Unemployment - A Scary Reality

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
U.S. Unemployment Rate Charting - Google

I had a chance to play around with Google's charting and graphing tools the other day and decided to get a bit of a refresher on the U.S. unemployment rate trend line. It was quite an eye opener.

Do you remember that the seasonally unadjusted unemployment rate in October, 2000 was 3.6%? Or that in October, 2006 it was 4.1%?

Do you remember how loud the Bush bashing was when the prospect for jobs was more than twice as good as it is today?

The current unemployment rate in the U.S. in the latest month of July, 2009 stands at 9.4% and yet we hear little criticism of the Obama Administration for failing to halt this slide even with his fatally flawed, yet massively expensive, stimulus package.

The laying of blame against President Bush continues here, it remains a popular pastime for those who have bought the line, the hook and the sinker. But those who have not will find it a cold comfort that the current Administration knows not what to do next. Except maybe double down on a failed game plan.

We are faced with critical issues all around, but unemployment in this country is the most likely to affect us all.

Bob Herbert writes an insightful article that captures the essence of the unemployment picture in the U.S.

A Scary Reality

August 11, 2009
The New York Times

A Scary Reality
By BOB HERBERT

Last week was a pretty good one for President Obama. Bill Clinton helped out big time when he returned from North Korea with the American journalists Laura Ling and Euna Lee. Sonia Sotomayor was elevated to the Supreme Court. And Friday?s unemployment report registered a tiny downward tick in the jobless rate.

But for American workers peering anxiously through their family portholes, the economic ship is still sinking. You can put whatever kind of gloss you want on last week?s jobs numbers, but the truth is that while they may have been a bit better than most economists were expecting, they were still bad, bad, bad.

Some 247,000 jobs were lost in July, a number that under ordinary circumstances would send a shudder through the country. It was the smallest monthly loss of jobs since last summer. And for that reason, it was seen as a hopeful sign. The official monthly unemployment rate ticked down from 9.5 percent to 9.4 percent.

But behind the official numbers is a scary story that illustrates the single biggest challenge facing the United States today. The American economy does not seem able to provide enough jobs ? and nowhere near enough good jobs ? to maintain the standard of living that most Americans have come to expect.

The country has lost a crippling 6.7 million jobs since the Great Recession began in December 2007. No one is predicting a recovery in the foreseeable future powerful enough to replace the millions of jobs that have vanished in this historic downturn.

Analysts at the Economic Policy Institute noted that the economy has fewer jobs now than it had in 2000, ?even though the labor force has grown by around 12 million workers since then.?

Two issues that absolutely undermine any rosy assessment of last week?s employment report are the swelling ranks of the long-term unemployed and the crushing levels of joblessness among young Americans. More than five million workers ? about a third of the unemployed ? have been jobless for more than six months. That?s the highest number recorded since accurate records have been kept.

For those concerned with the economic viability of the American family going forward, the plight of young workers, especially young men, is particularly frightening. The percentage of young American men who are actually working is the lowest it has been in the 61 years of record-keeping, according to the Center for Labor Market Studies at Northeastern University in Boston.

Only 65 of every 100 men aged 20 through 24 years old were working on any given day in the first six months of this year. In the age group 25 through 34 years old, traditionally a prime age range for getting married and starting a family, just 81 of 100 men were employed.

For male teenagers, the numbers were disastrous: only 28 of every 100 males were employed in the 16- through 19-year-old age group. For minority teenagers, forget about it. The numbers are beyond scary; they?re catastrophic.

This should be the biggest story in the United States. When joblessness reaches these kinds of extremes, it doesn?t just damage individual families; it corrodes entire communities, fosters a sense of hopelessness and leads to disorder.

The unemployment that has wrought such devastation in black communities for decades is now being experienced by a much wider swath of the population. We?ve been in deep denial about this. Way back in March 2007, when the official unemployment rate was a wildly deceptive 4.5 percent and the Bush crowd was crowing about the alleged strength of the economy, I wrote:

?People can howl all they want about how well the economy is doing. The simple truth is that millions of ordinary American workers are in an employment bind. Steady jobs with good benefits are going the way of Ozzie and Harriet. Young workers, especially, are hurting, which diminishes the prospects for the American family. And blacks, particularly black males, are in a deep danger zone.?

The official jobless rate is now more than twice as high ? 9.4 percent ? and even more wildly deceptive. It ticked down by 0.1 percent last month not because more people found jobs, but because 450,000 people withdrew from the labor market. They stopped looking, so they weren?t counted as unemployed.

A truer picture of the employment crisis emerges when you combine the number of people who are officially counted as jobless with those who are working part time because they can?t find full-time work and those in the so-called labor market reserve ? people who are not actively looking for work (because they have become discouraged, for example) but would take a job if one became available.

The tally from those three categories is a mind-boggling 30 million Americans ? 19 percent of the overall work force.

This is, by far, the nation?s biggest problem and should be its No. 1 priority.
 

TruePaige

Diamond Member
Oct 22, 2006
9,874
2
0
Originally posted by: PJABBER


This is, by far, the nation?s biggest problem and should be its No. 1 priority.

Exactly.

So if we can get UHC implemented we will take a burden off employers and they can have the funds to bring on new staff.

Now, why don't you write whatever Republican you like to follow and tell him that. ;)
 

TruePaige

Diamond Member
Oct 22, 2006
9,874
2
0
Originally posted by: Evan

Oh, and www.blogspot.com. Try it.

I wish he would. Or that there was some kind of "X number of threads per day" limit.

I'm okay with tolerating a few of these trolls as long as they mind their place but man...
 

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Originally posted by: PJABBER


This is, by far, the nation?s biggest problem and should be its No. 1 priority.

Exactly.

So if we can get UHC implemented we will take a burden off employers and they can have the funds to bring on new staff.

Now, why don't you right whatever Republican you like to follow and tell him that. ;)

I am sure you mean that I should "write" to a Republican, but alas, I am resident in the State of Maryland and all of our good representatives in the Congress are Democrats, save one. We went to a One Party Democrat Government some time ago and have been in decline since.

But, have no fear, I do plan to write and to meet these brave Congressmen when they choose to confront the electorate in the course of time and town hall meetings.

And I urge all who stand for freedom and against the slavery of non-representative government to do the same!
 

Patranus

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2007
9,280
0
0
Originally posted by: Evan
Fact; vast majority of jobs lost under Bush.

Oh, and www.blogspot.com. Try it.

Fact; vast majority of jobs lost under Democratically controlled congress.

Originally posted by: TruePaige
So if we can get UHC implemented we will take a burden off employers and they can have the funds to bring on new staff.

No problem with that if there is an individual mandate.
 

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Originally posted by: Evan

Oh, and www.blogspot.com. Try it.

I wish he would. Or that there was some kind of "X number of threads per day" limit.

I'm okay with tolerating a few of these trolls as long as they mind their place but man...

But if a limit were applied, then you, too, would be limited and then you would gnash your tiny teeth in dismay and rend your soiled under clothing in despair.

For free men do not tolerate the imposition of arbitrary limits on creative expression, nor the scope of intellectual inquiry. It is only the resentful and the uninteresting who might find fault in an abundance of perspicacity.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
87,679
54,677
136
Originally posted by: PJABBER
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Originally posted by: Evan

Oh, and www.blogspot.com. Try it.

I wish he would. Or that there was some kind of "X number of threads per day" limit.

I'm okay with tolerating a few of these trolls as long as they mind their place but man...

But if a limit were applied, then you, too, would be limited and then you would gnash your tiny teeth in dismay and rend your soiled clothing in despair.

For free men do not tolerate the imposition of arbitrary limits on creative expression, nor the scope of intellectual inquiry. It is only the resentful and the uninteresting who might find fault in an abundance of perspicacity.

It's like you work at a retarded right wing Renaissance Fair.
 

TruePaige

Diamond Member
Oct 22, 2006
9,874
2
0
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: PJABBER
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Originally posted by: Evan

Oh, and www.blogspot.com. Try it.

I wish he would. Or that there was some kind of "X number of threads per day" limit.

I'm okay with tolerating a few of these trolls as long as they mind their place but man...

But if a limit were applied, then you, too, would be limited and then you would gnash your tiny teeth in dismay and rend your soiled clothing in despair.

For free men do not tolerate the imposition of arbitrary limits on creative expression, nor the scope of intellectual inquiry. It is only the resentful and the uninteresting who might find fault in an abundance of perspicacity.

It's like you work at a retarded right wing Renaissance Fair.

I'm sure he'll give me a stern talking to at the next Continental Congress!
 

TruePaige

Diamond Member
Oct 22, 2006
9,874
2
0
Originally posted by: PJABBER
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Originally posted by: Evan

Oh, and www.blogspot.com. Try it.

I wish he would. Or that there was some kind of "X number of threads per day" limit.

I'm okay with tolerating a few of these trolls as long as they mind their place but man...

But if a limit were applied, then you, too, would be limited and then you would gnash your tiny teeth in dismay and rend your soiled under clothing in despair.

For free men do not tolerate the imposition of arbitrary limits on creative expression, nor the scope of intellectual inquiry. It is only the resentful and the uninteresting who might find fault in an abundance of perspicacity.

No, I wouldn't, because I don't have to run my trap 24/7. I post threads on new items that could provoke a stimulating discussion.

I am not the one putting my troll-pole out and fishing for responses.
 

Andrew1990

Banned
Mar 8, 2008
2,153
0
0
Can't we all agree it was both the Democrats and Republicans had a joint venture in this crappy economy? Both sides blame the other while in reality, both are to blame.


I guess common sense around here isnt appreciated though....
 

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Originally posted by: PJABBER
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Originally posted by: Evan

Oh, and www.blogspot.com. Try it.

I wish he would. Or that there was some kind of "X number of threads per day" limit.

I'm okay with tolerating a few of these trolls as long as they mind their place but man...

But if a limit were applied, then you, too, would be limited and then you would gnash your tiny teeth in dismay and rend your soiled under clothing in despair.

For free men do not tolerate the imposition of arbitrary limits on creative expression, nor the scope of intellectual inquiry. It is only the resentful and the uninteresting who might find fault in an abundance of perspicacity.

No, I wouldn't, because I don't have to run my trap 24/7. I post threads on new items that could provoke a stimulating discussion.

I am not the one putting my troll-pole out and fishing for responses.

My "troll-pole"? Perhaps you misunderstand my intent. I post to gain insight and to engage in intelligent discussion! I seek challenges and critiques that I can then use in my replies as teaching lessons for those inclined to benefit.

A short while ago I happened upon a young person, in some way familiar. This brilliant child lived happily in a world of her own making, much as you might. You should recognize yourself in her words and her deeds, if not her spirit -

I herd you liek Mooninites?

I am sure you can make it in the real world as well!
 

TruePaige

Diamond Member
Oct 22, 2006
9,874
2
0
Originally posted by: PJABBER
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Originally posted by: PJABBER
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Originally posted by: Evan

Oh, and www.blogspot.com. Try it.

I wish he would. Or that there was some kind of "X number of threads per day" limit.

I'm okay with tolerating a few of these trolls as long as they mind their place but man...

But if a limit were applied, then you, too, would be limited and then you would gnash your tiny teeth in dismay and rend your soiled under clothing in despair.

For free men do not tolerate the imposition of arbitrary limits on creative expression, nor the scope of intellectual inquiry. It is only the resentful and the uninteresting who might find fault in an abundance of perspicacity.

No, I wouldn't, because I don't have to run my trap 24/7. I post threads on new items that could provoke a stimulating discussion.

I am not the one putting my troll-pole out and fishing for responses.

My "troll-pole"? Perhaps you misunderstand my intent. I post to gain insight and to engage in intelligent discussion! I seek challenges and critiques that I can then use in my replies as teaching lessons for those inclined to benefit.

A short while ago I happened upon a young person, in some way familiar. This brilliant child lived happily in a world of her own making, much as you might. You should recognize yourself in her words and her deeds, if not her spirit -

I herd you liek Mooninites?

I am sure you can make it in the real world as well!

Did you just inject Boxxy into this?

Sorry, I do live in the real world where we don't have black and white enemies. I don't label D as BAD and R as GOOD nor do I do so in the reverse of it.

If you could follow the intelligent posters here in P&N you'd see how many of us vary in our viewpoints yet can have respectful conversations.

Unfortunately you have no interest in that. Continue to use this forum like a senile old man's blog.
 

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Originally posted by: PJABBER
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Originally posted by: PJABBER
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Originally posted by: Evan

Oh, and www.blogspot.com. Try it.

I wish he would. Or that there was some kind of "X number of threads per day" limit.

I'm okay with tolerating a few of these trolls as long as they mind their place but man...

But if a limit were applied, then you, too, would be limited and then you would gnash your tiny teeth in dismay and rend your soiled under clothing in despair.

For free men do not tolerate the imposition of arbitrary limits on creative expression, nor the scope of intellectual inquiry. It is only the resentful and the uninteresting who might find fault in an abundance of perspicacity.

No, I wouldn't, because I don't have to run my trap 24/7. I post threads on new items that could provoke a stimulating discussion.

I am not the one putting my troll-pole out and fishing for responses.

My "troll-pole"? Perhaps you misunderstand my intent. I post to gain insight and to engage in intelligent discussion! I seek challenges and critiques that I can then use in my replies as teaching lessons for those inclined to benefit.

A short while ago I happened upon a young person, in some way familiar. This brilliant child lived happily in a world of her own making, much as you might. You should recognize yourself in her words and her deeds, if not her spirit -

I herd you liek Mooninites?

I am sure you can make it in the real world as well!

Did you just inject Boxxy into this?

Sorry, I do live in the real world where we don't have black and white enemies. I don't label D as BAD and R as GOOD nor do I do so in the reverse of it.

If you could follow the intelligent posters here in P&N you'd see how many of us vary in our viewpoints yet can have respectful conversations.

Unfortunately you have no interest in that. Continue to use this forum like a senile old man's blog.

I guess the only reply I can make is this -

I'm Not Trollin'
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,538
6,704
126
Out of curiosity, why is unemployment a problem? I'm wondering if anybody knows. I think sometime, that ideas become so fixed in the consciousness of people and accepted as givens that real understanding to the issues gets lost. So please tell me, this young eager mind fresh on the scene, why is unemployment a problem?
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
I saw a day or so ago that unemployment has gone up in its duration for the average person in the past few decades; e.g. if you were canned in the 70's you'd be working in a few months, and it's continually gotten longer and longer, even with unemployment possibly going a lot lower, so now it's maybe half a year or whatever.
 

Double Trouble

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,270
103
106
Partisan hackery aside, it really is a scary prospect. If you lose your job right now, you're probably going to be a) looking for work for a long time, or b) going to be underemployed or making a lot less than what you were making.

Also, I'd like to point out that this finger pointing to which president "lost" the most jobs etc is dumb. That's a function of the economic situation and economic cycles, something the president can barely influence in the short term. In the long term, fiscal policies etc have a major impact, but that's more on Congress than the president....
 

Robor

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
16,979
0
76
Originally posted by: Double Trouble
Partisan hackery aside, it really is a scary prospect. If you lose your job right now, you're probably going to be a) looking for work for a long time, or b) going to be underemployed or making a lot less than what you were making.

Also, I'd like to point out that this finger pointing to which president "lost" the most jobs etc is dumb. That's a function of the economic situation and economic cycles, something the president can barely influence in the short term. In the long term, fiscal policies etc have a major impact, but that's more on Congress than the president....

Well said! :thumbsup:
 

Mursilis

Diamond Member
Mar 11, 2001
7,756
11
81
Originally posted by: TruePaige
No, I wouldn't, because I don't have to run my trap 24/7. I post threads on new items that could provoke a stimulating discussion.

I am not the one putting my troll-pole out and fishing for responses.

Yet you average 7 posts/day, and you're ridiculing someone averaging less than 1/day. Who's the one who can't keep his trap shut again?!?
 
Oct 30, 2004
11,442
32
91
Originally posted by: PJABBERThe current unemployment rate in the U.S. in the latest month of July, 2009 stands at 9.4% and yet we hear little criticism of the Obama Administration for failing to halt this slide even with his fatally flawed, yet massively expensive, stimulus package.

The laying of blame against President Bush continues here, it remains a popular pastime for those who have bought the line, the hook and the sinker. But those who have not will find it a cold comfort that the current Administration knows not what to do next. Except maybe double down on a failed game plan.

You're blaming Obama for all of this when he's barely been in office for more than six-and-a-half months. Don't you think that Bush deserves the brunt of the blame for setting up the underpinnings of this economic crisis? What exactly do you think Obama has done, as President, to contribute to it?

Now, I agree that the Obama Administration doesn't understand the nature of the problem nor know what to do, but neither did the clueless Bush Administration that played a huge role in creating this mess.

Under the Bush Administration it began to become painfully obvious that the United States had a problem with Global Labor Arbitrage. So what did Bush and the Republicans do? Did they end foreign outsourcing? No, instead they pursued new free trade agreements. Did they end the H-1B and L-1 visa programs? No. Did they end mass legal immigration and illegal immigration? No. Instead they sought amnesty for illegal aliens.

Neither Obama, McCain, Palin, nor any other conventional politician who could have possibly been elected would be much different in those regards, but my point is that most of the damage was done under Bush. However, at least Obama understands that the nation is also suffering from a huge health system crisis. At least we get the sense that Obama has some sort of intellectual ability whereas Bush came off as a brainless moron whose Daddy got him into Yale. At least Obama might actually be able to recognize a problem and address it whereas Bush was worse than worthless.

Thank you for posting the op-ed, by the way.
 

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,441
86
91
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Out of curiosity, why is unemployment a problem? I'm wondering if anybody knows. I think sometime, that ideas become so fixed in the consciousness of people and accepted as givens that real understanding to the issues gets lost. So please tell me, this young eager mind fresh on the scene, why is unemployment a problem?

Because we must prevent people from losing brain cells by sitting at home all day watching Jerry Springer.
 

Fingolfin269

Lifer
Feb 28, 2003
17,948
33
91
Originally posted by: Andrew1990
Can't we all agree it was both the Democrats and Republicans had a joint venture in this crappy economy? Both sides blame the other while in reality, both are to blame.


I guess common sense around here isnt appreciated though....

Exactly. Like it or not, everyone is to blame on this one.
 
Oct 30, 2004
11,442
32
91
Originally posted by: PJABBER

A Scary Reality

August 11, 2009
The New York Times

A Scary Reality
By BOB HERBERT

The country has lost a crippling 6.7 million jobs since the Great Recession began in December 2007. No one is predicting a recovery in the foreseeable future powerful enough to replace the millions of jobs that have vanished in this historic downturn.

Analysts at the Economic Policy Institute noted that the economy has fewer jobs now than it had in 2000, ?even though the labor force has grown by around 12 million workers since then.?

Thank you, Bob Herbert, for pointing this out. So, when you factor in population growth--that conveniently ignored factor--into the monthly job loss numbers our nation has actually lost about 18.7 million jobs relative to population since 2000 if these numbers are accurate. That is just a staggering figure.

This should be the biggest story in the United States. When joblessness reaches these kinds of extremes, it doesn?t just damage individual families; it corrodes entire communities, fosters a sense of hopelessness and leads to disorder.

What will happen when people's unemployment benefits run out? What will happen to our society when the federal, state, and local governments can no longer afford to provide welfare and food assistance? Will a hungry, angry, frustrated populace bare arms and take to the streets? Could we see food riots? What sort of a role will the foreclosure crisis and the prospect of increasing homelessness play in fostering this kind of civil unrest?

A truer picture of the employment crisis emerges when you combine the number of people who are officially counted as jobless with those who are working part time because they can?t find full-time work and those in the so-called labor market reserve ? people who are not actively looking for work (because they have become discouraged, for example) but would take a job if one became available.

The tally from those three categories is a mind-boggling 30 million Americans ? 19 percent of the overall work force.

This is, by far, the nation?s biggest problem and should be its No. 1 priority.

Hello Third World America and Economic Holocaust.

In other news, it has been reported that Americans are purchasing guns and ammo at a rapid rate. Could a sense that the American economy and nation are failing and that crime and civil unrest will increase be the primary driver behind those purchases rather than the perceived threat that Obama will ban guns? As I read Herbert's op-ed, I started to wish that I had some guns of my own.



 
Oct 30, 2004
11,442
32
91
Originally posted by: Andrew1990
Can't we all agree it was both the Democrats and Republicans had a joint venture in this crappy economy? Both sides blame the other while in reality, both are to blame.

I agree. Both the Democrats and the Republicans are equally to blame. In fact, for all intents and purposes they might as well be the same political party. What's sad is that Americans are squabbling over which party is worse while failing to grasp that both parties are fundamentally the same and that both advocate very similar policies and serve wealthy interests. Their brilliance is that each party has fooled and galvanized different segments of the populace into believing that one of the parties supports their interests.
 

Genx87

Lifer
Apr 8, 2002
41,091
513
126
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Originally posted by: Evan

Oh, and www.blogspot.com. Try it.

I wish he would. Or that there was some kind of "X number of threads per day" limit.

I'm okay with tolerating a few of these trolls as long as they mind their place but man...

Nothing stops you from ignoring these threads. But I suspect you enjoy them deep down inside.