Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

FarCenter

(19,429 posts)
Fri Mar 2, 2012, 05:00 PM Mar 2012

Barclays Debunks The Greatest 'Urban Legend' Of The Labor Market

The unemployment rate has been falling precipitously over the past several months, from 9.1 percent last summer, to 8.3 percent as of the January reading. There's a good chance it will fall to 8 percent or lower very soon.

But the unemployment rate these days always seems to carry with it an asterisk, because detractors like to point to this number: The Civilian Labor Force Participation Rate.

...

All of this is a long way of getting to the fact that Barclays economists Dean Maki, Troy Davig, and Peter Newland have a brand new paper called Dispelling An Urban Legend, which blasts the idea that labor force participation is mostly being dragged down by depressed workforce exiles. Instead it's really mostly about the demographics.

Specifically, they write:

Consistent with our view, only a third of the drop in the labor force participation rate is accounted for by those who say they want a job, and only about 15% by those who want a job and are also of prime working age (ie, 25-54). Thus, we view the possibility of a large and sudden return of previously discouraged job seekers to the labor force as remote.


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/barclays-debunks-the-greatest-urban-legend-of-the-labor-market-2012-3
4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Barclays Debunks The Greatest 'Urban Legend' Of The Labor Market (Original Post) FarCenter Mar 2012 OP
It's both I think dmallind Mar 2012 #1
Spoken like someone who has a job.. Fumesucker Mar 2012 #2
What is 1945 + 65? Bok_Tukalo Mar 2012 #3
It would be 2012 for the first year of baby boomers reaching full SSA retirement age FarCenter Mar 2012 #4

dmallind

(10,437 posts)
1. It's both I think
Fri Mar 2, 2012, 05:20 PM
Mar 2012

Just like it would be silly to pretend that workers are not discouraged by the shifts in recent employment (not just number of jobs but location, type, and demands of the jobsthat exist), it would be silly to pretend that the aging population, retiring boomers and so on have no effect.

The graph of actual to projected participation shows a slightly steeper slope on the actual. The difference between the two is probably that urban legend - but yes it's absurd to say the whole decline is.

 

FarCenter

(19,429 posts)
4. It would be 2012 for the first year of baby boomers reaching full SSA retirement age
Fri Mar 2, 2012, 06:14 PM
Mar 2012

1946 + 66 = 2012

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Barclays Debunks The Grea...