- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Chart of the day: Obama recovery - Labor Participation disparity
Posted on 1/10/14 at 2:33 pm
Posted on 1/10/14 at 2:33 pm
quote:LINK
In June of 2009, the labor force participation rate was 65.7 percent (by way of comparison, the average over the last decade is 65.1 percent, while the peak was 66.5 percent in June of 2003). Since the end of the recession, that number has nose-dived. At the end of last month, it hit 62.8 percent — on par with what the U.S. experienced in the late 1970's (although at the time, the number was on the upswing).
What does this all mean? Rather than being the sign of a vibrant economy, the falling unemployment rate is actually an arithmetic artifact of the BLS head-counting process. If the labor force participation rate had held steady since 2009, the number of people in the labor force today would total nearly 162 million people. Instead, BLS reports the official number to be just shy of 155 million.
And thanks to how BLS calculates and reports the official unemployment rate, those 7 million people are not included among the ranks of the unemployed. Add them back in and you have an unemployment rate that averages a very stubborn 10.8 percent since the end of the recession.
This post was edited on 1/10/14 at 3:46 pm
Posted on 1/10/14 at 2:35 pm to Politiceaux
Obama gets a big fat "F" on his handling of the economy, and this chart literally shows it.
Posted on 1/10/14 at 2:38 pm to Politiceaux
quote:What a crying damn shame!
Posted on 1/10/14 at 2:40 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Shut up!!!!!
Cris Christie caused a traffic jam.
Ann Romney has a horse.
Sexist! Racist!
Rabblrabblerabble!!!!
Cris Christie caused a traffic jam.
Ann Romney has a horse.
Sexist! Racist!
Rabblrabblerabble!!!!
Posted on 1/10/14 at 2:40 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
Obama gets a big fat "F" on his handling of the economy, and this chart literally shows it
Classic.
Posted on 1/10/14 at 2:42 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
Obama gets a big fat "F" on his handling of the economy, and this chart literally shows it.
No doubt. He needs to reduce taxes, get out of healthcare, and have a reasonable #weeks for unemployment benefits, and cut off welfare/food stamp abuse...Its tough-love, that will work, but he doesn't have the stomach for it....And will go down as the worst President, just watch!
Posted on 1/10/14 at 2:46 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:But will be seen by a few here but very few others. Maybe Jay Carney will have it with him today at his daily lying conference
and this chart literally shows it.
Posted on 1/10/14 at 2:55 pm to Politiceaux
it would be really interesting to see this since 2000.
Posted on 1/10/14 at 3:01 pm to UncleFestersLegs
its not the same as the chart above.
Posted on 1/10/14 at 3:34 pm to Politiceaux
quote:
Chart of the day: Obama recovery - U-3 and U-6 disparity
I may be wrong but I don't think you using the term U6 correctly. The U6 print today was 13.1%. U3 is 6.7%. There will always be a disparity between U6 and U3, they are defined differently. LINK
The disparity you are showing is the difference between U3 with two different participation rates.
This post was edited on 1/10/14 at 3:35 pm
Posted on 1/10/14 at 3:45 pm to GumboPot
You are correct. Very boneheaded of me. Thanks.
Posted on 1/11/14 at 7:00 am to Politiceaux
Posted on 1/11/14 at 7:10 am to Politiceaux
Obama Admin's unemployment calculation:
Number of people employed +/- a number that will give an unemployment number that will make us look good = desired unemployment
Number of people employed +/- a number that will give an unemployment number that will make us look good = desired unemployment
Posted on 1/11/14 at 7:16 am to Politiceaux
100 million not in the labor market in the country at present. I know that a portion of that number will be ineligible to participate, but that number of people will not and does not explain away the bulk of that number and the reporting about our recovering economy. If the unemployment numbers were calculated by the standards from the 30's or even up to the late 80's what would be the percentage of unemployment in the nation? Why is it calculated now to only include those eligible for benefits?
This post was edited on 1/11/14 at 7:22 am
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News