Author Topic: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force  (Read 1126 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rangerrebew

  • America defending Veteran
  • TBR Contributor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 74,482
Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« on: January 06, 2017, 10:12:28 AM »
 Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
Posted By Ali Meyer On January 6, 2017 @ 10:03 am In Issues | No Comments

The number of Americans not participating in the labor force hit a record 95,102,000 in December 2016, according to the latest numbers released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Last month, the number exceeded 95 million for the first time, with 95,084,000 Americans not participating.

The bureau counts those not in the labor force as people who do not have a job and did not actively seek one in the past four weeks.


Article printed from Washington Free Beacon: http://freebeacon.com

URL to article: http://freebeacon.com/issues/record-95102000-americans-not-participating-labor-force/
"Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim tribute to patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness -- these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens. . . . reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principles."
George Washington

"Only a virtuous people are capable of freedom. As nations become more corrupt and vicious, they have more need of masters."
Benjamin Franklin

Offline SirLinksALot

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,561
Re: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« Reply #1 on: January 06, 2017, 04:54:36 PM »
The questions needs to be asked .... how many of these non-participants really need to participate?

Too many people see this stat about "people out of the workforce" and forget that it includes retirees, children, prisoners, and others not even looking for work. It does not mean that there are 95 million people who are looking for jobs and can't find them.

So, the relevant question in order to gauge the severity of unemployment is this --- How many ( excluding retirees, students, prisoners, disabled ) are looking for work but cannot find it? <--- THAT IS THE REAL AND MORE RELEVANT QUESTION.

Offline Weird Tolkienish Figure

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 12,021
Re: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« Reply #2 on: January 06, 2017, 04:58:07 PM »
Aren't baby boomers retiring?

« Last Edit: January 06, 2017, 06:33:35 PM by SirLinksALot »
I am not a conservative.

Offline SirLinksALot

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,561
Re: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« Reply #3 on: January 06, 2017, 06:34:16 PM »
Aren't baby boomers retiring?

Yes they are, especially those born in the late 40's and early 50's. But hey, many are still working.

Offline Hondo69

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,673
  • The more I know the less I understand
Re: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« Reply #4 on: January 07, 2017, 02:08:28 AM »

So, the relevant question in order to gauge the severity of unemployment is this --- How many ( excluding retirees, students, prisoners, disabled ) are looking for work but cannot find it? <--- THAT IS THE REAL AND MORE RELEVANT QUESTION.

The way in which the unemployment rate is calculated has changed over time.  Many of the changes made have resulted in a picture more upbeat and positive than before each of the changes.  In short, administrations have cooked the books to make themselves look better.

Here's one website I found that provide a brief explanation of how the rate is calculated:
http://www.moneycrashers.com/what-is-national-us-unemployment-rate/

Personally, I add about 10% to the number each time it is released to arrive at a more realistic ballpark figure.

Offline Weird Tolkienish Figure

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 12,021
Re: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« Reply #5 on: January 07, 2017, 06:40:43 AM »
The way in which the unemployment rate is calculated has changed over time.  Many of the changes made have resulted in a picture more upbeat and positive than before each of the changes.  In short, administrations have cooked the books to make themselves look better.

Here's one website I found that provide a brief explanation of how the rate is calculated:
http://www.moneycrashers.com/what-is-national-us-unemployment-rate/

Personally, I add about 10% to the number each time it is released to arrive at a more realistic ballpark figure.


US Labor rate has generally been calculated the same way for a long time now, and conforms to ILO standards.


The ignoramus in that article doesn't understand statistical sampling.
I am not a conservative.

Offline Weird Tolkienish Figure

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 12,021
Re: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« Reply #6 on: January 07, 2017, 06:50:01 AM »
The way in which the unemployment rate is calculated has changed over time.  Many of the changes made have resulted in a picture more upbeat and positive than before each of the changes.  In short, administrations have cooked the books to make themselves look better.

Here's one website I found that provide a brief explanation of how the rate is calculated:
http://www.moneycrashers.com/what-is-national-us-unemployment-rate/

Personally, I add about 10% to the number each time it is released to arrive at a more realistic ballpark figure.


His quote about double counting people with multiple jobs is a laughable lie and falsehood.


More fake news.
I am not a conservative.

Offline IsailedawayfromFR

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5,446
  • Sept 11 2001 or March 6 1836
Re: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« Reply #7 on: January 07, 2017, 08:50:50 AM »
All I know is this number will swell once the government employees who provided the bulk of the new hires over the past 8 years are fired.

The size of the federal government needs some real serious reduction.

I'd start with the hundred czars Obama created.
Yearning to stay free takes place in many ways at many different times, whether by withstanding planes or bayonets

Offline corbe

  • Member
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 8,517
  • For your viewing pleasure
Re: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« Reply #8 on: January 07, 2017, 03:12:08 PM »
No government in the 6,000 years of modern mankind history has led its people into anything but the history books with a simple lesson, don't let this happen to you.

Offline corbe

  • Member
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 8,517
  • For your viewing pleasure
Re: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« Reply #9 on: January 07, 2017, 03:14:58 PM »
  Slinging dope in the projects can be very lucrative but can be to competitive for some and has deadly consequences, ask Mayor Rahm.
No government in the 6,000 years of modern mankind history has led its people into anything but the history books with a simple lesson, don't let this happen to you.

Offline Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 25,201
  • The income tax: Root of all evil!
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« Reply #10 on: January 07, 2017, 06:14:40 PM »
  Slinging dope in the projects can be very lucrative but can be to competitive for some and has deadly consequences, ask Mayor Rahm.

Yeah! And your earnings are completely tax free! 

Pass the fairtax into law and that ends immediately!

https://fairtax.org/about/how-fairtax-works?gclid=Cj0KEQiAwMLDBRDCh_r9sMvQ_88BEiQA6zuAQ3aXI5ToaOdiRvVKDyARf1lQmgz1_z6S1zpYDpOWiNoaAqUN8P8HAQ

Offline Hondo69

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,673
  • The more I know the less I understand
Re: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« Reply #11 on: January 08, 2017, 05:03:12 AM »
Most every administration fiddles with unemployment calculations in one way or another.

At its heart, the basic calculation has not changed over time:  X - Y = Z
What constitutes "X" and what constitutes "Y" is where the problems start.

Going way back to JFK changes were made by removing "discouraged workers" from the rolls.  Reagan tweaked how the military was counted and Clinton nuked the entire system by making JFK's "discouraged workers" completely vanish into thin air.  These vaporized workers have been a point of hot contention since.

The real way unemployment is calculated would put an accountant to sleep.  There are so many nooks and crannies to the numbers it is difficult to even find a starting place to begin dissecting the whole mess.  For example, there are 6 different unemployment reports calculated each month, only 1 is reported in the headlines.  And this is calculated largely from a poll.

What happens if the number of people polled changes from 60,000 a month to 50,000 a month?  What if the poll is conducted primarily in the inner city?  You can begin to see how it all quickly gets so deep into the weeds that it numbs the mind.

------

Back to Clinton's vaporized citizens:

Say 100 people live in a village.
Of those, only 60 are of working age.

Then one could safely assume if all 60 had jobs you'd have 100% employment.  This never happens in real life, but it does provide a starting point for the calculations.

If 6 of those people can't find a job, then you have a 10% unemployment rate.
But what happens if 2 of those people give up and throw in the towel about looking for a job?  They vaporize.

Instead of a 10% unemployment rate (6/60) you suddenly have a 6.6% rate (4/60).  Things are instantly looking up in the economy, wow, nice job politicians!!!

Thank you sir may I have another?

Offline Weird Tolkienish Figure

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 12,021
Re: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« Reply #12 on: January 08, 2017, 05:52:22 AM »
Most every administration fiddles with unemployment calculations in one way or another.

At its heart, the basic calculation has not changed over time:  X - Y = Z
What constitutes "X" and what constitutes "Y" is where the problems start.

Going way back to JFK changes were made by removing "discouraged workers" from the rolls.  Reagan tweaked how the military was counted and Clinton nuked the entire system by making JFK's "discouraged workers" completely vanish into thin air.  These vaporized workers have been a point of hot contention since.

The real way unemployment is calculated would put an accountant to sleep.  There are so many nooks and crannies to the numbers it is difficult to even find a starting place to begin dissecting the whole mess.  For example, there are 6 different unemployment reports calculated each month, only 1 is reported in the headlines.  And this is calculated largely from a poll.

What happens if the number of people polled changes from 60,000 a month to 50,000 a month?  What if the poll is conducted primarily in the inner city?  You can begin to see how it all quickly gets so deep into the weeds that it numbs the mind.

------

Back to Clinton's vaporized citizens:

Say 100 people live in a village.
Of those, only 60 are of working age.

Then one could safely assume if all 60 had jobs you'd have 100% employment.  This never happens in real life, but it does provide a starting point for the calculations.

If 6 of those people can't find a job, then you have a 10% unemployment rate.
But what happens if 2 of those people give up and throw in the towel about looking for a job?  They vaporize.

Instead of a 10% unemployment rate (6/60) you suddenly have a 6.6% rate (4/60).  Things are instantly looking up in the economy, wow, nice job politicians!!!

Thank you sir may I have another?


Or maybe they retire or for whatever reason just do not want to work?


Nothing I can say will get you to change your mind. It's all a big conspiracy!


Calculating unemployment in a complex economy isn't as cut and dry as you might think. How do we count people who are self employed? In the gig economy? Or how just get by by selling things?


Years ago I stopped arguing these things because in general morons on the internet will believe what they want to and nothing will get them to change their mind. I may want to revisit that.
I am not a conservative.

Offline ConstitutionRose

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 931
Re: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« Reply #13 on: January 08, 2017, 07:33:03 AM »
Aren't baby boomers retiring?

I started a book as an answer, but the short answer is "not really".  A significant portion of boomers are still working or are drawing Social Security and still working. 

That number includes myself and all of my friends who can still find any kind of work and get out of bed and struggle to their place or places of employment.

I think that 95 million includes in its numbers much of the discontent that elected Trump.  Soon as the Obama administration could magic the unemployment numbers down to something reasonable, the media and politicians forgot those 90 million plus individuals.  It as if they never existed.  That is a significant part of the population who have concluded that the American Dream is lost to themselves and their children.

So however they calculate that number, it has become large enough to become a force. 

Offline Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 25,201
  • The income tax: Root of all evil!
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« Reply #14 on: January 09, 2017, 09:17:20 AM »
Econ 101: Class begins

95,102,000: Trump's starting metric to monitor. As an economist, we can bet that President Trump will be monitoring this metric. Why is this metric so important? Simple: When this metric declines social security and medicare deposits increase.
This is called a teeter tooter in basic economics in that when one side goes down, the other side goes up.

CLASS DISMISSED

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/record-95102000-americans-not-labor-force-number-grew-18-obama-took-office

Offline Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 25,201
  • The income tax: Root of all evil!
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« Reply #15 on: January 09, 2017, 09:21:06 AM »
Current U-6 Unemployment Rate is 9.1% (BLS) or 13.7% (Gallup)

http://unemploymentdata.com/current-u6-unemployment-rate/

Offline Hondo69

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,673
  • The more I know the less I understand
Re: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« Reply #16 on: January 09, 2017, 09:54:06 AM »
Econ 101: Class begins

95,102,000: Trump's starting metric to monitor. As an economist, we can bet that President Trump will be monitoring this metric. Why is this metric so important? Simple: When this metric declines social security and medicare deposits increase.
This is called a teeter tooter in basic economics in that when one side goes down, the other side goes up.

CLASS DISMISSED

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/record-95102000-americans-not-labor-force-number-grew-18-obama-took-office

I read an interesting article on this very subject a few years back.  It was about the time Obama was extending the length of time for unemployment benefits.  The article illustrated exactly what happens when 1 single person gets a job that was previously on unemployment.

The impact was tremendous.  In essence, instead of drawing water from the well the newly employed person adds to the well, which is just common sense of course.  But it was the difference between the two that was quite the eye opener.

Offline Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 25,201
  • The income tax: Root of all evil!
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« Reply #17 on: January 09, 2017, 10:10:23 AM »
I read an interesting article on this very subject a few years back.  It was about the time Obama was extending the length of time for unemployment benefits.  The article illustrated exactly what happens when 1 single person gets a job that was previously on unemployment.

The impact was tremendous.  In essence, instead of drawing water from the well the newly employed person adds to the well, which is just common sense of course.  But it was the difference between the two that was quite the eye opener.

Oh absolutely!!  888high58888

Offline Hondo69

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1,673
  • The more I know the less I understand
Re: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« Reply #18 on: January 09, 2017, 10:29:27 AM »
It's all a big conspiracy!

Glad you're finally coming around - I understand it takes some people longer than others.

Politicians would have us believe its all rocket science and they have to dumb it down so us little people can digest the numbers.  In reality it's not that complicated at all.  They just make it unusually complicated in their own special way only governments can.

If anyone finds themselves having a good day and feeling unusually happy then I suggest they might try reading a few paragraphs of something called the ILO Standards.  Don't try this on a normal day, you'll puke.  The "I" part of ILO standards for International and of course that's the first problem right there.  Think Brexit.  It's a mess wrapped in an enigma.

Step One is to get the federal government out the unemployment reporting business.  Instead, do what the smart money on Wall Street does and pay close attention to the numbers calculated by private entities.  These entities have more at stake - like their reputations and their jobs.

Then hand the gaggle of newly unemployed federal workers a handy little form to fill out, they can apply for 4 million weeks of unemployment or whatever the number is these days.

Offline Weird Tolkienish Figure

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 12,021
Re: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« Reply #19 on: January 09, 2017, 10:32:28 AM »
Glad you're finally coming around - I understand it takes some people longer than others.

Politicians would have us believe its all rocket science and they have to dumb it down so us little people can digest the numbers.  In reality it's not that complicated at all.  They just make it unusually complicated in their own special way only governments can.

If anyone finds themselves having a good day and feeling unusually happy then I suggest they might try reading a few paragraphs of something called the ILO Standards.  Don't try this on a normal day, you'll puke.  The "I" part of ILO standards for International and of course that's the first problem right there.  Think Brexit.  It's a mess wrapped in an enigma.

Step One is to get the federal government out the unemployment reporting business.  Instead, do what the smart money on Wall Street does and pay close attention to the numbers calculated by private entities.  These entities have more at stake - like their reputations and their jobs.

Then hand the gaggle of newly unemployed federal workers a handy little form to fill out, they can apply for 4 million weeks of unemployment or whatever the number is these days.


There's a gaggle of net kooks on the internet who will believe whatever they believe and nothing will change their mind.


Zero hedge, an idiot site for idiots, has predicted financial collapse for the last 8 years or so. They were wrong every year.


Never take financial advice from people who are poor.
I am not a conservative.

Offline Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 25,201
  • The income tax: Root of all evil!
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« Reply #20 on: January 09, 2017, 10:36:06 AM »
Glad you're finally coming around - I understand it takes some people longer than others.

Politicians would have us believe its all rocket science and they have to dumb it down so us little people can digest the numbers.  In reality it's not that complicated at all.  They just make it unusually complicated in their own special way only governments can.

If anyone finds themselves having a good day and feeling unusually happy then I suggest they might try reading a few paragraphs of something called the ILO Standards.  Don't try this on a normal day, you'll puke.  The "I" part of ILO standards for International and of course that's the first problem right there.  Think Brexit.  It's a mess wrapped in an enigma.

Step One is to get the federal government out the unemployment reporting business.  Instead, do what the smart money on Wall Street does and pay close attention to the numbers calculated by private entities.  These entities have more at stake - like their reputations and their jobs.

Then hand the gaggle of newly unemployed federal workers a handy little form to fill out, they can apply for 4 million weeks of unemployment or whatever the number is these days.

LOL!   :beer:

Offline SirLinksALot

  • Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3,561
Re: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« Reply #21 on: January 09, 2017, 10:51:30 AM »
Current U-6 Unemployment Rate is 9.1% (BLS) or 13.7% (Gallup)

http://unemploymentdata.com/current-u6-unemployment-rate/

That's a HUGE disparity there between BLS and Gallup. The question is, whose numbers better reflect reality?

Offline Bigun

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 25,201
  • The income tax: Root of all evil!
    • The FairTax Plan
Re: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« Reply #22 on: January 09, 2017, 10:59:49 AM »
That's a HUGE disparity there between BLS and Gallup. The question is, whose numbers better reflect reality?

BLS is government  Gallup is not!  You decide! 

In either case, it isn't nearly so rosy as some would have us believe!


Offline Weird Tolkienish Figure

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 12,021
Re: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« Reply #23 on: January 09, 2017, 11:04:44 AM »
BLS is government  Gallup is not!  You decide! 

In either case, it isn't nearly so rosy as some would have us believe!


Nor are we on the brink of economic collapse as the Zero Sludget loonies would have us believe.
I am not a conservative.

Offline bolobaby

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2,294
Re: Record 95,102,000 Americans Not Participating in Labor Force
« Reply #24 on: January 09, 2017, 01:01:50 PM »
Waiting for Drudge's "Great Again" headline for this one...

Waiting...

Waiting...
How to lose credibility while posting:
1. Trump is never wrong.
2. Default to the most puerile emoticon you can find. This is especially useful when you can't win an argument on merits.
3. Be falsely ingratiating, completely but politely dismissive without talking to the points, and bring up Hillary whenever the conversation is really about conservatism.
4. When all else fails, remember rule #1 and #2. Emoticons are like the poor man's tweet!


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf