The Media, you WANT the Economy to Fail, you are WISHING for disaster, you're a Debbie Downer, etc.

[Hannah Bell]

22. gotcha. yes, there's a lot of that. some new (to me) faces, too.

[Statistical]

12. What was U6 when the economy was doing fine.

When we had record low U3?
What was U6 then?

16% yeah that is bad but would 10% U6 be "good", 8%?

Without any context it is difficult to compare numbers.

We know when the economy is roaring U3 tends to be around 4%-5%. 5%-7% is average. Anything more than 7% we likely are sliding back into a recession.

What are the comparable numbers for U6?

U6 will never be 0% so what would a good U6 number be?

[Hannah Bell]

13. before 1994 u-5 was the "real" measure of ue - so bugger off with your silliness.

[Statistical]

14. Blah. It isn't silliness.

Take boom years under Clinton. U3 was at a record low.

What was the corresponding U6?
Do they have historical U6 data on year by year basis?

10% U3 ~= 16% U6
5% U3 ~= ??? U6

It is a an honest question.
What would a "good" U6 be?

[Hannah Bell]

16. silliness. u-3 isn't comparable to most historical ue data for the reason

that it wasn't the official measure until clinton.

u-5 was.

so why don't you go back & do the comparisons, since you're so concerned.

ue is currently worse than under carter or reagan by comparative measure. & it will get worse, because the gm/chrysler layoffs aren't included yet.

& even u-3 = 9.4%.

[tritsofme]

17. U-5 pre-1994 isn't comparable to U-5 today, it is comparable to U-3.

Today's U-3 is historically the same measure as U-5, it was just renamed after the 94 shakeup, it is disingenuous to claim otherwise.

[Hannah Bell]

21. think no one will call you on bs?

"The Clintonites also extended the Pollyanna Creep of the nation’s employment figures. Although expunged from the ranks of the unemployed, discouraged workers had nevertheless been counted in the larger workforce.

But in 1994, the Bureau of Labor Statistics redefined the workforce to include only that small percentage of the discouraged who had been seeking work for less than a year. The longer-term discouraged—some 4 million U.S. adults—fell out of the main monthly tally. Some now call them the “hidden unemployed.”

For its last four years, the Clinton Administration also thinned the monthly household economic sampling by one sixth, from 60,000 to 50,000, and a disproportionate number of the dropped households were in the inner cities; the reduced sample (and a new adjustment formula) is believed to have reduced black unemployment estimates and eased worsening poverty figures."


http://www.harpers.org/archive/2008/05/0082023.

The popularly followed unemployment rate was 5.5% in July 2004, seasonally adjusted. That is known as U-3, one of six unemployment rates published by the BLS. The broadest U-6 measure was 9.5%, including discouraged and marginally attached workers.

Up until the Clinton administration, a discouraged worker was one who was willing, able and ready to work but had given up looking because there were no jobs to be had. The Clinton administration dismissed to the non-reporting netherworld about five million discouraged workers who had been so categorized for more than a year. As of July 2004, the less-than-a-year discouraged workers total 504,000. Adding in the netherworld takes the unemployment rate up to about 12.5%.

The Clinton administration also reduced monthly household sampling from 60,000 to about 50,000, eliminating significant surveying in the inner cities. Despite claims of corrective statistical adjustments, reported unemployment among people of color declined sharply, and the piggybacked poverty survey showed a remarkable reversal in decades of worsening poverty trends.

http://www.shadowstats.com/article/employment.

[TheWatcher]

23. Hmmmmm. Not sure how the "Happy Brigade" will counter that, but I'll give it a shot.

"That's not a reliable source because it doesn't tell me what i want to hear and does not fit into the false paradigm I desperately exist in, so I can feel good and ignore all other signs of reality that might reflect the contrary."

Or something like that. :) Not those exact words, but that is what it will amount to. :)

Bottom line Hannah, you can lead a Horse to Reality, but you cannot make him THINK.

People want their PERCEPTION managed so they don't have to do that.

Eventually, the Propaganda will run dry, the Emperor will be revealed to be naked, and the hard Rain will fall, but most of us won't even notice we are getting wet.

Because we don't want to SEE.

[Hannah Bell]

24. some = shills/hired guns

[TheWatcher]

25. Absolutely. And I have noticed their increased presence on DU lately.

Some have been with us forever, like one who's name I will NOT mention who was ACTUALLY Shilling in FAVOR of Roger Penske, and was a Market Apologist ALL the Way through the Bubble AND The Bust/Bailouts.

Then there are just the Rabid "True Believers" that either so desperately WANT to believe they haven't been sold a Bill Of Goods, or that think another Fake Boom like we had under Clinton is coming.

What they don't realize is that this hasn't even STARTED yet.

The Banks are INSOLVENT, and have been for months. Mark-To-Make-Believe Accounting is just that.

MAKE BELIEVE.

They keep trying to hide all their losses so the Sheep will not stir from the Meadow, and they can keep on robbing, looting, and stealing the country into third world status.

Same for the Unemployment Propaganda.

PROPAGANDA is basically all TPTB have left.

It's ALL Failing. All of it.

Our leaders have no real plans or interest in serving We The People.

They are merely trying to Manage us, so we don't get in the way of whatever agenda they are advancing.

We Don't Have Representative Government. Not any more.

And until We The People realize this, there will be NO "change".

Only "Hopes", "Assurances", Happy Talk, Platitudes, and all manner of meaningless La-Do-Do-Do, La-Da-Da-Da NONSENSE that is meant to Pacify, not Lead or Serve.

[girl gone mad]

38. Maybe my personal favorite:

"I talked to someone I know who works with statistics and he says all of your facts and figures are wrong and you don't know what you're talking about so take my word for it."

For some reason I get that response quite often whenever U6 v. U3 comes up. They really don't want anyone digging around in the reports and showing just how manipulated the unemployment data is.

[TheWatcher]

20. But don't you see Hannah? 9.4% Is GOOD and that means the Recession is easing, just like the TV

Said.

Stop trying to inject reality into the discussion.

Only PERCEPTION Matters. :)

And IGNORE all those upward revisions.

Remember, the Banks had "Record Profits" in the 1st Quarter, so don't forget to Tow that line as well.

Mark-To-Make-Believe Accounting and fudged, cooked, massaged government Data will SAVE us ALL and make the "Recovery" look even better. :crazy:

[TheWatcher]

19. When was the Economy doing "Fine"?

The period between 2003-2008 which saw the most artificial, manipulated Stock bubble in the History Of Man, and the most Reckless, Disastrous Monetary Policy in the History of Man, coupled with a completely Fake Housing Boom?

The Economy hasn't been "Fine" since early 2000.

But they sure gave you the illusion that it was.

You probably think that whole Crash in September was just "out of the blue" and "no one could have anticipated it."

Adorable.

But DON'T you worry.

Ben will Print Us Out Of It.

:rofl:

[Statistical]

28. 9 line rant and you still didn't answer the question.

Since you said the economy as fine in early 2000
What was U3 in 2000?
What was U6 in 2000?

How high was U6 during a period of time when the economy was fine.
How much higher is U6 now?

[Hannah Bell]

29. why don't you go answer your own question & report back?

[TheWatcher]

30. Because He Can't, Won't and isn't interested in those numbers anyway.

He wants to feel good and for you to be wrong, and for U6 to not matter, and all the Propaganda to be real.

He isn't worth wasting time on.

People either get it or they don't at this point, regarding the economy.

I have no patience to educate them any longer.

Because it still wouldn't exist to them.

They don't care about anything but Perception Management.

The Truth?

That's too inconvenient.

[Statistical]

40. Not at all.

I agreed 16% U6 is bad I just wanted to know what would be good.
IS 10% U6 good? 9%? 7%?

I found this.



Looks like the min U6 in last 15 years is ~7%

That was all I was asking. A number in a vacuum is useless.

Now putting it into context 16% vs 7% (greater than 100% increase) is even worse.

It is far worse even on a percentile basis than the 5% to 9% rise in U3.

So much hostility. It was just an honest question. "What is a good U6?"

Looks like the answer is <7%.

[TheWatcher]

42. The Hostility is from the Insane Spin that so many on DU are tying to put on EVERYTHING

To convince themselves that things are "Just not as bad as you "Doomsayers" and "Conspiracy Theorists" (Anyone who questions the validity of the Propaganda about "The Recovery") say.

Even if you BUY the Governments fudged data, which puts Unemployment at 9.4 %, that is horrendous.

Many people seem to be clinging to the desperate delusion that things are getting back to normal.

They haven't event STARTED to get bad.

With an insolvent Banking system, it will be interesting to see how all the Criminals hide the rot of their failed system for much longer.

You CANNOT have a Recovery without Jobs.

And pretending that the Recession will end this month when there continues to be a worsening job situation is simply a deluded lie.

[Statistical]

43. I didn't say anything of that.

I simply asked if 16% U6 is bad what is a good number for U6?

THAT IS IT!

I number without context is meaningless. Now looking @ U6 vs U3 it is clear the numbers are WORSE than they initially look.

Why?

Because why 16% looks bad it is actually 250X of the low where U3 has slightly less than doubled.

So U6 is growing at a faster rate than U3.

All I asked was for some context on the number. Nothing else.

It is sad that everything is "if you aren't on our side you are the enemy" thinking.

[TheWatcher]

31. I wasn't aware I was your Monkey, Stat Boy.

And, just for the sake it, The Economy really wasn't "Fine" then, either.

Just the beginning of the Fallout from yet ANOTHER Fake Boom, from 96-00.

That one was brought to you by Clinton's Lackies, the Abominable Tag Team Of Rubin And Summers.

OH NO! Now I'm a Right Wing Terrorist for blaspheming against "The Football Team"!!!!!!111111

:rofl:

TPTB have been playing you and everyone else like a damn fiddle for a long time.

And you've bought it.

Like Carlin Said, "It's A Big Club, And You Ain't In It."

Don't Stop Believin' Though!

We'll Propagandize ourselves out of this yet! :rofl:

[Batgirl]

26. I've seen figures that in Michigan the U=6 rate is 22.8%

a number I don't doubt at all, based on personal observation. I know of dozens of people who've been caught up in company-wide layoffs just in the last couple of months. None of these folks worked for auto companies. Also, commuter traffic became noticeably thinner in that last couple of months. It now takes me a little over an hour to get to work, previously it was closer to 1 1/2 hours. I've heard other commuters make similar observations.

[blue_onyx]

32. The scary part is Michigan's unemployment hasn't peaked

By the end of the year, we'll hit 20% officially so U6 will probably be 30%. Things are worse than the media is reporting. It's been said that the national unemployment would peak at 10% later this year. We're almost there and still losing jobs. Many of the auto dealer jobs haven't even been cut and that will effect pretty much every state. I don't think 15% nationally is out of the question.

[Hannah Bell]

35. not only that: it's the 11th yr of net job losses for the state.

mi has fewer jobs today than in 1999.

[blue_onyx]

37. I've heard it referred to as

MI's lost decade....very sad. I wish MI had received more federal aid years ago. We've lost more jobs than Louisiana did after Hurricane Katrina but we didn't get help.

[Batgirl]

39. Agreed, the crumbling process is still unfolding.

Every time I go somewhere in the car, I pass freshly-vacated homes and/or businesses. I'm not being remotely hyperbolic; that statement is literally true.

Batspouse is unemployed and has been able to wrangle just 2 interviews within the past 3 months. I'm extremely fortunate to have a job at the moment. Since 2005, I've lost jobs at 3 different companies that either eliminated entire departments or shut their doors, period.

The lady at a local greenhouse told Batspouse their sales of garden seedlings are 50% greater than last year. Not only are people trying to grow their own food to save money, she said a lot of them are looking at gardening as something useful they can occupy themselves with while being jobless and bored.

We would leave Michigan entirely if not for having shared custody of children from a previous marriage.

[DCKit]

27. Kick for the (re)education.

And the deconstruction of the argument disputing the "real" numbers is a hoot.

[bluesmail]

33. That was part of the Cheney/Bush deception. If you've exhausted your unemployment

benefits, you are no longer a statistic. You have become irrelevant. They can no longer USE you.

[Wednesdays]

34. K&R

:kick:

[The Hope Mobile]

36. Much more plausible. I remember being upset with Bush for changing

the way that the government kept track of unemployment numbers . . . part of their Orwellian show . . . so that all you were hearing about were new and current claims but those who had never been re-employed were dropped off the rolls after their claims ran out giving a false sense of stability. Does anybody else remember this? Since then I've always assumed that the numbers were on the very low side and in fact I would believe that its probably significantly higher in reality.

[G_j]

41. invisible people

just disappear off the radar