Job creation’s glum arithmetic
Michael Greenstone and Adam Looney of the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank, did some rough calculations estimating the job growth needed to reduce the unemployment rate, 7.7 percent in November, to 6.5 percent. Their conclusion: If job creation’s modest pace, about 220,000 a month during the past year, continues, the Fed’s mid-2015 prediction will be fulfilled.
But of course, it may not continue. Greenstone and Looney also estimated what would happen under different rates of job growth, as the numbers below show. The first number represents average monthly job growth; the second shows when the country would hit 6.5 percent unemployment under such a scenario.
150,000 — Spring 2018
200,000 — Fall 2015
250,000 — End of 2014
300,000 — Spring 2014
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
Just get more people to drop out of the workforce and go on the dole.
forest on December 20, 2012 at 9:43 AM
job creation is sooo….bush era.
tom daschle concerned on December 20, 2012 at 9:44 AM
Bah, the real number is so much higher, if only everyone were actually counted. They can paper over this all they want but it’s still a lie and everyone knows it.
Bishop on December 20, 2012 at 9:46 AM
Not everyone knows it. When I attempt to discuss all of the people that have dropped out of the workforce with my rabid Dem family members they simply do not accept what I’m talking about. They don’t “accept” that people stop getting counted in the unemployment numbers. They think that it’s GOP propaganda.
visions on December 20, 2012 at 9:51 AM
As long as I can get a job in a little over two years, or my schooling will be for naught… Going back for my masters, in a field that according to everything out there says is a growing field in demand which happens to coincide with something I’ve always wanted to do – make maps. GIS
Logus on December 20, 2012 at 9:55 AM
I’ll amend: Everyone knows it, not everyone can admit it.
Bishop on December 20, 2012 at 9:57 AM
Did they include the newly entering the job market people who left?
astonerii on December 20, 2012 at 9:59 AM
Work force participation chart will be your friend.
astonerii on December 20, 2012 at 10:00 AM
There are a lot of jobs out there. The problem is two-fold from what I can see: it’s an employer’s market and they can afford to be uber picky; combined with that, many of the jobs are very specific requiring very detailed skill sets and unless you already have those skill sets new/more schooling/education is needed. That presents a problem in that unless you have the money or can get a loan much more the ability to get back into school, you’re out of luck on being a viable candidate for any new job.
My problem was like many people’s I suspect. I’m a good, hard worker with a great work ethic, but my resume bit. It doesn’t matter how good of a worker you can be or how well you can do in an interview. If you can’t even get the interview, it’s pointless, and many people’s resumes hurt them regardless of their ethic and ability. I’ve talked with hiring managers before. They will scan dozens and hundreds of resumes and if they see even one red flag, they pitch it. They know nothing of the person except what the resume tells them, and if the resume shows any problem, in the waste bin it goes and so goes that job seeker’s opportunities.
So, it’s not necessarily about promoting job growth, there’s also a need for many of us who need a job to figure out how we can turn our poor resume into a positive asset, getting us that interview and thus the job.
For me, the only way for me to do this is to go back to school and get my masters degree. The “clouds aligned” for me, otherwise I’d still be at square one.
I feel like a giddy little school boy.
Logus on December 20, 2012 at 10:06 AM
I don’t even know if I figure into those statistics or will. I’ve never been to an unemployment office. I’ve only been fired once and laid off once, in nearly 25 years of working.
I suspect that those numbers are very much off because there are no doubt many, many people like me who never qualified for unemployment whether due to time or because they resigned a job… yet they’re having just as much trouble finding work as those who go to the unemployment office.
Logus on December 20, 2012 at 10:10 AM
We’ve hired three legal secretaries in the past year for a specific job. Each one of them turned out to not think appearing at work everyday was important. We were lucky if they completed a full week. These were younger employees. Consequently, we aim to hire more seasoned personnel who happen to really want a job.
Oh, and all three were fired.
NJ Red on December 20, 2012 at 10:13 AM
Its only glum if you use math.
Why not count jobs that have been saved or created?
Gatsu on December 20, 2012 at 11:52 AM