April jobs report: 288,000 jobs added; U-3 falls to 6.3 percent

posted at 9:21 am on May 2, 2014 by Erika Johnsen

Economists were expecting good news from the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ monthly jobs report today, and in some ways, they got it: The topline unemployment rate fell to 6.3 percent, the lowest level since September of 2008:

Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 288,000, and the unemployment rate fell by 0.4 percentage point to 6.3 percent in April, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Employment gains were widespread, led by job growth in professional and business services, retail trade, food services and drinking places, and construction. …

In April, the unemployment rate fell from 6.7 percent to 6.3 percent, and the number of unemployed persons, at 9.8 million, decreased by 733,000. Both measures had shown little movement over the prior 4 months. Over the year, the unemployment rate and the number of unemployed persons declined by 1.2 percentage points and 1.9 million, respectively. (See table A-1.)

But lest we forget, the labor force participation rate in September of 2008 was 66 percent; this month, another 806,000 people dropped out of the labor force, leaving the participation rate right around its new-normal low of 62.8 percent. That means that just about 92,594,000 Americans are not in the labor force right now. Sure, the U-3 unemployment rate has dropped, but the employment-population ratio hasn’t really budged at all:

The civilian labor force dropped by 806,000 in April, following an increase of 503,000 in March. The labor force participation rate fell by 0.4 percentage point to 62.8 percent in April. The participation rate has shown no clear trend in recent months and currently is the same as it was this past October. The employment-population ratio showed no change over the month (58.9 percent) and has changed little over the year. (See table A-1.)

The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes referred to as involuntary part-time workers) was little changed at 7.5 million in April. These individuals were working part time because their hours had been cut back or because they were unable to find full-time work. (See table A-8.)

In April, 2.2 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force, down slightly from a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally adjusted.) These individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey. (See table A-16.)

Read: The net number of employed Americans actually fell by 73,000. Yes, this job report is an improvement over a lot of the trends we’ve been seeing in the past few years, but that’s hardly a metric worth celebrating — we’re still nowhere near our pre-recession unemployment or labor force participation rates. Stay tuned for the White House’s ritual spin-doctoring/endzone dancing.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

At some point we have to disregard these numbers.
They do not reflect reality.

weedisgood on May 2, 2014 at 9:25 AM

More BS…

PatriotRider on May 2, 2014 at 9:27 AM

Part-time nation…

PatriotRider on May 2, 2014 at 9:29 AM

Read: The net number of employed Americans actually fell by 73,000. Yes, this job report is an improvement over a lot of the trends we’ve been seeing in the past few years, but that’s hardly a metric worth celebrating

So it’s not an improvement. The bleeding has slowed, but we are still bleeding.

rbj on May 2, 2014 at 9:29 AM

Obamacare and a new minimum wage will fix this…

PatriotRider on May 2, 2014 at 9:30 AM

At this rate, unemployment will be 0.0% by Nov. 2016. Remember when the W admin. had 6% UE – it was the “worst economy since the Great Depression”? Good times…

fortcoins on May 2, 2014 at 9:34 AM

So it’s not an improvement. The bleeding has slowed, but we are still bleeding.

rbj on May 2, 2014 at 9:29 AM

The bad news – it’s not exactly because there is a clot being formed. It’s closer to there not being enough blood left to continue bleeding.

Steve Eggleston on May 2, 2014 at 9:34 AM

What’s the U-6 number?

BacaDog on May 2, 2014 at 9:34 AM

$15/hour should take care of the rest…

Electrongod on May 2, 2014 at 9:34 AM

Now is a great time to pursue your dreams! :)

– Unless you dream of food and shelter. Then you’re SOL. So dream bigger!

Axe on May 2, 2014 at 9:35 AM

The New Mobility…

Poetry…anyone?

Electrongod on May 2, 2014 at 9:37 AM

I am looking forward for part time..

So I can have time to see a Clippers game…

Electrongod on May 2, 2014 at 9:38 AM

The topline unemployment rate fell to 6.3 percent, the lowest level since September of 2008:

Dude, that was like six years ago. ;0

Before the current resident of the White House transformed America into a welfare culture where producers are punished, takers are rewarded, and public policy is based on homosexuality, illegal aliens, and birth-canal vigilantism.

Happy Nomad on May 2, 2014 at 9:39 AM

800,000 left the job market

jake-the-goose on May 2, 2014 at 9:41 AM

So it’s not an improvement. The bleeding has slowed, but we are still bleeding.

rbj on May 2, 2014 at 9:29 AM

The bleeding has slowed but the patient’s breathing as become heavily labored.

But the bleeding is slowed! Lean Forward!

Bishop on May 2, 2014 at 9:42 AM

Math is hard.

ButterflyDragon on May 2, 2014 at 9:42 AM

Thank Gwad people are so kind to stop looking for work….

Obama is proud of these numbers…

Viva America..

God Obama Speed

Electrongod on May 2, 2014 at 9:43 AM

800,000 left the job market

jake-the-goose on May 2, 2014 at 9:41 AM

Wish the prick in DC could make it 800,001.

msupertas on May 2, 2014 at 9:45 AM

While Erika suffers through the White House spin, a few more numbers for the good of the order:

- The total number of people not part of the workforce but who want a job (this includes both those who last looked between 5 and 52 weeks prior to mid-April and counted as marginally-attached to the workforce, and those who last looked before mid-April 2013 and not counted as marginally-attached to the workforce) – 6,146,000 (seasonally-adjusted), unchanged from March.

- The average private-sector workweek (seasonally-adjusted) – 34.5 hours, unchanged from March.

- The average manufacturing sector workweek (seasonally-adjusted) – 40.8 hours, down 0.2 hours from March. Sort of blows the good news that more people are working at least 35 hours per week out of the water.

- Via Tom Blumer (emphasis and extraneous comma in the original): While, the white teen unemployment rate dropped from 18.3% to 15.9%, the African-American teen rate went up from 36.1% to 36.8%.

Also, Tom noticed that the upward revisions in the February and March jobs numbers came more from changes in seasonal adjustments than from changes in the underlying non-adjusted numbers.

Steve Eggleston on May 2, 2014 at 9:46 AM

U6 is 12.3%……

still trying to confirm

Electrongod (waving)

CoffeeLover on May 2, 2014 at 9:47 AM

#17 The number of Americans receiving benefits from the federal
government each month exceeds the number of full-time workers in the
private sector by more than 60 million .

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/17-facts-to-show-to-anyone-that-believes-that-the-u-s-economy-is-just-fine

Murphy9 on May 2, 2014 at 9:48 AM

What’s the U-6 number?

BacaDog on May 2, 2014 at 9:34 AM

(Partially) seasonally-adjusted – 12.3%, the same 0.4-point drop the U-3 number had.

Not seasonally-adjusted – 11.8%, compared to April 2013′s 13.4%. The unadjusted U-3 of 5.9% compares to April 2013′s 7.1%.

The reason why I stuck the “partially” in there is the number of marginally-attached workers is not seasonally-adjusted.

Steve Eggleston on May 2, 2014 at 9:50 AM

Everyone has missed the real good news. Government grew by 30K.

jmtham156 on May 2, 2014 at 9:52 AM

“Lies, damned lies, and statistics”

the_nile on May 2, 2014 at 9:52 AM

So at what is the economy’s breakpoint for labor participation? And as to actual labor particpation, what percentage is non military government employment? What is the ratio of total private sector employment to the total of those not particating in the workforce and government employees? In other words how many John Gaults are left to support this new workforce economy?

cthemfly on May 2, 2014 at 9:53 AM

So it’s not an improvement. The bleeding has slowed, but we are still bleeding.

rbj on May 2, 2014 at 9:29 AM

The bleeding always slows before a ‘bleed out’.

socalcon on May 2, 2014 at 9:54 AM

Steve Eggleston on May 2, 2014 at 9:46 AM

So success and the perfect society are just around the corner.

Ok sure it might resemble that which the Khmer Rouge created but let’s face facts, the KR weren’t as smart and wise as our people are today, this time it will work.

Bishop on May 2, 2014 at 9:54 AM

Our labor force participation rate is now as low as it was in 1978 at 62.8%

Think about it. The only reason for this drop is there are less people to measure.

In fact, the drop in labor force participation, which is the main reason for this unemployment decrease, is we had the second largest monthly drop on record.

92 million people are now out of the labor force. That is an all-time high.

But %6.3%!!

Marcus Traianus on May 2, 2014 at 9:56 AM

Why in the name of God would anyone believe the governments claim about unemployment? The Obama Administration can’t tell the truth about anything.

oscarwilde on May 2, 2014 at 9:56 AM

We won’t be second to China for long with these types of job numbers!

Oh, wait…

chuckfinlay on May 2, 2014 at 9:57 AM

Our labor force participation rate is now as low as it was in 1978 at 62.8%

Think about it. The only reason for this drop is there are less people to measure.

In fact, the drop in labor force participation, which is the main reason for this unemployment decrease, is we had the second largest monthly drop on record.

92 million people are now out of the labor force. That is an all-time high.

But %6.3%!!

Marcus Traianus on May 2, 2014 at 9:56 AM

Just wait for the spin: THIS IS WHY WE NEED AMNESTY! Aliens do jobs Americans won’t!!!

Scottie on May 2, 2014 at 9:58 AM

This gives cooking the books another meaning entirely.

upinak on May 2, 2014 at 9:59 AM

A few million more people drop out of the workforce, and we’ll be at full employment–W00t!

DRPrice on May 2, 2014 at 9:59 AM

Stay tuned for the White House’s ritual spin-doctoring/endzone dancing.

Spin doctoring?

Heck I’d say they fudged the participation numbers and had to make the correction sometime so they did it now because the unemployment rates had a good month.

I do not, in anyway, believe any of these numbers represent reality or are even a model of such.

Skywise on May 2, 2014 at 10:00 AM

At some point we have to disregard these numbers.
They do not reflect reality.

weedisgood on May 2, 2014 at 9:25 AM

They’re skewed, right?

Louey on May 2, 2014 at 10:03 AM

At some point we have to disregard these numbers.
They do not reflect reality.

weedisgood on May 2, 2014 at 9:25 AM

“Sweet Leaf”

ALRIGHT NOW!
Won’t you listen?

When I first met you, didn’t realize
I can’t forget you, for your surprise
you introduced me, to my mind
And left me wanting, you and your kind

I love you, Oh you know it

My life was empty, forever on a down
Until you took me, showed me around
My life is free now, my life is clear
I love you sweet leaf, though you can’t hear

Come on now, try it out

Straight people don’t know, what you’re about
They put you down and shut you out
you gave to me a new belief
and soon the world will love you sweet leaf

NotCoach on May 2, 2014 at 10:12 AM

Why work when you can get Obamacare, Section 8, and food stamps (housing, shelter, and food). Just part time work for cable TV and cell phones.

Oil Can on May 2, 2014 at 10:14 AM

The bad news – it’s not exactly because there is a clot being formed. It’s closer to there not being enough blood left to continue bleeding.

Steve Eggleston on May 2, 2014 at 9:34 AM

I am worrying that it’s an engineered Weimar situation.

rbj on May 2, 2014 at 10:16 AM

They don’t even bother with the cover of plausibility anymore.

ncinca on May 2, 2014 at 10:16 AM

It is amazing how Obama Derangement Syndrome has people mad about Americans getting jobs. Yet those same people want to cut unemployment insurance and food stamps. What would actually make you people happy?

libfreeordie on May 2, 2014 at 10:18 AM

So at what is the economy’s breakpoint for labor participation? And as to actual labor particpation, what percentage is non military government employment? What is the ratio of total private sector employment to the total of those not particating in the workforce and government employees? In other words how many John Galts are left to support this new workforce economy?

cthemfly on May 2, 2014 at 9:53 AM

The BLS doesn’t count military personnel in its household survey (they aren’t civilians), and doesn’t break out military personnel in the establishment survey (that is, if they count them there). From the household survey (specifically, Table 8), on a seasonally-adjusted basis, there were approximately 125,250,000 paid private-sector workers (including farm workers), and approximately 20,320,000 civilian government workers.

That suggests that roughly 50.6% of the 16-and-older civilian noninstiutional population has a private-sector job. I don’t know (yet) how that is historically.

Steve Eggleston on May 2, 2014 at 10:20 AM

It is amazing how Obama Derangement Syndrome has people mad about Americans getting jobs. Yet those same people want to cut unemployment insurance and food stamps. What would actually make you people happy?

libfreeordie on May 2, 2014 at 10:18 AM

Labor force participation rate December of 2008: 65.8%

Labor force participation rate April of 2014: 62.8%

Lowest since March, 1978.

Jobs are raining from the sky!

Dishonest progressive-Marxist strikes again. Will the dishonest progressive-Marxist ever address the following, or will he continue to pile stupid on top of stupid for all eternity? Stay tuned to find out!

Here’s a simple question for you. Which of the founding fathers did not subscribe to the communitarian ethos Calhoun deploys to rationalize slavery? *sets sundial*

libfreeordie on August 21, 2013 at 9:30 AM

None. They weren’t nascent Commies like John C. Calhoun, and full blown Commies like you. Don’t you think you need to provide some proof for such a ridiculous smear there Mr. Calhoun? You’re a history perfesser, right?

NotCoach on August 21, 2013 at 9:36 AM

Oh dear God….hold on, give me 10 minutes.

libfreeordie on August 21, 2013 at 9:45 AM

NotCoach on May 2, 2014 at 10:25 AM

Obamacare and a new minimum wage will fix this…

PatriotRider on May 2, 2014 at 9:30 AM

Obamacare certainly will. People just don’t know what they are in for with that. The Republicans are really going to have a hard time trying to save that thing, and their hides, at the same time.

rickv404 on May 2, 2014 at 10:26 AM

Our labor force participation rate is now as low as it was in 1978 at 62.8%

Marcus Traianus on May 2, 2014 at 9:56 AM

But those people can now participate in their dreams such as being an out-of-work writer, out-of-work poet, out-of-work actor, out-of-work painter and so on. This opens a whole new work of possibilities that conservatives could never even imagined.

Walter L. Newton on May 2, 2014 at 10:26 AM

It is amazing how Obama Derangement Syndrome has people mad about Americans getting jobs. Yet those same people want to cut unemployment insurance and food stamps. What would actually make you people happy?

libfreeordie on May 2, 2014 at 10:18 AM

Nah, what’s amazing is just how fukking stupid you are. Nobody be all mad that people be getting jobs. Us people are pointing out what a miserable job your prezzy has done being a steward of the economy and pointing out that there are fewer people working now than when he took office 6 years ago.

HumpBot Salvation on May 2, 2014 at 10:31 AM

… another 806,000 people dropped out of the labor force, leaving the participation rate right around its new-normal low of 62.8 percent.

.
Can any of the wonks describe where these people are going? Are they retiring, giving up, dying? What happens to 806,000 people, conveniently, for the government to prop up labor statistics?
.
This is propaganda.

ExpressoBold on May 2, 2014 at 10:32 AM

On these numbers and the 100% A.W.O.L U.S. Goverment regarding the borders and over stay visas etal.

Take the trains, 4 to 8 leave southern Mexico each day, 300 to 500 illegals from south america allow by the Mexican goverment (and the U.S. Goverment) to mount up the invasion on top of the freight cars.

Say 6 trains a day, 400 per train, 300 days a year = 720,000 per year just from this. Each train stop 500 to 700 miles apart the Mexican Goverment hands free food, water, and shelter and enables the re-mount of the troops of the on going invasion.

Now add in the walk over Mexicans 700,000 or more a year, add in the world wide over stay visas, add in the legal new citizens.

The same leadership in Washington D.C. (D’s and R’s) are A.W.O.L. and or in fact aidding and abbeting this invasion.

No one is runnig toward the sound of this fight.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on May 2, 2014 at 10:34 AM

I am worrying that it’s an engineered Weimar situation.

rbj on May 2, 2014 at 10:16 AM

.
AH! The Weimar Republic! Let me remind everyone of the events surrounding the Chancellor of Germany in late 1933 through early 1934:

So, I was watching a History Channel documentary on The Rise of the Third Reich and was interested in the assertion that 52 days after the selection of the German Chancellor in 1933, the Chancellor was given complete control of the German government. The usual form of this government is called “dictatorship.”
.
In pursuing my interest in this assertion that the German Chancellor was appointed “dictator” after 52 days, I read that because of a financial crisis, The Great Depression, no coalition government could be maintained in the Weimar Republic and the president of the republic began to “rule by decree,” paving the way for authoritarian socialist government within three years. The whole problem was that the rule of law and normal government structure was abandoned because austerity measures required to reduce government spending proved unpopular and an emerging leader promised to perform according to democratic principles, winning him the popularity of the middle class and mid-level military officers.
.
In any case, the transformation from democratically elected republic to dictatorship took only about four years and was achieved during a period of economic crisis by the abandonment of democratic principles in favor of an autocratic leader who insisted he was going to pursue political power by democratic elections. The key is that the leaders of the previous government, The Weimar Republic, began to issue executive orders rather than insisting on legislation from the Reichstag, the elected legislature, which in turn prepared the country for the autocratic rule to follow, beginning in 1934.
.
Interesting, huh?

ExpressoBold on May 2, 2014 at 10:36 AM

Can any of the wonks describe where these people are going? Are they retiring, giving up, dying? What happens to 806,000 people, conveniently, for the government to prop up labor statistics?
.
This is propaganda.

ExpressoBold on May 2, 2014 at 10:32 AM

It’s been a while since I did the math, but ZeroHedge freshly confirms that the bulk of the additional dropouts are the under-55 crowd taking Todd Rundgren to heart and banging on the drum all day instead of working:

Namely, in the one most important age group for jobs, those workers aged 25-54 which represent the bulk of the US labor force and are also the best and most productive group, the total number of jobs tumbled from 95,360K to 95,151K, a drop of 209K!

But wait, because it wasn’t just the most important age group bucket: it was all younger workers who got the shaft: jobs in the 16-19 age group dropped by 24K, while those in the 20-24 age group declined by another 26K, which means that in the “young” workers category, those under 55, some 259K jobs were lost.

Steve Eggleston on May 2, 2014 at 10:37 AM

What would actually make you people happy?

libfreeordie on May 2, 2014 at 10:18 AM

A U-3 unemployment rate that goes down because more Americans are working instead of going down because more Americans become discouraged enough that they stop looking entirely. That too much to ask for?

Happy Nomad on May 2, 2014 at 10:37 AM

What would actually make you people happy?

libfreeordie on May 2, 2014 at 10:18 AM

An end to this over-the-top propaganda. Enough already!

ncinca on May 2, 2014 at 10:48 AM

If we ever find out how low these commie Democrats will go, it will be to late.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on May 2, 2014 at 10:49 AM

What would actually make you people happy?

libfreeordie on May 2, 2014 at 10:18 AM

People in the prime workforce age group actually working or choosing to raise a family in a one-worker/two-adult household because they can (rather than because there’s no jobs), a federal government that doesn’t seize and redistribute over a fifth of the entire economy in an attempt to make Marxism “work this time”, and a Jack Daniels on the rocks.

Steve Eggleston on May 2, 2014 at 10:49 AM

ExpressoBold on May 2, 2014 at 10:32 AM

Well, I have a friend that lost his job 3 yrs. ago. He was in the mortgage business. Mid 50′s in age. College graduate. Can not find a job. Sent out resumes for 2 years. Finally gave up. Does any odd job he can find. Lost home, most everything. Wife works and they just struggle to keep from getting government aid. Lots of older people in the same shape.

Barred on May 2, 2014 at 10:51 AM

Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 288,000, and the unemployment rate fell by 0.4 percentage point to 6.3 percent in April, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today.

 
this month, another 806,000 people dropped out of the labor force, leaving the participation rate right around its new-normal low of 62.8 percent.

 

It is amazing how Obama Derangement Syndrome has people mad about Americans getting jobs… What would actually make you people happy?
 
libfreeordie on May 2, 2014 at 10:18 AM

 
Removal of “Math for Non-Science Majors” from college course catalogs would be a good start.

rogerb on May 2, 2014 at 10:51 AM

Obvious result of “Common Core” teaching the libs “New Age Math”.

MSGTAS on May 2, 2014 at 10:57 AM

According to this, they make more on welfare that they do working.

Of course, this doesn’t say how much gets squandered between the recorded spending and how much the recipient receives.

This is the environment out there

lineholder on May 2, 2014 at 11:05 AM

Removal of “Math for Non-Science Majors” from college course catalogs would be a good start.

rogerb on May 2, 2014 at 10:51 AM

I’d settle for two semesters of first-year Economics.

Newtie and the Beauty on May 2, 2014 at 11:05 AM

What would actually make you people happy?

libfreeordie on May 2, 2014 at 10:18 AM

You people? Sounds kind of racist to me, perfesser. Maybe you need to unpack your Affirmative Action black privilege.

slickwillie2001 on May 2, 2014 at 11:07 AM

…why even talk about this shit?….the ‘bullshit’ hasn’t changed!

KOOLAID2 on May 2, 2014 at 11:13 AM

Steve Eggleston on May 2, 2014 at 10:49 AM

Perfect answer.One thing I have not seen in all the reports is the percentage of part time and or temp jobs in the reports.

If the percentage is still at 72% or more that means very few “bread winner” jobs, which IMHO is all they should report.

Why r the unemployment numbers based on a survey, when they have hard count from alllll the unemployment offices around the country?

And if they don’t have the hard count, why not? This is 2014 isn’t it? Not 1929?

dogsoldier on May 2, 2014 at 11:13 AM

One thing I have not seen in all the reports is the percentage of part time and or temp jobs in the reports.

If the percentage is still at 72% or more that means very few “bread winner” jobs, which IMHO is all they should report.

Why r the unemployment numbers based on a survey, when they have hard count from alllll the unemployment offices around the country?

And if they don’t have the hard count, why not? This is 2014 isn’t it? Not 1929?

dogsoldier on May 2, 2014 at 11:13 AM

I alluded to it above, but the number of people working fewer than 35 hours a week dropped by a seasonally-adjusted 398,000, while the number working at least 35 hours a week increased by a seasonally-adjusted 412,000. Side note – the reason that doesn’t add up to -73,000 is because the different categories use different seasonal adjustments.

That also doesn’t mesh with the establishment survey that says the overall private-sector workweek was unchanged and that the workweek in the manufacturing sector was down.

Tom Blumer (linked to in my “additional numbers” comment) tracks the temporary jobs situation every month, and once again, it vastly outperformed the larger job market.

Unemployment benefits only covers a portion of those who are unemployed. Those who previously worked for themselves or in jobs where unemployment insurance wasn’t collected, those who voluntarily left, those whose former employer successfully fought unemployment benefits, and those whose benefits ran out wouldn’t be counted.

Steve Eggleston on May 2, 2014 at 11:34 AM

Love it when you true beoievers try to Unskew unemployment numbers, or any numbers rwally, when it’s clear you have no idea what you’re talking about.

Unskew, unskew, unskew!

No matter how many times it blows up in your faces, you keep repeating the same idiocy.

everdiso on May 2, 2014 at 11:42 AM

Got to be a sock.

rogerb on May 2, 2014 at 11:43 AM

“Stay tuned for the White House’s ritual spin-doctoring/endzone dancing”

That is exactly what you did here. Spin

ChildOfGod on May 2, 2014 at 11:44 AM

806,000 people dropped out of the labor force

In one month..?

d1carter on May 2, 2014 at 11:45 AM

It is amazing how Obama Derangement Syndrome has people mad about Americans getting jobs. Yet those same people want to cut unemployment insurance and food stamps. What would actually make you people happy?
libfreeordie on May 2, 2014 at 10:18 AM

Reality in reporting instead of propaganda for one. Being a, so-called, perfesser I would think you’d like facts from your government reports too.

Secondly, regardless of what these numbers say, the majority of my friends and family have not had steady work (all with college degrees… Perfesser) for going on 5 years now. 3 have been unemployed the entire time and have had to get by with freelance work or fast food jobs.

Meanwhile we’re supposed to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants which will make unemployment WORSE for my friends (why should they hire the 50+ year old woman with bake pain when they can hire the 30 year old Hispanic?). But Oooh… No I’m just a hateful racist!

Right?

Take off your rose colored glasses and/or stop being a paid troll because you’re just selling out your country for an ideology that is destroying us all.

Skywise on May 2, 2014 at 11:45 AM

ChildOfGod on May 2, 2014 at 11:44 AM

In what way?

lineholder on May 2, 2014 at 11:46 AM

Can any of the wonks describe where these people are going? Are they retiring, giving up, dying? What happens to 806,000 people, conveniently, for the government to prop up labor statistics?
.

It’s basic demographics.

We have known for decades that the labor force would shrink significantly as the baby boomers reached retirement age.

This is no surprise – it’s exactly what was expected.

everdiso on May 2, 2014 at 11:47 AM

What would actually make you people happy?

libfreeordie on May 2, 2014 at 10:18 AM

For starters, the keynesian crowd finally understanding and admitting that the unemployment rate does decline during fiscal austerity and, as a corollary, that the monetary offset works even at ZLB.

Then that the decline on active population and total employment is a supply side one, not a demand side one and needs to be solved through supply side policies, not ill-targeted demand side policies designed to solve problems that don’t exist any more.

joana on May 2, 2014 at 11:48 AM

Love it when you true beoievers try to Unskew unemployment numbers, or any numbers rwally, when it’s clear you have no idea what you’re talking about.

Unskew, unskew, unskew!

No matter how many times it blows up in your faces, you keep repeating the same idiocy.

everdiso on May 2, 2014 at 11:42 AM

That’s funny – the New York Times is saying what we’re saying.

Next.

It’s basic demographics.

We have known for decades that the labor force would shrink significantly as the baby boomers reached retirement age.

This is no surprise – it’s exactly what was expected.

everdiso on May 2, 2014 at 11:47 AM

It’s barely half demographics.

NEXT!

Steve Eggleston on May 2, 2014 at 11:53 AM

everdiso on May 2, 2014 at 11:47 AM

It isn’t baby-boomers we’re losing from the job market.

Namely, in the one most important age group for jobs, those workers aged 25-54 which represent the bulk of the US labor force and are also the best and most productive group, the total number of jobs tumbled from 95,360K to 95,151K, a drop of 209K!

But wait, because it wasn’t just the most important age group bucket: it was all younger workers who got the shaft: jobs in the 16-19 age group dropped by 24K, while those in the 20-24 age group declined by another 26K, which means that in the “young” workers category, those under 55, some 259K jobs were lost.

Steve Eggleston on May 2, 2014 at 10:37 AM

lineholder on May 2, 2014 at 11:55 AM

I’m starting to think that everdiso is nonintelligent’s dumber twin brother. I think they both are a scientific experiment in whch boxes of rocks were raised as children.

NotCoach on May 2, 2014 at 11:57 AM

We have known for decades that the labor force would shrink significantly as the baby boomers reached retirement age.
 
This is no surprise – it’s exactly what was expected.
 
everdiso on May 2, 2014 at 11:47 AM

 
+1. They retired and made those jobs available for…
 
wait…
 
Oopsies.

rogerb on May 2, 2014 at 11:57 AM

Then that the decline on active population and total employment is a supply side one, not a demand side one and needs to be solved through supply side policies, not ill-targeted demand side policies designed to solve problems that don’t exist any more.

joana on May 2, 2014 at 11:48 AM

How would you suggest that this be accomplished?

lineholder on May 2, 2014 at 12:00 PM

So it’s not an improvement. The bleeding has slowed, but we are still bleeding.

rbj on May 2, 2014 at 9:29 AM

The bad news – it’s not exactly because there is a clot being formed. It’s closer to there not being enough blood left to continue bleeding.

Steve Eggleston on May 2, 2014 at 9:34 AM

Very apropos continuation of the analogy.

It is amazing how Obama Derangement Syndrome has people mad about Americans getting jobs. Yet those same people want to cut unemployment insurance and food stamps. What would actually make you people happy?
libfreeordie on May 2, 2014 at 10:18 AM

Feel free to show proof anyone is mad about Americans getting jobs.. we can wait.

Oh dear God….hold on, give me 10 minutes.

libfreeordie on August 21, 2013 at 9:45 AM

Effay5 on May 2, 2014 at 12:02 PM

Love it when you true beoievers try to Unskew unemployment numbers, or any numbers rwally, when it’s clear you have no idea what you’re talking about.

Unskew, unskew, unskew!

No matter how many times it blows up in your faces, you keep repeating the same idiocy.

everdiso on May 2, 2014 at 11:42 AM

We have known for decades that the labor force would shrink significantly as the baby boomers reached retirement age.

This is no surprise – it’s exactly what was expected.

everdiso on May 2, 2014 at 11:47 AM

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Just when we thought you couldn’t get any dumber.

HumpBot Salvation on May 2, 2014 at 12:02 PM

Love it when you true beoievers try to Unskew unemployment numbers, or any numbers rwally, when it’s clear you have no idea what you’re talking about.

No matter how many times it blows up in your faces, you keep repeating the same idiocy.

everdiso on May 2, 2014 at 11:42 AM

.
My emphases are comment enough…

ExpressoBold on May 2, 2014 at 12:03 PM

Don’t worry guys… As soon as republicans are in office libfree, Joanna and everdiso will sudden to rediscover the growing homeless problem and the scores of “hidden unemployed”.

Skywise on May 2, 2014 at 12:04 PM

According to Drudge, BLS says 93.6 mil out of the labor force.

Even if you take it as only proportional, that’s 27% unemployed.

formwiz on May 2, 2014 at 12:17 PM

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Just when we thought you couldn’t get any dumber.

HumpBot Salvation on May 2, 2014 at 12:02 PM

You’d think everdiso doesn’t know that “unskew” would mean “rectify” if it were actually a real word.

Effay5 on May 2, 2014 at 12:19 PM

806,000 annualized is 9,672,000.

bw222 on May 2, 2014 at 12:29 PM

Then that the decline on active population and total employment is a supply side one, not a demand side one and needs to be solved through supply side policies, not ill-targeted demand side policies designed to solve problems that don’t exist any more.

joana on May 2, 2014 at 11:48 AM

How would you suggest that this be accomplished?

lineholder on May 2, 2014 at 12:00 PM

Genuinely interested in what ideas you have on this.

lineholder on May 2, 2014 at 12:33 PM

What do you suppose that 92.5 million people are doing if they are not in the labor force? Given that there are 50 million on food stamps, many of whom are working poverty level jobs, that still leaves tens of millions of people who simply aren’t in the system.

How big does this number have to grow before these feel good lies about jobs are finally put to rest? At what point does money printing cease to fool people about the state of the country?

Another Libertarian on May 2, 2014 at 12:36 PM

We have known for decades that the labor force would shrink significantly as the baby boomers reached retirement age.

This is no surprise – it’s exactly what was expected.

everdiso on May 2, 2014 at 11:47 AM

That’s certainly part of it, but the vast majority have dropped out because the job market sucks and pay is weak.

Economist Heidi Shierholz of the liberal Economic Policy Institute, using data from researchers at the Boston Federal Reserve, found that approximately 6 million people have left the labor market since 2008. Of those, nearly three-quarters — 4.4 million people — left for cyclical reasons.

Link

FYI- the EPI is Robert Reich’s think tank.

Wages have dropped over 4% under Obama – and that’s just since the June 2009 recovery.

And don’t forget poverty has now been above 15% for the third year in a row- the worst streak in FIVE DECADES.

Obama’s presidency has been wonderful for the rich, Wall Street and corporate America but murder on the 99%

Chuck Schick on May 2, 2014 at 12:39 PM

I know that math is hard, but the numbers don’t add up. 288,000 “jobs” were added in April (acording to the employer survey), yet the net number of employed Americans FELL by 73,000. Add to that the four week moving average of those filing NEW unemployment claims of 320,000 (meaning during April, 1,280,000 people filed a new unemployment claim).

Could someone explain to us how you can have 1,280,000 people filing NEW unemployment claims (meaning they LOST their job), yet the Administration claims 288,000 new jobs were added. By my math, the net impact should have been a decrease of about 992,000 jobs. What gives?

I know an employer survey is used to determine the new “jobs” numbers and a household survey is used to determine the unemployment rate, but the NEW unemployment claims isn’t based on a survey, it is based on state unemployment office numbers.

GAlpha10 on May 2, 2014 at 12:54 PM

It is amazing how Obama Derangement Syndrome has people mad about Americans getting jobs. Yet those same people want to cut unemployment insurance and food stamps. What would actually make you people happy?

libfreeordie on May 2, 2014 at 10:18 AM

An economic recovery.

Chuck Schick on May 2, 2014 at 12:55 PM

Everdiso, you have a call holding on line two. Everdiso, line two, please.

rogerb on May 2, 2014 at 1:05 PM

Hopefully, things will stabilize when the boomers drop.

DoNotPanic on May 2, 2014 at 2:38 PM

It is amazing how Obama Derangement Syndrome has people “mad about Americans getting jobs”.

libfreeordie on May 2, 2014 at 10:18 AM

Lying about people’s motives doesn’t suit your argument, libfree.

We have known for decades that the labor force would shrink significantly as the baby boomers reached retirement age.

everdiso on May 2, 2014 at 11:47 AM

Yeah, this is the same argument presented to me by the HuffPo faithful, talking about how 10,000 bluehairs are leaving the workforce every day.

What’s 10,000 times 30, everdiso? 806,000?

The Schaef on May 2, 2014 at 3:05 PM

That suggests that roughly 50.6% of the 16-and-older civilian noninstiutional population has a private-sector job. I don’t know (yet) how that is historically.

Steve Eggleston on May 2, 2014 at 10:20 AM

Thanks Steve

cthemfly on May 2, 2014 at 4:56 PM

For 144 straight months of Republican majority control, Jan 1995 – Dec 2006, the employment-population ratio never dropped below 62%, and averaged 63.3%.

For 88 straight months of Democrat majority control, Jan 2007-Apr 2014, the employment-population ratio has averaged 59.8%, and has been BELOW that level for FIVE STRAIGHT YEARS!

ITguy on May 2, 2014 at 10:45 PM

When the official unemployment rate goes down, but only because people have given up on ever finding work, then the official unemployment number is about as useless as it can get.

No, this is not good news. Statistical blips regardless.

There Goes the Neighborhood on May 2, 2014 at 10:53 PM

We have known for decades that the labor force would shrink significantly as the baby boomers reached retirement age.

everdiso on May 2, 2014 at 11:47 AM

Many problems with that: Many baby boomers cannot afford to retire completely; it’s a global issue; our population is growing, not dwindling; we continue to receive immigrant workers; many major companies continue to conduct layoffs in the thousands including younger workers; and lastly, what you offer is propaganda, not a solution.

From your buddies at the ILO:

Since the beginning of the crisis the global jobs gap increased by 67 million. In spite of positive employment gains over the past years, global unemployment is still high and expected to approach 208 million people by 2015 and 214 million people by 2018. The challenge is greater in advanced economies and among the youth.

Youth have been particularly affected by the recession. In 2013, almost 74 million youth were unemployed (or 12.6%) compared to 70 million (11.5%) in 2007. After declining from 2009 to 2011, youth unemployment is again on the rise. ILO’s World of Work Report 2013 notes that high unemployment and inequality are likely to cause lower future wages and further social unrest in many parts of the world.

Over 30 million jobs are still needed to return employment to the pre-crisis level.

http://www.ilo.org/washington/areas/global-economic-recovery-and-job-creation/lang–en/index.htm

You guys should at least coordinate your talking points…

It is amazing how Obama Derangement Syndrome has people “mad about Americans getting jobs”.

libfreeordie on May 2, 2014 at 10:18 AM

Most jobs created in this recovery are low-wage, study finds

http://blogs.marketwatch.com/capitolreport/2014/05/01/most-jobs-created-in-this-recovery-are-low-wage-study-finds/

Dr. ZhivBlago on May 3, 2014 at 12:05 AM

When Bush was in office, his budget and everything else was called fuzzy math. With Obama, we now have fantasy math.

savage24 on May 3, 2014 at 9:41 AM

The U-3 number is purely political, thus the only one we hear about with this regime. Doesn’t reflect reality at all.

waelse1 on May 4, 2014 at 1:17 AM

Comment pages: 1 2