It’s quite a graphic–take some time to try to let it sink in (Hat tip: Calculated Risk)
It’s quite a graphic–take some time to try to let it sink in (Hat tip: Calculated Risk)
Interesting graph. I think that history will look back at the stimulus package/bank and industry bailouts as a doing all the wrong things. Instead of allowing recessions to do what they do best – burning away the chaff and refining the dross – Obama tried to “soften the blow” and instead of having a leaner, meaner economy which could could grow, we have a bloated mess.
If week 24 is the present (or nearly present) time, then the
unemployment rate hasn’t quite bottomed out – more to
come. The point of inflection (upward swing) hasn’t occurred yet.
Hello! It makes one wonder if anyone in Washington looked at this before the special election in Mass.?
Please note, too, that the numbers driving the graph have been softened artificially. That does not mean intentionally. Clear?
What’s not reflected?
a) People who have given up on looking for work. Based on official U-6 rates, drive the curve down to about minus-9%.
b) People working at least 4 hours per week, even if they got laid off from a full-time job and are looking for another one. Based on official U-6 rates, drive the curve down to about -12%.
c) People with limited education frozen out of a first job because minimum wage jumped in July ’09 to a point it was no longer worth taking a chance on them and dedicating other precious staff hours to training them.
d) People who have simply left the work force. Some of these, like my daughter-in-law, are giving more time to family and/or studies (in her case, seminary). Others have taken early retirement or buy-outs. They are, however, no longer in the “work force,” the participation rate of which has plunged in the last 18 months.
Therefore … the nominal unemployment rate(s) are calculated against a workforce roughly 10% smaller than it was two years ago.
Consequently, it’s not much of a stretch to assume that overall unemployment is probably in the range of 22%, give or take a few percent. That’s not yet into 1930s territory, when unemployment reached 25% of a mostly-male (therefore smaller) workforce, but it is about a 17% drop from employment levels only two years ago.
The less government attempts to re-flate the old bubble, and allows the process of liquidating bad debt and failed businesses to proceed, the faster we can begin anew, building on the abundant and remarkable opportunities that await us once all the mal-investment is written off.
I think folks may be missing the point.
The socialists are not wasting this crisis. Doing all the “wrong things” for recovery is actually doing all the “right things” to destabilize and topple the existing social order, that will usher in the new Socialist Utopia. There is an assumption that the administration’s policies are well intentioned to restore the economy that we had. Perhaps they are, but if so, they incredibly inept. Yet, if there is ill will toward the existing order, then these moves are incredibly shrewd and effective.
And ye shall know them by their fruits….
#5 – agreed. This, in my opinion, is nothing more than the deliberate wrecking of the U.S. economy by the international financial elite. First they transfer our wealth and jobs to the East (mostly China) and when our economy collapses they have not only robbed us of our wealth, but they are also rid of that pesky American middle class that insists on having a say about how their lives and country are run. And no, it’s not a conspiracy. It’s nothing more than a business decision to destroy the competition.
Assumption that the administration’s policies are well intentioned to restore the economy that we had. Is nothing more than the deliberate wrecking of the U.S. economy by the international financial elite.
Thanks, Martha, Job Search Expert from resignation letter sample