U6 Unemployment Hits 12.5%

[RichardE]

WSJ article

The U-6 rate only has comparable history back to 1994, but November?s rate is by far the highest since then and the swift rise to that elevated level also far surpasses similar moves during the recessions in 2001 and 1990-91. Previously, the Labor Dept. kept a similar gauge with history back to 1970, showing a high of 14% unemployment during the deep recession in 1982.

The U-6 rate rose sharply in November, from 11.8% in October, and is markedly higher now than the 8.4% recorded in November 2007.

?It was already clear that this would be ?one of the worst recessions? in the post-war period,? said Nigel Gault, chief U.S. economist at IHS Global Insight. ?After today?s horrendous November employment report, it is beginning to look like the worst.? ?Kelly Evans

12.5% of Americans have no real way to sustain themselves at the moment besides government handouts.

I think its telling that when the U3 (the released unemployment numbers) only jumped .2 from Oct aand .6 from August, the U6 has jumped .7 from Oct and a almost full 2% since August.

U1-U6

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: RichardE
12.5% of Americans have no real way to sustain themselves at the moment besides government handouts.

and many of the MRR said Unemployment wouldn't go double digit.

 

[cubby1223]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: RichardE
12.5% of Americans have no real way to sustain themselves at the moment besides government handouts.

and many of the MRR said Unemployment wouldn't go double digit.

Where are those reading comprehension skills? Or did Republicans steal that inalienable right away from you too? Unemployment is still well under 10%.

 

[Farang]

Does U6 include college and high school students who are not seeking employment as actively as, say, a laid off worker?

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: RichardE
WSJ article

The U-6 rate only has comparable history back to 1994, but November?s rate is by far the highest since then and the swift rise to that elevated level also far surpasses similar moves during the recessions in 2001 and 1990-91. Previously, the Labor Dept. kept a similar gauge with history back to 1970, showing a high of 14% unemployment during the deep recession in 1982.

The U-6 rate rose sharply in November, from 11.8% in October, and is markedly higher now than the 8.4% recorded in November 2007.

?It was already clear that this would be ?one of the worst recessions? in the post-war period,? said Nigel Gault, chief U.S. economist at IHS Global Insight. ?After today?s horrendous November employment report, it is beginning to look like the worst.? ?Kelly Evans

12.5% of Americans have no real way to sustain themselves at the moment besides government handouts.

I think its telling that when the U3 (the released unemployment numbers) only jumped .2 from Oct aand .6 from August, the U6 has jumped .7 from Oct and a almost full 2% since August.

U1-U6

And if you go back and look at the data, you find that u3 and u6 follow similar trends. Nothing new to see here.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Farang
Does U6 include college and high school students who are not seeking employment as actively as, say, a laid off worker?

U6 includes everyone. Every who wants a job including those unwilling to look for one and those that want a job that gives them more hours.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Farang
Does U6 include college and high school students who are not seeking employment as actively as, say, a laid off worker?

U6 includes everyone. Every who wants a job including those unwilling to look for one and those that want a job that gives them more hours.

U6 doesn't include retirees, veterans, people living off their parent's wealth.
All of these groups limit productivity and increase liabilities on a society.

I'd much rather see an 'employment rate' than an 'unemployment rate'...
Combine that with median household income vs. median household spending and a realistic understanding of discretionary spending...and i think we'd have a much better understanding of our economies.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: RichardE
12.5% of Americans have no real way to sustain themselves at the moment besides government handouts.

and many of the MRR said Unemployment wouldn't go double digit.

It hasn't yet; grow a brain. PLEASE.

 

[nergee]

..."And if you go back and look at the data, you find that u3 and u6 follow similar trends. Nothing new to see here."...

You are right and the increasing unemployment percentage trend will continue in 2009....

 

[OCGuy]

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: RichardE
12.5% of Americans have no real way to sustain themselves at the moment besides government handouts.

and many of the MRR said Unemployment wouldn't go double digit.

Why do you like to make yourself look stupid?

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Farang
Does U6 include college and high school students who are not seeking employment as actively as, say, a laid off worker?

U6 includes everyone. Every who wants a job including those unwilling to look for one and those that want a job that gives them more hours.

U6 doesn't include retirees, veterans, people living off their parent's wealth.
All of these groups limit productivity and increase liabilities on a society.

I'd much rather see an 'employment rate' than an 'unemployment rate'...
Combine that with median household income vs. median household spending and a realistic understanding of discretionary spending...and i think we'd have a much better understanding of our economies.

How so?

 

[umbrella39]

:disgust:

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: umbrella39

Originally posted by: cubby1223

Originally posted by: dmcowen674

Originally posted by: RichardE
12.5% of Americans have no real way to sustain themselves at the moment besides government handouts.

and many of the MRR said Unemployment wouldn't go double digit.

Where are those reading comprehension skills? Or did Republicans steal that inalienable right away from you too? Unemployment is still well under 10%.

Because you say so? Pft.

We all know there are various tiers, but the go-to figure that is cited by 99% of articles and references on unemployment has it at less than 7% and that is an indisputable fact. Of course, it will go higher--much higher before this is all said and done.

 

[Stunt]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Farang
Does U6 include college and high school students who are not seeking employment as actively as, say, a laid off worker?

U6 includes everyone. Every who wants a job including those unwilling to look for one and those that want a job that gives them more hours.

U6 doesn't include retirees, veterans, people living off their parent's wealth.
All of these groups limit productivity and increase liabilities on a society.

I'd much rather see an 'employment rate' than an 'unemployment rate'...
Combine that with median household income vs. median household spending and a realistic understanding of discretionary spending...and i think we'd have a much better understanding of our economies.

How so?

A working person typically consumes less government assistance than retirees and verterans...
People living off their parents are not using their labor for productive means (business growth or efficiency increases), it's no different than a nice welfare handout to their kid.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: RichardE
WSJ article

The U-6 rate only has comparable history back to 1994, but November?s rate is by far the highest since then and the swift rise to that elevated level also far surpasses similar moves during the recessions in 2001 and 1990-91. Previously, the Labor Dept. kept a similar gauge with history back to 1970, showing a high of 14% unemployment during the deep recession in 1982.

The U-6 rate rose sharply in November, from 11.8% in October, and is markedly higher now than the 8.4% recorded in November 2007.

?It was already clear that this would be ?one of the worst recessions? in the post-war period,? said Nigel Gault, chief U.S. economist at IHS Global Insight. ?After today?s horrendous November employment report, it is beginning to look like the worst.? ?Kelly Evans

12.5% of Americans have no real way to sustain themselves at the moment besides government handouts.

I think its telling that when the U3 (the released unemployment numbers) only jumped .2 from Oct aand .6 from August, the U6 has jumped .7 from Oct and a almost full 2% since August.

U1-U6

And if you go back and look at the data, you find that u3 and u6 follow similar trends. Nothing new to see here.

Except very recently with the massive amount of layoffs as people give up looking for work. That is the story these stats tell, not that people are loosing jobs, that has always happened in society, but that they gave up finding new ones after looking. When they give up and rely on the government they get moved to U6, which jumped 2% in the past 2 months.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Farang
Does U6 include college and high school students who are not seeking employment as actively as, say, a laid off worker?

U6 includes everyone. Every who wants a job including those unwilling to look for one and those that want a job that gives them more hours.

U6 doesn't include retirees, veterans, people living off their parent's wealth.
All of these groups limit productivity and increase liabilities on a society.

I'd much rather see an 'employment rate' than an 'unemployment rate'...
Combine that with median household income vs. median household spending and a realistic understanding of discretionary spending...and i think we'd have a much better understanding of our economies.

How so?

A working person typically consumes less government assistance than retirees and verterans...
People living off their parents are not using their labor for productive means (business growth or efficiency increases), it's no different than a nice welfare handout to their kid.

I agree on the government handout, but one private voluntary transaction is just as valid as any other, so that "welfare handout to their kid" is in fact different. Plus all of these people still spur on production from others from their consumption. Singling out these people's liabilities society, especially veterans, is pretty unfair.

 

[LumbergTech]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian

Originally posted by: Stunt

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Farang
Does U6 include college and high school students who are not seeking employment as actively as, say, a laid off worker?

U6 includes everyone. Every who wants a job including those unwilling to look for one and those that want a job that gives them more hours.

U6 doesn't include retirees, veterans, people living off their parent's wealth.
All of these groups limit productivity and increase liabilities on a society.

I'd much rather see an 'employment rate' than an 'unemployment rate'...
Combine that with median household income vs. median household spending and a realistic understanding of discretionary spending...and i think we'd have a much better understanding of our economies.

How so?

A working person typically consumes less government assistance than retirees and verterans...
People living off their parents are not using their labor for productive means (business growth or efficiency increases), it's no different than a nice welfare handout to their kid.

I agree on the government handout, but one private voluntary transaction is just as valid as any other, so that "welfare handout to their kid" is in fact different. Plus all of these people still spur on production from others from their consumption. Singling out these people's liabilities society, especially veterans, is pretty unfair.

producing plastic shit and lattes isn't the only thing that keeps a society running, of course its very important, but so are many other things

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

The people buying most of that plastic shit and lattes probably weren't veterans or retirees. It was those other regular people, who did it at the expense of those other important things.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
The people buying most of that plastic shit and lattes probably weren't veterans or retirees. It was those other regular people, who did it at the expense of those other important things.

huh?

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

I was getting at the regular 9to5, 2.4 kids, SUV driving people going into debt buying all the crap they buy and doing their part in turning the economy to shit. Seems to me those are the folks right now with the greatest liability to society. Basically we are a nation of moms sacrificing designer jeans this Christmas so we can buy our six year old $600 worth of crap.