Unemployment down to 5.2%

[vaulos]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4236911.stm

The US created fewer jobs than expected ... n office.

[Burz]

Sure beats the EU 'paradise' of 10% and 38hour work weeks to encourage more employment.

[Klast Brell]

The US created fewer jobs than expected in January, but a fall in jobseekers pushed the unemployment rate to its lowest level in three years.

The fall in job seekers would be the key here. That would be the number of people who's unemployment benefits ran out. The Unemployment numbers only reflect those collecting unemployment benefits.

I would love to see the % employed numbers instead.

[Klast Brell]

Found them at http://www.bls.gov/

Series Id: LNU02300000Not Seasonally AdjustedSeries title: (Unadj) Employment-Population RatioLabor force status: Employment-population ratioType of data: PercentAge: 16 years and over

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual
1995 62.0 62.3 62.6 62.7 62.8 63.4 63.7 63.3 62.9 63.2 63.0 62.7 62.9
1996 61.7 62.1 62.5 62.7 63.1 63.7 64.1 63.8 63.4 63.8 63.6 63.4 63.2
1997 62.5 62.7 63.3 63.5 63.9 64.3 64.7 64.4 63.8 64.1 64.2 64.1 63.8
1998 63.1 63.3 63.6 63.9 64.2 64.5 64.7 64.3 64.1 64.3 64.3 64.3 64.1
1999 63.5 63.6 63.9 64.0 64.3 64.7 64.9 64.5 64.1 64.5 64.5 64.5 64.3
2000 63.8 64.0 64.2 64.6 64.4 64.9 64.8 64.5 64.2 64.4 64.4 64.5 64.4
2001 63.7 63.8 64.0 63.9 63.9 64.1 64.2 63.5 63.4 63.4 63.1 63.0 63.7
2002 62.0 62.5 62.5 62.6 62.9 63.1 63.2 63.0 63.0 63.0 62.5 62.4 62.7
2003 61.8 62.0 62.1 62.3 62.3 62.7 62.6 62.4 62.1 62.4 62.4 62.3 62.3
2004 61.6 61.8 61.9 62.1 62.3 62.7 63.0 62.7 62.4 62.6 62.6 62.4 62.3
2005 61.7

the data comes from a search query so I cant link directly to the table.

[Partha]

A net loss of 2.1 workers per 100 since Bush took office.

[Grygonos Thunderwulf]

and it's all his fault too... pffftt...

[Partha]

No, it's Clinton's, of course.

[Aabe]

Nah, just more women finding their true place in society, barefoot, pregnant in the kitchen.

[Grygonos Thunderwulf]

I never said it was clinton's fault cpt. presumptuos. I think alot of of fault rests with the dot bomb in the late 90's early 00' and then 9/11 happening. there were a good number of jobs lost to those two things.. neither of which I think were a product of any policy

[Mukik]

dont forget the baby boomers are starting to retire as well.

[Beestyall]

Unfortunately do to good health and a suck-ass retirement (stock markets) baby boomers will stay longer in the work-force, so really expect to see these types of unemployment numbers until we can bring back manufacturing jobs or we start WWIII.

[SicTimMitchell]

America's future is in innovation.

There are jillions of people who can do just as good a job as Americans at manufacturing, and in India, China, etc. a jillion more who can do all our "information age" basic gruntwork. (Accounting, programming, etc.)

That's part of the reason the partial stem-cell research ban is so stupid. It's an economic blunder as much as a moral one.

America has always had the ability to make science fiction into product. Let's get hopping on that nanotech and cold fusion, hey?

Oh, and our entertainment industry pwns the world. Even countries and people that hate us watch and listen to our stuff.

[Beestyall]

America's future is in innovation.

That would be the cause for WWIII. Since the US buracrats have no real stomach for space exploration or the common sense to continue funding the NASA geeks, then war is the next best innovator.

That's part of the reason the partial stem-cell research ban is so stupid. It's an economic blunder as much as a moral one.

America has always had the ability to make science fiction into product. Let's get hopping on that nanotech and cold fusion, hey?

Unfortunately we don't have the school system in place to really help our kids choose this path. Both science and math scores are dropping or holding consistant and last time I checked we were 11th or 14th in the world in that standard. Not really a booming place to learn to innovate.

Not to mention that most researchers these days are paid far below the average national salary.

Oh, and our entertainment industry pwns the world. Even countries and people that hate us watch and listen to our stuff.

Produced in the US, financed in the US, shot in Canada. I'm not saying Toronto is a movie/TV whore...

Wait, yes I am. I'm pretty sure the Toronto City movie liasion people would sell their souls for a low budget flick to be made there.

[Torakus]

The fall in job seekers would be the key here. That would be the number of people who's unemployment benefits ran out. The Unemployment numbers only reflect those collecting unemployment benefits.

I would love to see the % employed numbers instead.

I had taken that at face value for a long time. As much as you and Relbeek spout that out I figured it had to be true.

Guess what..................?

You should have snoped it out.

Courtesy of http://www.snopes.com

Claim: The government understates the unemployment rate because they report how many people are collecting unemployment insurance rather than how many people are out of work.
Status: False.

Origins: Although
this belief is widespread and has at times been reported as factual in the mainstream media, the truth of the matter is that unemployment statistics are gathered through a process of sampling a representative number of households; they are not arrived by counting the number of unemployment insurance claims made during a particular month. Data collected in the Current Population Survey (CPS), a monthly survey of over 60,000 households, is used for this purpose. From this data, an extrapolation is made about the unemployment status of the country as a whole.

Were this not so, jobless people whose benefits have run out would not be included in the number. Likewise, those who were never eligible for benefits or who never applied for pogey would be missed, rendering the statistic inaccurate.

While not related to the national unemployment rate, unemployment insurance claims data do serve as inputs into the calculation of state and local area unemployment estimates.

Tora

[Relbeek Einre]

Klast had it wrong. Anyone not actively looking for work isn't counted. So those collecting unemployment benefits are all looking for work and are counted. Those who aren't may be looking for work and are counted.