Real Unemployment Rate Hits 16.8%

Tyler Durden's picture

As markets digest the worse, yet somehow better, than expected 9.7% unemployment, the real state of the labor market is much worse, as indicated by the U-6 number, which has hit a recent record of 16.8% on a seasonally adjusted basis. As a reminder, the "U-6 represents 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." In other words, in reality the U.S. labor market is likely about as bad as Spain in terms of undoctored jobless data.

And while pundits were touting the inflection point in June when U-6 hit 16.5% and started to retrace, the most recent monthly data has crashed yet another green shoot in the great propaganda game.

Source: BLS

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
RobotTrader's picture

Normal, orderly markets???

Heh, looks like the Robots are misfiring today........

Anonymous's picture

... and in this scene, we see Bloomberg and CNBC, being played by Moe and Larry, trying to keep a lid on unemployment reporting, being played by Curly ...

. . .'s picture

 

Big bank robots don't do random.  They use free financing from Bernie to make money by skimming off the day traders (like silly valley did in the 1990s and the 1960s) and generally moving prices to inflict max pain on the short-term punters.

BobPaulson's picture

Graphics don't fit on smaller screens. But the three stooges are great!

Cognitive Dissonance's picture

In reality, the 16.8% is low. Shadowstats.com pulls out all the gerrymandering done to the underlying methods of measurement over the years to produce a real number somewhere around (and most likely now north of) 20%.

They also produce corrected numbers for inflation and so on that will make you head spin. Take a look if you can.

. . .'s picture

Do people trust shadowstats?  I looked at one of Williams' statistical charts a while back, and it looked as if he was tacking a linear delta onto the relevant statistic.  Which is pretty unlikely to be accurate, except occassionally by chance.

Cognitive Dissonance's picture

John Williams, the man behind shadowstats.com, is more than willing to send you his raw data. Plus a lot of it is already on the web site.

Granted you must be a subscriber to receive some of this but that doesn't invalidate what he's doing. I spent a long weekend looking over his methods and data a few months ago and I feel comfortable with his conclusions. It passes the smell test as well, meaning it supports what we see, feel and experience on a daily basis.

Why is it people can easily see the manipulation in the markets by private and public entities but not recognize that the government would also manipulate the economic statistics so much of it's economic policies (and other publicly admitted manipulation) relies on?

Anonymous's picture

I full well belive all government bureaucracies juke statistics, so as to get bigger budgets for more subordinates, bigger offices, etc. I just wasn't impressed because the CPI or unemployment chart of his I saw just showed a straight linear adjustment. Which can't be right.

They steal from us everyday's picture

We have laid off exactly 600,000 workers a month for approaching a solid year at this point.

 

WHY WOULD THE CHART NOT LOOK LINEAR?

gmrpeabody's picture

Suffice it to say shadowstats is a LOT closer to the truth than government stats.

glenlloyd's picture

Williams has no vested interest in fudging anything, so I trust his results far more than a govt sponsored entity. In fact that would be the only way to produce credible results in my book, take the reporting entity and control of the methodology away from those who have a vested interest in misreporting.

John Self's picture

... and the stress tests were predicated on maximum unemployment of what?  Just north of 10%, if I recall. 

glenlloyd's picture

I thought the extreme case was unemployment of 9%? I remember reading at the time that the unemployment rate had already exceeded the worst case scenario by the time they released the stress test results.

John Self's picture

Either way... kinda like NASA sending you on a ferris wheel to prepare for G-force.

BobPaulson's picture

Only because not all the ones that need them can get them. Probably one in six need em.

AnonymousMonetarist's picture

In total one out of six are on the dole.

 

glenlloyd's picture

woman living in the house behind me got food stamps for years although she was perfectly capable of working but had grown up on the system and learned that if she stayed there everything would be comfortable. Of course we have people on food stamps who don't need to be, it's because people will learn to work the system.

Cheeky Bastard's picture

1933 all over again

Anonymous's picture

1930 all over again.

We have barely started into this Greater Depression (the Lesser Depression ran from Aug. '29 through Mar. '33, after which economic activity began picking up, slowly).

dza's picture

And she's about 12 years old.

Marley's picture

I can't wait until the young detractors strip while they proclaim the economy has recovered.

Miles Kendig's picture

And housing is on the upswing since it is not dependent on employment.... ROFLMAO

Cheeky Bastard's picture

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA; current post of the day

Sqworl's picture

Im so sick and tired of this bs.  Employment is at 18% counting gov jimmy numbers, *U6, U3. 

You cannot have a recovery without employment.  unless its PFM.  There are millions of perfect storm couples from 40 - 60 who have lost their jobs at the same time and have fallen off the employment chart.  They have sold what little assets they have and are living off 401K.  Basic necessities only.

Were basically Fucked!!!  Thank you Greenspan, Clinton and Obama...you too Bush.  You could have stopped those greedy politicians. i.e. Rains who collected $200M from Fannie.

Dick Grasso collected $190M from a not for profit by stacking the board with those he regulated...brilliant.

Anonymous's picture

Actually I think it is closer to April 1930. Where is Louis T. McFadden? He should be popping up any time now...

blackebitda's picture

imo it may ba 5 X worse. 

not 1933, try 1929 the first micro drop. people are way too short sighted. 

even if dow moves up to 14,000 again it may not change the ultimate destination. 

after 70 years of price advance, a relative correction is natural. 

....its about the beauty of the trade, not the money. waiting and then 

reacting....strength and honor

 

Cheeky Bastard's picture

the dollar will move to 14 000 iff DXY is somewhere in the 12-13 range. no scratch that; IT WILL move to 14 000 no matter what; and the drop which will happen when it does; will mark the end of civilisation ( not a joke )

Mos's picture

118k mystery jobs added by the B/D model, can I add mystery dollars to my bank account?

Miles Kendig's picture

Only if you own the bank

glenlloyd's picture

Just wait till after the markets close today, you'll prolly be able to buy one, or two. My bet is four closures today..we'll see.

Once you own it just add funny money to make it good.

Sqworl's picture

LOL..The best way to rob a bank is to own it!

Verbal Kint's picture

it's all good! NFP change from prev month +60k. less bad = fantastic.

Anonymous's picture

fantastic news, more jobs lost because companies not able to get enough work for their employees so earnings falling, so buy buy buy more shares in the companies after all they have cut costs even more now they have fewer workers to pay

chinaguy's picture

More jobs were lost in August than in July.

From the BLS web site: the birth/death model bumped up the August jobless figure by a healthy 54%...118K jobs. Actual jobs lost was 334K

So, this figure is actually WORSE than July's official job loss figure of 247K plus 32K B/D model = 279K

 Is it any wonder that the overall unemployment rate increased?

chinaguy's picture

More jobs were actually lost in August than in July.

From the BLS web site: the birth/death model bumped up the August jobless figure by a healthy 54%...118K jobs. Actual jobs lost was 334K

So, this figure is actually WORSE than July's official job loss figure of 247K plus 32K B/D model = 279K

Is it any wonder that the overall unemployment rate increased?

Opps, they just revised July's numbers down 49K. Still, @ 328K (for July's revised) August's numbers were worse.

 

lizzy36's picture

Christine Romer is such a rolly, polly happy person.

I have massive distrust of happy people.

Why the heck can't someone in CNBC ask her about the mysterious b/d model additions.  And then note that in the absence of those phantom additions the number would be worse have been closer to -330,000 (worse than expected).

lizzy36's picture

Well as long as the administration is going to get a massive fail on healthcare, they have to go with a full court press on the economy.

Mid terms are a coming.....

 

. . .'s picture

Romer tries to be as much of a happy salesman as Art Laffer, Laura Tyson, and Peter Wallison.  They are all way slicker than her though.  Of course, even they pale behind the true master, Robert Rubin.  Even today, he is amazingly slick.

Miles Kendig's picture

"And we are cautiously optimistic.."

Sounds like the need to translate is in order. 

Success - Is proclaimed in the most glowing terms. 

Marginal success - Is described as a situation that is well in hand. 

Total and abject failure - Is described as a situation where success can still be achieved.

lizzy36's picture

Andy, the bridesmaid was a much, much better visual. I may not shop in that aisle but i have a keen appreciation of aesthetics. 

lizzy36's picture

ahhh, the slutty blond.

Merci, kind andy.

lizzy36's picture

well, the slutty blond is a classic amongst the boys (who will look at that picture and think "how long will it take to undo all those fricking bows").

from what i hear the slutty blonds are easily pleased :)!

 

Cheeky Bastard's picture

IME; slutty blonds are usually not slutty at all, but a magnificent and very very smart women. but that's just my experience; i find myself lucky :D

lizzy36's picture

CB, i will take your very learned opinion on this matter. As a red head i have no personal knowledge on this issue :)

Cheeky Bastard's picture

that man/woman suffers from an extreme case of aesthetic deficiency

Takingbets's picture

You do know that some of us here on the west coast eat our breakfast while reading ZH. That picture does not help the appetite. It does the complete opposite. Lol!!!!

Takingbets's picture

Thanks! Now thats something you could sink your T into!