6 ms·

How can you say that businesses are rehiring when unemployment is the highest since the great depression? Previously, jobs were being shed and productivity was

How can you say that businesses are rehiring when unemployment is the highest since the great depression? Previously, jobs were being shed and productivity was rising. Now, jobs are still being shed and productivity is declining.

alexro 15y ago
One explanation would be that people at work couldn't keep going on 60 hour week, so at some point decrease in productivity is unavoidable. That means the businesses will start recruiting to get back on track with 'normal' productivity.
hugh3 15y ago
Not actually so. Unemployment has fallen from 10.1% to 9.2% since its peak in October 2009. Businesses aren't rehiring fast, but they are rehiring. Oh, and it's not the highest since the Great Depression either -- there was a spike to 10.8% in 1982. http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=z1ebjpgk2654c1_&ctype=l&strail=false&nselm=h&met_y=unemployment_rate&fdim_y=seasonality:S&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=state&ifdim=state&tdim=true&tstart=-692553600000&tend=1311231600000&hl=en&dl=en&icfg&uniSize=0.035&iconSize=0.5 http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=z1ebjpgk2654c1_&... Isn't data wonderful?
- forensic 15y ago
  The main reason unemployment stats look that way is because people give up looking for work and are no longer counted in the stats. Data is not wonderful when it is used to confuse and deceive rather than enlighten. Data becomes a tool of enslavement when a word like "unemployment" takes on an operational definition that does not reflect the public perception.
  - hugh3 15y ago
    Do you have any more reliable data that would contradict this data and support your own assertion that unemployment is actually increasing?
    - bandushrew 15y ago
      Its a fact that the data you provided does not take into account 'participation' drop off. If you want to continue presenting statistics like that, maybe you should find a set of data that encompasses the more obvious problems?
      - hugh3 15y ago
        I'm sorry, I had assumed that the onus of proof lay with the person making the original (and countrary-to-popular-belief-and-best-available-statistics) claim that unemployment was still increasing. Participation, of course, is a tricky beast. Sometimes people stop participating because they're despairing over being able to find a job, but they also retire, or get pregnant, or go back to university or (if immigrants) their home countries.
        bandushrew 15y ago
        I think the onus of proof lies with the person seeking the truth. He presented no statistics at all, you presented statistics that are clearly entirely ignoring a important figure. Neither of you seem to be at all interested in seeking the truth, each just advancing their own personal agenda. meh.
- yequalsx 15y ago
  It is true that non government employment has increased but the decline in the unemployment rate has a lot to do with a decline in the participation rate. One needs to look at the participation rate. Around 125,000 jobs per month need to be created in order to keep up with the increase in population.
jamesaguilar 15y ago
This graph from the Bureau of Labor Statistics refutes your premise. http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet?request_action=wh&graph_name=LN_cpsbref3 http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet?request_action=w...
- forensic 15y ago
  What is sad is that people are going to see your post and think that unemployment is actually falling. When in reality, those statistics have been cooked. Those numbers don't include people who have given up looking, the underemployed, part-time workers, or even suicides. The Bureau of Labor Statistics is part of the problem. Their measurements are deceptive.
  - NY_Entrepreneur 15y ago
    There actually is a point about suicides and other problems: During the early 1980s when the Rust Belt was suffering, the rates of divorce, domestic violence, infant mortality, alcoholism, and suicide all went through the roof. Sadly I blame the UAW, for then and for what's happened to Detroit since, but it still happened. It was grim. Sadly, a UAW like solution solves some problems but creates some bigger ones including just killing off the whole industry it tried to 'organize'.
  - jamesaguilar 15y ago
    They also don't account for people who have reentered the job force and are keeping unemployment up. So that criticism swings both ways. At any rate, I suspect people on this board who are interested in economics are aware of the limitations of the BLS's measuring quirks. At any rate, all the actual data linked in this thread points to the view that unemployment is not at its peak since the great depression. Unless you post something credible to refute that, I'm going to assume that I was right about this point and that your hypothesis is unsupported.

alexro 15y ago

One explanation would be that people at work couldn't keep going on 60 hour week, so at some point decrease in productivity is unavoidable. That means the businesses will start recruiting to get back on track with 'normal' productivity.

hugh3 15y ago

Not actually so. Unemployment has fallen from 10.1% to 9.2% since its peak in October 2009. Businesses aren't rehiring fast, but they are rehiring. Oh, and it's not the highest since the Great Depression either -- there was a spike to 10.8% in 1982. http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=z1ebjpgk2654c1_&ctype=l&strail=false&nselm=h&met_y=unemployment_rate&fdim_y=seasonality:S&scale_y=lin&ind_y=false&rdim=state&ifdim=state&tdim=true&tstart=-692553600000&tend=1311231600000&hl=en&dl=en&icfg&uniSize=0.035&iconSize=0.5 http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=z1ebjpgk2654c1_&... Isn't data wonderful?

forensic 15y ago
The main reason unemployment stats look that way is because people give up looking for work and are no longer counted in the stats. Data is not wonderful when it is used to confuse and deceive rather than enlighten. Data becomes a tool of enslavement when a word like "unemployment" takes on an operational definition that does not reflect the public perception.
- hugh3 15y ago
  Do you have any more reliable data that would contradict this data and support your own assertion that unemployment is actually increasing?
  - bandushrew 15y ago
    Its a fact that the data you provided does not take into account 'participation' drop off. If you want to continue presenting statistics like that, maybe you should find a set of data that encompasses the more obvious problems?
    - hugh3 15y ago
      I'm sorry, I had assumed that the onus of proof lay with the person making the original (and countrary-to-popular-belief-and-best-available-statistics) claim that unemployment was still increasing. Participation, of course, is a tricky beast. Sometimes people stop participating because they're despairing over being able to find a job, but they also retire, or get pregnant, or go back to university or (if immigrants) their home countries.
      - bandushrew 15y ago
        I think the onus of proof lies with the person seeking the truth. He presented no statistics at all, you presented statistics that are clearly entirely ignoring a important figure. Neither of you seem to be at all interested in seeking the truth, each just advancing their own personal agenda. meh.
yequalsx 15y ago
It is true that non government employment has increased but the decline in the unemployment rate has a lot to do with a decline in the participation rate. One needs to look at the participation rate. Around 125,000 jobs per month need to be created in order to keep up with the increase in population.

jamesaguilar 15y ago

This graph from the Bureau of Labor Statistics refutes your premise. http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet?request_action=wh&graph_name=LN_cpsbref3 http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet?request_action=w...

forensic 15y ago
What is sad is that people are going to see your post and think that unemployment is actually falling. When in reality, those statistics have been cooked. Those numbers don't include people who have given up looking, the underemployed, part-time workers, or even suicides. The Bureau of Labor Statistics is part of the problem. Their measurements are deceptive.
- NY_Entrepreneur 15y ago
  There actually is a point about suicides and other problems: During the early 1980s when the Rust Belt was suffering, the rates of divorce, domestic violence, infant mortality, alcoholism, and suicide all went through the roof. Sadly I blame the UAW, for then and for what's happened to Detroit since, but it still happened. It was grim. Sadly, a UAW like solution solves some problems but creates some bigger ones including just killing off the whole industry it tried to 'organize'.
- jamesaguilar 15y ago
  They also don't account for people who have reentered the job force and are keeping unemployment up. So that criticism swings both ways. At any rate, I suspect people on this board who are interested in economics are aware of the limitations of the BLS's measuring quirks. At any rate, all the actual data linked in this thread points to the view that unemployment is not at its peak since the great depression. Unless you post something credible to refute that, I'm going to assume that I was right about this point and that your hypothesis is unsupported.