Comments on: Ever more unemployment http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/05/08/ever-more-unemployment/ A slice of lime in the soda Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:05:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: Bill Simpson in Slidell http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/05/08/ever-more-unemployment/comment-page-1/#comment-1510 Sun, 10 May 2009 03:42:53 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/05/08/ever-more-unemployment/#comment-1510 The census hiring 60,000 people made it look better than it really was. A radically downsized US auto industry is unfortunately, on the way. Thinking that all those unemployed plant workers can become engineers, writers, physicians, computer programmers & nuclear scientists is a popular fantasy. Once the current charismatic President is out of the White House, a large group of discontented people, concentrated in the Midwest, might spawn a third political party. I’ll even contribute to that effort!

]]>
By: sandy http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/05/08/ever-more-unemployment/comment-page-1/#comment-1491 Sat, 09 May 2009 11:45:06 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/05/08/ever-more-unemployment/#comment-1491 Irrespective of the gender, joblosses hurt everybody. But looks like situation is improving.

]]>
By: Derek http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/05/08/ever-more-unemployment/comment-page-1/#comment-1486 Sat, 09 May 2009 04:28:18 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/05/08/ever-more-unemployment/#comment-1486 Bringing up the U6 stats are important, but you aren’t telling the entire story with them. Why compare the April number to December when you could compare it to March? In March it was at 15.6. So that’s a .2 rise. Compared to the .7 rise from February to March. .9 rise from January to Feb.

You’re being a bit dishonest.

]]>
By: otto http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/05/08/ever-more-unemployment/comment-page-1/#comment-1474 Fri, 08 May 2009 19:34:59 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/05/08/ever-more-unemployment/#comment-1474 Mish has done a good analysis on the jobs numbers

http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.c om/2009/05/jobs-contract-16th-straight-m onth.html

]]>
By: william http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/05/08/ever-more-unemployment/comment-page-1/#comment-1469 Fri, 08 May 2009 17:55:30 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/05/08/ever-more-unemployment/#comment-1469 Thank you Donaldo since you asked another question that I have wanted answered. Somehow there is some heavy number manipulation going on.

]]>
By: william http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/05/08/ever-more-unemployment/comment-page-1/#comment-1467 Fri, 08 May 2009 17:46:19 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/05/08/ever-more-unemployment/#comment-1467 Does anyone remeber when President Obama said “the party is over”? Realistic thinking says it is over. I look at %20 unemployment as the real bottom. Credulity? Really readers?

]]>
By: Donaldo http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/05/08/ever-more-unemployment/comment-page-1/#comment-1465 Fri, 08 May 2009 17:36:23 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/05/08/ever-more-unemployment/#comment-1465 Just to correct my previous comment. The same people don’t have to find jobs during the month. But it does seem like 1.8m new jobs were created so that we have a net loss of 591K jobs! I find it hard to believe we’re creating that many new jobs during a recession

]]>
By: Donaldo http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/05/08/ever-more-unemployment/comment-page-1/#comment-1464 Fri, 08 May 2009 17:31:38 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/05/08/ever-more-unemployment/#comment-1464 I’m having difficulty understanding the math here. During the month of April, weekly new jobless claims were > 600k each week. This means that 2.4m people lost jobs last month. If the labor report shows only 591k jobs lost, does that mean the other 1.8m people found work during the same month?

Ok I understand that the way the data is collected for these two series is different but still, I find it difficult to reconcile the two numbers! Any explanation for this Felix?

]]>
By: Kev http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/05/08/ever-more-unemployment/comment-page-1/#comment-1461 Fri, 08 May 2009 16:49:57 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/05/08/ever-more-unemployment/#comment-1461 sorry for mistake $40–>40%

]]>
By: Kev http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/05/08/ever-more-unemployment/comment-page-1/#comment-1460 Fri, 08 May 2009 16:49:02 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/05/08/ever-more-unemployment/#comment-1460 I would add to the above comment that women outperform men across almost all educational fields–in admittance and in achievement, meaning the modern young man, on average, is simply less qualified for advanced employment, and is less likely to find employment. College enrollment now is almost 60% female and $40 male.

]]>