LINK to the 9.7% Total unemployment stat from Fed.Bureau of Labor

[underpants]

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t12.htm

U-6 Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers


May Apr. May May Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr.
2003 2004 2004 2003 2004 2004 2004
9.7 9.3 9.3 10.1 9.9 9.6 9.9 9.6 9.7

[NMDemDist2]

1. i thought so

too bad it's not on all the front pages

[Hubert Flottz]

2. Sounds more like the truth!

People are still losing jobs in this state! How about your state? The jobs that are being lost are the good paying ones too, like they have been all along! The new jobs created here are flipping burgers or summer jobs for kids! Even construction is almost at a standstill! Bush's recovery is like Reagan's was,,,Jobless and FAKE!

[Media_Lies_Daily]

3. Yep...that's quite bit more realistic, but I wonder if it includes...

...those workers that have used all of their unemployment insurance and have given up hope of finding anything at all?

[mhr]

4. Link To Bogus Jobs Data At BlS Also - Most Jobs Created By Computer Model

Thet do not exist except in cyber space!


http://www.bls.gov/web/cesbd.htm

[mhr]

5. Six Unemployment Rates - Article From One Year Ago on U1 - U6

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascitystar/business/5962629.htm?1c

Unemployment: It depends on how you define it
May 29, 2003
DIANE STAFFORD

You've been out of work for 18 months and know 15 others who are vainly job hunting.
You suspect that the 5.8 percent unemployment figure for April is government propaganda.

In your world, things are much worse off. And, guess what, in your
world, you're right.

The "real" unemployment rate for you is 9.8 percent. You can look it up.
It's every bit as real as the 5.8 percent that was reported in the media. So what's the deal?

The deal is that there are six government-sanctioned definitions of
unemployment. The six measures produce a broad range of unemployment
numbers. For April 2003, the range was a scant 2.5 percent to a scary
9.8 percent.

One of the midrange numbers, dubbed U-3 and defined as "total
unemployed, as a percent of the civilian labor force," is the official
unemployment rate.

Snip ......

[Frodo]

9. So, all we have to do now...

is show how much better the rate was in May/June of 1996 and there won't be any more argument right?

[mhr]

10. As Always FRODO - Your Point Would Be What?

Those of us that are long-term unemployed are tired of your sanctimonious attitude to our plight.

Since our last sparring session, I have sent another 75 resumes out the door.

The response is NADA.

Do NOT BEGIN TO TELL ME again why your numbers tell me I am a loser.

The loser is the economy, though you refuse to accept it.

[Frodo]

13. ???

What are you, reading tea leaves or something?

We've had this conversation before. People act like the U6 figure is somehow "hidden" in the report to mask how TERRIBLE (oh, the shame) the REAL unemployment situation is. "Oh if people could only see the TRUTH that unemployment is 9.7%!"

The problem is that the 1996 numbers look the same as today. And pointing that out is NOT taking a "sanctimonious attitude" toward your "plight". Gee, it sounds like you have a "sanctimonious attitude" toward the "plight" of all those people unemployed in May of 1996???




On your ongoing flow of resume's... has anyone ever taught you the right way to do this? Who are you sending them to??? And based on what? Did you find a job listing? You've found over 4000 companies that do something you could contribute to? Or are you using the alphabetical part of the yellow pages?

That's something like 85 resume's a MONTH? A well done resume (or at least the cover letter) is at least tergeted to the intended position/company. How are you doing this?

[mhr]

14. FRODO - I send Blind, Targeted, And Mass Distribution

I ran out of targeted resume opportunities long ago.

All that is left is blind and mass distribution.

Very occasionally, a target of opportunity comes along and I respond like thousands of other unemployed professionals.

(Remember that the BLS itself estimates that there are 3 job seekers for every position on average.)

So far nothing, nada, zilch!

You just don't seem to get it do you?

[Frodo]

21. I don't think anyone "gets it"

You are in something of an unusual situation.


Even those who have been unemployed for some time are not in the same boat. You have (based on your previous posts) extensive qualifications, but no options so far for over four years.

The number you cite (three job seekers for every position) can't come close to explaining your situation. Even if DFW were ten to one, 4,000 resumes would be expected to get SOME kind of response.

Have you put anything out on the national boards with a "willing to relocate" phrase?

[Selwynn]

27. I always love the jackass attitude that says -

if you're out of work its YOUR fault.

Hi, my name's dick and I know nothing about your situation, but I'm going to go ahead and assume that clearly your to blame for the fact that you can't find a job. Have a nice name, and remember, the name's dick.

[patriotvoice]

20. Have you considered changing careers or becoming a consultant?

You're master of your destiny, not the companies that are refusing to hire you.

Think of how much research into products, sales pitches you could have thrown, or days you could have helped an old lady or crippled child have been wasted distributing resumes.

Good luck.

[Frodo]

22. "Consultant" is code for "unemployed"

Some consultants get paid a ton, but they usually started off as staff consultants in a larger company.

[patriotvoice]

24. Not always. Avoid generalizations.

See www.ideacode.com

I am a consultant, and I own the place, and we've managed to stay employed and bill paying for the last 3 years. Did I mention we are in software? And telecom? And training? The three biggest negatives possible?

All it takes is will power. If you believe you will fail, you will fail.

[Selwynn]

25. What the hell ever.

In the Technology sector, good consultants easily make six figures, and are highly desirable to companies. They usually don't start off as "staff consultants" they usually start as grad students who then get experience in engineering and project management and then turn that knowledge into power as the network through the industry.

[patriotvoice]

31. Bingo.

See also my response for an example.

[Frodo]

23. Dupe - deleted

[louis c]

6. I remember a worker

at a town hall meeting with Bush 41 in 1992 telling him,"I know you're creating jobs, I've got three of them". Like father like son, one term and you're done.

[trogdor]

18. Sometimes I wish I was still registered GOP...

...so I could get invited to one of those Bushit events and ask questions like that.

Edit: Not to mention the sublime pleasure I would feel from telling a Bush fundraising caller where he can go and why. :evilgrin:

[rkc3]

7. Since I'm at work and don't have the time...

Is there any information relating to the Total Unemployed through the late 90's - the hey days of Clinton's era?

Without a clearer picture of total unemployment during that period, these numbers mean little in the denigration of Herr Bush.

It looks like there are 50% more unemployed when you jump from U-5 (generally reported in the press) to U-6. If this percentage jump holds the same throughout Clinton's presidency, it's no big deal.

[Frodo]

11. Much better.

In 1999-2000 Clinton's numbers were substantially better than these. U6 floated between 7.5% and 6.5% with a little variability outside that range.

However, the numbers were not at attractive during his 1996 reelection campaign. This report is the first this year where the current number did not beat the '96 figure. And the next two months have to be over 10% to underperform.

[underpants]

12. LINK-1994 and forward

http://www.bls.gov/schedule/archives/empsit_nr.htm#2004

[rkc3]

15. Thanks for the link.

You've got to scroll to near the middle of the report to get to the
U-# reportings. Tables A-7 and A-8 are likely targets.

It looks like the differences between U-5 and U-6 ranged from around 35% to 50% for parts of Clinton's presidency. It would be a stretch to say Bush's numbers are much worse than recent history.

The U-6 numbers list those who are marginally employed for economic reasons - for instance, my wife has to work because my employment can't support both of us. If we saw those numbers well outside historical norms over the past 2-3 years, the economy would be in a sad state.

What would be more difficult to assess is the methodology or the algorithms used to derive unemployment. Let's hope the parameters haven't changed since Bush came to office.

[ProfessorGAC]

19. They Are Statstically Significant

Going back to using those same terms to 1975 (therefore 30 years), the difference between the mean of the first Clinton term and the most recent term of Li'l Georgie are significantly different. The Clinton values are about 0.28 standard deviations above the 95% confidence interval value for the 30 year dataset. The Bush numbers are 0.49 sigma below. That gives a student test of <0.01% that the results are NOT statistically significantly different.

This is universally true for all classes of UE, as well as the employment robustness index ((1 - UE5)*MHI) for the entire period of the Clinton administration vs. 41 and 43's combined periods.

The U6 values for Reagan are similar to the Clinton period, but the U5 and ERI are statistically different. There are those here who don't want to admit it, but the economy was better, more sustainable and raised more boats under Clinton that at any time since the end of WWII. The data are, what the data are.
The Professor

[crossroads]

29. Thanks for the link!

:hi:

[teryang]

8. Thank you!

The economy isn't getting better. I was looking at the want ads for a major city yesterday and was appalled by the number of sales/marketing jobs. The number of real jobs where a person actually performs some role other than desparately seeking to find someone to buy something are really quite scarce except perhaps in the medical sector.

[loudsue]

16. Me, and about 12 other people, lost our "jobs" yesterday afternoon.

But we don't "count" in the numbers, because we are all independent contractors.... and we also got totally SCREWED out of whatever $$ we were contracted to make, because the "pay points" were creatively jiggled to give our client their work, but not tied down sufficiently to make our money out of it.

This is what happens when corporations run the courts and the government. We have no recourse, except to sue the bastards... and the contracts we signed (we HAD to sign their non-negotiable contracts, or we wouldn't even have a shot at the work) make the "pay points" vague enough for the client to wiggle out of paying us for the work we did.

I'm FURIOUS at the lack of morality in business these days. It's been creeping in since the Reagan years, and has killed small businesses (like mine) in favor of the huge corporations. I'm in my mid-fifties, and I remember a time, long long ago, when people doing business together could actually do the whole thing on a handshake. Now, either you sign a crooked contract, or you don't even get your foot in the door.

I was unemployed for 19 months after 9/11. Now, I'm unemployed again. This totally sucks. And I'm falling deeper into the hole. So much for the American Dream.

:kick::kick::kick::kick:

[underpants]

17. I'm very sorry to hear that

I don't know what to say other than I feel for you.

[loudsue]

30. Thank you,

I'm feeling pretty bummed out, as you can prolly tell!!

I appreciate your kind words.

:kick:

[crossroads]

26. Going nowhere fast!

Well so much for the "good" economy! I figured this...
:eyes:

[Selwynn]

28. All employees in my company just lost wages--

it was called "job standardization" and most people got demoted, and most people lost pay, the least I heard of was 5% and the worst I heard of was 17%. All while our boss was out on a two and a half week paid vacation which we don't qualify for. The noticiations were sent monday morning, effective immediately. Not even face to face, just an email.

Oh yeah, the economy kicks ass!