[HaroldMY]

Friday's decline in unemployment is another testament to the Bush administration's statistical chicanery. The raw numbers give an unemployment rate of 5.1%. However, using the mystical "seasonal adjustment," the rate declines to 4.7%. Though the payroll employment number rose by 193,000, the number of those who dropped out of the participating labor force increased by 168,000. Below is a copy of the "Not In Labor Force" numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics.



This information can also be found at the "Not In Labor Force" statistics from Bureau of Labor Statistics site at: N.I.L.F. During November the number of new dropouts from the labor force was 250,000. Thus, over the last 2 months the number of "Not In Labor Force" workers has increased by 418,000. In fact, at a different section of the U.S. BLS site, the non-seasonally adjusted increase in the number of unemployed workers increased 652,000 in the last month alone, from 6.956 million in December to 7.608 million in January 2006. Over the last 2 months, the number of new payroll jobs has increased by only 233,000.This can be found at BLS: Employment

Thus the number of those dropping out of the labor force had increased almost twice as much as the number of new jobs, even when using "seasonally-adjusted" numbers. Using non-seasonally adjusted numbers for the last month alone, the 652,0000 workers dropping out of the labor force is over 3 times the number of new jobs created.

Both seasonal adjustment, and alteration of the "Not In Labor Force" workers has a tremendous effect on the unemployment rate. Those that drop out of the participation labor force (labelled as "Not In Labor Force") are not counted as unemployed. As a result their number is not included in the total for unemployed workers. With a total employment 143.07 million, and a total participating labor force of 150.11 million, there are 7 million unemployed workers. This gives an unemployment percentage of 4.7%. However, if the "non-seasonally" adjusted numbers were used (which are the actual raw numbers recorded by the BLS) the total number of employed workers would be 141.48 million, total participating labor force of 149.09 million, and a total of 7.608 million unemployed. Again, these latter numbers are the actual raw numbers, not the "adjusted" ones used to concoct the 4.7% number. Using the raw numbers, the unemployment rate would be 5.1%. Below is a copy of the page from the BLS showing these numbers.



These numbers can also be found at Employment.

Furthermore, even these latter numbers do not take into account the unusually high number of people who just stopped looking for work. It's just amazing how many more people have given up on finding a job under Bush than they did under Clinton. In fact, people have dropped out of the labor force under Bush at twice the rate they did during Clinton's last 5 years. In fact, had the dropout rate from the labor force over the last 5 been the same as that under Clinton, the number of those counted as "unemployed" would be 10.5 million, instead of the current 7 million. And this change alone would make the unemployment rate 7.0%, instead of 4.7%. If the seasonal adjustment factor had not been used as well, the total number unemployed would be 11.1 million, and the unemployment rate would be 7.3%.

Don't be deceived by a 4.7% unemployment rate. The numbers have been cooked by the Bush administration. Not only have they reclassified 3.5 million from unemployed into the "not-in-labor-force" category, they've used the so-called "seasonal adjustment" factor to reduce the rate even further. Without the "not-in-labor-force" manipulation, the unemployment rate would be 7.0%. But even when using that manipulation, the raw numbers put the unemployment rate at 5.1%. However, by the magic of the "seasonal adjustment" factor, that 5.1% has been further reduced to 4.7%.

The Bush administration is the most dishonest, corrupt, and incompetent administration in U.S. history.

EconomicPopulistCommentary

Economic Patriot Forum

[wmtravelservice]

I am curious about who these numbers represent? Who is within that group of 77.5Million people in the US who are not unemployed yet not in the labour force? People under 16 are not included and I can't beleive that 1 out of every 4 people in the US are retired.

The only thing I can think of is that people are going back to single income families, so the previous "extra" income earner is no longer looking for a job and is considered "not in the labour force".

[auctionlover]

The number of employed are up as well.

The number you are actually looking for is "discouraged workers" those who want to work but have stopped looking for work. That number is not unusually high.

Nice try, but there are many reasons people drop out of the labor force. You'll notice that frmo 96-98, the number of those who dropped out also increased, mainly due to people taking early retirement due to their wealthy stock portfolios. I'd imagine now a lot of people are selling their overpriced homes, buying an apartment, and retiring on the proceeds.

[MyOwnStyle]

Another stat that has gone overlooked is that most of the jobs created in America the past few years have paid far less than the jobs created in the two decades before it. Retail and part time jobs have soared, while white collar jobs have seen a decline. On top of that, America is in debt to it's ears, both the gov't and personal debt of citizens. Spending has hit a bit of a snag and although it's not doomsday or anything, the economy in America isn't nearly as robust or strong as the White House is spinning it.

[infarrelisam]

That's not quite true. Yes, wages have declined during the Bush administration, but that's normal considering the economic conditions that have prevailed during the Bush years. Wages don't start to go up at any kind of decent pace until the third or fourth year of a boom. This was true in the 90s, when wages didn't start to really take off until 1996, and it's true of this boom too, with wages in the last 12 months rising 3.3%, causing fears of inflation as the labor market tightens.

I think that from here until the next recession, hopefully at least a few years away, we'll see wage gains over inflation of at least 2% per year.

Now, onto consumer spending and debt. Yes, consumers are more indebted than ever. This is mostly due to the irrational exuberance in the housing market. People who own houses are spending all their money, figuring that their homes will rise 15% a year indefinitely and never drop in value. Even worse, many are borrowing nearly the full value of their home so they can spend more! People who have just bought homes are spending all their money trying to make the payments. So right now we have a savings problem. But I don't think it's as economically problematic as you might think. All it means is that when the next recession hits, something is going to happen that happens in every recession: a lot of people are going to bankrupt. Real estate will get the bad name stocks did around 2001-2002. Of course by then, stocks will be rising and all the people with short memories will start pouring money into stocks again. Which means an increase in the savings rate, which in turn leads to higher capital gains taxes which in turn leads to a balanced budget.

These things move in cycles. I see nothing happening in 2006 that hasn't happened here before. Unlike a nation like France or Japan, we don't have an impossible structural deficit, or longterm problems with our economy. Being Canadian, I think the best example I can give you of our situation is Canada during the Mulroney years. Mistakes were made on the budget side, but Canada's free economy and smarter government after the Liberals took power made it all right.

[N9NACzws]

Friday's decline in unemployment is another testament to the Bush administration's statistical chicanery....

...The Bush administration is the most dishonest, corrupt, and incompetent administration in U.S. history.

Good gosh this is a bit over the top.

I'm pretty sure you will find such labour statistics routinely manipulated and understated by every single western government going back for the last 30+ years.

As reprehensible as the action is, Bush is hardly the "most dishonest, corrupt and incompetent administration in US history" on this basis.

[Nurfzerne]

Lets not forget the so-called surplus that was had by siphoning off money from pension funds during the Clinton administration, either.

Not to single out Clinton as particularly dastardly a politician, either. But numbers juggling is what these guys do - they're in for 4 years (or 8) and then its some other guy's problem.

[Bobdilan]

Okay .. I'll humor you ... we now have a 5.1% unemployment rate .. That's still great!

[Beragagnu]

Good gosh this is a bit over the top.

I'm pretty sure you will find such labour statistics routinely manipulated and understated by every single western government going back for the last 30+ years.

As reprehensible as the action is, Bush is hardly the "most dishonest, corrupt and incompetent administration in US history" on this basis.

Well said. Acting like these numbers are new or that changing the impact of the statements according to political whim is new is rediculous. The BLS has numbers going way back. This is all just partisan BS. Unemployment in the US is extremely low to the point of we have jobs that are going unfilled. Currently over 2 million job openings.

[GWRIeEQp]

..... using the mystical "seasonal adjustment," ....

Which has been in use for decades. Yup, It's all Bush's fault. He sucks.

[Tic Tac Took]

Even a partisan like myself can't drop this all on Bush.
Virtually every administration has changed the way unemployment is calculated, tweaking the numbers to make them look a little better.
Although the change is usually barely noticeable, a tenth of a percent maybe, it all adds up. If we used the same method they used in the 1950's, that is the percentage of people who want jobs but can't find them, unemployment would be around 12 or 14%.
But now you are only unemployed if you report that you are looking for work, and the only people who actually do that are collecting unemployment, once the unemployment runs out, unless you keep filling out the form,(even though you don't get a check) you are no longer counted.

[Dstyeglm]

..... If we used the same method they used in the 1950's, that is the percentage of people who want jobs but can't find them, unemployment would be around 12 or 14%. .....

Any data to support this or did you recieve a vision from Allah?

[DoctorIrokezov]

If somebody cant find a job today they have a problem. There are jobs that go unfilled every day all across this country. Everything from warehouse to health care to IT positions. Yes many of them are "service oriented" positions, but there also are many jobs that are technical and higher paying as well.

I am making more today than I was 2 years ago and will make more in the years to come, its called an education, I was laid off when the company i worked for closed (poor management), I found out about a program in my state that would pay for schooling for those that were laid off, I took advantage of it and now have a degree in Network Administration with a very bright future. Its all about taking advantage of the programs that ARE out there to help people find work, get educational assistance for a career change, etc.

[ANCETPYNCTEXT]

Yeah but you are taking responsibility for your own life. What about the slackers who don't?

[wsbizwsa]

Yeah but you are taking responsibility for your own life. What about the slackers who don't?

Its time we ALL take responsibility for our own life, time to get off of the goverment tit for everything.

If they want to go back to school fine, they can work part time at McDonalds while they go back on my dime as long as they hold a 2.5 GPA or higher in a field that is short of people ie: ANYTHING medical.
It can be done, I worked at Sears 20-30 hours a week for a few months, then worked at Sears on the weekend and tutored during the week. Then I left sears and tutored and worked the campus help desk while going to school. I graduated with a 3.55 GPA so I KNOW it can be done.

You helped to pay for my schooling and I am gratefull and now I am back to work paying taxes etc...
The circle is now complete.

[mirzaterak]

Its time we ALL take responsibility for our own life, time to get off of the goverment tit for everything.

If they want to go back to school fine, they can work part time at McDonalds while they go back on my dime as long as they hold a 2.5 GPA or higher in a field that is short of people ie: ANYTHING medical.
It can be done, I worked at Sears 20-30 hours a week for a few months, then worked at Sears on the weekend and tutored during the week. Then I left sears and tutored and worked the campus help desk while going to school. I graduated with a 3.55 GPA so I KNOW it can be done.

You helped to pay for my schooling and I am gratefull and now I am back to work paying taxes etc...
The circle is now complete.

Good for you, your's is a wise approach

KUDOS

[Shootohoist]

Good for you, your's is a wise approach

KUDOS

I wouldnt say wise, just using common sense and taking advantage of the programs out there for what they were designed for.

[ggdfgtdfffhfyj]

If somebody cant find a job today they have a problem. There are jobs that go unfilled every day all across this country. Everything from warehouse to health care to IT positions. Yes many of them are "service oriented" positions, but there also are many jobs that are technical and higher paying as well.

I am making more today than I was 2 years ago and will make more in the years to come, its called an education, I was laid off when the company i worked for closed (poor management), I found out about a program in my state that would pay for schooling for those that were laid off, I took advantage of it and now have a degree in Network Administration with a very bright future. Its all about taking advantage of the programs that ARE out there to help people find work, get educational assistance for a career change, etc.

Your example is one of the success of government re-training of unemployed workers, during the 50's the GI bill provided a free college education to anyone who served in the armed forces during WWII, which was virtually every male from 18 to 35. This coupled with no money down low interest VA mortgages, created college educated homeowners who in turn fed a great economic expansion.
Your individual work ethic is a part of your success, but without the government provided training, where would you be? Would you have paid for it yourself?

[fectsnanteemy]

....
Your individual work ethic is a part of your success, but without the government provided training, where would you be? Would you have paid for it yourself?

Don't turn this into another government program for slackers. Being a Marine, he earned every GD penny of it. As a matter of fact, he's owed much more.