4 ms·

I thought I'd bother after reading your comment. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm and the numbe

I thought I'd bother after reading your comment. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm and the numbers: https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t01.htm https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t01.htm It's actually kinda straightforward, and very clear about what measures they're using. The numbers are bit scary - "The employment-population ratio, at 56.6 percent, changed little over the month but is 4.5 percentage points lower than in February." "The number of persons not in the labor force who currently want a job, at 7.2 million, changed little in September; this measure is 2.3 million higher than in February. These individuals were not counted as unemployed because they were not actively looking for work during the last 4 weeks or were unavailable to take a job." So that's 12m officially unemployed, plus 7m "not in the labor force" but who want a job. So yeah, the article is kinda on point; that the numbers don't mean what they think we mean. But I have to agree: that's not because the numbers aren't available for anyone to look at and understand.

hajile 6y ago
74.1 million children 54.0 million over 65 48.9 million on disability 328.2 million total population 185.8 million people employed at 56.6% employment 128.1 million people not employed (including children) 54 million people not employed, but marginally employable (max income is $1,260 per month if on disability and $18,240/yr when retired) In any case, under-employment is still a bigger issue than unemployment.
- shuckles 6y ago
  Am I reading this right: almost 1 in 5 American adults is on disability?
  - darawk 6y ago
    Yes. Disability numbers are shockingly high. It's an issue that is really not talked about enough.
  - bostonvaulter2 6y ago
    Yes, it is truly scary. A large portion of them are in more rural areas that have been decimated. Also, IIRC states pay money to trainers/consultants that help people get on the national disability programs.
  - amznthrwaway 6y ago
    That number doesn't match what the SSA publishes in their annual reports.[1]. They put the figure on disability at 8.9 million disabled workers, with 11.2 million total beneficiaries once you include the disabled workers' children.) That said, the real figures are still startling. They represents 4.4% of the US worker population but some states rely incredibly heavily on the program. Alabama - 8.0% of the population Arkansas - 7.9% of the population Kentucky - 7.6% of the population Maine - 7.4% of the population Mississippi - 7.5% of the population West Virginia - 8.6% of the population 1: https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/di_asr/2019/di_asr19.pdf https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/di_asr/2019/di_asr...
    - Forbo 6y ago
      No idea why this was downvoted into oblivion, so I vouched for it. It seems to state factual information and cites direct sources. The information presented is located on page 29. Maybe instead of just drive-by downvoting, you can state some reasoning for doing so.
      - Noumenon72 6y ago
        For a second I thought I'd lost my ability to vouch, then I reloaded and found you had already done so. Thanks for recognizing good posts!
  - sk2020 6y ago
    Collecting disability doesn’t necessarily mean you’re incapacitated or can’t work at all. Depression is a common disability, for example. It’s very common for veterans who served more than 4 years to get some amount of disability if they are persistent, and often not for crippling injuries (sleep apnea is a popular one)
dalbasal 6y ago
Exactly right. The reality is that "unemployment" is a highly visible metric. Sure, the data itself is available... A big part of the reason why it's important to have this data available is exactly for this purpose: call bullshit on the unemployment numbers when necessary... ...especially considering that "want a job" is measured in very specific ways.
- lostlogin 6y ago
  > reality is that "unemployment" is a highly visible metric. Is it though? The photos of queues for jobs and unemployment benefits is something of the distant past. Find out that a different measure makes the rate 3x higher came as news to me.

hajile 6y ago

74.1 million children 54.0 million over 65 48.9 million on disability 328.2 million total population 185.8 million people employed at 56.6% employment 128.1 million people not employed (including children) 54 million people not employed, but marginally employable (max income is $1,260 per month if on disability and $18,240/yr when retired) In any case, under-employment is still a bigger issue than unemployment.

shuckles 6y ago
Am I reading this right: almost 1 in 5 American adults is on disability?
- darawk 6y ago
  Yes. Disability numbers are shockingly high. It's an issue that is really not talked about enough.
- bostonvaulter2 6y ago
  Yes, it is truly scary. A large portion of them are in more rural areas that have been decimated. Also, IIRC states pay money to trainers/consultants that help people get on the national disability programs.
- amznthrwaway 6y ago
  That number doesn't match what the SSA publishes in their annual reports.[1]. They put the figure on disability at 8.9 million disabled workers, with 11.2 million total beneficiaries once you include the disabled workers' children.) That said, the real figures are still startling. They represents 4.4% of the US worker population but some states rely incredibly heavily on the program. Alabama - 8.0% of the population Arkansas - 7.9% of the population Kentucky - 7.6% of the population Maine - 7.4% of the population Mississippi - 7.5% of the population West Virginia - 8.6% of the population 1: https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/di_asr/2019/di_asr19.pdf https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/statcomps/di_asr/2019/di_asr...
  - Forbo 6y ago
    No idea why this was downvoted into oblivion, so I vouched for it. It seems to state factual information and cites direct sources. The information presented is located on page 29. Maybe instead of just drive-by downvoting, you can state some reasoning for doing so.
    - Noumenon72 6y ago
      For a second I thought I'd lost my ability to vouch, then I reloaded and found you had already done so. Thanks for recognizing good posts!
- sk2020 6y ago
  Collecting disability doesn’t necessarily mean you’re incapacitated or can’t work at all. Depression is a common disability, for example. It’s very common for veterans who served more than 4 years to get some amount of disability if they are persistent, and often not for crippling injuries (sleep apnea is a popular one)

dalbasal 6y ago

Exactly right. The reality is that "unemployment" is a highly visible metric. Sure, the data itself is available... A big part of the reason why it's important to have this data available is exactly for this purpose: call bullshit on the unemployment numbers when necessary... ...especially considering that "want a job" is measured in very specific ways.

lostlogin 6y ago
> reality is that "unemployment" is a highly visible metric. Is it though? The photos of queues for jobs and unemployment benefits is something of the distant past. Find out that a different measure makes the rate 3x higher came as news to me.