Nearly 102 Million Working Age Americans Do Not Have A Job Right Now

[DamianTV]

The Truth About The Employment Numbers – Nearly 102 Million Working Age Americans Do Not Have A Job Right Now
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/a...-job-right-now

Don’t get too excited about the “good employment numbers” that you are hearing about from the mainstream media. The truth is that they actually aren’t very good at all. For years, the federal government has been taking numbers out of one category and putting them into another category and calling it “progress”, and in this article we will break down exactly what has been happening. We are being told that the U.S. unemployment rate has fallen to “3.8 percent”, which is supposedly the lowest that it has been “in nearly 50 years”. If these were honest numbers that would be great news. But these are not honest numbers…

Let’s take this one step at a time, and we are going to use the Federal Reserve’s own numbers.

According to the Fed, there were 6,065,000 working age Americans unemployed in May.

That would be an excellent number if it was an honest number. But of course that number does not tell the whole story.

We also have to factor in the other category of working age Americans that are not currently employed. They are not considered to be “officially unemployed” because they are considered to be “not in the labor force”.

According to the Federal Reserve, 95,915,000 working age Americans were “not in the labor force” in May.

That is an all-time record high, and this is how the federal government has been making the employment numbers look so good. The number of Americans that are “officially unemployed” keeps going down, and the number of Americans “not in the labor force” keeps going up.

When you add 6,065,000 and 95,915,000 together, you come up with a grand total of 101,980,000 working age Americans that do not have a job right now.

So we essentially have 102 million working age Americans that are not employed, and that is the same level that we had four years ago.

And back during the peak of the last recession, the number of working age Americans without a job never surpassed the 100 million mark.

That means that there are more working age Americans without a job right now than there was at any point during the last recession.

...

Full article and referenced sources on link at top.

[euphemia]

Not every working age American needs to work or wants to work. My daughter is a SAHM. She doesn't need a job or want one, but she's fully qualified to have a job if something happens and she needs to have income.

[Anti Federalist]

How many of these people are "failure to start" millennials, like that doofus in NY state?

Millions of jobs, that pay well, are going unfilled, simply because nobody wants to work hard and show up sober and on time.

Mike Rowe is doing a stunning job trying to solve this issue.

[euphemia]

Another point is that a lot of working-age Americans are working. They are just not working in ways the system recognizes. I don't know that there is a way to fully document how many people have income derived from their own work. I'm sure not all income is reported for tax purposes.

[Zippyjuan]

The Truth About The Employment Numbers – Nearly 102 Million Working Age Americans Do Not Have A Job Right Now
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/a...-job-right-now



Full article and referenced sources on link at top.

That means that there are more working age Americans without a job right now than there was at any point during the last recession.

But do they even want a job? Who are those people? If we added 95 million more jobs, would they take them?

Let's take a look at those 95 million "not in the labor force". That includes people who have retired from work and stay at home parents and disabled people and students who are studying instead of working. A breakdown:

https://www.bls.gov/cps/lfcharacteristics.htm

Not in the labor force

Persons who are neither employed nor unemployed are not in the labor force. This category includes retired persons, students, those taking care of children or other family members, and others who are neither working nor seeking work.

Of that 95 million, 89 million said they do not want a job.

Six million said they did.

Of them, 3.5 million said they didn't bother to look for work in the previous year. If you haven't looked for work in a year, do you really want a job?

One million said they aren't available to work right now.

If you don't include these people, that comes to 1.5 million who would take a job now if one was offered.

https://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea38.htm

The number of Americans that are “officially unemployed” keeps going down, and the number of Americans “not in the labor force” keeps going up.

A good chunk of that is from 10,000 baby boomers retiring a day on average (that is over 3.5 million a year).

[Swordsmyth]

But do they even want a job? Who are those people?

Let's take a look at those 95 million "not in the labor force". That includes people who have retired from work and stay at home parents and disabled people and students who are studying instead of working. A breakdown:

https://www.bls.gov/cps/lfcharacteristics.htm



Of that 95 million, 89 million said they do not want a job.

Six million said they did.

Of them, 3.5 million said they didn't bother to look for work in the previous year. If you haven't looked for work in a year, do you really want a job?

One million said they aren't available to work right now.

https://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea38.htm




A good chunk of that is from 10,000 baby boomers retiring a day on average (that is over 3.5 million a year).

Wow zip, who did this study and how did they manage to talk to 95,000,000 people so quickly?

[Zippyjuan]

Wow zip, who did this study and how did they manage to talk to 95,000,000 people so quickly?

It is the exact same source as the OP article- just broken down more. The Bureau of Labor Statistics. The article says "the Fed" but the Fed chart was of the BLS statistics. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS15000000

[Swordsmyth]

It is the exact same source as the OP article. The Bureau of Labor Statistics.

That doesn't explain how they talked to 95,000,000 people.
They are just making things up as usual.

[Zippyjuan]

That doesn't explain how they talked to 95,000,000 people.
They are just making things up as usual.

They don't literally call every single person in the country every month- that would be impossible and incredibly expensive. They do statistical surveys and interview 60,000 families every month. Each family is followed for three months and 20,000 are replaced each month.

[Swordsmyth]

They don't literally call every single person in the country every month- that would be impossible. They do statistical surveys and interview 60,000 families every month. Each family is followed for three months and 20,000 are replaced each month.

And then they "interpret" the numbers however they want.

[Zippyjuan]

And then they "interpret" the numbers however they want.

I am not going to try to explain statistics and sampling to you but if you are seriously interested (and not just blowing hot air), you can find plenty of sources on the internet.

You can start with the BLS: https://www.bls.gov/cps/faq.htm

[timosman]

They don't literally call every single person in the country every month- that would be impossible and incredibly expensive. They do statistical surveys and interview 60,000 families every month. Each family is followed for three months and 20,000 are replaced each month.

I am not brainwashed.

[Swordsmyth]

I am not going to try to explain statistics and sampling to you but if you are seriously interested (and not just blowing hot air), you can find plenty of sources on the internet.

You can start with the BLS: https://www.bls.gov/cps/faq.htm

Lies, D@#^ Lies and statistics.

[Zippyjuan]

Lies, D@#^ Lies and statistics.

So you are not interested in learning. As I suspected. But you are now closer to you daily posting quota.

[Swordsmyth]

So you are not interested in learning. As I suspected.

I am not interested in being lied to.

[Zippyjuan]

I am not interested in being lied to.

What are the "facts"? Source?

[timosman]

What are the "facts"? Source?

A psychopath pretending not to be one.

[DamianTV]

I am not going to try to explain statistics and sampling to you but if you are seriously interested (and not just blowing hot air), you can find plenty of sources on the internet.

You can start with the BLS: https://www.bls.gov/cps/faq.htm

Which is the source of the LIES we are refuting, and yet all you can do is point right back to the liars. They may as well be YOUR Bible. "Gotta have 'Faith' in the BLS".

And for the record, the RETIRING Baby Boomers does NOT count as "Working Age Americans". So yet another attempt to rationalize the lies of the BLS. A huge chunk of those people ARE of working age and DO want to work, but just dont count because you get paid to push low numbers to make whats left of the working people feel better about having a crappy job.

Edit: For the record, Zippy, why didnt you weigh in on this thread?

[Zippyjuan]

Which is the source of the LIES we are refuting, and yet all you can do is point right back to the liars. They may as well be YOUR Bible. "Gotta have 'Faith' in the BLS".

And for the record, the RETIRING Baby Boomers does NOT count as "Working Age Americans". So yet another attempt to rationalize the lies of the BLS. A huge chunk of those people ARE of working age and DO want to work, but just dont count because you get paid to push low numbers to make whats left of the working people feel better about having a crappy job.

Edit: For the record, Zippy, why didnt you weigh in on this thread?

It was the exact same source of data as your article. If BLS is bunk, the article you posted is bunk.

And for the record, the RETIRING Baby Boomers does NOT count as "Working Age Americans".

Actually, they do. The "Labor force" is:

the civilian noninstitutional population 16 years old and over.

(they don't count prisoners or those in mental institutions or the military) https://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm

55 million of the 95 million counted as "not in the labor force" were aged 55 and older so if you would like to exclude them, we just reduced the "not in the labor force" count by more than half- dropping it down to 40 million.

23 million were 24- 54 years old.

57 million were women. (Stay at home mothers are not in the labor force- also if they are not working but helping take care of somebody else- women tend to be the caregivers in society)

but just dont count because you get paid to push low numbers to make whats left of the working people feel better about having a crappy job.

If they have a crappy job (or a good one), they are counted as in the labor force and employed. If you have a job but want a better one, you are considered employed. If you have a job but want more hours, you are considered employed. If you don't have any job but are looking for one, you are considered in the labor force but not employed. If you are not looking for a job and don't have one, you are considered "not in the labor force".

To summarize, the employed are:

All those who did any work for pay or profit during the survey reference week.
All those who did at least 15 hours of unpaid work in a business or farm operated by a family member with whom they live.
All those who were temporarily absent from their regular jobs because of illness, vacation, bad weather, labor dispute, or various personal reasons, whether or not they were paid for the time off.

The unemployed are:

All those who did not have a job at all during the survey reference week, made at least one specific active effort to find a job during the prior 4 weeks, and were available for work (unless temporarily ill).
All those who were not working and were waiting to be called back to a job from which they had been laid off. (They need not be looking for work to be classified as unemployed.)

Say you have a classic American family of four. Dad works, Mom stays at home to take care of things. Son is 16 and daughter is 12. Two thirds of this family would be considered "without a job". Daughter is too young to be counted in the labor force. Son is old enough but only in school and not working. Mom not working. Would you consider that to mean that for this family the unemployment rate was 67%? Does that mean that there are not enough jobs since two thirds are not working?

We could add in the Grandparents. Say one Grandfather is still working and one is retired. Wives not working. Now our population is eight with two working. Seventy five percent not in the labor force (actually two of seven- daughter still doesn't count so 71% not working). Is there a problem with not enough jobs? Is the unemployment rate too high? (actually the unemployment rate in this example would be zero percent). Does this mean we are in an economic crisis?