4 ms·

That's why the number of people 18-70 employed full time would be a much more interesting number. No removing of prisoners, people on disability, housewifes, p

by brohee 12y ago

That's why the number of people 18-70 employed full time would be a much more interesting number. No removing of prisoners, people on disability, housewifes, people that worked just one paid hour this week... The picture painted by that number would be bleak in most of the developing word, that's why it's not readily published.

maxerickson 12y ago
The BLS publishes pretty comprehensive statistics for the US: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.toc.htm http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.toc.htm They still have some of the caveats that you mention, but not as many (and many of the reports are for some purpose where the caveat is sensible). For instance, this table breaks down full and part time employment: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t08.htm http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t08.htm
nmcfarl 12y ago
The problem here is that it wouldn't necessarily be bleak. Housewives by choice, college kids and those just retired at 35 (or 65) are good things - these people are doing what they most want to do with their lives, and are having all their needs met without a job. However, as we haven't been collecting this data for the last hundred years we don't know what's normal for this number. And we don't know what percentage of the population are these "good unemployed" and what percentage of people are the traditional (bad) unemployed, so our guesses suck as well. I think this number should be released, but I don't think it will do much good for the first decade or 2. -- Addendum- after seeing maxericson's comment, I was reminded that I should not comment on things I don't know in depth. And it does seem like the U.S. does report the number of employed, it's just not what the press tracks. However, oddly, the numbers he links to seem to mainly be predicated on the same definition of unemployment, and do not seem to dive deeply into the category of "neither employed nor unemployed." Anyhow I'll leave my comment for the time being.
- maxerickson 12y ago
  I expect the other tables there contain the information to get some answer to your "neither employed nor unemployed", several of them analyze the workforce. For instance: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t01.htm http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t01.htm I don't think I'm very informed on this topic, I just happen to know the BLS is tracking a lot more than gets reported in the news.
zanny 12y ago
Except one shouldn't see it as bleak, they should see it as reality. I imagine even the given 30 million number is grossly below what reality is. If you only consider people who have careers, who are not wage slaves in menial labor, who are not ultra-rich who don't work actual hours, who are not retired, who are not disabled, or are not off the grid, who are not children, who are not homemakers, etc you would probably only have 40 - 60 million people working what many consider what a "job" is supposed to be. The other 200+ million are all either working dirt wages in economically compelled indentured servitude, are taking behind the scenes cash deals to survive off, are living with family, etc. There is just not that much practically productive work to be done right now where someone is willing to pay someone else to do it.

by brohee 12y ago

maxerickson 12y ago

The BLS publishes pretty comprehensive statistics for the US: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.toc.htm http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.toc.htm They still have some of the caveats that you mention, but not as many (and many of the reports are for some purpose where the caveat is sensible). For instance, this table breaks down full and part time employment: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t08.htm http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t08.htm

nmcfarl 12y ago

The problem here is that it wouldn't necessarily be bleak. Housewives by choice, college kids and those just retired at 35 (or 65) are good things - these people are doing what they most want to do with their lives, and are having all their needs met without a job. However, as we haven't been collecting this data for the last hundred years we don't know what's normal for this number. And we don't know what percentage of the population are these "good unemployed" and what percentage of people are the traditional (bad) unemployed, so our guesses suck as well. I think this number should be released, but I don't think it will do much good for the first decade or 2. -- Addendum- after seeing maxericson's comment, I was reminded that I should not comment on things I don't know in depth. And it does seem like the U.S. does report the number of employed, it's just not what the press tracks. However, oddly, the numbers he links to seem to mainly be predicated on the same definition of unemployment, and do not seem to dive deeply into the category of "neither employed nor unemployed." Anyhow I'll leave my comment for the time being.

maxerickson 12y ago
I expect the other tables there contain the information to get some answer to your "neither employed nor unemployed", several of them analyze the workforce. For instance: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t01.htm http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t01.htm I don't think I'm very informed on this topic, I just happen to know the BLS is tracking a lot more than gets reported in the news.

zanny 12y ago

Except one shouldn't see it as bleak, they should see it as reality. I imagine even the given 30 million number is grossly below what reality is. If you only consider people who have careers, who are not wage slaves in menial labor, who are not ultra-rich who don't work actual hours, who are not retired, who are not disabled, or are not off the grid, who are not children, who are not homemakers, etc you would probably only have 40 - 60 million people working what many consider what a "job" is supposed to be. The other 200+ million are all either working dirt wages in economically compelled indentured servitude, are taking behind the scenes cash deals to survive off, are living with family, etc. There is just not that much practically productive work to be done right now where someone is willing to pay someone else to do it.