The news that the unemployment numbers have dropped is great for President Obama's run for reelection. However, does this tell the whole story? I don't believe that unemployment can be measured effectively with a simple equation. Just because someone has given up hope looking for a job doesn't mean that they are no longer unemployed but it does make them statistically invisible when it comes to the current measure of unemployment. Is there a better way to measure unemployment? Is there anything more that the government should be doing to decrease real unemployment?
I'm not so sure that there is a better way to measure unemployment because its hard to account for all of the people who aren't looking for a job at all.
ReplyDeleteI agree with what Jones is saying here, but I also agree with Lamrock in that it would be damn near impossible to account the people who aren't looking for a job in general. I dont know if there is anything the government can even do to increase real unemployment because I dont know if there is anything they could do that would make people who dont want a job...want a job
ReplyDeleteI think an important point to evaluate is the timing of the report. It is common for many companies especially in the retail sector to employ extra help during the holiday season. It will be interesting to see if these jobs are sustained for the next report. That point aside, based on my own personal interactions with people, I think that the "statistically invisible" portion of the population is growing at an alarming rate. The disgruntled worker that has given up looking for employment is becoming more prevalent. I believe that if unemployment decreases and more jobs are created, it will be interesting to see how the disgruntled worker reintegrates themselves back into the workforce. As manufacturing jobs are continually outsourced, will the average disgruntled worker have the skill sets necessary to gain employment in a market that depends less and less on manual labor?
ReplyDeleteThis is very similar to the article my group had in Wednesday's class, where unemployment had caused the people to rely heavily on friends and family. The individuals searching for jobs where able to find jobs from the help of their friends but they were not job suited for their skills, and in many cases the new job was temporary. While this worked for those cases in the short run, what does this mean for the long run? Will these miss-matched workers end up unemployed again within the year?
ReplyDeleteI agree with Mike Lamrock and Mike Page that it is very hard to account for those who are no longer considered part of the labor force. I believe the general requirement to be considered "out of the labor force" is three years of unemployment. However, there are other circumstances and reasons for entering and exiting the labor force that are not considered in this basic description. This can create errors in the statistics.
ReplyDeleteI agree with all of this. I think that the classification of being unemployed is flawed but I don't know if there is a better way to do this. So until we figure something better out, we are stuck with this flawed system
DeleteI personally believe that when considering the unemployment rate one must first always take into consideration the idea of "no longer looking for work" or "no longer part of the work force." That when you see or here that unemployment rate has decreased that we know it isn't as accurate and not as great as it seems, however it is better than an increase in unemployment.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Nick, the Government conducts a monthly sample survey called the Current Population Survey (CPS) to measure the extent of unemployment in the country. As with most statistics there is a margin of error that is associated with the number, so when unemployment only changes a small amount it may not reflect the "real" change in unemployment.
ReplyDeleteVery applicable article. We also need to consider the facts that we're living in Michigan and getting some of the worst of it. In michigan the unemployment rate is up to nearly 10%. Whereas the united states is closer to 8.5% as a whole. It's obviously hard to identify all of the factors but I agree that the government should be able to step in and create more jobs suited to the skills and abilities of those who are trained (in reference to Cate Oldfather's comment).
ReplyDeleteI'm going to be a bit off track. Although the graduates from last year made a huge leap into the "real world" where employment was an issue in the US, many of them got a job and are now working. The real unemployment rate might be still high, but that shouldn't stop us fro getting jobs. It only limits the kind of job we can get. We are fortunate enough to not largely contribute to the unemployed category. Let's find out as we graduate.
ReplyDelete