">
Home
June 26, 2017 Why's the FED Panicking?
May 25, 2017 LFPR anyone?
Apr 26, 2017 What's up with the FED?
March 10, 2017 Feb Employment Situation
Oct 10, 2016 Tax Burden
Aug 1, 2016 Here Comes the Debt
June 26, 2016 Moribund US Economy
June 16 2016 Labor Update
Mar 10, 2016 Spring Renewal for Labor Markets?
Feb 21, 2016 GDP Gap
Feb 16, 2016 FED and Monetary Policy
Jan 19, 2016 Employment Gap Age Groups LFPR
Jan 10, 2016 A look at the Employment Situation
Dec 30, 2015 Fed Funds Rate up 25 Basis points...so what?
Dec 15, 2015 Fed Funds on the rise? Has Yellen 'Fell-in'?
Oct 15, 2015 Labor Markets Seven years of misery
Oct 6, 2015 Sept: Horrible Month for Labor
Sept 30, 2015 The FED: Interest Rate Angst
Sept 11, 2015 FED on the Monetary Policy Front
July 31, 2015 Trade and Foreign Exchange Rates
July 20, 2015 Economic Growth?
July 10, 2015 Labor Picture by Age Group
July 2, 2015 Disastrous Month in Labor Rpt
June 19, 2015 Minimum Wage - Income Distribution
Jun 5, 2015 Encouraged Worker Effect
May 8, 2015 Updated Employment Situation for April
May 4, 2015 Languishing Labor Markets
Apr 7, 2015 LFPR Doldrums on the Labor Front
March 8, 2015 Less than Zero Interest Rates - Trade War
2014 Articles
2013 Articles
2012 Articles
2011 & 2010 Articles
Dec 23, 2011 Revisionist History Depression
Dec 10, 2011 Depression & Now Part 1
Dec 5, 2011 Lies, Damned Lies, Statistics
Nov 16, 2011 Taxes Part 2
Nov 8, 2011 Taxes Pt 1
Nov 1, 2011 Demographics
Oct 12, 2011 Fed-FOMC
Oct 6, 2011 Fed's Operation Twist
Sep 30, 2011 What Price Bailouts?!
Sep 9, 2011 Trade Deficit - States
Sept 3, 2011 Unemployment Ongoing Challenge
August 22, 2011 Restricting Oil Supply
August 11, 2011 Credit Rating-Taxes
August 8, 2011 QE3? What to do?
Aug 5, 2011 Employment Update
August 1, 2011 Competitive Free Mkt Capitalism
July 26, 2011 Cradle of Democracy
July 16, 2011 Capital Ratios
July 10, 2011 Unemployment Again
July 1, 2011 QE2 Over-Apres Moi, le Deluge
June 11, 2011 Unemployment
June 8, 2011 Net Worth Collapse
May 18 2011 Credit Collapse '08-'10
May 15, 2011 Fed Miracle-Mayhem
May 10, 2011 Unemployment
Mar 30, 2011 Puppet Show
Mar 18, 2011 Locked-in-Effect
Mar 10, 2011 Bummer Days
Feb 12 2011 Inflation by Decontenting
Feb 6 2011 Unemployment
Jan 14 2011 Money Supply
Jan 12 2011 Trade Deficit
Jan 6 2011 Printing Press Myth
Dec 18, 2010 College Pricing
Dec 7 2010 Debt & Deficits
Dec 2, 2010 J-Laffer Curve
Sep 24 2010 Competition
Sept 23 2010 Trade Deficit China
Introduction
About us
Links of Interest
Straw Poll
Definitions & Miscellaneous
 

Economic Newsletter for the New Millennium


August 5, 2011
 

Editor
Donald R. Byrne, Ph.D.
dbyrne5628@aol.com  


Associate Editor
Edward T. Derbin, MA, MBA
edtitan@aol.com  

Download current blog  

 

Employment_Picture_July_2011a.pdf



ANOTHER QUICK, YET PAINFUL WALK THROUGH EMPLOYMENT

- July 2011



When we combine the Civilian noninstitutional population 182,000 with those dropping out of the Civilian Labor Force 193,000, we have a massive shift of population away from the employment pool.  In a typical, at least somewhat robust economy, those folks added to the Civilian noninstitutional population would flow through to the Civilian Labor Force.  What we have, instead, is reflected in the 'Not in labor force' number of 374,000.  The net result is that this drives down the Labor Force Participation Rate to its 28 year low of 63.9%.  At this point, the unemployment rate is virtually useless, since it only reflects those folks in the Civilian Labor Force who are either working (employed) and those who are not 'officially' classified as not working - seeking employment, the unemployed.  This is a horrible, horrible situation!


Household Data July 2011.jpg


When we combine the Civilian noninstitutional population, 182,000, with those dropping out of the Civilian Labor Force 193,000, we have a massive shift of population away from the employment pool.  In a typical, at least somewhat robust economy, those folks added to the Civilian noninstitutional population would flow through to the Civilian Labor Force.  What we have, instead, is reflected in the 'Not in labor force' number of 374,000.  The net result is that this drives down the Labor Force Participation Rate to its 28 year low of 63.9%

At this point, the unemployment rate is virtually useless, since it only reflects those folks in the Civilian Labor Force who are either working (employed) and those who are not 'officially' classified as not working - seeking employment, the unemployed.  This is a horrible, horrible situation!  

The thing to key on in the months ahead is an unchanged unemployment rate...even rising a bit, as will certainly happen in the event of the encouraged worker phenonomon - when jobs become available, more individuals begin looking for work, and rise in the Labor Force Participation Rate. 




Annual Change in Household Data.jpg


 
Update on employment picture…


The Noninstitutional Civilian Population (Population age 16 and over) grew 182,000 last month and 1,781,000 from last year [July 2010]. 

The Civilian Labor Force is the subset of the Noninstitutional Civilian Population which is either ‘employed’ or unemployed.  The Civilian Labor Force shrank from both last month by 193,000 and from July 2010 by 400,000.  


Note: if the Civilian Labor Force had not fallen, the Unemployment Rate would have remained at 9.2%...the same as last month, June 2011.

The ‘difference’ between the Noninstitutional Civilian Population and the Civilian Labor Force consists of those people 16 years and older who are non-working individuals, whether they are retirees, spouses, or others who are NOT classified as employed, nor are they classified as unemployed.  As we indicated in previous newsletters*, the Labor Force Participation Rate, which compares the Civilian Labor Force to Noninstitutional Civilian Population, was 66.2% through most of the last decade.  



Feb 2011 - Unemployment


* http://www.econnewsletter.com/60601/44801.html   

“From January 2001 through December 2008, the Labor Force Participation Rate averaged 66.2%.” 



The July 2011 Labor Force Participation Rate was 63.9%.  This means that 63.9% of the Noninstitutional Civilian Population, 239,671,000, was counted as being in the Civilian Labor Force of 153,228,000.  Using the 66.2% (Labor Force Participation) average noted previously, this would add 5.4 million to the Civilian Labor Force.  Since those people were obviously not employed, they would certainly be added to the unemployment rolls if they were seeking employment.  These folks represent the ‘Discouraged (and other Workers out of the Labor Force)’, those among us who probably would be working if the economy was in better shape.   

Note: the last time the Labor Force Participation Rate was below 63.9% was May 1983 when it was 63.7%.



The Labor Force Participition Rate simply compares the Labor Force with the Civilian noninstitutional population.  In late 1982 and early 1983, the U.S. was coming out of recession where the economy was trying to come back after a credit tightening used to drive out terribly high inflation experienced in the late 1970s.  Monthly inflation recordings were experienced in the 20% range in 1979-1980 period.

 

Labor Force Participation Rate 80s through July 2011.jpg




Job Shortfall Current.jpg



Employment

Employment (employed) shrank last month by 38,000 and has only grown by 204,000 since July 2010.   

While it seems obvious that employment growth is a requirement for recovery, there is often a confusion between the ‘employed’ numbers from the Household Survey (CPS - Current Population Survey) and the ‘jobs’ number from the Payroll Survey (CES - Current Employment Statistics, or Establishment Survey).  The Household Survey covers a wider swath of the population, while the Payroll Survey provides us with a more detailed, yet smaller image of those comprising the Civilian Labor Force (including those employed and those unemployed).  

In short, the Payroll Survey is a subset of the Household Survey.  Employment in the Payroll Survey grew last month by 117,000 and grew by 1,258,000 since July 2010.  The good news is that job growth has occurred WITHIN the Payroll Survey portion of the Employed (Household Survey), but not so good news is that it has been meager overall since the Payroll Survey is actually a subset of the Household Survey.  In the Household Survey (Current Population Survey) we lost 38,000 jobs in July 2011 and only gained 305,000 jobs since July 2010.



Household Survey Monthly Jobs Jan 2010-July 2011.jpg


 
Again, as we pointed out in a previous newsletter article (Down the Rabbit Hole http://econnewsletter.com/60601/55401.html), in May 2011 we needed on the order of 525,000 jobs per month over the subsequent 2-years to reach 66.2% Labor Force Participation Rate and 5% unemployment rate, both modest goals.  We’ll get to the unemployment rate shortly. 

According to the more inclusive Household Survey we lost 38,000 more jobs in July, pushing that number from 525,000 per month [May 2011] to 555,000 per month [July 2011], for 24 months, to reach 66.2% Labor Force Participation Rate and 5% Unemployment Rate (allowing for an expansion in Civilian Noninstitutional Population of 125,000 per month).  
 
That amounts to 13,320,000 jobs created over 24 months.  From January 2011 to July 2011, we’ve gained 90,000 jobs...OOPS!

We cover the differences between the surveys extensively in previous newsletter articles, but keep in mind that changes in the ‘employed’ number is most important in measuring expansion or contraction since it captures self-employed, farm workers and other non-payroll type categories in addition to the traditional employees. 



Two-year targeted Job Growth - Employment Recovery.jpg
      



Unemployment June 2011

http://www.econnewsletter.com/68201/66401.html  

Unemployment


The last item we’ll address is unemployment.  This is the term that confuses most of the public and what obfuscates the measures of unemployment from U-1 through U-6, is that the ‘Discouraged (and other Workers out of the Labor Force)’ we described previously, numbering 5.4 million (note that the estimation is based on a Labor Force Participation Rate of 66.2%).  These are the folks that have given up looking for work and are therefore NOT considered in the Civilian Labor Force and for that reason are NOT, REPEAT, NOT considered unemployed. 


Unemployment is simply measured by subtracting the Employed (from the Household Survey) from the Civilian Labor Force.  The Unemployment Rate represents the percentage of Unemployed as compared to the Civilian Labor Force.  The problems on the Unemployment side are pretty much addressed in the various measures of Unemployment, noted as follows:


 

U-3 and U-6 Unemployment July 2011.jpg


 
U-3 is the officially reported unemployment rate that we see every month in the media.  In July 2011, it was 9.1%, lower than June’s 9.2% and lower than the 9.5% reported in July 2010.  Keep in mind that the Labor Force Participation Rate was 63.9% in July 2011, while the rate was 64.6% in July 2010. 

Comparing apples to apples, if the Labor Force Participation Rate was at 64.6% in July 2011, the unemployment rate would be at 10.0%, not the stated 9.1%.

Using the 66.2% Labor Force Participation Rate which was the average from 2001-2008, the U-3 unemployment rate would be 12.2%


The U-6 unemployment rate, the broadest measure of unemployment rate, captures the marginally attached, part-time, etc., and that rate dropped to 16.1%.
 
Again, comparing apples to apples, if the Labor Force Participation Rate was at 64.6% in July 2011, the U-6 unemployment rate would be at 17.0%.

Ratcheting up to the 66.2% Labor Force Participation Rate, the average from 2001-2008, the U-6 unemployment rate would be 19.2%
 

A last note on the Labor Force Participation Rate – a good reason, in our estimation, for using the higher Labor Force Participation Rate as a metric (e.g., 66.2% versus 63.9%) is to help identify and ‘count’ the unidentified discouraged individuals who we term as the very discouraged worker.  The U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, views the discouraged worker as being part of the smaller pool of Civilian Labor Force as reflected by the current 63.9% Labor Force Participation Rate in U-6, but not in U-3.


 
THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION – JULY 2011

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf  
 
Among the marginally attached, there were 1.1 million discouraged workers in July, about the same as a year earlier. (These data are not seasonally adjusted.)  Discouraged workers are persons not currently looking for work because they believe no jobs are available for them. The remaining 1.7 million persons marginally attached to the labor force in July had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey for reasons such as school attendance or family responsibilities. (See table A-16.)



Discouraged and Not in Labor Force July 2011.jpg


Again, when it comes right down to it, we're currently running a deficit of around 11 million jobs and we add around 125,000 (probably more like 150,000) to that total each month as our population expands.  This is a situation that cannot continue to go on.  These 11 million people have families and households to support.  These are people who could help a housing recovery, contribute in terms of taxes and produce more of the goods and services we all need. 

Unless, or until, we consistently begin to add in the neighborhood of 500,000 jobs on a monthly basis [actually, 550,000 or more] - private sector jobs that is, there will be no recovery, irrespective of political or academic pronouncements.  


Adding to the problem, we have seen continued problems with extended duration of unemployment, note the “Average (mean) duration in weeks” for July of 40.4! 



Unemployment Duration July 2011.jpg