Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

Unemployment aid applications near a 4-year low

Thu Feb 9, 2012 8:34 AM EST
politics, us, benefits, unemployment-benefits
Christopher S. Rugaber, AP Economics Writer
< PreviousNext >
showing 1 of 3 photos
<p>In this Jan. 18, 2012 photo, job seekers line up to attend a Career Fair event in San Francisco. (AP Photo/Eric Risberg)</p>

In this Jan. 18, 2012 photo, job seekers line up to attend a Career Fair event in San Francisco. (AP Photo/Eric Risberg)

Advertise | AdChoices

WASHINGTON — The number of people seeking unemployment aid neared a four-year low last week, a positive sign that strong hiring could continue in the coming months.

The Labor Department said Thursday that weekly applications for unemployment benefits fell 15,000 to a seasonally adjusted 358,000. That's the second-lowest level since April 2008.

The four-week average, a less volatile measure, fell to 366,250, the lowest since late April 2008.

"The encouraging U.S. employment news continues," Jennifer Lee, an economist at BMO Capital Markets, wrote in a note to clients. The "job market started February off on a sturdy footing."

When applications fall consistently below 375,000, it generally signals that hiring is strong enough to lower the unemployment rate.

Employers added a net gain of 243,000 jobs in January, the biggest gain in nine months. The unemployment rate fell for the fifth straight month to 8.3 percent, the lowest in nearly three years.

From November through January, the economy has added an average of 201,000 net jobs per month.

The increased hiring in part reflects faster economic growth. The economy expanded at an annual rate of 2.8 percent in the final three months of last year — a full percentage point higher than the previous quarter.

Applications are also falling because companies are laying off fewer workers. A separate report from the Labor Department, released earlier this week, showed that job cuts have fallen below pre-recession levels. Layoffs dropped last year to the lowest annual total in the 10 years the government has tracked the data.

With job cuts low, even a modest increase in hiring results in net job gains.

The number of people receiving benefits edged up in the week ending Jan. 21, the latest data available. About 7.6 million people received unemployment aid that week, a slight increase from the previous week. That figure includes about 3.5 million people receiving extended unemployment benefits under an emergency program set up during the recession.

That program is set to expire at the end of this month, unless Congress agrees to extend it through the end of the year. Lawmakers are wrangling over how to pay for an extension of benefits and for an extension of a Social Security tax cut that is also set to expire at the end of this month.

Most economists expect growth will slow a bit in the January-March quarter, because companies won't need to rebuild their stockpiles of goods as much as they did in the winter.

But some economists are increasingly optimistic that the economy will steadily expand this year, given last month's unexpectedly large job gains and other positive signs.

U.S. manufacturing activity grew in January at the fastest pace in seven months. Americans are buying more cars and trucks. And consumers stepped up borrowing in November and December by the most in a decade, which could indicate they are growing more confident in the economy.

Still, the job market has a long way to go before it fully recovers from the damage of the Great Recession. Nearly 13 million people remain unemployed, and 8.3 percent unemployment is painfully high.

One reason the unemployment rate has fallen for five straight months is that many people have stopped looking for work. The government only counts people as unemployed if they are actively searching for a job.

© 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

  • Christopher S. Rugaber's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: none
  • Regions: Washington DC
  • Public Discussion (89)
Idj

Oh my GOD, what is the right wing to do? How much longer can the Regressives proclaim "the sky is fallin, the sky is falling".

Seems the one sure thing falling, are foolish people that continue to believe their 'BS'. And that's a good thing...

  • 5 votes
#1 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 9:08 AM EST
Ben-478550

Somehow, Mitt will still spin this to prove Obama to be a "food stamp president." He'll say and do anything to get elected.

  • 4 votes
#1.1 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 9:46 AM EST
Fed up with Republicans

Mitt Romney is losing the only rationale for him running for President and his campaign is beginning to falter.

  • 2 votes
#1.2 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 9:56 AM EST
BostonMan-3128434

Did you two miss the last sentence?

One reason the unemployment rate has fallen for five straight months is that many people have stopped looking for work. The government only counts people as unemployed if they are actively searching for a job.

  • 4 votes
#1.3 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 9:57 AM EST
echo82

yes and that's is the way it has been calculated.... point is, numbers are lower. good news is good news. we all know it could be better.

  • 2 votes
#1.4 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 10:03 AM EST
Nicey-1026620

One reason the unemployment rate has fallen for five straight months is that many people have stopped looking for work. The government only counts people as unemployed if they are actively searching for a job.

Did you miss the first 2 words? One reason. And *now* with the current job growth over 2011, it's not the *biggest reason*

The biggest reason is more people are finding jobs.

Jobs are being created well above population growth rate, enough to lower the rate 0.45% in 2011.

Quick info. At pre-recession participation rate (66%) and current pop growth, minus worker outflows (boomers are exiting quicker), it takes 92,000 jobs for people coming into the workforce. The economy created around 150,000 jobs a month last year.

And what does that have to do with the headline about *initial claims*?

The Labor Department said Thursday that weekly applications for unemployment benefits fell 15,000 to a seasonally adjusted 358,000. That's the second-lowest level since April 2008.

This number. Has nothing to do with people who happen to leave the workforce. It's based on people filing initial claims after they are laid off, let go, quit jobs, etc.

  • 3 votes
#1.5 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 10:06 AM EST
ivorybill

Propaganda.......brought to you by.......... letsfoolamerica.com

  • 6 votes
#1.6 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 10:08 AM EST
TheyreAllCrooks

Did you two miss the last sentence?

Did you miss the fact that 3.2 MILION jobs have been created in the last 23 months? Did you miss the fact that more manufacturing jobs were created in January than in ANY moth since 1998?

Did you miss the fact that practically all the GOP leaders are admitting the economy is headed in the right direction and now all they can say is "we could do better"...but "better" is the same old failed policies they pushed under Bush?

Did you miss all that?

Amazing that the rightwing is now claiming the employment numbers have been "made up"...I guess that's what you say when you really have no plan of your own other than abortion, school prayer, Muslim hating, starting a war with Iran, abortion, contraceptives, Planned Parenthood, abortion!

  • 5 votes
#1.7 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 10:08 AM EST
Nicey-1026620

yes and that's is the way it has been calculated....

Depending on how the labor market changes, how they calculate U-3 might change.

Until 2008, U-3 was solid. Because jobs in the 90s, 2000s, were mostly available and everyone who was out of the work place was mainly making that decision for reasons unrelated to finding a job.

Now, it's important to keep in mind, the U-3 number isn't as good as pre-recession time. For instance, if we return to 5%, it's not the same as 5% in 2007. But that doesn't mean the rate isn't also dropping because more people are becoming employed. It is now dropping more for that reason than any other.

    #1.8 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 10:12 AM EST
    Nicey-1026620

    Given inventory builds, business spending, initial claims, consumer sentiment, and other near term indicators, the last 3 months won't be a fluke and will be confirmed for the next 3 months as well.

    Now, beyond that, there are other larger macro circumstances that make predicting the health of the labor market difficult. But nice numbers will continue to come in into the spring.

    • 2 votes
    #1.9 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 10:14 AM EST
    Pilotshark

    just to help out for clarification, in case people wonder what U-3 is.

    U-1, persons unemployed 15 weeks or longer, as a percent of the civilian labor force;
    U-2, job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs, as a percent of the civilian labor force;
    U-3, total unemployed, as a percent of the civilian labor force (this is the definition used for the official unemployment rate);
    U-4, total unemployed plus discouraged workers, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus discouraged workers;
    U-5, total unemployed, plus discouraged workers, plus all other marginally attached workers, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers; and
    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.

    • 1 vote
    #1.10 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 10:16 AM EST
    Nicey-1026620

    just to help out for clarification, in case people wonder what U-3 is.

    U-1, persons unemployed 15 weeks or longer, as a percent of the civilian labor force;
    U-2, job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs, as a percent of the civilian labor force;
    U-3, total unemployed, as a percent of the civilian labor force (this is the definition used for the official unemployment rate);
    U-4, total unemployed plus discouraged workers, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus discouraged workers;
    U-5, total unemployed, plus discouraged workers, plus all other marginally attached workers, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers; and
    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.

    http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpsatab15.htm

    And also the note:

    NOTE: Persons marginally attached to the labor force are those who currently are neither working nor looking for work but indicate that they want and are available for a job and have looked for work sometime in the past 12 months. Discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached, have given a job-market related reason for not currently looking for work. Persons employed part time for economic reasons are those who want and are available for full-time work but have had to settle for a part-time schedule.

    Which defines what marginally attached, discouraged, or part-time employed mean.

    Also, U-3, means

    Unemployed persons are:

    • All persons who did not have a job at all during the survey reference week, made at least one specific active effort to find a job during the prior 4 weeks, and were available for work (unless temporarily ill).
    • 

    • All persons who were not working and were waiting to be called back to a job from which they had been laid off (they need not be looking for work to be classified as unemployed).

    http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm

      #1.11 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 10:21 AM EST
      Roy-933464

      Great news, but like I've always said, in the real world outside of the articles and spin, unemployment has always been a flawed short-term indicator of the President's performance. Standing back in hindsight looking over a President's 8-year term is the only point at which it becomes usable...unless you have something like a stock market crash or a 9/11 as a factor. President Obama framed the unemployment picture perfectly from the start in telling people that there was a "new norm" because of the housing market and stock market crashes...artificial non-labor-bubble-based income was a high roller's market now. People just didn't listen. A lot of people with newly accepted realities of their own level of marketability are taking the jobs that were always there to be filled...some after seeking re-training, or even (gasp) re-locating.

      • 3 votes
      #1.12 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 10:35 AM EST
      Nicey-1026620

      That's too logical Roy. Haha.

      You can't expect people to accept Logic.

      I've always said that you really can't put everything on a POTUS, he gets the most attention cause he's the top elected official, but there's a lot he doesn't control.

      So, more has to be said about what a POTUS actually does do that impacts us as citizens. In terms of evaluating performance.

      • 1 vote
      #1.13 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 10:43 AM EST
      Nicey-1026620

      http://ycharts.com/indicators/initial_claims_for_unemployment_insurance#series=type:indicator,id:initial_claims_for_unemployment_insurance,calc:&zoom=10&startDate=&endDate=&format=real&recessions=false

      I'm impressed the US is close to returning to pre-recession claims levels. From 2005-2007 (the last trough) claims averaged around 315k.

      At these levels, the near term job creation looks good. Barring some disaster (Katrina 2005, Arab Spring/Japan Nuclear event in Spring 2011) we should see 200-250k jobs created a month for the next 3 months.

      • 1 vote
      #1.14 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 10:51 AM EST
      thisbusymonster

      The right is getting @!$%#ing desperate for some kind of cudgel to beat Obama with.

      And Obama keeps handing them foam rubber hammers. LOL.

      • 3 votes
      #1.15 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 10:54 AM EST
      Roy-933464

      I'm impressed the US is close to returning to pre-recession claims levels. From 2005-2007 (the last trough) claims averaged around 315k.

      At these levels, the near term job creation looks good. Barring some disaster (Katrina 2005, Arab Spring/Japan Nuclear event in Spring 2011) we should see 200-250k jobs created a month for the next 3 months.

      And this is why the political rhetoric makes me want to puke. I KNOW things are getting better. These people should be lifting Americans up, not trying to keep them feeling beaten up. I think spending levels and investing levels would be much higher because all of this stuff is emotion-based behavior. People have eliminated a lot of debt over the past couple of years, yes. But, the investment piece was taken from many of them, and the wealth gap exploded between the 99% and the 1%. I think this generation of Republicans are absolutely despicable.

      Have you ever before had a salesman sit and trash one of his products while trying to get you to buy one of his other products...only to try to take back or spin all of the bad stuff he said when he realizes what you actually want to buy and that he's screwed up? Can't wait 'til November.

      • 2 votes
      #1.16 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 11:08 AM EST
      Randy McMurphy

      The first one who posts 1.2 million left the labor force in january is a mope....

      • 1 vote
      #1.17 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 11:16 AM EST
      leonthecat

      Did you two miss the last sentence?

      Bostonman ...Did you miss the headline?

      Unemployment aid applications near a 4-year low

      The article is about a four year low in applications for unemployment... not the total receiving unemployment. This means that fewer people are being laid off than have been in four years. It is the best indicator that the job market is getting stronger. As much as you hate that news it is guaranteeing Obama's re-election.

      • 1 vote
      #1.18 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 11:17 AM EST
      greck

      Did you two miss the last sentence?

      nope,

      real unemployment is trending downward too.

      • 1 vote
      #1.19 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 12:16 PM EST
      RI Mom

      Slow & steady did the American economy slip into the toilet....as did the global economy.

      Slow & steady is America climbing into a healthier economy.....despite the fact that Greece is threatening all of Europe and NO ONE was jailed for derivative fraud here in the USA

      I've heard the GOP say some very reckless, uncharitable, heinous things about our President, liberals and woman's rights....so it is hard for me to grasp their GUILLOTINE prophecy of more gloom and doom.....especially since their WEALTHIEST are prospering so nicely.

      The Tea Party rally was cheerleaded by Mr. Boehner in his GOP MORE JOBS promise of 2010.

      I'mgoing on record to say that the Tea Party failed.

      This distraction from the GOP on contraceptives is indicative of their true concern about unemployment...all talk...no action.

      • 4 votes
      #1.20 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 12:34 PM EST
      Sunspot-2447476

      One reason the unemployment rate has fallen for five straight months is that many people have stopped looking for work. The government only counts people as unemployed if they are actively searching for a job.

      Can someone answer my question: ... eliminating the numbers of homeless people from the total of unemployed, now "not looking for work", I don't understand how the remaining thousands are surviving ??? With no job and no unemployment insurance where are the dollars for rent, groceries, gas, etc.?

      Perhaps they are living with relatives ... still, no paycheck and no unemployment check equals zero dollars to survive ... I don't understand what happens to these people and their families?

      • 1 vote
      #1.21 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 12:54 PM EST
      Roy-933464

      With no job and no unemployment insurance where are the dollars for rent, groceries, gas, etc.?

      Perhaps they are living with relatives ... still, no paycheck and no unemployment check equals zero dollars to survive ... I don't understand what happens to these people and their families?

      Statistics are only as useful as what you want to get out of them. I think people commonly make the mistake of believing that the 10 people unemployed today are always the same 10 people unemployed tomorrow...the Republicans usually help and encourage that perception...at least while they're not in the White House. It wouldn't work as favorably for them to paint it as a picture of change right now...you know?! I say again:

      President Obama framed the unemployment picture perfectly from the start in telling people that there was a "new norm" because of the housing market and stock market crashes...artificial non-labor-bubble-based income was a high roller's market now. People just didn't listen. A lot of people with newly accepted realities of their own level of marketability are taking the jobs that were always there to be filled...some after seeking re-training, or even (gasp) re-locating.

      • 1 vote
      #1.22 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 1:13 PM EST
      cannonballer

      That's good news, whats even better is the Dems can stop working on extending UE bennies, right?

      • 1 vote
      #1.23 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 1:14 PM EST
      RI Mom

      About those who have stopped looking for work:

      (1) Boehner promised ...that the Tea Party infusion was going to solve that with more jobs.....you know, the ones created by the the 1%.

      (2) America needs RE-TRAINING PROGRAMS.

      Old jobs are GONE...kaput, nada, negative....and they aren't coming back.

      The 21st Century has different needs and there are JOBS for those who qualify with 21st C. training.

      (3) The GOVERNMENT CAN provide jobs...this absurd reluctance from the GOP to invest in infrastructure means that contractors, small businesses, corporations, ancillary mom & pops aren't getting a boost of work opportunities while our interstate roads and bridges and airports are in woeful and dangerous disrepair.

      Do we need a military bloated budget....or an infusion of $$$ to fix the infrastructure & get jobs rolling?

      WHAT spurs employment in YOUR State or town?...a nice big contract to build something!

      • 3 votes
      #1.24 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 1:14 PM EST
      lisaed

      Boehner promised ...that the Tea Party infusion was going to solve that with more jobs.....you know, the ones created by the the 1%.

      RIMom: See Harry Reid. And Boehner never said the "tea party" was gonna create jobs.

      • 1 vote
      #1.25 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 1:20 PM EST
      RI Mom

      1.25:

      The GOP tea party won control of the House in 2010 by promising independent voters that, if elected, they would focus on “jobs, jobs, jobs.” But upon gaining a majority in the House, the tea party has focused instead on abortion, gay marriage and playing political games designed to obstruct the economic recovery.

      I don't see Mr. Boehner veering from this Tea Party agenda.

      • 4 votes
      #1.26 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 1:26 PM EST
      Nicey-1026620

      And this is why the political rhetoric makes me want to puke. I KNOW things are getting better. These people should be lifting Americans up, not trying to keep them feeling beaten up. I think spending levels and investing levels would be much higher because all of this stuff is emotion-based behavior. People have eliminated a lot of debt over the past couple of years, yes. But, the investment piece was taken from many of them, and the wealth gap exploded between the 99% and the 1%. I think this generation of Republicans are absolutely despicable.

      The investment in the bottom 99% continues to not happen.

      Cap Gains tax at 15% has only accelerated this problem and caused that gap to balloon even more. It's a terrible policy, and a terrible incentive. That basically ensures many better off people will not re-invest (by starting a business, buying real goods and services, etc) but rather just re-dump money into the stock market.

      Which also pushes lower earners out. Because of lack of wage growth, and rise in price of goods and services, they have less left over to invest. While wage growth continues at the very top.

      Also, just sheer size of wealth. A person with 1 billion can push someone out with 1 million at 15%. So long as capital gains aren't progressively taxed, that's what happens.

      • 1 vote
      #1.27 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 1:59 PM EST
      Barbara -1012158

      The U6 unemployment rate, reflecting all of the unemployed still wanting work and the underemployed who can’t get full time work, is still 16.2%. That includes an army of the unemployed or underemployed of over 26 million Americans. And that still doesn’t fully count the millions of Americans who have given up and dropped out of the work force altogether. So don't go jumping up & down singing glory Obama.

      He's has not done what he said he would and done what he said he would never do. For all the left leaning posters here that accuse Republicans for flip flopping, look at your own front porch first.

      • 1 vote
      #1.28 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 2:13 PM EST
      Roy-933464

      That basically ensures many better off people will not re-invest (by starting a business, buying real goods and services, etc) but rather just re-dump money into the stock market.

      I would love to see the breakdown on actual numbers of investors in the stock market past vs present as well. The irreversible fear-based environment we're in screams for people to not take risks, and to keep their assets as liquid as possible...minimum payments even if you can afford more. Brings the 21st century gold rush to mind..."send us your tangible gold resources for may-not-be-worth-the-paper-that-it's-printed-on-cash!"

      • 1 vote
      #1.29 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 2:23 PM EST
      lisaed

      The GOP tea party won control of the House in 2010 by promising independent voters that, if elected, they would focus on “jobs, jobs, jobs

      RIMOM--and they have. Harry Reid on the other hand hasn't.

      • 1 vote
      #1.30 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 2:48 PM EST
      Nicey-1026620

      The U6 unemployment rate, reflecting all of the unemployed still wanting work and the underemployed who can’t get full time work, is still 16.2%.

      You're looking at the not seasonally adjusted number, which if you compare year-over-year (instead of just this last month) will give you the same drop.

      But the right number to use for looking for trends month to month is the seasonally adjusted one.

      It's 15.2%, down from the peak at 17.2%. And also the U-6 number itself (part-time) has fallen from 6% to 5.2%.

      That includes an army of the unemployed or underemployed of over 26 million Americans. And that still doesn’t fully count the millions of Americans who have given up and dropped out of the work force altogether. So don't go jumping up & down singing glory Obama.

      It includes many of them. Because U-4, U-5 are considered to be "outside the labor force", they are already counted as people who have "left the job market" because by definition to be discouraged or marginally attached technically you have left the job market.

      The only people they don't directly count is the above average increase in people outside the labor force. Which is something like 2-3 million people over the last 4 years.

      26 million would be about right, 15.1% of 154.395 million would be 23.313 million, another 2-3 million are no longer directly counted.

        #1.31 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 2:56 PM EST
        RI Mom

        1.30...

        well congratulations on your imagined victory for the Tea Party...

        you might want to share your facts with all of us with a direct link from the Tea Party to the current unemployment numbers.

        Along with your victory lap,you might as well add in the negative link about Harry Reid and how he personally has thwarted job growth.

        • 3 votes
        #1.32 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 3:29 PM EST
        lisaed

        RIMom - are you aware of all the bills Harry Reid won't even bring to the floor?

        • 1 vote
        #1.33 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 3:38 PM EST
        RI Mom

        1.33...

        this is exhausting...if you've got specific damaging info on Harry Reid's bills..do tell....

        I googled Tea Party creates jobs...and found nothing.

        • 5 votes
        #1.34 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 4:02 PM EST
        Jim Davis, Veterans-For-Change

        I can’t believe most Americans are so gullible to believe unemployment is down.

        First, you lose your job and file for unemployment, then file for all the extensions up to 99 weeks and all the while looking for a job!

        Once you have exhausted your unemployment benefits and still have no jobs, poof you’re a number now that no longer exists.

        CA for example dropped 400,000 from the unemployment rolls in late 2011, but 88% are still unemployed and they are no longer accounted for.

        And I’m quite sure this is a nationwide issue, but it’s totally ignored and people believe the unemployment situation is getting better.

        Yet major corporations are still shipping jobs over seas left and right, why? So they can maintain cheap labor costs, increased profits and the kicker to this is they get to import their products back into the United States absolutely FREE of import duties because there is always a Senator or Congressman in someone’s pocket to put a bill forth to waive import duties and taxes!

        End result there is we are now buying inferior US Products at overly inflated prices!

        IF every American chose to only buy American Made Products which were manufactured right here in the USA, then you’d really grab the attention of the 1% and they’d have no choice but to bring those jobs back home where they belong and the unemployment numbers would really mean something and closer to reflecting fact vs fiction!

        • 2 votes
        #1.35 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 4:03 PM EST
        BXURZ

        The first one who posts 1.2 million left the labor force in january is a mope....

        Correction, 5.4 million workers; just saying,..

        http://susananthony.newsvine.com/_news/2012/02/09/10368245-missing-54-million-workers

          #1.36 - Fri Feb 10, 2012 12:34 AM EST
          Nicey-1026620

          Correction, 5.4 million workers; just saying,..

          Just quick summation.

          From January 2008 till January 2012 you have about a 9 million person increase in "people outside the labor force"

          http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpsatab16.htm

          From the table above you can research the, non seasonally adjusted numbers (for some reason they don't table seasonally adjusted of outside the labor force, but it is seasonally adjusted in the employment report here http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf)

          Over a 4 year period, you'd expect an increase of about 1 million a year simply from population growth.

          Then you also have to look at the sub categories. Persons who want a job, marginally attached, discouraged, not looking for other reasons. And measure the increases as compared to what is "normal"

          Now, two of those numbres, Marginally attached and Discouraged are already measured by U-4 and U-5, so any above normal increase there is not contributory to the Unemployment number (U-3) but rather needs to be subtracted from the overall outside the labor force increase.

          Adjusting for more boomers retiring, an aging population, normal population growth, and the categories above normal, you will come up with 3 million people.

          Though, in 2011, some people did start to return to the workforce actually. The increase in outside the workforce population declined by 0.2 million people from the previous year.

          • 1 vote
          #1.37 - Fri Feb 10, 2012 10:24 AM EST
          Nicey-1026620

          I can’t believe most Americans are so gullible to believe unemployment is down.

          It is down in any figure.

          Whether it's total unemployment, or even underemployment, or even including people outside the labor force.

          First, you lose your job and file for unemployment, then file for all the extensions up to 99 weeks and all the while looking for a job!

          Once you have exhausted your unemployment benefits and still have no jobs, poof you’re a number now that no longer exists.

          .....

          Once again, someone who believes they use unemployment benefits to count how many people are unemployed.

          That's not how they count it. As long as you are still looking for a job, even if you exhaust your benefits, you will still be counted as unemployed.

          And I’m quite sure this is a nationwide issue, but it’s totally ignored and people believe the unemployment situation is getting better.

          It's not ignored, it's that *you* have not taken the time to learn how *unemployment* is calculated.

          Things are still tough out there, but there is gradual improvement.

            #1.38 - Fri Feb 10, 2012 10:30 AM EST
            BXURZ

            Great research!, Thanks, Nicey.

              #1.39 - Fri Feb 10, 2012 10:45 AM EST
              thisbusymonster

              @Nicey-1026620

              I am just thinking about how Barbie (the plastic doll) said that "Math is hard."

                #1.40 - Fri Feb 10, 2012 3:57 PM EST
                Nicey-1026620

                I am just thinking about how Barbie (the plastic doll) said that "Math is hard."

                These numbers aren't too bad.

                If you start looking at the theory behind some of it (methodology of BLS for various calculations), it does get a little more intimidating. A bit higher level math.

                All I'm looking at is addition, subtraction, multiplication, etc.

                  #1.41 - Fri Feb 10, 2012 6:14 PM EST
                  Jim Davis, Veterans-For-Change

                  Prove to me beyond any shadow of a doubt that those who are NOT on the unemployment rolls are accounted for and by what agency!

                  And please do not give me the IRS as they do NOT track that information!

                  • 1 vote
                  #1.42 - Sat Feb 11, 2012 2:50 AM EST
                  thisbusymonster

                  These numbers aren't too bad.

                  LOL. I am in agreement with you. It is just that some people seem incapable of doing the simple math required to accept reality. Sorry, I was just a tad too snarky with that one.

                    #1.43 - Sat Feb 11, 2012 8:01 AM EST
                    Jim Davis, Veterans-For-Change

                    How the Government Measures Unemployment (PDF)

                    Why does the Government collect statistics on the unemployed?

                    When workers are unemployed, they, their families, and the country as a whole lose. Workers and their families lose wages, and the country loses the goods or services that could have been produced. In addition, the purchasing power of these workers is lost, which can lead to unemployment for yet other workers.

                    To know about unemployment—the extent and nature of the problem—requires information. How many people are unemployed? How did they become unemployed? How long have they been unemployed? Are their numbers growing or declining? Are they men or women? Are they young or old? Are they white or black or of Hispanic ethnicity? Are they skilled or unskilled? Are they the sole support of their families, or do other family members have jobs? Are they more concentrated in one area of the country than another? After these statistics are obtained, they have to be interpreted properly so they can be used—together with other economic data—by policymakers in making decisions as to whether measures should be taken to influence the future course of the economy or to aid those affected by joblessness.

                    Where do the statistics come from?

                    Early each month, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) of the U.S. Department of Labor announces the total number of employed and unemployed persons in the United States for the previous month, along with many characteristics of such persons. These figures, particularly the unemployment rate—which tells you the percent of the labor force that is unemployed—receive wide coverage in the media.

                    Some people think that to get these figures on unemployment, the Government uses the number of persons filing claims for unemployment insurance (UI) benefits under State or Federal Government programs. But some people are still jobless when their benefits run out, and many more are not eligible at all or delay or never apply for benefits. So, quite clearly, UI information cannot be used as a source for complete information on the number of unemployed.

                    Other people think that the Government counts every unemployed person each month. To do this, every home in the country would have to be contacted—just as in the population census every 10 years. This procedure would cost way too much and take far too long. Besides, people would soon grow tired of having a census taker come to their homes every month, year after year, to ask about job-related activities.

                    Because unemployment insurance records relate only to persons who have applied for such benefits, and since it is impractical to actually count every unemployed person each month, the Government conducts a monthly sample survey called the Current Population Survey (CPS) to measure the extent of unemployment in the country. The CPS has been conducted in the United States every month since 1940, when it began as a Work Projects Administration project. It has been expanded and modified several times since then. For instance, beginning in 1994, the CPS estimates reflect the results of a major redesign of the survey. (For more information on the CPS redesign, see Chapter 1, "Labor Force Data Derived from the Current Population Survey," in the BLS Handbook of Methods.)

                    There are about 60,000 households in the sample for this survey. This translates into approximately 110,000 individuals, a large sample compared to public opinion surveys which usually cover fewer than 2,000 people. The CPS sample is selected so as to be representative of the entire population of the United States. In order to select the sample, all of the counties and county-equivalent cities in the country first are grouped into 2,025 geographic areas (sampling units). The Census Bureau then designs and selects a sample consisting of 824 of these geographic areas to represent each State and the District of Columbia. The sample is a State-based design and reflects urban and rural areas, different types of industrial and farming areas, and the major geographic divisions of each State. (For a detailed explanation of CPS sampling methodology, see Chapter 1, of the BLS Handbook of Methods.)

                    Every month, one-fourth of the households in the sample are changed, so that no household is interviewed more than 4 consecutive months. This practice avoids placing too heavy a burden on the households selected for the sample. After a household is interviewed for 4 consecutive months, it leaves the sample for 8 months, and then is again interviewed for the same 4 calendar months a year later, before leaving the sample for good. This procedure results in approximately 75 percent of the sample remaining the same from month to month and 50 percent from year to year.

                    Each month, 2,200 highly trained and experienced Census Bureau employees interview persons in the 60,000 sample households for information on the labor force activities (jobholding and jobseeking) or non-labor force status of the members of these households during the survey reference week (usually the week that includes the 12th of the month). At the time of the first enumeration of a household, the interviewer prepares a roster of the household members, including their personal characteristics (date of birth, sex, race, Hispanic ethnicity, marital status, educational attainment, veteran status, and so on) and their relationships to the person maintaining the household. This information, relating to all household members 15 years of age and over, is entered by the interviewers into laptop computers; at the end of each day's interviewing, the data collected are transmitted to the Census Bureau's central computer in Washington, D.C. (The labor force measures in the CPS pertain to individuals 16 years and over.) In addition, a portion of the sample is interviewed by phone through three central data collection facilities. (Prior to 1994, the interviews were conducted using a paper questionnaire that had to be mailed in by the interviewers each month.)

                    Each person is classified according to the activities he or she engaged in during the reference week. Then, the total numbers are "weighted," or adjusted to independent population estimates (based on updated decennial census results). The weighting takes into account the age, sex, race, Hispanic ethnicity, and State of residence of the person, so that these characteristics are reflected in the proper proportions in the final estimates.

                    A sample is not a total count, and the survey may not produce the same results that would be obtained from interviewing the entire population. But the chances are 90 out of 100 that the monthly estimate of unemployment from the sample is within about 290,000 of the figure obtainable from a total census. Since monthly unemployment totals have ranged between about 7 and 11 million in recent years, the possible error resulting from sampling is not large enough to distort the total unemployment picture.

                    Because these interviews are the basic source of data for total unemployment, information must be factual and correct. Respondents are never asked specifically if they are unemployed, nor are they given an opportunity to decide their own labor force status. Unless they already know how the Government defines unemployment, many of them may not be sure of their actual classification when the interview is completed.

                    Similarly, interviewers do not decide the respondents' labor force classification. They simply ask the questions in the prescribed way and record the answers. Based on information collected in the survey and definitions programmed into the computer, individuals are then classified as employed, unemployed, or not in the labor force.

                    All interviews must follow the same procedures to obtain comparable results. Because of the crucial role interviewers have in the household survey, a great amount of time and effort is spent maintaining the quality of their work. Interviewers are given intensive training, including classroom lectures, discussion, practice, observation, home-study materials, and on-the-job training. At least once a year, they attend day-long training and review sessions. Also, at least once a year, they are accompanied by a supervisor during a full day of interviewing to determine how well they carry out their assignments.

                    A selected number of households are reinterviewed each month to determine whether the information obtained in the first interview was correct. The information gained from these reinterviews is used to improve the entire training program.

                    What are the basic concepts of employment and unemployment?

                    The basic concepts involved in identifying the employed and unemployed are quite simple:

                    • People with jobs are employed.
                    • People who are jobless, looking for jobs, and available for work are unemployed.
                    • People who are neither employed nor unemployed are not in the labor force.

                    The survey is designed so that each person age 16 and over who is neither in an institution (for example, correctional facilities and residential nursing and mental health care facilities) nor on active duty in the Armed Forces is counted and classified in only one group. The sum of the employed and the unemployed constitutes the civilian labor force. Persons not in the labor force combined with those in the civilian labor force constitute the civilian noninstitutional population 16 years and over. (There is no upper age limit.) Under these concepts, most people are quite easily classified. For example:

                    • Elizabeth Lloyd reported to the interviewer that last week she worked 40 hours as a sales manager for the Western Beverage Company. Elizabeth is employed.
                    • Steve Hogan lost his job when the local plant of the Chariot Aircraft Manufacturing Company was closed down. Since then, he has been visiting personnel offices of other businesses in town trying to find a job. Steve is unemployed.
                    • Linda Coleman is a homemaker. Last week, she was occupied with her normal household chores. She neither held a job nor looked for a job. Her 80-year-old father who lives with her has not worked or looked for work because of a disability. Linda and her father are not in the labor force.

                    Who is counted as employed?

                    Not all of the wide range of job situations in the American economy fit neatly into a given category. For example, people are considered employed if they did any work at all for pay or profit during the survey week. This includes all part-time and temporary work, as well as regular full-time, year-round employment. Persons also are counted as employed if they have a job at which they did not work during the survey week, whether they were paid or not, because they were:

                    • On vacation
                    • Ill
                    • Experiencing child-care problems
                    • Taking care of some other family or personal obligation
                    • On maternity or paternity leave
                    • Involved in an industrial dispute
                    • Prevented from working by bad weather

                    These persons are counted among the employed and tabulated separately as "with a job but not at work," because they have a specific job to which they will return.

                    But what about the two following cases?

                    • George Lewis is 16 years old, and he has no job from which he receives any pay or profit. However, George does help with the regular chores around his father's farm and spends about 20 hours each week doing so.
                    • Lisa Fox spends most of her time taking care of her home and children, but she helps in her husband's computer software store all day Friday and Saturday.

                    Under the Government's definition of employment, both George and Lisa are considered employed. They fall into a group called "unpaid family workers," which includes any person who worked without pay for 15 hours or more per week in a family-owned enterprise operated by someone in their household.

                    Unpaid family workers comprise a relatively small proportion of total employment. Most of the employed are either wage and salary workers (paid employees) or self-employed (working in their own business, profession, or farm). Information also is collected for the employed on, for example, the industry and occupation of their job, weekly earnings, hours at work, multiple jobholding, and union membership.

                    Who is counted as unemployed?

                    Persons are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work. Actively looking for work may consist of any of the following activities:

                    • Contacting:
                      • An employer directly or having a job interview
                      • A public or private employment agency
                      • Friends or relatives
                      • A school or university employment center
                    • Sending out resumes or filling out applications
                    • Placing or answering advertisements
                    • Checking union or professional registers
                    • Some other means of active job search

                    Passive methods of job search do not have the potential to result in a job offer and therefore do not qualify as active job search methods. Examples of passive methods include attending a job training program or course, or merely reading about job openings that are posted in newspapers or on the Internet.

                    Workers expecting to be recalled from temporary layoff are counted as unemployed, whether or not they have engaged in a specific jobseeking activity. In all other cases, the individual must have been engaged in at least one active job search activity in the 4 weeks preceding the interview and be available for work (except for temporary illness).

                    The questions used in the interviews are carefully designed to elicit the most accurate picture of each person's labor force activities. Some of the major questions that determine employment status are: (The capitalized words are emphasized when read by the interviewers.)

                    1. Does anyone in this household have a business or a farm?
                    2. LAST WEEK, did you do ANY work for (either) pay (or profit)?
                      If the answer to question 1 is "yes" and the answer to question 2 is "no," the next question is:
                    3. LAST WEEK, did you do any unpaid work in the family business or farm?
                      For those who reply "no" to both questions 2 and 3, the next key questions used to determine employment status are:
                    4. LAST WEEK, (in addition to the business,) did you have a job, either full or part time? Include any job from which you were temporarily absent.
                    5. LAST WEEK, were you on layoff from a job?
                    6. What was the main reason you were absent from work LAST WEEK?
                      For those who respond "yes" to question 5 about being on layoff, the following questions are asked:
                    7. Has your employer given you a date to return to work?
                      and, if "no,"
                    8. Have you been given any indication that you will be recalled to work within the next 6 months?
                      If the responses to either question 7 or 8 indicate that the person expects to be recalled from layoff, he or she is counted as unemployed. For those who were reported as having no job or business from which they were absent or on layoff, the next question is:
                    9. Have you been doing anything to find work during the last 4 weeks?
                      For those who say "yes," the next question is:
                    10. What are all of the things you have done to find work during the last 4 weeks?
                      If an active method of looking for work, such as those listed at the beginning of this section, is mentioned, the following question is asked:
                    11. LAST WEEK, could you have started a job if one had been offered?
                      If there is no reason, except temporary illness, that the person could not take a job, he or she is considered to be not only looking but also available for work and is counted as unemployed.

                    Some examples of responses that are typically given in interviews and that may result in a person being classified as unemployed are:

                    1. Yvonne Bennett reported that 2 weeks ago she applied for a job as a receptionist at the Capitol Travel Agency and the Equity Mortgage Lending Company. She is awaiting the results of her applications. Yvonne is unemployed because she made a specific effort to find a job within the prior 4 weeks and is presently available for work.
                    2. Mrs. Jenkins tells the interviewer that her daughter, Katherine Marie, was thinking about looking for work in the prior 4 weeks but knows of no specific efforts she has made. Katherine Marie does not meet the activity test for unemployment and is, therefore, counted as not in the labor force.
                    3. John Stetson has been checking for openings at a local superstore for each of the past 3 weeks, but his wife reported that last week he had the flu and was unable to work because of it. John is counted as unemployed because he took steps to look for work and would have been available for work during the survey reference week, except for his temporary illness.
                    4. Marcus Green was laid off from the Hotshot Motor Company when the firm began retooling to produce a new model car. Marcus knows he will be called back to work as soon as the model changeover is completed, and he also knows it is unlikely that he would be able to find a job for the period he is laid off; so, although he is available to work, he is not seeking a job. Marcus is unemployed because he is waiting to be recalled from layoff.
                    5. Joan Howard told the interviewer that she has filed applications with three companies for summer jobs. However, it is only April and she doesn't wish to start work until at least June 15, because she is attending school. Although she has taken specific steps to find a job, Joan is classified as not in the labor force because she is not currently available for work. Students are treated the same as other persons; that is, they are classified as employed or unemployed if they meet the criteria, whether they are in school on a full- or part-time basis.

                    From these definitions and examples, it can be seen that the total unemployment figures cover more than the number of persons who have lost jobs. It includes persons who have quit their jobs to look for other employment, workers whose temporary jobs have ended, persons looking for their first jobs, and experienced workers looking for jobs after an absence from the labor force (for example, a woman who returns to the labor force after her children have entered school). Information also is collected for the unemployed on, for example, the industry and occupation of their last job held, duration of unemployment, reason for being jobless, and job search methods.

                    Who is not in the labor force?

                    Labor force measures are based on the civilian noninstitutional population 16 years old and over. Excluded are persons under 16 years of age, all persons confined to institutions such as nursing homes and prisons, and persons on active duty in the Armed Forces. As mentioned previously, the labor force is made up of the employed and the unemployed. The remainder—those who have no job and are not looking for one—are counted as "not in the labor force." Many who are not in the labor force are going to school or are retired. Family responsibilities keep others out of the labor force.

                    A series of questions is asked each month of persons not in the labor force to obtain information about their desire for work, the reasons why they had not looked for work in the last 4 weeks, their prior job search, and their availability for work. These questions include:

                    1. Do you currently want a job, either full or part time?
                    2. What is the main reason you were not looking for work during the LAST 4 WEEKS?
                    3. Did you look for work at any time during the last 12 months?
                    4. LAST WEEK, could you have started a job if one had been offered?

                    These questions form the basis for estimating the number of persons who are not in the labor force but who are considered to be "marginally attached to the labor force." These are persons without jobs who are not currently looking for work (and therefore are not counted as unemployed), but who nevertheless have demonstrated some degree of labor force attachment. Specifically, to be counted as "marginally attached to the labor force," individuals must indicate that they currently want a job, have looked for work in the last 12 months (or since they last worked if they worked within the last 12 months), and are available for work. "Discouraged workers" are a subset of the marginally attached. Discouraged workers report they are not currently looking for work for one of four reasons:

                    1. They believe no job is available to them in their line of work or area.
                    2. They had previously been unable to find work.
                    3. They lack the necessary schooling, training, skills, or experience.
                    4. Employers think they are too young or too old, or they face some other type of discrimination.

                    Additional questions about persons not in the labor force are asked during each household's last month of its 4-month tenure in the sample rotation pattern. These questions are designed to collect information about why these people left their previous jobs, when they last worked at a job or business, and whether they intend to look for work in the near future.

                    What about cases of overlap?

                    When the population is classified according to who is employed, unemployed, and not in the labor force on the basis of their activities during a given calendar week, situations are often encountered where individuals have engaged in more than one activity. Since individuals are counted only once, a system of priorities is used to determine status. Labor force activities take precedence over non-labor force activities and working or having a job takes precedence over looking for work. Some examples are:

                    1. James Kelly and Elyse Martin attend Jefferson High School. James works after school at the North Star Cafe, and Elyse is seeking a part-time job at the same establishment (also after school). James' job takes precedence over his non-labor force activity of going to school, as does Elyse's search for work; therefore, James is counted as employed and Elyse is counted as unemployed.
                    2. Last week, Mary Davis, who was working for Stuart Comics, went to the Coastal Video Shop on her lunch hour to be interviewed for a higher paying job. Mary's interview constitutes looking for work, but her work takes priority, and she is counted as employed. (Indeed, because of the way the questionnaire is set up, information about Mary's search for work is not even obtained.)
                    3. John Walker has a job at the Nuts and Bolts Company, but he didn't go to work last week because of a strike at the plant. Last Thursday, he went to the Screw and Washer Factory to see about a temporary job until the strike terminates. John was "with a job but not at work" due to an industrial dispute, which takes priority over looking for work; therefore, he is counted as employed. (Again, information would not be obtained on John's job search effort.)
                    4. Evonne Avery lost her job at the book store on Wednesday of the survey reference week. She answered newspaper want-ads on Thursday and Friday but had not obtained a new job by the end of the week. Evonne is counted as employed, since she did work for 3 days in the reference week, even though she was unemployed for part of the week. (Once again, information would not be obtained on her search for work, though Evonne would be identified as working "part time for economic reasons," by virtue of having her workweek reduced to part time—defined as less than 35 hours per week—by her dismissal from her previous job.)

                    To summarize, employed persons are:

                    • All persons who did any work for pay or profit during the survey week.
                    • All persons who did at least 15 hours of unpaid work in a family-owned enterprise operated by someone in their household.
                    • All persons who were temporarily absent from their regular jobs because of illness, vacation, bad weather, industrial dispute, or various personal reasons, whether or not they were paid for the time off.

                    Unemployed persons are:

                    • All persons who did not have a job at all during the survey reference week, made at least one specific active effort to find a job during the prior 4 weeks, and were available for work (unless temporarily ill).
                    • All persons who were not working and were waiting to be called back to a job from which they had been laid off (they need not be looking for work to be classified as unemployed).

                    Because of the complexities of the American economic system and the wide variety of job arrangements and jobseeking efforts, the definitions of employment and unemployment must be specific to ensure uniformity of reporting at any given time and over any period of time. When all of the details are considered, definitions may seem rather complicated. The basic concepts, however, remain little changed: People with jobs are employed, people who do not have jobs and are looking for jobs are unemployed, and people who meet neither labor market test are not in the labor force. The qualifying conditions are necessary to cover the wide range of labor force patterns and to provide an objective set of standards for consistent treatment of cases.

                    Where can people find the data?

                    Each month, summary statistics on unemployment and employment are published in a news release titled The Employment Situation.

                    Detailed information also is published in tables online and in a periodical called Employment and Earnings.

                    On an irregular basis, special labor force topics are addressed in articles published in the Monthly Labor Review, in a series of briefs called Issues in Labor Statistics, in a variety of special reports, and in other BLS publications.

                    How are seasonal fluctuations taken into account?

                    Total employment and unemployment are higher in some parts of the year than in others. For example, unemployment is higher in January and February, when it is cold in many parts of the country and work in agriculture, construction, and other seasonal industries is curtailed. Also, both employment and unemployment rise every June, when students enter the labor force in search of summer jobs.

                    The seasonal fluctuations in the number of employed and unemployed persons reflect not only the normal seasonal weather patterns that tend to be repeated year after year, but also the hiring (and layoff) patterns that accompany regular events such as the winter holiday season and the summer vacation season. These variations make it difficult to tell whether month-to-month changes in employment and unemployment are due to normal seasonal patterns or to changing economic conditions. To deal with such problems, a statistical technique called seasonal adjustment is used. This technique uses the past history of the series to identify the seasonal movements and to calculate the size and direction of these movements. A seasonal adjustment factor is then developed and applied to the estimates to eliminate the effects of regular seasonal fluctuations on the data. When a statistical series has been seasonally adjusted, the normal seasonal fluctuations are smoothed out and data for any month can be more meaningfully compared with data from any other month or with an annual average. Many time series that are based on monthly data are seasonally adjusted.

                    Is there only one official definition of unemployment?

                    Yes, there is only one official definition of unemployment, and that was discussed above. However, some have argued that this measure is too restricted, and that it does not adequately capture the breadth of labor market problems. For this reason, economists at BLS developed a set of alternative measures of labor underutilization. These measures are published every month in the Employment Situation news release. They range from a very limited measure that includes only those who have been unemployed (as officially defined) for 15 weeks or more to a very broad one that includes total unemployed (as officially defined), all persons marginally attached to the labor force, and all individuals employed part time for economic reasons.

                    What other information is collected in the CPS?

                    The CPS also is used to obtain detailed information on particular segments of the population and labor force. Generally, these "supplemental" inquiries are repeated annually or biennially in the same month and include topics such as annual earnings and total incomes of individuals and families (published by the Census Bureau); the extent of work experience of the population during the prior calendar year; the employment of school-age youths, high school graduates, and dropouts; contingent workers; job tenure; displaced workers; and disabled veterans. Some additional supplements that are unrelated to labor force issues, such as those on smoking and voting, also are conducted through the CPS. Supplemental questions are asked following the completion of the regular monthly labor force questions.

                    Generally, the persons who provide information for the monthly CPS questions also answer the supplemental questions. Occasionally, the kind of information sought in the special survey requires the respondent to be the person about whom the questions are asked. Results of these special surveys usually are published in news releases and in the Monthly Labor Review and other BLS reports.

                    How is unemployment measured for States and local areas?

                    The Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS) program is a Federal-State cooperative effort in which monthly estimates of total employment and unemployment are prepared for approximately 7,300 areas:

                    • Census regions and divisions
                    • States
                    • Metropolitan Statistical Areas and Metropolitan NECTAs (New England City and Town Areas)
                    • Metropolitan Divisions and NECTA Divisions
                    • Micropolitan Statistical Areas and Micropolitan NECTAs
                    • Combined Metropolitan Statistical Areas and Combined NECTAs
                    • Small Labor Market Areas
                    • Counties and county equivalents
                    • Cities of 25,000 population or more
                    • Cities and towns in New England regardless of population

                    These estimates are key indicators of local economic conditions. BLS is responsible for the concepts, definitions, technical procedures, validation, and publication of the estimates that State workforce agencies prepare under agreement with BLS.

                    The concepts and definitions underlying LAUS data are the same as those used at the national level. State monthly model estimates are controlled in "real time" to sum to national monthly labor force estimates from the CPS. These models combine current and historical data from the CPS, the Current Employment Statistics (CES) program, and State UI systems. Estimates for seven large areas and their respective balances of State are also model-based.

                    Estimates for the remainder of the substate labor market areas are produced through a building-block approach known as the "Handbook method." This procedure also uses data from several sources, including the CPS, the CES program, State UI systems, and the decennial census, to create estimates that are adjusted to the statewide measures of employment and unemployment. Below the labor market area level, estimates are prepared using disaggregation techniques based on inputs from the decennial census, annual population estimates, and current UI data.

                    Where can people get more information?

                    For national labor force statistics from the CPS or inquiries regarding the concepts and definitions described in this report, contact the Division of Labor Force Statistics at BLS. National CPS data can be found on the Internet at: www.bls.gov/cps/.

                    State and local CPS employment and unemployment data are available on the Internet at: www.bls.gov/lau/; e-mail address: lausinfo@bls.gov.

                    What do the unemployment insurance (UI) figures measure?

                    The UI figures are not produced by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Statistics on insured unemployment in the United States are collected as a by-product of UI programs. Workers who lose their jobs and are covered by these programs typically file claims ("initial claims") that serve as notice that they are beginning a period of unemployment. Claimants who qualify for benefits are counted in the insured unemployment figures (as "continued claims"). Data on UI claims are maintained by the Employment and Training Administration, an agency of the U.S. Department of Labor, and are available on the Internet at: workforcesecurity.doleta.gov/unemploy/claims.asp.

                    Some countries base their estimates of total unemployment on the number of persons filing claims for or receiving UI payments or the number of persons registered with government employment offices as available for work. These data are also available in the United States, but they are not used to measure total unemployment because they exclude several important groups. To begin with, not all workers are covered by UI programs. For example, self-employed workers, unpaid family workers, workers in certain not-for-profit organizations, and several other small (primarily seasonal) worker categories are not covered.

                    In addition, the insured unemployed exclude the following:

                    1. Unemployed workers who have exhausted their benefits
                    2. Unemployed workers who have not yet earned benefit rights (such as new entrants or reentrants to the labor force)
                    3. Disqualified workers whose unemployment is considered to have resulted from their own actions rather than from economic conditions; for example, a worker discharged for misconduct on the job
                    4. Otherwise eligible unemployed persons who do not file for benefits

                    Because of these and other limitations, statistics on insured unemployment cannot be used as a count of total unemployment in the United States. Indeed, during 2008, only 36 percent of the total unemployed received UI benefits. The weekly data on UI claims do have important uses, however, and provide a timely indicator on labor market conditions.

                    Source: http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm

                    • 1 vote
                    #1.44 - Sat Feb 11, 2012 2:41 PM EST
                    Reply
                    Pilotshark

                    well now, guess the republicans chicken little is not working, and its going to be very hard for them to continue to obstruct and sabotage.

                    as it seems good news is starting to filter out, not great news but positive news.

                    • 4 votes
                    Reply#2 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 10:09 AM EST
                    Wizeguy

                    Every friggin GOP/TEA Congressman, Senator and candidate just threw up in their mouth.

                    The spin it must be opitmisim that Rom-knee will lead us to glory....see we told you by attacking abortion rights thing will turn around....

                    • 2 votes
                    Reply#3 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 10:12 AM EST
                    Manic Drummer

                    Meanwhile, the number of homeless, unemployed Americans has reached an all-time high and more are on the way. And no one in Washington seems to care.

                    • 1 vote
                    Reply#4 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 10:15 AM EST
                    thisbusymonster

                    Well, we know for a fact the GOP doesn't give a rat's ass. I think Obama has had several initiatives to increase jobs, fix the housing situation, etcetera, that the GOP has thrown a @!$%#-fit over.

                    I think someone mentioned hat the House GOP has passed like FOUR BILLS in this session. 100% of their efforts have been around fake deficit hawkery, holding the unemployed hostage for tax cuts for the rich, and other useless bull@!$%#. I think there are plenty in Washington who do care, but it is BLATANTLY APPARENT that the right-wing DOES NOT CARE.

                    Nice try at fake equivalence, but nobody is buying this crap anymore.

                    • 3 votes
                    #4.1 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 10:56 AM EST
                    Reply
                    Fed up with Republicans

                    There are a lot of reasons people quit looking for work.

                    But why they quit looking isn't the most important thing, the most important thing is that the job market overall is improving.

                    Also some Republicans need to face reality a lot of old people that are out of work simply do not have the necessary skills that would enable them to qualify for a position in todays economy.

                    • 2 votes
                    Reply#5 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 10:16 AM EST
                    Nicey-1026620

                    Also some Republicans need to face reality a lot of old people that are out of work simply do not have the necessary skills that would enable them to qualify for a position in todays economy.

                    The current elderly are actually way more employed than the younger generations.

                    Boomers are higher than Gen X, Gen X is higher than Gen Y.

                      #5.1 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 10:28 AM EST
                      Fed up with Republicans

                      Yes employed now, but if they lose their jobs they are not skilled enough to get another job.

                      • 1 vote
                      #5.2 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 10:31 AM EST
                      Nicey-1026620

                      Yes employed now, but if they lose their jobs they are not skilled enough to get another job.

                      That is one of the issues they have faced. Though, to me it's not that they don't have the skills.

                      It's more age bias. People with 30 years experience + generally have skills. And with all that experience, are more talented than young people entering the market place.

                      But companies....

                      • An older person will cost me more insurance
                      • An older person will expect more money
                      • A younger person *may* be more trainable
                      • A younger person will cost less

                      And even just some bias that they don't want to hire someone old.....because they are old.

                        #5.3 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 10:41 AM EST
                        Fed up with Republicans

                        Some skills are not transferable from one job to the next.

                        • 1 vote
                        #5.4 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 1:32 PM EST
                        BXURZ

                        Some skills are not transferable from one job to the next.

                        That shows some real heart,..

                          #5.5 - Fri Feb 10, 2012 12:37 AM EST
                          Reply
                          Rationalt92

                          more people are checking out than checking in.....almost all of my friends are now facing the reality that this country is going down. We are checking out, this is going to be survival of the self-sufficient, and being completely non-reliant on any form of Government.

                          • 1 vote
                          Reply#6 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 10:48 AM EST
                          Nicey-1026620

                          more people are checking out than checking in

                          Care to elaborate.

                          • 1 vote
                          #6.1 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 10:52 AM EST
                          Randy McMurphy

                          Another Declinist Republican, nicey...hyperinflation just around the corner...relying on the Beck Gold guns and god for retirement...

                          • 1 vote
                          #6.2 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 11:33 AM EST
                          Rationalt92

                          I am not a republican or affiliated with any form of party or Government. I provide for my family and build, create and determine my future with minimal Government interference. I used to create companies hire thousands of people. Until, I looked at the economics, and determined that the Government was getting almost 40% of all the cash flows generated by my efforts. I have received nothing in comparison, for every dollar that I raised, and every dollar of revenue, the Government has averaged over 40% take, then if you are fortunate to be profitable, they take even more. I have quit building companies and hiring people, until this is corrected. The Government has no purpose in my life, and I have resigned as a subject of the Government at all levels, just like a bad Job with bad management, I have resigned, I have opted out, I am unsubscribed. And, if anyone challenges that, then they are making me a slave, and indentured servant, against my free will to something I despise, and consider irrelevant to improving my life..... People the system is broke, and broken...time to move on...I will not waste my precious time on earth on either Government or Religion....

                            #6.3 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 12:54 PM EST
                            Nicey-1026620

                            I am not a republican or affiliated with any form of party or Government. I provide for my family and build, create and determine my future with minimal Government interference. I used to create companies hire thousands of people. Until, I looked at the economics, and determined that the Government was getting almost 40% of all the cash flows generated by my efforts. I have received nothing in comparison, for every dollar that I raised, and every dollar of revenue, the Government has averaged over 40% take, then if you are fortunate to be profitable, they take even more. I have quit building companies and hiring people, until this is corrected.

                            So, in other words, you'd like to be in China where there are no laws for workers, you don't have to pay taxes, worry about the environment, etc, etc.

                            Now, for a small business, I do agree that there are far too many restrictions, taxes, regulations, etc. Of course, that's by design of Mega Businesses, who lobby to create those very barriers so you will give up. And thus not compete with them.

                            40% of revenue? Care to elaborate on that calc.

                            I'm sure there are many taxes, state taxes, property taxes, FICA taxes for employees, inventory, etc, etc. All things that have to be paid whether you're profitable or not. But of course, that excludes that there are also many tax credits/deductions available to businesses.

                            And of course, that too is by design, because only large businesses have the army of Lawyers needed to get the maximum advantage.

                            The Government has no purpose in my life, and I have resigned as a subject of the Government at all levels, just like a bad Job with bad management, I have resigned, I have opted out, I am unsubscribed. And, if anyone challenges that, then they are making me a slave, and indentured servant, against my free will to something I despise, and consider irrelevant to improving my life..... People the system is broke, and broken...time to move on...I will not waste my precious time on earth on either Government or Religion....

                            Maybe we can all battle it out thunderdome style.

                              #6.4 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 2:08 PM EST
                              Reply
                              Rob-599086

                              It's amazing how anytime "good news" comes along that goes against someone's political party, there is always a "caveat" that nullifies it.

                              How about this news:

                              Chrysler Group Chief Executive Officer Sergio Marchionne said bonus checks would arrive early this year following the first company profit in 15 years.

                              Chrysler earned a net profit of $183 million in 2011; it also reported an operating profit of almost $2 billion, the first since 2005, The Detroit News reported Tuesday.

                              "It took an incredible team effort to bring about such remarkable results, and you should be proud," Marchionne said Monday in a message to union workers.

                              The average bonus check for hourly workers will come to $1,500, less taxes and union dues, the newspaper said.

                              The checks are normally sent in March. This year, the checks should arrive by Feb. 10, a Friday.

                              Chrysler announced Thursday that it would add 1800 jobs and a third crew to the Belvidere plant, 500 of which will be added specifically to produce the all-new Dodge Dart. UPI/Brian Kersey

                              Now let's see how this is spun into "not good news."

                              • 2 votes
                              Reply#7 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 10:54 AM EST
                              Randy McMurphy

                              This would be the republican superbowl car commercial

                                #7.1 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 11:24 AM EST
                                Reply
                                EJCanavan

                                I find it seriously irritating that it's assumed because you don't find the numbers wonderful and convincing that you are automatically a GoP/Tea Party member. Grow up already !

                                We see the same article every single month with new numbers plugged in to make us believe things are different. The job market has changed. Companies are laying off less because they have cut to the bare bone minimum and people are finding themselves doing the job of 4 people for no more money than they were making 3 years ago. Those who were hired over the holidays have all claimed their benefits last month so they didn't starve to death. It's an election year so I expect to see these articles pop up depending on whose side the reporting source may be for the day. I want to see improvements and see my kids have an opportunity to learn good work ethic. Right now I have 3 who can't find a job, not even 10 hours available at the local Taco Bell. Until I see things improve for them I will sit patiently waiting and read these biased articles pretending everything is ok.

                                • 3 votes
                                Reply#8 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 11:00 AM EST
                                Nicey-1026620

                                We see the same article every single month with new numbers plugged in to make us believe things are different. The job market has changed. Companies are laying off less because they have cut to the bare bone minimum and people are finding themselves doing the job of 4 people for no more money than they were making 3 years ago.

                                I'm sure the rest of this will be additional bad reasoning, so let's look one by one.

                                If things were getting *worse* businesses would cut more people. There's *always* more people to fire. To the point of just shuttering the whole business.

                                While I'm willing to concede that some layoffs/firings are not happening because businesses have become more lean, you say this as a sole reason. Which it isn't.

                                Initial Claims was 315k average from 2005-2007 when the economy was in good shape.

                                In other words, people are always leaving jobs, quitting, getting fired, laid off, and filing claims reports. Oh, yeah, initial claims can be people who simply quit or leave their jobs. A person filed for a "performance" issue is not prevented from filing a claim. Technically, they might not qualify, but they'll still file a claim many times.

                                A labor force of 141 million employed people, is going to have constant churn even in a healthy market. It's a really bad conclusion that a drop from 675k to 360k is only because businesses don't have anyone else to fire. Most of it is a gradually improving labor market.

                                360k could also go right back to 675k if there was some sort of global meltdown, despite businesses have "no one else to fire" by your reasoning.

                                Those who were hired over the holidays have all claimed their benefits last month so they didn't starve to death.

                                ?What?

                                I'm not even sure what you're trying to get at. If you're saying this is temp people coming off holiday work, that doesn't make much sense. You have to work a minimum number of weeks to have a claims benefit (more than the holiday period).

                                It's an election year so I expect to see these articles pop up depending on whose side the reporting source may be for the day.

                                If you don't like the article, why not read the source material? Which is reported every week. Draw your own conclusions.

                                I want to see improvements and see my kids have an opportunity to learn good work ethic. Right now I have 3 who can't find a job, not even 10 hours available at the local Taco Bell. Until I see things improve for them I will sit patiently waiting and read these biased articles pretending everything is ok.

                                I think you are reading more into even the article than is there. Definitely more than the data suggests.

                                I define it as a "gradually improving" labor market.

                                  #8.1 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 2:30 PM EST
                                  Reply
                                  ivorybill

                                  "Also, U-3, means".....etc.....etc..............................Hey!!!..what did Russia shoot down that was ours during the cold war???.....all these U's are messing me up, I think?

                                    Reply#9 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 11:00 AM EST
                                    TooManyPuppies

                                    Small businesses have more job openings since 2008.

                                    all of the UE Us have dropped, including the ones that ACTUALLY count the people who gave up looking for work.

                                    Jobless claims have dropped.

                                    The DOW is flirting with 13,000

                                    consumer spending is up

                                    Home sales are up!!!!!!!

                                    New home construction is up.

                                    Remember the right denied we were slipping into recession. Saying that whiny americans had recession on the mind. They also said talking bad about the economy will make it true.

                                    They cant deny the recovery forever.

                                    Also remember the right said Obama would send us into depression, with hyper inflation, simultaneously with hyper deflation(some how, now they are going to want to claim that the recovery would have been faster with the GOP, and killing of the big three and cutting the rich taxes even though they are seeing record profits and incomes returned to prerecession levels before anyone else, and oh yeah they were going to get rid of UE extensions because the only reason why jobless was so high wasnt the lack of jobs but the fact that people enjoy getting UE..

                                    It was republican policies of no regulation, and cutting capital gains taxes making buying homes an investment game, that caused the mess. Republicans claimed that dem policies would make the mess worse. Instead it cleaned the mess the right left us with. Now the republicans want to claim they could have cleaned it faster, by DOING MORE OF THE SAME THAT STARTED THE RECESSION IN THE FIRST PLACE.

                                    • 2 votes
                                    Reply#10 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 11:06 AM EST
                                    webslinger

                                    They cant deny the recovery forever.

                                    Sure they can - the question is whether or not we will call them on it and whether or not the sheep will believe it.

                                    We see day in and day out how much denial there is out there and how much the spin cycle is in effect.....One need only see the efforts being made by Fox and the like, and the paid trolls on the Vine.

                                    Hopefully enough people will say "enough" come November, vote out the teabaggers and give the President a Congress to work with.....but that requires Democrats to NOT stay home this time....and I'm optimistic they they learned the hard lesson of 2010.

                                    • 2 votes
                                    #10.1 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 11:45 AM EST
                                    Reply
                                    dandegirl

                                    One reason the unemployment rate has fallen for five straight months is that many people have stopped looking for work. The government only counts people as unemployed if they are actively searching for a job.

                                    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

                                    This administration has the media in their pocket. One way or another, this administration will push the number to 8.0% or below so it looks good to the public. In the meantime, millions are unemployed because THEY STOPPED LOOKING for a job. You must convince those people that are actually still suffering, that things are better.

                                    Detroit is on the verge of bankruptcy.

                                    In spite of low interest rates for YEARS, the housing market is still not moving. And it was the DEMS that insisted the banks provide loans to people who could not afford them. Obama has printed money and borrowed money from China to pay our debts. Our trillions of dollars of debt is not sustainable. Many commenters on this thread seem to know nothing about current events.

                                      Reply#11 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 11:52 AM EST
                                      webslinger

                                      Wash. Rinse. Repeat.....no matter how many times the talking points are debunked.

                                      • 4 votes
                                      #11.1 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 11:58 AM EST
                                      Randy McMurphy

                                      you could set your clock by their daily derision ,web

                                        #11.2 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 12:35 PM EST
                                        dandegirl

                                        to webslinger-

                                        Yes, actual facts are hard for libs to deal with. Much better that everyone think we are living in la la land where the money falls of trees in our backyards. You need to talk to some of these people who have lost their jobs...

                                          #11.3 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 2:31 PM EST
                                          Nicey-1026620

                                          And it was the DEMS that insisted the banks provide loans to people who could not afford them.

                                          *Everybody* created the housing bubble. Government on all side, Banks, and people.

                                          What that fails to miss is it was not the housing bubble that made the downturn so catastrophic. It was the 200 trillion + that domestic banks had created in financial instruments based on housing.

                                          That weren't regulated at all.

                                          It's called an inverse pyramid. Which, should suggest that it's not something to build. Kinda like building a tall building on a microscopic foundation. Why would you?

                                            #11.4 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 2:33 PM EST
                                            Rob-599086

                                            dande, here are some "actual facts":

                                            Chrysler Group Chief Executive Officer Sergio Marchionne said bonus checks would arrive early this year following the first company profit in 15 years.

                                            Chrysler earned a net profit of $183 million in 2011; it also reported an operating profit of almost $2 billion, the first since 2005, The Detroit News reported Tuesday.

                                            "It took an incredible team effort to bring about such remarkable results, and you should be proud," Marchionne said Monday in a message to union workers.

                                            The average bonus check for hourly workers will come to $1,500, less taxes and union dues, the newspaper said.

                                            The checks are normally sent in March. This year, the checks should arrive by Feb. 10, a Friday.

                                            Chrysler announced Thursday that it would add 1800 jobs and a third crew to the Belvidere plant, 500 of which will be added specifically to produce the all-new Dodge Dart. UPI/Brian Kersey

                                            dande, now let's see how you spin this into "not actual facts."

                                            • 1 vote
                                            #11.5 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 2:44 PM EST
                                            Reply
                                            lisaed

                                            One reason the unemployment rate has fallen for five straight months is that many people have stopped looking for work. The government only counts people as unemployed if they are actively searching for a job.

                                            In this they get to in the last sentence.

                                            • 1 vote
                                            Reply#12 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 12:40 PM EST
                                            bore-head007

                                            One reason the unemployment rate has fallen for five straight months is that many people have stopped looking for work. The government only counts people as unemployed if they are actively searching for a job

                                            Which means those actively receiving un employment benefits.

                                            Those that expired, must've expired, according to the administration.

                                            • 1 vote
                                            #12.1 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 12:46 PM EST
                                            greck

                                            the real unemployment rate, including the people who have stopped looking, is going down too.

                                            http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2012/01/06/unemployment-rate-drop-is-for-real/

                                            The U.S. unemployment rate dropped to 8.5% in December, while a broader measure dropped even further to 15.2% from 15.6% the prior month, both at their lowest levels since February 2009.

                                              #12.2 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 1:38 PM EST
                                              bore-head007

                                              greck, if they estimate unemployed people that are not enrolled in a system of accountability, it is only an estimate, and if it IS an estimate, I have about as much faith in that as I do with NOAA and their new codfish numbers. Based on drumroll please Bull @!$%#!

                                              From boom to bust.

                                              • 1 vote
                                              #12.3 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 2:24 PM EST
                                              Nicey-1026620

                                              Which means those actively receiving un employment benefits.

                                              Those that expired, must've expired, according to the administration.

                                              No it doesn't.

                                              How they count the unemployment has nothing to do with people who are recieving benefits. *Nothing*

                                              And of course....

                                              *One* reason the unemployment rate has fallen for five straight months is that many people have stopped looking for work. The government only counts people as unemployed if they are actively searching for a job

                                              Nobody is ignoring that. That data is readily available at the BLS to see.

                                              But it is actually, not the main reason as it may have been in prior years. In 2011, enough jobs were created to lower unemployment 0.45%. U-3 fell from 9.4% to 8.5% in 2011.

                                              So half is from *jobs created*, some of the rest is from employers simply hiring more people, which doesn't necessarily translate to a job created. Jobs listed as available and unfilled, are *already existing* they do not count towards the calculation of created jobs. And yes, some is from people leaving the workforce.

                                                #12.4 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 2:40 PM EST
                                                Nicey-1026620

                                                it is only an estimate, and if it IS an estimate,

                                                If the estimate methodology is the same from month to month and shows a confirmed trend, then it is what it is.

                                                The data support each other as well. Claims falling to 358,000 is an indication that the unemployment rate will be coming down. Jobs created at 243,000 in a month is yet another, because that's 150,000 more than is needed to account for population growth.

                                                  #12.5 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 2:43 PM EST
                                                  greck

                                                  If the estimate methodology is the same from month to month and shows a confirmed trend, then it is what it is.

                                                  exactly

                                                  whether or not the yardstick is actually a yard long, they're using the same one each time

                                                    #12.6 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 2:53 PM EST
                                                    bore-head007

                                                    , then it is what it is

                                                    Yes! An estimate!

                                                      #12.7 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 2:55 PM EST
                                                      Nicey-1026620

                                                      Yes! An estimate!

                                                      Let's just say for sh**s and giggles my estimate is off from month to month on counting apples.

                                                      It's off by a variance factor (which is what all statistical analysis of populations have, but it is confirmable within % points, just like exit polling, etc).

                                                      Let's give it a wide birth, +/-10%.

                                                      I estimate as follows

                                                      • January 100 apples (actual 94)
                                                      • Febrary 95 apples (actuual 103)
                                                      • March 90 apples (actual 85)
                                                      • April 80 apples (actual 84)
                                                      • May 75 apples (actual 71)
                                                      • June 75 apples (actual 82)
                                                      • July 70 apples (actual 74)
                                                      • August 70 apples (actual 77)
                                                      • September 65 apples (actual 64)
                                                      • October 55 apples (actual 57)
                                                      • November 45 apples (actual 41)
                                                      • December 30 apples (actual 33)

                                                      Your argument is that the trend from 100 to 33 is just an estimate because the data points are estimated with an accuracy factor and therefor has no bearing of reality........

                                                      ???

                                                      I can only assume you think that if they estimate unemployment at 8.3% it can really be 50%? You're basically saying that they have an infinite margin of error. Which isn't true.

                                                      For example, it's like stats on flipping a coin. should be 50/50, it comes out 54/46 in reality, that doesn't mean I can't use a 50/50 estimate, that I have an infinite margin of error, etc. The average margin of error is never going to be higher than a few % points.

                                                      While I'm sure there is a margin of error, even if it was high, the trend would still be what it is. Which is down.

                                                      • 1 vote
                                                      #12.8 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 3:20 PM EST
                                                      bore-head007

                                                      I can only assume you think that if they estimate unemployment at 8.3%

                                                      That figure is based on solid data. Not an estimate. A fact.

                                                      while a broader measure dropped even further to 15.2% from 15.6% the prior month, both at their lowest levels since February 2009.

                                                      If there is no recorded data of those not officially counted, its an estimate.

                                                        #12.9 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 4:23 PM EST
                                                        Reply
                                                        Nicey-1026620

                                                        That figure is based on solid data. Not an estimate. A fact.

                                                        If there is no recorded data of those not officially counted, its an estimate.

                                                        You're confusing even me now.

                                                        U-1 thru U-6 are *all* estimates with a margin of error.

                                                        The BLS uses the CPS (Current Population Survey) which is generated by the Census. It does a monthly survey of 50,000 people, and then extrapolates the figures.

                                                        U-3 and U-6 use the same survey. Looking at U-6 overall doesn't tell you much though, because it's affected by U-3.

                                                        U-6 is the cumulative number of, which means if U-3 is dropping, U-6 will too. Though, U-6 by itself peaked at 6%, and is now 5.2%, you can get that by subrtracting U-5 from U-6.

                                                        What this doesn't measure is people who have left the labor force and are no longer accounted by U-4 and U-5. That can be seen here:

                                                        http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpsatab16.htm

                                                        Just looking at normal population growth rates, accounting for U-4, U-5 above normal rates, and factoring an aging population, it can be seen that this number is growing way more than normal.

                                                        From there you arrive at about 3 million people are outside the labor force and not accounted by U-1 thru U-6 and wouldn't normally be outside the labor force. But even putting these back in over the last several years shows a trend down.

                                                        You also have to bear in mind that they don't seasonally adjust the outside the workforce data. Thus there are big jumps from month to month instead of smoothed trends. But looking at the annualized data you can just see big jumps in the population.

                                                        But that declined by about 200,000 people in the most recent year. My bet would be you'll see people actually coming back into the workforce soon.

                                                        • 1 vote
                                                        Reply#13 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 5:08 PM EST
                                                        bore-head007

                                                        Nicey, thank you for really working hard to convince me.

                                                        I applaud your dogged determination, but I have no faith in government statistics, especially when they are based on 50,000 versus millions. To many uncertainty's for me to be convinced.

                                                        I originally made a crack about codfish and NOAA numbers.

                                                        There is a reason for it. We have gone from boom to bust in two years based on estimates, and model reconfigurations, and questionable survey data that has caused a new crisis.

                                                        Please forgive my pessimism.

                                                        • 1 vote
                                                        #13.1 - Thu Feb 9, 2012 5:20 PM EST
                                                        Nicey-1026620

                                                        Nicey, thank you for really working hard to convince me.

                                                        I'm not really interested in convincing you.

                                                        I'm interested in trying to understand why you think U3 is real but people outside the labor force is an estimate.

                                                        This is what you said about the 8.3% unemployment rate...

                                                        That figure is based on solid data. Not an estimate. A fact.

                                                        I really don't need to convince you if you don't understand that is also an estimate. It means you haven't taken the time to learn about it before talking about it.

                                                        I applaud your dogged determination, but I have no faith in government statistics, especially when they are based on 50,000 versus millions. To many uncertainty's for me to be convinced.

                                                        That's common statistical sampling for populations. It's used the world over to create *real* systems that you use and rely on everyday.

                                                        Beyond that much of theoretical and applied science is an "estimation" so many equations only work within a % of the actual empirical real world data.

                                                        So much of what you use and rely on in your everyday life is based on those kinds of iterative methods. Where we guess, iterate, compensate from empirical data, then apply safety factors. (Which is the same thing the BLS does by refining it's statistical methods over time)

                                                        There is a reason for it. We have gone from boom to bust in two years based on estimates, and model reconfigurations, and questionable survey data that has caused a new crisis.

                                                        Where is this?

                                                          #13.2 - Fri Feb 10, 2012 10:39 AM EST
                                                          bore-head007

                                                          Rep. Ann-Margaret Ferrante and state Sen. Bruce Tarr, the state legislative team for Gloucester and Cape Ann, both denounced the cod assessment as evidence of a governmental crisis in science rather than one in the cod fishery.

                                                          "What happened?" said Ferrante. "We had Steve Murawski, (NOAA's chief scientist in early 2011) announcing that overfishing was over, and corks were coming off the champagne bottles; now we have a stock assessment that is off by 85 percent and everybody shrugs."

                                                          "Rebuilt is now collapse — the crisis is a falsity," said Tarr. "Our choice is to enable that behavior, or stand up and say we won't accept this. (Accepting) means consigning us in foreseeable future to more faulty science."

                                                          http://www.savingseafood.org/opinion/john-sackton-why-new-england-cod-is-a-crisis-for-noaa-fish.html

                                                            #13.3 - Fri Feb 10, 2012 11:01 AM EST
                                                            bore-head007

                                                            I don't dispute the 8.3 number. What I do dispute is the estimated 14- 15%+ number that includes those that fell off the rolls because they have not been re employed and are now not officially counted because their benefits expired.

                                                              #13.4 - Fri Feb 10, 2012 11:10 AM EST
                                                              Nicey-1026620

                                                              I don't dispute the 8.3 number. What I do dispute is the estimated 14- 15%+ number

                                                              They come from the *same* source of population data. U3 and U6 both use the CPS (current population survey) that is provided and updated by the census department each year.

                                                              Both are the result of the same sample population of 50,000 which asks questions to determine what their employment status is.

                                                              that includes those that fell off the rolls because they have not been re employed and are now not officially counted because their benefits expired.

                                                              U-6 doesn't include people outside the workforce *except* for those who are defined by U-4 and U-5, U-3 (unemployed)+U-4(discouraged)+U-5(marginally attached)+U-6(part time but want full time) = U-6 cumulative. So by definition, those people who are "discouraged" (U-4) and marginally attached "U-5" are also in U-6.

                                                              They are outside the labor force because they have stopped looking for work. However, U-4/U-5 only includes the previous *12 months*

                                                              So after this period, if they haven't started looking for work again, they will then become the part of "outside the labor force" that is not included in U-6. And they won't be specifically counted as unemployed.

                                                              Benefits expiring doesn't apply. That's not how the unemployed are counted. The "claims" report only tells you a few things.

                                                              A) How many new people are filing Unemployment Claims (initial claims)

                                                              B) How many people are currently collecting claims (continuing claims)

                                                              C) Those collecting on extended benefits (extended claims)

                                                              The definition of U-3 is just...

                                                              "Anyone who has looked for work in the last 30 days", whether or not you are getting unemployment or not, doesn't mean you may be looking for work or not.

                                                              There is *some* correlation because generally most states require you to look for work in order to collect benefits. How much that is enforced? Depends on the state. Also, once you exhaust your benefits, if you're still looking for work, you will still be counted.

                                                              __________

                                                              I'll be the first to tell you 8.3% is not a "true measure" of unemployment. It has many short comings. However, the trend down is across the board. Because more jobs are being created, people are no longer leaving the workforce as much as previous years.

                                                              Neither is 15.1% a true measure of under employment. For the same reason that it does fail to capture some people.

                                                              However, even measuring the additional people (which I've calculated I believe fairly closely based on the data they do keep on people outside the labor force), even adding this to U-3, and U-6 shows a dropping trend over the last 18 months.

                                                              Basically, this number has grown to around 2% additional unemployment at peak in 2010. It remains around this level. That tells me 2 things since the rate is dropping *more* than job growth alone would indicate.

                                                              1) People are not leaving the workforce in as large numbers as they were in 2009/2010 when more were giving up

                                                              2) Those people haven't yet started coming back to the workforce even as job creation has picked up. (If they were, the U3 rate would go up, suddenly the number of people looking for jobs would be higher)

                                                              That's particularly concerning, but also shows why UI benefits are important. UI benefits allow people to have a better chance to regain employment. Once you leave the labor force, your skills in general decline more rapidly. More rapidly than even when on 99 weeks of unemployent.

                                                              During those 99 weeks, those benefits help to keep people still trying to train themselves, stay active in their job search, etc.

                                                                #13.5 - Fri Feb 10, 2012 12:21 PM EST
                                                                Reply
                                                                Leave a Comment:
                                                                You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                                                                You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
                                                                (XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
                                                                Newsvine Privacy Statement
                                                                As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
                                                                FUN STUFF:
                                                                • Leaderboard |
                                                                • E-Mail Alerts |
                                                                • Top of the Vine |
                                                                • Newsvine Live |
                                                                • Newsvine Archives |
                                                                • The Greenhouse
                                                                COMPANY STUFF:
                                                                • Code of Honor |
                                                                • Company Info |
                                                                • Contact Us |
                                                                • Jobs |
                                                                • User Agreement |
                                                                • Privacy Policy |
                                                                • About our ads
                                                                LEGAL STUFF:
                                                                • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
                                                                • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
                                                                • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com