A Simple Yet Comprehensive View Of America's Unemployed
Lately there has been much back and forth over the definitions of (un)employment, of improving (deteriorating) trends therein, and of just what is going on with the labor pool in the U.S. Due to the lack of a definitive data series that tracks comprehensive unemployment over time, the possibility for loose interpretation exists and is (ab)used by many. In order to hopefully mitigate a lot of the debate on the margin, here is probably one of the more comprehensive charts available, which tracks Initial Claims, Continuing Claims and Emergency Unemployment Compensation (the last being somewhat notorious lately, and a datapoint that has to be considered due to the skyrocketing exhaustion rate) since 1967. Pretty simple. The result does not need much commentary.
(9 votes)
»
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 22:51
#162766
Ayuh--dat's bad...
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 09:13
#163140
What I see is all these new investors, in the market of investing in themselves.
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 22:53
#162767
Looks like the trend is still increasing.
I expect it to move sideways for a while and then slowly declining due to people exhausting their unemployment benefits throughout the next year.
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 22:54
#162768
is that a hockey stick?
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 05:04
#163031
that was exactly my thought when I first saw Tyler's graph and looks like it is:
http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/~lambert/parody/tcs/soonlegatesfig1.gif
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:05
#162782
That graph clearly shows a bottom is forming. Thank God.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 01:08
#162941
Almost fell off my chair reading that. You should be a comedian!
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 10:13
#163174
:)
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 03:46
#163023
+100
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 12:59
#163324
Yeah we truly need a sarcasm button or icon on here. :)
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:05
#162784
It would be interesting to plot Monthly Net Tax Revenues, perhaps inverted, on the same time line. You should see similar type of stimulus effects as we see in this data.
Mark Beck
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:08
#162788
I wonder what that graph would look like without the fiscal and monetary stimulus measuring 18% of GDP?
I can't wait for the money printing to end. Or not...
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:15
#162799
Why would the money printing end?
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:20
#162806
Touché.
Haven't you heard it's ending in Q1'10?
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 08:34
#163115
Sorry. I don't get out much.
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:11
#162793
Has anyone factored in the plethera of Tiger whores now looking for work?
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 00:32
#162907
they will be eligible for extended benefits
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 00:33
#162911
heh
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 06:53
#163064
Didn't we already hear they received an "extended" benefit from Tiger himself?
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 12:07
#163304
Yes, but the stimulus is wearing off and Tiger is going through a deflationary phase. Rumor has it that his recreational companions are trying to leverage their deposit and withdrawal experience into banking careers. My captcha answer was, appropriately, 69.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 10:32
#163193
Thought it would be a net wash - the out of work 'companions' replaced by reporters, lawyers, marriage counselors, security - but I was wrong. The question now is which courses has he not played.
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:13
#162797
Lazyman needs to come over and see this chart.
Must read. Bluesquid posted this and I want to be sure you see it. Lazyman is a shitty journalist, he sucked up to Russian authorities and did not see the collapse coming.
http://www.thenation.com/doc/19991004/taibbli
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:44
#162832
"The record shows that Liesman's bureau was little more than a PR conduit for a corrupt regime, consistently averting its eyes from the ugly truth."
Deja Vu, with a side of LOL. He's such an idiot.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 00:11
#162869
I'm sure Liesman knows this AND the real numbers that the BLS isn't releasing.
But it will be interesting to see how he spins this to protect the current adgenda.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 08:19
#163103
Wait! You mean that people in old media would report bogus information as if it were true and they would experience great success in their media career as a result?
"I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!"
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 02:14
#162982
Oh SNAP. I didn't know he has been full of shit his entire career. I thought it was a progressive disease.
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:18
#162803
The real unmeasurable is job quality. If a college graduate is flipping burgers at McDonalds, then he or she is considered employed, but are they really? As more college level positions are off-shored, the goal of higher education is being decimated. How do you count the under-employed? I suspect their number is shockingly large.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 02:10
#162978
the bls attempts to measure underemployment through
u-6 and other data series....that number reads near 17%
and if you use pre-clinton methodology gross
unemployment is 22%...
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:19
#162804
Oh I just remebere dmy self as an example of data forgotten. You see,those unemployment numbers contain only employees numbers. What about independent contractors?they don't qualify for unemployment. And since during the nineties and the new milinum,many companies were resorting to ousourcing many of their nonecore businesses to "independent contractors",who are usually like employees but they don't qualify for benefits. Is there any way of knpwing how many of those are unemployed?
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 10:35
#163194
+100... I was one of them!
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 10:45
#163202
Funny, most of the independent contractors I know (guys with their own one-man LLC or S Corp, and I say "man" because only men seem to do this for the most part) are gainfully employed and have been the entire time. It seems that the country still needs those who, you know, ACTUALLY DO WORK. Funny that. They all have to pay into unemployment, but none can ever draw from it. Another stupid problem that screws up the ability of anyone who works hard and takes risks to actually get ahead.
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:27
#162809
LMAO, wowzers, count me in there. I decided to take a philosophical stand and get on unemployment simply on the basis of frustration with feeding an unending, tireless war machine, nvm the fact that all that really matters to the powers that be is maintaining a path of the rich despite all the moral hazard. The time is now, we need to organize into a cohesive force for change, screw voting, make change with ur wallets.DO NOT PAY TAXES or minimize those that u cannot avoid!
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 00:07
#162861
Front page of this morning's San Francisco Chronicle:
Tea Party radicals gear up for 2010 elections
Organizers of the conservative Tea Party movement are forging plans to translate the anger that fueled nationwide anti-tax rallies and town hall protests into an electoral force that can boot incumbents in next year's midterm elections.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/12/13/MN3L1B34BA.D...
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:27
#162810
Hungry people riot,There will never stop extending UI claims,They can't have a massive uprising because there troupes are 6000 miles away
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:28
#162811
LMAO, wowzers, count me in there. I decided to take a philosophical stand and get on unemployment simply on the basis of frustration with feeding an unending, tireless war machine, nvm the fact that all that really matters to the powers that be is maintaining a path of the rich despite all the moral hazard. The time is now, we need to organize into a cohesive force for change, screw voting, make change with ur wallets.DO NOT PAY TAXES or minimize those that u cannot avoid!
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:28
#162812
Interesting, 50% increase in population over the period:
http://numbersusa.org/images/population459.jpg
And yet the chart is flat until 2008 crash dispite the population increase.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 01:29
#162959
True, it would be nice to see this this data set as a percentage of the population instead.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 09:15
#163142
Agreed, or a percentage of the population aged 18 to 65.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 10:53
#163216
Agreed. Raw numbers are meaningless. Here's a link to the US population from 1970 - 2000:
1960 179,323,175
1970 203,302,031
1980 226,542,199
1990 248,718,301
2000 281,421,906
http://www.census.gov/prod/2002pubs/pol02marv-pt5.pdf
Unfortunately, it doesn't break the population down by age. (Though that would need some adjustment, too, since people tend to be healthier and more able to work at older ages now.)
305,529,237: U.S. population estimate for Jan. 1, 2009
http://www.usnews.com/articles/opinion/2008/12/31/us-population-2009-305-million-and-counting.html
These are very rough figures but they're better than not adjusting for population at all.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 16:47
#163708
Thanks, that's just about what I was imagining as the basis change while I looked at the chart. Much less dramatic if scaled to population. It would be interesting to see U6 scaled in fully normalized terms (standardizing all statistical definitions) over the same period.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 11:05
#163228
Yes it would. Another problem is that this chart is comparing apples to oranges since the current period includes people covered by the emergency extension program. In most of the earlier periods, people in the same situation would not be included in the statistics, thereby inflating the current period. There may be other differences in the way the claims are determined through the period covered by the chart. It would be much more informative if the information were adjusted for working population and used the same definition for "unemployed" for the entire period of the chart. (E.g., if you're going to include people who are eligible for Emergency Unemployment Compensation, also include people who would have been eligible for such a program had it existed throughout the period covered. Also adjust the regular employment compensation coverage - if the definitions or eligibility has been changed - so that you are comparing like with like for the whole period. Or at least asterisk the discrepancies and give at least a ballpark estimate for what the comparable number would have been.)
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:32
#162815
Where's the problem?
I'm not seeing it.
*shrug*
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:35
#162821
That chart is unbelievable, and it doesn't even include those who aren't receiving anymore un-employment benefits because they ran out. And it doesn't include those who lost a $20.00-$40.00 per hour factory job, and replaced it with a part time job at Walmart for $7 bucks an hour. We are going into the Great Depression Two!
Red
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:35
#162822
What's all the commotion? It's like golf-- higher is better, right!?
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 00:20
#162888
Certainly!
Higher is better when my bowling score beats my golf score.
It's been a while though.
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:36
#162825
Does this factor in growth in the pool of workers subject to becoming unemployed? I agree with the message, just curious.
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:54
#162849
Chart does not adjust for the fact that total US population has grown from 198MM in 1967 to 305MM today
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 00:17
#162882
+1
v. important factor
which actually mitigates the unemployment factor during the 90s and early 00's
of course, nothing mitigates the current malarkey
I also wonder if this has filtered out the changes in definitions to the unemployment figures, the likes of which the guys at
http://www.shadowstats.com/
track....
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:38
#162827
How does it look if you seasonally adjust it? (and zoom in) Is there a bottom there, or not?
This is a notch above 9 million people. Where are the other 20-40 millions that are without jobs? Which numbers track them?
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:41
#162829
Looks like the ES futures charts (among others) in the last 1/2 hour or so since Citi announced it will pay back TARP and give every taxpayer a candy cane.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 00:07
#162864
For some odd reason, I would not trust that candy-cane....
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:53
#162842
Missing are all the illegal-immigrants who lost their jobs in the downturn though they number in the millions.
Missing are all the sole-proprietorships that went puff -- many a tradesman in that story.
Missing are the newly graduated. Even PHDs are finding it hell to get employed.
Missing are the real estate agents who've seen their commissions sliced and diced to the bone.
////
Federal tax receipts tell the story: we're in worse shape than the Great Depression.
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:54
#162847
Is there enough data available to recalculate the modern unemployment rate so it is comparable to 1928-1946?
on Sun, 12/13/2009 - 23:54
#162848
Can someone explain the spikes? They appear to occur in January each year. So should we expect another big spike in January, 2010?
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 00:17
#162883
employment has a seasonal component, such as retail
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 00:18
#162884
Retail laying off temp workers after the Christmas and post-Christmas seasons.
Yes, expect another spike this January.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 00:09
#162866
Tyler,
Don't forget "Extended Benefits." That's another Federal program that's grown in a big way and should be included.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 00:10
#162867
Where I work we've already gotten rid of the deadweight. It seems that with each passing week the pool of easily laid-off no-goodniks would diminish, making it successively more difficult to maintain an increasing unemployment rate. I suspect that most companies take a breather following a 10+% or greater lay-off just to see if the economy is going to improve. When it becomes obvious everything is only getting worse, then real lay-offs will begin again in earnest.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 00:13
#162872
Lets call it: 22%
The SGS Alternate Unemployment Rate reflects current unemployment reporting methodology adjusted for SGS-estimated long-term discouraged workers, who were defined out of official existence in 1994. That estimate is added to the BLS estimate of U-6 unemployment, which includes short-term discouraged workers.
http://www.shadowstats.com/
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 00:13
#162873
All during the 8 year presidency of George W Bush and his dimwit US Labor Secretary Elaine Chao, Mitch McConnell's wife. Proof that Republican tax cuts do not work to create jobs. The labor available in India and China is way too large.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 01:16
#162952
What chart are you reading?
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 02:14
#162980
yes they did create jobs....they created jobs
for chinese, indians, vietnamese and a smattering
east europeans and irish...
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 02:22
#162988
I blame the fucking Whigs. They fucked everything up....
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 08:30
#163111
+1
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 00:14
#162875
quit stealing algores global warming charts!
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 00:37
#162914
High tight flag. Go long that chart.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 00:50
#162923
Chart looks like it is setting up nicely for an upside move.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 01:13
#162946
Anyone know how the hiring for the census will impact this next year? I heard there will be approx 1 million people hired part time to do census work -- so will that cause this to artificially drop? when? the media will point to a great improvement and ignore the fact the census workers will be unemployed again within 6 mos.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 01:21
#162953
The only way this can be spun in a good way is by Dubai paying off its debt.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 01:23
#162955
Actually the chart is pointless since it just tells us what we already know: there was a huge spike in unemployment recently. Liesman claims that unemployment is on its way down, but your chart is not detailed enough to show us any trend that may have started in the last few months.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 02:15
#162985
The chart also lends no insight into those folks "leaving the workforce" that are often mentioned in discussions of BLS data. Where did they go? And why did they go there? The answers may shock you:
"U.S. Workforce Disappearing At Alarming Rate"
http://outsidethe-cardboard-box.tumblr.com/post/281336116/u-s-workforce-disappearing-at-alarming-rate
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 01:46
#162968
Well, we better keep fighting overseas because the Military will keep People employed. Then the VA will provide them medical care. Then they can enjoy benefits.
Awesome.
On the other hand, employing people under burden of do not touch anything, do anything that impacts other people, make any decision binding on the Company (except to quit), and do not do anything that will incur Management's reassessment of your unqualified thoughts.
Hell, Even Ebayers are working under rules fit for a workplace. They must follow certain behaviors to benefit the buyers or face clawbacks according to paypal. They cannot access thier money for 21 days when they are new or accumulate problem data.
Finally the Utilities are the last line. If those bills stop payment because millions cannot get unemployment, then we lost capacity to recover from disasters and freezing cold when poles and wires fall.
My area has no prospects for employment. If you are lucky, you might become a temp working 6 hours a week doing something no one else is willing to do. We had temps working the barn doors for Car temp drivers at the auction. They had no job responsibility other than lift, pull and wait. Oh and a capacity for Pain, medical care is self-optional.
Ever hear of a train wreck or a collapse? Now sit quietly and listen to the decreasing sounds of money diminishing power on this great Country while we struggle like Sisyphus to roll this great rock up hill.
Soon it will go the other way dominated by Sir Issac first and later by cries of revolution.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 08:34
#163114
dude. I've sworn off whiskey for breakfast. that's not helping...
wow.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 02:16
#162986
and for those who are employed in the bottom 4 quintiles, their incomes have been declining progressively since peaking in 1973....this all thanks to heavy regulation, taxation, and massive federal reserve manipulation of the currency which it has debased relentlessly without remorse or sanction...
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 03:23
#163010
Yes, new upside move, obviously
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 08:35
#163116
+1
clearly a "buy" signal...
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 06:31
#163055
That doesn't account for the underemployed or huge number of contract employees who don't qualify for unemployment either does it?
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 07:54
#163086
Or self employed looking at the end of the line (equity) but dont have UI
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 10:36
#163195
If you switch from working as a 1099 to a W2 through a third party, you qualify for unemployment. As a W2 contractor, I can deduct up to 98% of my expenses as communicated to me by the IRS and I avoid the huge expense of the second part of social security required as a 1099.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 06:33
#163056
This chart resembles a field hockey stick. Wait till February when ice hockey is in full swing. I will use my brother's restaurant as an example. He has cut back the number of employees by over 60% in the last year. He is just hanging on with minimal staff. The 27 dinners he did on Sunday won't cut it. 2 years ago he used to do at least 500 to 600 on a weekend.
The next round of layoffs will include everyone and (sadly) the restaurant will close.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 06:44
#163058
Does this number take into account
the 2.3 million people incarcerated as
of 2007 census.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 08:09
#163095
The graph is a nice "real look" at 3 raw components, which is helpful to see what most folks are experiencing organically around them.
In terms of the BLS series I only look at the U6 number, now above 17%
The plan is to Borrow, Spend, Extend and Pretend. As we can see in this graph, this has worked well so far. Keep doing the same thing, making the same mistakes, and expect a different outcome. Keynsian economic theory (bubblenomics) at it's best. The Keynsians have no answers.
The only solution that will work now is to cut taxes, cut govt. spending ( at all levels: fed, state, local), reduce regulation on businesses, raise interest rates and remove liquidity from the system. In other words they need to do exactly the opposite things they are doing. Keep doing the same things and you will get the same outcome.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 11:22
#163242
Yes, those are the only solutions, but how much damage will be done before those solutions are implemented? If the US could get off its high horse and stop all the meddling in people's lives, and end the "Law Enforcement Bubble" aka "War on Drugs" that would be a fine start. We have to get capital flowing into productive enterprises and stop having it soaked up by the mishmash of central planners who seek to divert it.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 08:54
#163129
Redraw it, normalized to population.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 09:39
#163157
yes, because it's critical to catch that massive surge in population of 100 million people in 2007.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 10:22
#163181
It's because of Global Warming. lol
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 10:40
#163199
If 10 employees lose their jobs because of off-shoring, but the company contracts for 20 jobs off-shore, have 20 American jobs been eliminated? This is an,"if a tree falls in the forest..." sort of thought.
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 10:45
#163204
This a perfect starting point rather than some of the other mumbo jumbo I have seen from BLS and others. I hope CNBC et. al. begin using it. Thanks again ZH
on Mon, 12/14/2009 - 13:24
#163403
How long to the point of no return?