• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

In states (all have Repub governors) that cut off $300 extended unemployment benefits, job vacancies are still not being filled

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
20,991
853
126

Missouri scrapped federal pay to the unemployed, saying it kept people out of the labor market.
But so far, workers still seem to be choosy.

Work-force development officials said they had seen virtually no uptick in applicants since the governor’s announcement, which ended a $300 weekly supplement to other benefits. And the online job site Indeed found that in states that have abandoned the federal benefits, clicks on job postings were below the national average.

the job squeeze has given many job seekers the confidence that they can push for higher wages or wait until employers come around.

Wages, hours and a short commute are what matter most to job seekers, she said, and few would work for less than $14 an hour (in St Louis).
<Incidentally, In St. Louis, a single person needs to earn $14 an hour to cover basic expenses at a minimum standard.>


Last month (May), many Repub governors said no more $300 extended unemployment benefits because it incentivized people to stay out of the work force.
They were wrong. (Repubs wrong? I'm shocked i tell you. S H O C K E D.)


A month later (June), people still arent taking low paying jobs. (servers, front-desk receptionists, Housekeepers, etc)
If you were a single parent, facing $300/week in unemployment vs $350/week of close to minimum wage, which would you you choose?
 

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
28,492
4,093
126
If you were a single parent, facing $300/week in unemployment vs $350/week of close to minimum wage, which would you you choose?
you're not making a strong argument for minimum wage...which is precisely the point.

in fact, the 300/wk unemployment is probably far more attractive because you'd have to arrange child care while working, and you'd lose time/money commuting. you'd also get to spend more time with your child. and you'd have more time/energy to look for not-slave-wage jobs. so yeah...not a particularly difficult choice.
 
Nov 8, 2012
20,778
4,751
136
you're not making a strong argument for minimum wage...which is precisely the point.

in fact, the 300/wk unemployment is probably far more attractive because you'd have to arrange child care while working, and you'd lose time/money commuting. you'd also get to spend more time with your child. and you'd have more time/energy to look for not-slave-wage jobs. so yeah...not a particularly difficult choice.
OH MY GOD!

Are you telling me that if someone just gave me $150k instead of making me employed and working for $150k that I would take the path of least resistance and just not work?

NO WAY! FAR OUT! Who would have thought?!

Christ you people are economically retarded to boot lol.
 

Mai72

Lifer
Sep 12, 2012
10,735
1,194
126
There are too many moving parts to just claim that people are lazy, or that work conditions for low pay workers is horrible. I think it's a combination of both. The unemployment that people have been receiving has been both a curse and a blessing. A blessing that they can pay their bills, put food on the table, and have time to look around. To get another perspective on their life. Maybe they hated their job(s), and wanted out but had no time and money to make that change. I'm sure that many have found new employment. Better employment. Maybe they gained new skills? Which brings me to the curse. How many used their time wisely? How many took online courses to better their odds of finding a more fullfilling and higher paying position? Or, how many just chilled, watched Netflix, played video games, and smoked blunts all day. We don't have statistics on these kind of things. All that we can do is just guess. What I know is the government isn't going to come save you. That is on YOU. It's your responsibility to do better. If you didn't then it's your fault. Which brings me to my rant. Many people don't want to take responsibility anymore. Think back to past generations. My dad worked 2-3 jobs when he was young. Maybe it was foolish. But, he had to do this because he was an unskilled worker. If you're an unskilled worker you are in a terrible position today. The only remedy is to take responsibilty and to do the work. Get the skills to compete today. There is no excuse. An unemployed individual could start viewing courses on Coursera, or view a topic of interest on YouTube. And, take community college classes. Do something. Sitting home and wasting time is dangerous. We are going to have tens of thousands of unskilled workers who are going to be all looking for work because they are going to be in a terrible position. Not having money sucks.

My mom was a restaurant owner for well over 20 years. Back in the late 1990s she would pay her employees a minimum of $15 an hour because she knew that to get good help you had to pay them well. She had very little turnover. Anyway, just a thought.
 

sandorski

No Lifer
Oct 10, 1999
68,525
3,634
126
I suspect these job issues might have something to do with cutting off "Illegals". All those Millions of people don't just squat inside the country, they Do things that need doing.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
29,666
10,017
136
I suspect these job issues might have something to do with cutting off "Illegals". All those Millions of people don't just squat inside the country, they Do things that need doing.
Its immigration and boomers retiring/dying, plus some of it had to do with families unable to leave their children alone in order to go back to work.
 
Nov 8, 2012
20,778
4,751
136
Hoooooooooooooooooooooooow 'bout dat unemployment numbers eh?

Let's take a little peeky-roo at the numbers for June shall we?



  • Change in non-farm payrolls: 850,000 vs. 720,000 expected and an upwardly revised 583,000 in May
  • Unemployment rate: 5.9% vs. 5.6% expected and 5.8% in May
  • Average hourly earnings, month-over-month: 0.3% vs. 0.3% expected and a downwardly revised 0.4% in May
  • Average hourly earnings, year-over-year: 3.6% vs. 3.6% expected and a downwardly revised 1.9% in May
Friday's jobs report also came with revisions to the past two months' payrolls figures. In April, non-farm payroll additions were revised down by 9,000 to 269,000, while May's were revised up by 24,000 to 583,000.
So 130,000 more jobs added than expected.

Biggest key though - Unemployment rate INCREASED from 5.6 to 5.9%. That means, a bunch of people who weren't considered "in the job market" have entered the job market.... Which means... a fuckton more people started applying for jobs in May/June timeframe.

OH WOW, who would have thought?

You gullible silly peasants.
 

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
12,033
8,719
136
Hoooooooooooooooooooooooow 'bout dat unemployment numbers eh?

Let's take a little peeky-roo at the numbers for June shall we?





So 130,000 more jobs added than expected.

Biggest key though - Unemployment rate INCREASED from 5.6 to 5.9%. That means, a bunch of people who weren't considered "in the job market" have entered the job market.... Which means... a fuckton more people started applying for jobs in May/June timeframe.

OH WOW, who would have thought?

You gullible silly peasants.
so dumb. these are national numbers. you need the state by state breakdowns comparing states that ended the extra $300 vs those who didn't.

can you walk and chew gum at the same time?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

Fenixgoon

Lifer
Jun 30, 2003
28,492
4,093
126
so dumb. these are national numbers. you need the state by state breakdowns comparing states that ended the extra $300 vs those who didn't.

can you walk and chew gum at the same time?
even taking the national numbers, you could argue that the shift has caused people to hold out longer on accepting work than previously in order to get a higher wage, because they know they can command it now. let's see what happens the next few months.
 

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
101,626
5,921
126
Hoooooooooooooooooooooooow 'bout dat unemployment numbers eh?

Let's take a little peeky-roo at the numbers for June shall we?





So 130,000 more jobs added than expected.

Biggest key though - Unemployment rate INCREASED from 5.6 to 5.9%. That means, a bunch of people who weren't considered "in the job market" have entered the job market.... Which means... a fuckton more people started applying for jobs in May/June timeframe.

OH WOW, who would have thought?

You gullible silly peasants.
surveys for this are done the week/pay period with the 12th in it. the first states that cut benefits did so that same week. you're not going to see any result of cutting benefits until next month's report.

and i wonder what else might have happened between the week of may 12th and the week of june 12th?
 
  • Haha
  • Like
Reactions: Burpo and Zorba

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
12,033
8,719
136
surveys for this are done the week/pay period with the 12th in it. the first states that cut benefits did so that same week. you're not going to see any result of cutting benefits until next month's report.

and i wonder what else might have happened between the week of may 12th and the week of june 12th?
I think this thing called lowering mask mandates and Covid restrictions for vaccinated folks by the CDC, with many states then reopening or more fully reopening businesses. off the top of my head.

don't complicate the muddled brains of the conservative dum dums with actual critical thinking
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
73,361
25,115
136
Hoooooooooooooooooooooooow 'bout dat unemployment numbers eh?

Let's take a little peeky-roo at the numbers for June shall we?





So 130,000 more jobs added than expected.

Biggest key though - Unemployment rate INCREASED from 5.6 to 5.9%. That means, a bunch of people who weren't considered "in the job market" have entered the job market.... Which means... a fuckton more people started applying for jobs in May/June timeframe.

OH WOW, who would have thought?

You gullible silly peasants.
Lol. Look at you humiliating yourself again.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
14,282
9,892
136
Hoooooooooooooooooooooooow 'bout dat unemployment numbers eh?

Let's take a little peeky-roo at the numbers for June shall we?





So 130,000 more jobs added than expected.

Biggest key though - Unemployment rate INCREASED from 5.6 to 5.9%. That means, a bunch of people who weren't considered "in the job market" have entered the job market.... Which means... a fuckton more people started applying for jobs in May/June timeframe.

OH WOW, who would have thought?

You gullible silly peasants.
No, it doesn't mean that at all. Labor force participation did not go up. The unemployment rate went up in spite of adding so many jobs because more people voluntarily quit their jobs to seek employment elsewhere than started new ones. This is likely a reflection of the labor shortage which is giving workers more options.


While the labor force participation rate was unchanged at 61.6%, the number of people quitting their jobs voluntarily to look for another position jumped by 164,000 to 942,000 in June -- the highest level since November 2016.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zorba

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
10,189
4,228
136
Hoooooooooooooooooooooooow 'bout dat unemployment numbers eh?

Let's take a little peeky-roo at the numbers for June shall we?





So 130,000 more jobs added than expected.

Biggest key though - Unemployment rate INCREASED from 5.6 to 5.9%. That means, a bunch of people who weren't considered "in the job market" have entered the job market.... Which means... a fuckton more people started applying for jobs in May/June timeframe.

OH WOW, who would have thought?

You gullible silly peasants.
Pretty sure anyone getting the benefits were considered "in the job market." So even if you were telling the truth (you're not), it'd show that people who were sitting out for reasons other than enhanced UI started looking again.
 
Last edited:

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
10,189
4,228
136
I think this thing called lowering mask mandates and Covid restrictions for vaccinated folks by the CDC, with many states then reopening or more fully reopening businesses. off the top of my head.

don't complicate the muddled brains of the conservative dum dums with actual critical thinking
Also schools getting out for summer.
 
Mar 11, 2004
21,537
3,696
126
Oooh, Diarrhea Clown strikes again! Is there literally anything he can be correct about or does he have to be the dumbest motherfucker at every opportunity?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DaaQ

UNCjigga

Lifer
Dec 12, 2000
23,239
5,782
136
Side note—my wife just turned down a job offer for nearly double her salary because we didn’t want to move cross country. This was for a job she didn’t even apply for. The labor shortage isn’t just impacting minimum wage and service jobs—it’s across the board. My guess is that a whole lot of women (and some men) left the workforce due to pandemic childcare concerns…and some of them aren’t coming back any time soon. We were down to one salary at one point during the pandemic and still living comfortably. I assume others in that situation have more flexibility about whether or not to go back to work.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY