(Las Vegas, May 3, 2012) - There are at least 8 million Americans who've been out of work for at least 99 weeks or longer. To date they have exhausted all their unemployment benefits without ever finding work again. Also, they are no longer being counted (in either the media's reported U-3 unemployment rate or in the Bureau of Labor Statistics' reported U-6 rate -- as either "marginally attached" or "discouraged workers".)
Eight million Americans were just swept under the statistic rug.
To whom it may concern: As of April 19, 2012 the Department of Labor reported that the U.S. had 12.7 million people unemployed (8.2% U-3) and 7.7 million part-time workers. The total number of people claiming benefits in all programs was 6.8 million.
Two and half years ago (130 weeks ago) in October of 2009, 15.9 million Americans were out of work when the unemployment rate was reported to be 10.2%.
Question #1 - How many of these same 15.9 million Americans (who were out of work 130 weeks ago) found jobs since that time, and how many people were laid off? (churn)
Yesterday the Huffington Post reported "5.3 million Americans had been out of work for six months or longer, including 1.9 million who'd been out of work for at least 99 weeks, according to the Labor Department." They said they same thing 5 months ago (1.9 million).
It's true that the DOL did recently report this, but it's somewhat odd how the number (1.9 million) remained unchanged.
On April 19, 2012 the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported "The number of long-term unemployed (those jobless for 27 weeks and over) was essentially unchanged at 5.3 million.
It also reports that " These individuals accounted for 42.5 percent of the unemployed. Since April 2010, the number of long-term unemployed has fallen by 1.4 million. (See table A-12.)"
Question #2 - Does that mean that those 1.4 million are assumed to
have found jobs or retired?
Question #3 - Does that also mean 1.4 million can be subtracted from the 15.9 million Americans who were out of work back in October of 2009?
If so, that would leave a balance of 14.5 million. It's been said that 4 million jobs were created during Obama's time in office, so for the sake of argument, let's subtract another 4 million from the previous balance of 14.5 million, which would equal a balance of 10.5 million.
Since October of 2009, many more people were laid off, but to give the Department of Labor the benefit of the doubt, let's say no more jobs were lost since then.
Question #4 - Wouldn't that mean that at least 10.5 million Americans have been out of work for at least 130 weeks, and not " 1.9 million who'd been out of work for at least 99 weeks" or " 5.3 million Americans had been out of work for six months or longer"?
Question #5 - And what about the additional 6 million Americans who graduated from high school and college since that time? Are they counted in the unemployment rate if they have no work history?
Of the 10 million Americans who were at one time receiving unemployment benefits in May of 2010, ALL of them have already exhausted all their qualifying unemployment benefits.
Question #6 - Are those 10 million UI "exhaustees" no longer being counted, in either the media's reported U-3 unemployment rate, or in the Bureau of Labor Statistics' reported U-6 rate (as either "marginally attached" or "discouraged workers")?
The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported "2.4 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force (including 865,000 discouraged workers), essentially unchanged from a year earlier. These individuals had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding a [CPS] household survey."
Question #7 - Does this mean we should subtract another 2.4 million from the previous balance of 10.5 million Americans who were counted as unemployed 130 weeks ago in October 2009 - - when 15.9 million Americans were out of work, and when the unemployment rate was reported to be 10.2%?
If so, that would mean that at least 8.1 million Americans are still unemployed, are no longer qualifying for unemployment benefits, are no longer being counted, and have been out of work 130 weeks (2½ years) or longer. That would help explain the jump in food stamps.
Question #8 - Now, in addition to that, couldn't we can also add the recently reported 12.7 million people who are unemployed, bringing it to at least 20 million total people who are unemployed?
We know they didn't find part-time jobs because the DOL just reported that that number has dropped. And we already know from an earlier White House report that nearly 18 million Americans have at some point received federally funded extended unemployment benefits...and a great many didn't even file an initial claim or had even qualified.
It was also reported by the DOL/BLS that the civilian labor force participation rate was 63.8 percent and the employment-population ratio was 58.5 percent (little changed from previous month).
Question #9 - Please explain the difference between these two ratios. For example, if all Americans between the ages of 18 and 65 were working, how large would the labor force be if we had 100% for both ratios?
Question #10 - How could 8 million people just disappear into thin air? There MUST be at least 8 million Americans who've "been out of work for at least 99 weeks or longer". I know, because I am one. I'm 56 years old and I've been unemployed over 3½ years.
My related posts:
- Take Your Low-Paying Job and Shove it!
- 15 Million Americans Jobless Over 2 years
- Where did 15 million jobless Americans go?
- Two Income Households, 'Mean' and 'Median' Income Statistics
- Lowest Income Earners Always Get Screwed the Most
- Wages: Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow
- How many jobs did Mitt Romney create last year?
- What "we" Earn & what "they" Earn
- Ann Romney Needs to get a REAL Job!
- Republicans, Wages, Unions, and the Deep South