214,000 new jobs - Rate down to 5.8% - 6 year low - good/bad?

[Mai72]

Unemployment rate:

Labor Participation Rate:

Anyone else notice a correlation here?

Your saying people have given up looking for work? You don't hear about that anymore. Extending unemployment was a hot topic at this time last year. What happened to all the people who were denied benefits? Did they find work? Did they go homeless? Are they living with their children?

 

[jackstar7]

Anyone else notice a correlation here?

The old continue to age, too.

 

[xBiffx]

Your saying people have given up looking for work? You don't hear about that anymore. Extending unemployment was a hot topic at this time last year. What happened to all the people who were denied benefits? Did they find work? Did they go homeless? Are they living with their children?

The old continue to age, too.

Just a quick question. How does one account for an employment rate that drops along with an unemployment rate?

 

[Mai72]

Just a quick question. How does one account for an employment rate that drops along with an unemployment rate?

IMO, people have stopped looking for work. I'm surprised CNN didn't touch on that today.

 

[xBiffx]

IMO, people have stopped looking for work. I'm surprised CNN didn't touch on that today.

I agree. That would appear to be the case. It would also appear to make the unemployment rate today useless when comparing it to the unemployment rate at time when the employment rate was different, let alone much higher.

 

[ElFenix]

Oops I was thinking about my old,old text book. 4.5% is more like it
Yes I would accept some inflation provided wage increases covered it.

4.5% has also almost never been achieved.

you'll see wages start to increase which will trigger more people coming back into the labor force which will keep the unemployment rate level. right now for many people with children, the cost of daycare + commuter costs + stress of work + other misc costs (bet dual income eats out more) = not worth having the second earner in the household.

number of two or more earner families (as a % of married families) fell by 7.4% from 2007 to 2011.

I agree. That would appear to be the case. It would also appear to make the unemployment rate today useless when comparing it to the unemployment rate at time when the employment rate was different, let alone much higher.

rising wages will fix that.

 

[dmcowen674]

I just saw an analyst on CNN. What she said made a lot of sense. The economy is improving. This is 6 straight quarters that the economy has improved. Fields that pay well are hiring. The unemployment rate for someone with a bachelors degree in October was 3.2%. It was a little over 5% for high school graduates.

Seeing excellent news like this makes me wonder why Dems were shying away from Obama this election. It was as a stupid move.

You're new to P&N.

Dems didn't shy away from Obama, they just didn't vote in the midterm and normally do not.

The whacko America Hating Republitards on the other hand obviously brainwashed their base enough to get out and vote.

 

[ElFenix]

You're new to P&N.

Dems didn't shy away from Obama,

yeah the democratic nominee for senate for the state of kentucky wouldn't admit if she voted for obama or not because she was embracing obama.


it makes sense when you don't think about it.

 

[smackababy]

This is just more people making an unlivable, minimum wage. How is that a good thing? Thanks Obama!

 

[hal2kilo]

I agree. That would appear to be the case. It would also appear to make the unemployment rate today useless when comparing it to the unemployment rate at time when the employment rate was different, let alone much higher.

Huh?

 

[doubledeluxe]

Unemployment rate:

Labor Participation Rate:

Anyone else notice a correlation here?

Of course.

Is there a place that runs the numbers on the actual unemployment rate as a percentage of the able bodied workforce?

The labor dept has a number of different unemployment numbers but I'm not sure if one of them is that number.

 

[xBiffx]

rising wages will fix that.

Explain.

 

[xBiffx]

Huh?

Pretty simple. Any unemployment rate of say 5% at a time of 66% employment is not the same as an unemployment rate of 5% at a time of 60% employment.

 

[xBiffx]

Of course.

Is there a place that runs the numbers on the actual unemployment rate as a percentage of the able bodied workforce?

The labor dept has a number of different unemployment numbers but I'm not sure if one of them is that number.

What do you mean, of course.

 

[doubledeluxe]

I see the correlation.

10 people are in the work force. 3 lose their jobs. Unemployment is at 30%. 3/10

10 people are in the work force. 3 lose their jobs. Government says 2 are not looking for jobs. Unemployment rate is now 12.5%. 1/8

People leave the workforce due to retirement, school, and a few other legitimate reasons. What I would like to see is either something showing me in laymans terms how we justify the lower participation rate or what the actual unemployment rate is. I'll be the first to admit I don't get it.

 

[ElFenix]

Explain.

rising wages drive people who were sitting on the sidelines into the active labor force.

 

[xBiffx]

rising wages drive people who were sitting on the sidelines into the active labor force.

How does a rising wage change whether a person is working or not?

Edit: another question, why are people sitting on the sidelines? You make it seem like they are choosing to is why I ask.

 

[doubledeluxe]

Low end they are on welfare. High end they are living off savings rather than working for $12/hr.

In reality I don't know the reason. That's why I would love to see a real report on why the labor participation rate is so low.

 

[1prophet]

Jobs are jobs and a McManufacturing job isn't necessarily any better than a McService job. Better to classify what pay level the positions are (entry, professional, manager) and what the skill areas of those hired are to determine how healthy this job growth is. Part-time vs. full-time also doesn't matter quite as much in light of the prior questions - I'd rather a couple hundred web developers get hired part time than a couple hundred unskilled textile workers full time.

That is the dumb ass, elitist attitude that has been used to push things such as NAFTA, because you know it's only the jobs we don't want or beneath us that will leave,

I rather have a couple of hundred (so called) unskilled textile workers making a decent wage and benefits instead of relying on the software developers tax money filling up their EBT cards and paying for their FREE health insurance.

 

[Engineer]

I rather have a couple of hundred (so called) unskilled textile workers making a decent wage and benefits instead of relying on the software developers tax money filling up their EBT cards and paying for their FREE health insurance.

Ding...ding....ding....we have a winner!

Oh wait, every single one of those unskilled textile workers are FULLY capable of being a software developer! Just send them all to college and bam, instant skills and jobs! Problems solved.

 

[Cozarkian]

Edit: another question, why are people sitting on the sidelines? You make it seem like they are choosing to is why I ask.

There are a couple of reasons for sitting on the sidelines. A sampling of reasons include:

Discouraged workers - stopped working for work because they are depressed about not being able to find a job.

Health - stopped looking for work for medical reasons

Transportation - stopped looking for work because they don't have transportation to available jobs

School - Would prefer to have a job, but enrolled in training programs or college courses because they couldn't find one and are forced to learn a new trade.

Family - Would prefer to work, but available jobs conflict with family obligations and/or don't pay enough to justify daycare costs, etc...

 

[ElFenix]

How does a rising wage change whether a person is working or not?

Edit: another question, why are people sitting on the sidelines? You make it seem like they are choosing to is why I ask.

if after taxes, commuting costs, and child care expenses you're barely netting anything, would you work?

if you can't find a job in your field of expertise with pay that you feel is worth it, would you think of yourself as 'choosing' to sit out?

it's like the guy in OT the other day who is being offered some barely minimum wage job with a bachelor's in physics.

 

[senseamp]

Work is on the outs. Robots will replace most jobs going forward.
I know, every previous technological shift, workers just moved on to more productive equipment, but stayed employed. Yes, but before there was no alternative to the human brain to operate that equipment, and soon that won't be the case. Computer abilities are improving exponentially, whereas human abilities are not. There is a crossover point where the two intersect, and for most tasks, it will happen within the next decade or two.
The only way we'll have jobs like truck driver or taxi driver in 20 or so years is if government requires a real person to be the driver. Not because a real person is a better driver, but purely as a jobs program for real people. Free market, if left to its own devices, will not need those jobs, and it's naive to think that those people will somehow become knowledge workers, or that there will be sufficient demand for knowledge workers to offset the decline in demand in menial jobs. It's much more likely that with machine learning, knowledge workers will be in same boat, just somewhat later.
We need to start thinking about how a society would work if there was no or little demand in human workers from the labor markets, because it's coming.

 

[Zorkorist]

Ding...ding....ding....we have a winner!

Oh wait, every single one of those unskilled textile workers are FULLY capable of being a software developer! Just send them all to college and bam, instant skills and jobs! Problems solved.

LOL!

-John

 

[Zorkorist]

Work is on the outs. Robots will replace most jobs going forward.
I know, every previous technological shift, workers just moved on to more productive equipment, but stayed employed. Yes, but before there was no alternative to the human brain to operate that equipment, and soon that won't be the case. Computer abilities are improving exponentially, whereas human abilities are not. There is a crossover point where the two intersect, and for most tasks, it will happen within the next decade or two.
The only way we'll have jobs like truck driver or taxi driver in 20 or so years is if government requires a real person to be the driver. Not because a real person is a better driver, but purely as a jobs program for real people. Free market, if left to its own devices, will not need those jobs, and it's naive to think that those people will somehow become knowledge workers, or that there will be sufficient demand for knowledge workers to offset the decline in demand in menial jobs. It's much more likely that with machine learning, knowledge workers will be in same boat, just somewhat later.
We need to start thinking about how a society would work if there was no or little demand in human workers from the labor markets, because it's coming.

This won't happen as long as there is free-will, and freedom. Any one that wants to work, will be able to work. The only danger is institutionalized (Government) limits on freedom. For instance, legislating that a human can't drive a car.

Today, Government is legislating things like Minimum Wages, which is far beyond their bounds, and very similarly scary.

-John