Record 1.2 Million People Fall Out Of Labor Force In One Month

[Tsing Tao]

Quote from Ricter:

Well said. I'm happy to admit that the real unemployment/underemployment situation is not good, not good at all. So the retort that I've received before, regarding people on social assistance and the nonsense of just cutting them off, that "they should just get a fucking job", is itself nonsense. The jobs are not there. Some righties box themselves in. The job situation is terrible when they're evaluating Obama, but the job situation is not terrible when they're evaluating the social safety net.

The job situation is terrible no matter what the argument is about, or who is responsible for it.

 

[Tsing Tao]

Quote from Wallet:

I'm all for helping people, specially helping people to learn to help themselves.

Do you think someone who's receiving unemployment, who's suppose to be looking for a job, albeit there's few to find, should pass a drug test?

They will probably have to pass one to get a job?

No, since, as you say, that is normally covered by an employment drug test. But to get welfare? Absolutely.

 

[Tsing Tao]

Quote from Ricter:

The U6 includes those persons with "shit jobs"? I guess that's a good thing, our economy is producing more of those it seems, and they are better than nothing.

When you are used to making 90k a year as a senior accountant, and then have to go to work at SuperValu as a cashier for minimum wage, is it not a good thing for either the person OR the economy.

 

[Epic]

Quote from Tsing Tao:

I am with you on the U3 being complete garbage, and the U6 being a better stat. I think the best is the LFPR, but can agree that there are times when it is not the best to use - depending on what you are looking for. But the fact remains, the media touts the U3 headline number as if it were the true employment situation, and it is SO not.

My only argument against the LFPR is that it is easy to manipulate and doesn't factor in a changing workforce demographic. To me, the retirement age should be 60. We keep arbitrarily changing it for political reasons. So we have a rapidly retiring baby boomer population, many of whom aren't waiting till 65 to retire, and until they are 65 they are counted as unemployed by the LFPR.

That just isn't a reliable stat. In times of economic prosperity that allows younger retirement, the LFPR would suggest a recession.

U6 is the only thing that really matters to Joe America.

 

[Wallet]

Quote from Tsing Tao:

No, since, as you say, that is normally covered by an employment drug test. But to get welfare? Absolutely.

To get welfare agreed, but if you can't pass a drug test to get a job, why am I paying your unemployment benefits.

 

[Epic]

Quote from Tsing Tao:

When you are used to making 90k a year as a senior accountant, and then have to go to work at SuperValu as a cashier for minimum wage, is it not a good thing for either the person OR the economy.

This type of situation is mostly accounted for in the stats. There are reports of average work week in hours and average hourly earnings.

The bigger issue is people who want work but cannot find it.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from Wallet:

... but if you can't pass a drug test to get a job, why am I paying your unemployment benefits.

Exactly!

 

[Tsing Tao]

Quote from Epic:

This type of situation is mostly accounted for in the stats. There are reports of average work week in hours and average hourly earnings.

The bigger issue is people who want work but cannot find it.

Wasn't talking about stats there. I was pointing out that it's not a good thing.

 

[Tsing Tao]

Quote from Epic:

My only argument against the LFPR is that it is easy to manipulate and doesn't factor in a changing workforce demographic. To me, the retirement age should be 60. We keep arbitrarily changing it for political reasons. So we have a rapidly retiring baby boomer population, many of whom aren't waiting till 65 to retire, and until they are 65 they are counted as unemployed by the LFPR.

That just isn't a reliable stat. In times of economic prosperity that allows younger retirement, the LFPR would suggest a recession.

U6 is the only thing that really matters to Joe America.

The LFPR claims it does not count retired persons no matter what the age. So I'm having trouble with your argument.

 

[Epic]

Quote from Tsing Tao:

The LFPR claims it does not count retired persons no matter what the age. So I'm having trouble with your argument.

Well, I'm not certain that I trust their ability to determine what portion of people 55-65 are voluntarily retired and still working just to stay active.

Anyway, we can drop that aspect and only consider the student and female demographics. Recessions dramatically effect the flow of students and females into and out of the workforce. It is much harder for the LFPR to paint an accurate employment situation as a headline number. During a recession, as household income drops, more students and housewives enter the workforce at the very time that there are fewer jobs to go around resulting in a massive LFPR drop. This suggests a much bleaker picture than is actually the case. The opposite is true during expansion.