• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Unemployment falls again to 8.3%

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Baby boomers are retiring and it's affecting the participation rate used to determine unemploment percentages. This is especially evident the last 2 years. See Social Security graph below.
http://www.ssa.gov/oact/ProgData/icpGraph.html

icpBenies.gif

We will have to see how persons not in labor force acts the rest of the year, its possible that many people decided january was the month they were going to drop out, but these charts are quite surprising.

People%20Not%20In%20Labor%20Force.jpg

Participation%20Rate.jpg

20120202_notinlabor_0.png


credit to zerohedge.com
 
Hay we all know that Obama's stimulus package is finally kicking in and that money was well spent....

Yes, that was a big part of it. We got government spending right when we needed it the most. He also gave us the payroll tax break which I'm philosophically opposed to; but desperate times...

It's important that American voters keep all this in mind. Whoever they elect in November they need to demand that government spending stay high until the this recovery is strong enough to withstand cuts.
 
Its an election year of course thy are going to say things are ticking upward . But how many people can no longer claim unemployment benefits is the bigger question , I know a few who can no longer collect. I no none who have a new job . I know hundreds that went on SS in january . I know you people are grabbing at straws in the numbers game . 150,000 employees retire and DRAW SS. 250,000 new jobs added . You like the math good for you . Sheepo
 
Last edited:
Its an election year of course thy are going to say things are ticking upward . But how many people can no longer claim unemployment benefits is the bigger question , I know a few who can no longer collect.

I think you have a point there....If a Republican was in the White House (I just threw up a little)they would NEVER point out any recovery of a Recession.

🙄
 
Pretty much everyone seems happy with the progress. We need to make sure we continue these government policies conducive to growth. Once the unemployment rate is back below 4% and the economy is strong again we should balance the budget and really start to address the debt. That should be 1-2 years away if all goes well.

4% unemployment is way more than 2 years away. We would need 500,000 every month to even get close to that. What specific pro growth policies are you talking about?
 
I think you have a point there....If a Republican was in the White House (I just threw up a little)they would NEVER point out any recovery of a Recession.

🙄

You haven't pointed out anything . There is no recovery . The Old workers that are retiring can't even be replaced the younger people are educated but have NO SKILLS. So they go to forums and TALK !
Unless people stop basing the numbers on unumployeement claims they can lie and scheme all they want . There will always be the fools who can't help themselves . To bad we nurse these types in the name of humanity when it destroys humanity. I hate this gooberment and the people who support it. I pray they recieve from big goooberment what they rightfully have coming to them .
 
4% unemployment is way more than 2 years away. We would need 500,000 every month to even get close to that. What specific pro growth policies are you talking about?

I would argue what we have now is far better then the almost 800K jobs lost per month when Obama took over. Wanna go back to that??
 
You haven't pointed out anything . There is no recovery . The Old workers that are retiring can't even be replaced the younger people are educated but have NO SKILLS. So they go to forums and TALK !
Unless people stop basing the numbers on unumployeement claims they can lie and scheme all they want . There will always be the fools who can't help themselves . To bad we nurse these types in the name of humanity when it destroys humanity. I hate this gooberment and the people who support it. I pray they recieve from big goooberment what they rightfully have coming to them .

So then the Economy has not gotten any better then the crash in 2008 with your rationalization??

😱
 
We will have to see how persons not in labor force acts the rest of the year, its possible that many people decided january was the month they were going to drop out, but these charts are quite surprising.

People%20Not%20In%20Labor%20Force.jpg

Participation%20Rate.jpg

20120202_notinlabor_0.png


credit to zerohedge.com

Some of them look amazingly like the CO2 graphs...

😉
 
Simply put, yes. Unemployment doesn't count people that have given up looking for work. The REAL unemployment rate is substantially higher. And then there's the underemployed. The Obameconomy is far from stellar.

Would you admit it is just a tad more "stellar" than under your hero Bush?
 

Here ya go!

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

An explanation:

http://bonddad.blogspot.com/2012/02/no-rick-santelli-and-zero-hedge-one.html


In accordance with usual practice, BLS will not revise the official household survey estimates for December 2011 and earlier months. To show the impact of the population adjustment, however, differences in selected December 2011 labor force series based on the old and new population estimates are shown in table B.

Basically, the numbers were always this way, but previous statistics were based on the 2000 census.
 
The percentage means nothing. Number of jobs actually added was mediocre at best and would never make the percentage move that much if other things were constant.

By the way, large blue-chip companies are still laying off their people. Take a look at Proctor & Gamble the other day announcing a lay-off of 1,600 people. That's not including the large number of sales people they're in process of firing over the next year.
 
Here ya go!

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

An explanation:

http://bonddad.blogspot.com/2012/02/no-rick-santelli-and-zero-hedge-one.html




Basically, the numbers were always this way, but previous statistics were based on the 2000 census.

lol. I like how Rick Santelli was also parroting this 'million+ people dropped out of the workforce' thing on CNBC. What are the odds that he admits he didn't know what he was talking about? I'm going to go with zero.
 
More proof the quality of zerohedge contributions varies extraordinarily widely. BLS brought in new Census numbers starting last month, so there was no decrease in the participation rate. Just hogwash.
The report says there was a .3% decline in Participation Rate using the new Census numbers. You say no decrease in Participation Rate...am I missing something?

BLS Report
Effective with data for January 2012, updated population estimates which reflect the results of Census 2010 have been used in the household survey. Population estimates for the household survey are developed by the U.S. Census Bureau. Each year, the Census Bureau updates the estimates to reflect new information and assumptions about the growth of the population during the decade. The change in
population reflected in the new estimates results from the introduction of the Census 2010 count as the new population base, adjustments for net international migration, updated vital statistics and other
information, and some methodological changes in the estimation process.

The vast majority of the population change, however, is due to the change in base population from Census 2000 to Census 2010.

In accordance with usual practice, BLS will not revise the official household survey estimates for December 2011 and earlier months. To show the impact of the population adjustment, however,
differences in selected December 2011 labor force series based on the old and new population estimates are shown in table B.

The adjustment increased the estimated size of the civilian noninstitutional population in December by 1,510,000, the civilian labor force by 258,000, employment by 216,000, unemployment by 42,000, and persons not in the labor force by 1,252,000. Although the total unemployment rate was unaffected, the labor force participation rate and the employment-population ratio were each reduced by 0.3 percentage point. This was because the population increase was primarily among persons 55 and older and, to a lesser degree, persons 16 to 24 years of age. Both these age groups have lower levels of labor force participation than the general population.
 
Republicans are already talking down the economy:
Drudge headlines:
8.3%...

FLASHBACK: CBO SAYS REAL UNEMPLOYMENT RATE 10%...

Record 1.2M Fall Out Of Labor Force...

Participation rate falls to 63.7%...

30-year low...

SANTELLI: 'What does that mean in English? Shrinkage. Shrinkage.'...
 
The report says there was a .3% decline in Participation Rate using the new Census numbers. You say no decrease in Participation Rate...am I missing something?

BLS Report

Answer in your own quoted passage:

Although the total unemployment rate was unaffected, the labor force participation rate and the employment-population ratio were each reduced by 0.3 percentage point. This was because the population increase was primarily among persons 55 and older and, to a lesser degree, persons 16 to 24 years of age. Both these age groups have lower levels of labor force participation than the general population.
 
LOL! I love how the GOP paints itself into a corner CONSTANTLY

the economy CANNOT get better...until after 2012 elections of course! 😛
 
Back
Top