Slashdot Mirror
Jobless Claims In US Decline To Match Lowest Since 1973 (bloomberg.com)
Sho Chandra, reporting for Bloomberg: The number of Americans filing applications for unemployment benefits unexpectedly declined last week to match a more than 42-year low, indicating employers are upbeat about an economy that bogged down in the first quarter. Jobless claims dropped by 13,000 to 253,000 in the week ended April 9, equaling the level in March that was the lowest since November 1973, a report from the Labor Department showed Thursday. The median forecast in a Bloomberg survey called for 270,000. Continuing claims also declined, to the lowest since mid-October. "Jobless claims are running really low and all other labor market data are telling us that the economy is creating a lot of jobs," said Patrick Newport, an economist at IHS Global Insight in Lexington, Massachusetts. "This is further confirmation that the labor market is strong."
The unemployment number is really a farce. While the unemployment number showing the ratio of employed people to people seeking employment is important, it does not show the whole picture. We need to see what the labor force participation rate is. People that have given up looking for work are not counted in the unemployment number. Real unemployment is far higher than the official unemployment rate.
See http://data.bls.gov/timeseries...
And also, with the less people claiming unemployment, there's no indication if they're in decent full time, not minimum wage jobs that are going to stick around. More than likely they're some variation of part-time and/or zero hour contracts.
Jobless claims is a deceiving statistic because it doesn't count people whose unemployment insurance expired without them finding new jobs or people who have dropped out of the labor market altogether (e.g. underemployed recent grads who move back into their parents because they can't find a job).
The actual labor market participation rate is 63.0, which, outside of last year, is the lowest it's been since the late 70's. See Labor Force Participation Rate from Dept. of Labor. I couldn't save a URL that pointed to the full series, but just adjust the start date back to 1976 to see the graph.
What's really happening is that capital is doing great, but the recovery from the financial crisis of 2007/8 has been largely jobless.
Can you not post hyperlinks on the mobile site? That was supposed to link to https://research.stlouisfed.or....
U-6 is the real unemployment rate. Nobody but you, apparently, is fooled by the fraudulent U-3. Obama has yet to match Bush's worst U-6.
Unemployment statistics are a contentious topic because there are many "in betweens" to "unemployed". For example, a retired person may take up a job if it pays well and is convenient in terms of work/home balance, but otherwise are not spending much effort seeking. Does that make them "unemployed"? A prototypical "housewife" (house-spouse=PC?) may be in the same boat.
Because of these gray areas, it's been generally agreed as a de facto standard to ONLY count those "actively seeking" unemployment. This is usually measured by a combination of random surveys, and unemployment applications, which typically ask one to list companies contacted. (Since they don't need to fill out such forms when benefits run out, the random surveys are used to fill in the gaps.)
Sometimes political trolls will say, "unemployment is actually [really high percent] instead of the 5% official number; you are being lied to!". When probed, it will usually be found that they are using a statistic that includes one of gray area categories, like those mentioned above.
The same trolls will then often switch metrics again when their favorite politician or party is in power to make them look better.
Because what's usually used is merely a de facto standard, the trolls are not technically lying; just being manipulative. Most political "lies" are actually manipulation of words and misleading statistical games rather than being outright wrong.
Table-ized A.I.
The official unemployment numbers are based off a small random sample and don't capture a lot, so there's that issue.
The other issue is that the raw unemployment number doesn't address underemployment, such as
- Displaced workers who have to work crappy jobs but want better ones
- People who have to work part time but want more hours
- Long-term unemployed that stop getting counted when their benefits run out
If these factors were thrown in the mix, that raw percentage would go way up. I remember reading a statistic a little while back that showed that every net job gain since (I think) 2005 has been due to "gig economy" types of arrangements like Uber driver, etc. That's great for Uber and Taskrabbit and the like, but lousy for someone who needs stable full time work to support a family.
I'm one of those crazy people that thinks full employment for anyone who wants it in well paying jobs should be the macroeconomic goal. Unfortunately, it seems that most people don't agree anymore and are perfectly willing to throw the middle class away.
At first I was gonna say same thing, till I got to the part of your not paying Unemployment Insurance. Per another person answering you, it sounds like you need to incorporate.
I have an S-Corp...which is pretty sweet, I pay myself a "reasonable" salary out of my bill rate...and am only paying taxes (SS and medicare) out of that along with state/federal. At EOY, the rest of the money falls through onto my personal taxes, and I just pay state and fed on that, but I save on paying employment taxes on my whole bill rate.
That being said, I DO have to pay UI.
But awhile back I found the state of LA at least...has a catch 22.
In LA, I have to pay UI...however, as the sole employee of my company...by laws there, I could not collect unemployment insurance even though I paid into the system for quite some time?!?!?
If I ever won the lottery and had spare money for lawyers, I"d want to challenge something like that...doesn't seem right.
But yes, if you're working 1099, you REALLY need to incorporate yourself....helps with your liability and ability to save more of your hard earned money from the damned tax man....
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Unemployment rates are not based on unemployment claims. They are based on a random survey of 60,000 households. Here's some information on how the various employment rates are calculated.
Worse is that I own a house (it used to be my grandmothers), which means I'll be homeless when I can't pay for things like utilities (water, heating, and electricity)... Or my local taxes... Whichever comes first.
But yes, it make far more sense to help me before I become yet another homeless person filling the crowded facilities for them. Facilities that btw don't even exist where I live, but only in the nearest major city. Oh and did I mention the waiting lines to even get in?
It strains my mind about how fucked the system has become that they can't tell real need and when it's best to help, from when they don't need to. You hear about the abusers of the system all the time, and I've seen some, but the attempts to get rid of them seem to fail and the attempts to help people who really need it are a mess.
we are all invisible unless we choose otherwise