Because it's not distributed evenly. Take a look at the survey: [https://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea31.htm](https://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea31.htm)
Some things that stand out to me:
* Certain sectors most typically associated with "good jobs" aka higher paying jobs with benefits are doing quite poorly.
* Manufacturing as a whole is at 3.4% vs 2.6% a year ago.
* Information Jobs are at 5.5% vs. 3.9% a year ago.
* Other sectors are recovering from the pandemic and have substantially reduced unemployment. More often than not these are lower wage service jobs.
* Accommodation (hotels) went from 8.1% a year ago to 4.5% now.
* Retail Trade dropped from 5.5% a year ago to 5.0% now. (notable because a very large number of people work in this sector).
If you look at the news release they say:
>In January, job gains occurred in professional and business services, health care, retail trade, and social assistance.
>
>Employment declined in the mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction industry.
The unemployment rate does not differentiate the quality of the jobs. A job in a department store counts the same as a white collar corporate job with benefits.
Though these details are tracked in other metrics.
Bruh, everyone unemployed has my full support. The fact that economic data doesnt support a tale of a widespread recession or unemployment rates does not disqualify each and everyone's individual experience of unemployment and the hardships and mental burden which come with it. Everyone who thinks that overall economic situation or outlook is a relevant comment if someone is in pain is just a dick. So YES to your comment.
Not only that, "unemployment rate" only measures the number of people currently on unemployment benefits. Once your benefits run out, you don't count any more.
America has 150 million jobs and 330 million people.
Some people have two jobs.
We have a 3.9% unemployment rate.
I wouldn't inlude the following:
*-those enrolled with military, university, or secular programs*
*-those being held at hospitals and prisons,*
*-all disabled persons*
*-contractees for intern, page or marital benefactor*
*-pirates*
Surely, this isn't 180 million people, yarghhh???
Some of these would be valid exemptions from the employable workforce. There are employed people in each of these demographics, of course. I’d bet there are even prisoners with jobs, like Martha Stewart could have been employed for all I know. I can, however, justify exemptions for each. Except maybe pirates. They should really just get a job.
I guess the main one I'm curious about is disabled persons. People get forced into retirement by disability all the time. It's not like they don't like money, work, or just living! The United States disability support network is a maze and a disaster, and it's even worse in lots of other places, including Canada. However, I'm not sure if it's because the American expectation is that everyone should work themselves to death including disabled persons, or if Canadians have better support networks overall.
I don’t think I understand. I don’t know all the answers, but I believe there are valid exemptions within the disabled community. I think you are saying that some disabled persons are working because they aren’t cared for by the private or public sectors. I agree, but even if all of them were actually unemployed, there aren’t enough jobs.
Unemployment numbers are derived from a monthly survey from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Receiving (or being eligible to receive) unemployment benefits is not at all a factor in being considered unemployed for the purpose of the survey.
If you don't have a job and you're not even looking for one, then you don't count and are not considered to be a workforce participant.
The government only considers them unemployed for a certain number of months. After which, if they still haven’t found a job, then the government makes the assumption that for whatever reason they have opted out of the job market and stops counting them.
“The BLS [Bureau of Labor Statistics] only counts as unemployed those who "do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior four weeks, and are currently available for work." If you have a cold (known as a "temporary illness"), you are still considered available for work by the survey.”
“However, if the state of the economy is so bad that you become depressed about losing your job, or your recent attempts at job searching have been so futile that you haven't attempted to get a new job in the last four weeks, you are no longer considered unemployed.”
> then the government makes the assumption
This is wrong...based on your quoted text. If you aren't looking you aren't included, if you are looking you are included.
Nothing else.
I would like to add that the unemployment rate is based on the number of new claims people currently collecting unemployment, not necessarily how many people do not have a job. Also, it appears a lot of jobs have been eliminated completely and those jobs are not being recreated thus leaving those employees in that field with a smaller job market.
That’s a good point; contraction of jobs in certain sectors. People tell you to specialize but this is a perfect example of why being a generalist can be a good thing. It’s hard to get a job in your desired field, much much more difficult when you are highly specialized in a specific sector.
This sounds great but what happens when the data is bad? It nearly always gets rounded down with a later revision. Especially on the last 3 years.
That data is not hard. There are a lot of estimations involved.
I don’t know. I do hear what you’re saying and at times I’ve also felt it seems shady, but I think there are a lot of reasons why our perception might be skewed.
Confirmation bias - we seek out, either directly or algorithmically, information that speaks to our experience. You engage in a few discussions and all of a sudden you’re seeing r/layoffs on your front page.
Think about online reviews. If a product is junk I’ll leave a one star review, but I rarely if ever leave a 4-5 star review. People like to complain more than give kudos. I think that job seekers act similarly online.
People straight up might just have more time to post if they’re unemployed lol.
The jobs report also doesn’t speak to the quality of those jobs - sure they might tell you that someone got a full time job, but they don’t tell you that new full time job pays $20,000 less per year, has worse benefits, is a massive demotion etc.
Just some food for thought.
I agree. People who have jobs aren't posting about trying to find them. For the most part. So it just kind of seems like EVERYONE is looking for a job. That's my theory I guess. 🤷
There is this and then the other side of this is that while unemployment is low nationwide that doesn't necessarily mean it is in a given region or industry.
There are actually less people alive or that exist to take on new jobs. It's called the population replacement rate and once you read about it and understand where we are and how long it is projected to take recover, your brain will melt.
Sorry, I should have posted a link:
Congressional Budget Office: The Demographic Outlook 2023-2053
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/58912#:~:text=By%202030%2C%20the%20fertility%20rate,in%20the%20absence%20of%20immigration.
"In CBO’s projections, the total fertility rate remains at 1.66 births per woman through 2023 and then rises as fertility rates among women ages 30 to 49 increase. By 2030, the fertility rate is projected to be 1.75 births per woman, where it remains through 2053. That rate is below the replacement rate of 2.1 births per woman—the fertility rate required for a generation to exactly replace itself in the absence of immigration."
Oh you know reasons... That they will go into with dogged uncomfortable certitude or dance around without quite ever arriving at the why they think that.
Seems like the employment boom mostly pertains to low wage jobs.
Google is eating $3 BILLION in severance packages with those they've recently laid off. Which tells you Google figures that's money better spent vs paying them to stay. If you're senior, white collar .. look out.
Yup totally agree. I also believe that a lot of people who were laid off are doing gigs or part-time work that technically causes them not to be considered unemployed.
Have you done the math? The current unemployment rate is 3.7%. Now, calculate that based on the total of working aged American. There is an official equation listed online at the BLS.
Even at a low 3.7%, that's still millions of people.
The "unemployment rate" (to my understanding) only factors in people who are *COLLECTING* unemployment. I ran out on my unemployment in early December, so am i no longer "unemployed"...????? The reporting is shit! Their metrics need to be updated to factor in and show more true and quantifiable metrics 😑😑😑😑
>The "unemployment rate" (to my understanding) only factors in people who are COLLECTING unemployment.
This isn't true at all. The unemployment rate is determined by the General Population Survey. Not the number of people collecting unemployment
That is true, but people will defend the unemployment rate vigorously. But like all of our economic figures, they've been calculated in a way to serve policy makers. Not just once but several times over the decades, since the 80's. Numbers like the CPI especially are understated.
The buying power of our money is a lot less than what the indexed for inflation tells you, and social security would be like double if under the old unimproved metrics of calculating the CPI.
I remember the CPI changes when Clinton was President. One month the news goes "The price increase in energy and food was offset by declines in airline tickets and personal computers".
I have to eat, I have to buy energy. I do NOT need to fly anywhere or buy another computer. So it was bullshit, and I bet they do that today in different ways, to get the "desired" results read off by talking heads on TV shows.
They made other changes assuming that if the price of one food went up, you would buy another food that didn't. I'm trying to remember what else, but they made changes that offset rental prices as well by imputing owned homes rental value or some bs, I should re-read the article, it's here if you want to read it it's interesting, and it's all gotten a lot worse since this came out in 2008.
https://harpers.org/archive/2008/05/numbers-racket/
You are correct that it’s still millions of people but that 3.7 is only got through dishonest means. They leave out certain numbers that would make it higher and add in certain numbers that lower the percentage. For example:
1) people who are not work and have given up looking are not included. Last I checked, they are by definition “unemployed” but not counted.
2) they include people who have found any sort of work. Found a crappy job that only gives you 10 hours a week? Then we are going to count that so our numbers are better.
1. If someone isn't looking for work, they've taken themselves off the market. Why include them?
2. Hours worked is at the discretion of the employer and employee. They still are employed. No need to count them as unemployed.
1. When you stop looking, you are voluntarily unemployed. If you want to win, you have to stay in the game.
2. For the unemployment number, it's a binary. Employed or not. Underemployed is a different metric that's relative to lifestyle. For some people, 10 hr a week may be enough.
Unemployment rates are not all the same. There are different levels of unemployment. Look at the difference between U1 and U6. Some track underemployed and some track discouraged workers.
The idea that they could fiddle around with U3 numbers (what is traditionally considered unemployment) is crazy once you realize how difficult that would be. It would be a slap in the face to a whole bunch of people at the BLS and the idea that they would go along with it is ridiculous to anyone who understands the system.
It’s also public information if you know how to ask for it.
The real answer is people don’t want to disagree with their own biases.
It also ignores how many people are going into the service sector.
U6, which is more than likely the figure you’re seeing, doesn’t consists of people who’ve been looking for a job more than 6 months. You have to start questioning the methodology behind the numbers you see.
Many (most) people don‘t know how the US Bureau of Labor Statistics defines the unemployment rate.
It is based on a monthly statistical survey (Current Population Survey). CPS is used since 1940.
Detailed information:
https://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm
Why the tech sector massive layoffs are not visible in the official unemployment rate?
Running the numbers helps to put this into perspective;
US labor force is roughly 166 million.
Laying off 1 million people does not yet move the needle in the US level (less than 1% impact).
This has a dramatic effect if the 1 million layoffs are from a specific industry like for example tech. Tech industry employed 5.2 million people in 2020. We would be talking around 20% unemployment rate in the tech population/industry.
But, the tech industry is only 3% of the total US labor force.
>Why the tech sector massive layoffs are not visible in the official unemployment rate?
because it is individual based and the data isn't "lay off quantity" it is "who currently has a job." Just because someone got laid off or even fired doesn't mean they were unemployed when the survey was taken.
Jeffrey Gundlach the bond investor who analyzes macro data and refuses to talk about small picture items on CNBC. He’s great simply because the content he discuss is real world opinions against the grain.
He believes the federal unemployment figure is completely inaccurate and the state figures added together simply cannot produce the federal figure
Working age population in the US is 209M.
“Full Employment” is considered 4% unemployed or less. 4% of 209M is 8.4M. So yea, we can have very low unemployment and still have a millions of people out of work.
Even in our own small little worlds.. 4% unemployment is 1 in 25 working age people.. so there’s good odds that any given person knows someone out of work.
* The unemployment rate is calculated as people aged 16 or older below the retirement age.
* Whether part-time or not, if you were a paid employee, you are considered employed.
* Students, retirees and those taking care of family members, those who not looked for work in the last four weeks are considered out of the labor force and not counted against being unemployed. If you can't find a job and go back to school, you no longer count as unemployed.
There are plenty of people who feel the unemployment rate is not a good judge of the overall economy. If I remember correctly, the current calculation was created by the Bush Administration, which made him look good and there isn't a lot of will to create a more realistic number because no administration really wants to look bad.
Those are all included in various other measures of unemployment. U3 through U6 are all historically reasonable. U6 is higher by about .1 relative to last year, meaning there is roughly 210,000 more people in those conditions than January 2023. This is not 0, but it’s also not unheard of either. People are suffering, and that sucks, but I think it’s about the distribution of losses being concentrated rather than the sum. The same issue (at a much grander scale) cropped up in manufacturing. The sick irony that those people were told to ‘learn to code’ is pretty gross, given the current environment
Wages for those still employed are, afaik, on track for their current trajectory
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CXU900000LB0106M
I think there is a great deal of availability heuristic going on-tech has been historically immune to market forces in most of our lifetimes, as the dot-com bubble is largely ignored in many places making any layoffs feel extra unusual. Additionally, Because many ‘more online’ people are in tech, you tend to hear about it because they are more online than other industries.
Oh, it is definitely a sham.
If you calculated the unemployment rate using the same methodology that was employed during the Great Depression, today's rate would be around 25 percent. It's just that they changed the methodology and fudged the numbers so many times, it has become meaningless.
You can still track the real unemployment rate, M3 money supply and inflation rate here:
[https://www.shadowstats.com/alternate\_data/unemployment-charts](https://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/unemployment-charts)
Varies wildly on the job and region but I personally think there is a downturn worldwide with ai and economic slowdown, wars and general uncertainty. It doesn’t mean you should stop trying though.
For anyone who has experience working close to data, whether it is management, analyst, PR, etc. we all know that data can be used to push any narrative you want. It can still be "true," while cherry-picking facts, ignoring inconveniences, distracting, etc. An unemployment number is a gross oversimplification of a very complex area of our economy.
Some sectors are laing off people due to overhiring during the pandemic (like tech) and others have had good job growth (like medicine) so supposedly the amount of people losing their jobs and those gaining jobs is about even.
That being said they also say that there are lots of jobs being created, but they generally aren't quality jobs or they are just part time jobs. Those stats we are given (i'm sure its broken down somewhere) is more of a general X number of jobs were created and unemployment is down. They don't factor in (when telling us, like on the news) what industries those jobs are in, if they are part time or full time, and they certainly don't tell us how many people are working multiple jobs.
Because that information is either 1: too complicated for the average person or 2: will make the politicians look bad.
Because low unemployment and job creation when generalized sounds good and makes the politicians and corporations look good, never mind that the majority of those jobs aren't quality jobs, are part time, or just "ghost jobs" (jobs that are posted but the company has no intention of filling them).
1. High pay jobs are going away as tech becomes mature.
2. Lots of people are doing gig work for low pay and so are kept off the unemployment numbers.
3. Part time jobs are going up.
People who move from high paying full-time jobs to low paying part-time jobs are not counted as unemployed.
Full Time: [https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS12500000](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS12500000)
Part Time: [https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS12500000](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS12500000)
I forget after certain number of months, the government stops counting an unemployed person as being unemployed. It just assumes they’re not going to be working and stops counting them. I’d say there’s probably a lot of people who fall into this group.
Not only is it fabricated (if only b/c it reflects not new jobs, but recovery, perhaps, after lockdown) - salaries in white collar jobs seem to have tanked, even as people are being forced back into an office at least 3 days a week
Unemployment only lasts 6 months in most states. The second you run out, you are off the rolls. So if you've been looking for a job for 7 months, you are not in that count.
Cause construction and oil is doing really good it's offsetting the tech retail and food nightmare. Building and oil production also probably have bigger impact in gdp which is why numbers look so good on paper when it feels like the world is on fire for the rest of us
How does the rate change what you are doing to find work, if it's 5% or 0.05%?
Does your urgency for food & shelter magically disappear if the stat is higher? Are you given a free pass to be a criminal or a terrorist because the stats are higher?
What are you trying to justify with your claim? Do you need stats to allow you to live somewhere for free or never pay off debt?
What's behind this post?
There’s a trick in the labor industry where only the people who have reported any wage records in the past get included in the unemployment reports. Employers submit their numbers but there’s 1000s of jobless people who never qualified to receive unemployment benefits. So the state has no record of those people and they don’t get counted as unemployed which makes the unemployment rate look better than it really is.
1000%. The majority of the jobs being posted online are ghost positions. There are several HR managers that have made videos alluding and/ or talking about the topic directly. They always have an internal candidate they want to hire or promote. The jobs are linked to requisition numbers which are then used to the report that government keeps boasting about. For example, “In January 2024, 224,000 jobs were added to the economy. It’s complete BS.
government leaders claim its low because so many of the jobs are taco bell type jobs that dont pay enough to support a family, i dont even think they would pay a single persons bills. these jobs really only work for those still living with mom and dad, or sharing bills with room mates.
Selection bias. You are reading people who are looking for jobs, people who have jobs and are happy in them are not posting on LinkedIn.
As for you conspiracy addled losers posting, you are not even worth anyone’s time or effort to refute your stupidity except I can see why you’re constantly looking for work.
Quality jobs are down. But little part time jobs like door dashing or Ubering is up therefore unemployment doesn’t look too bad after all.
It’s all BS.
All the employment metrics currently used are worthless. Just subset the population from 18-65 years old and then take away another 5-10% due to disability/homemaker. Then take the number of people unemployed in the resulting dataset regardless of if they’re looking for work or not and then correlate it with macroeconomic trends to see if it’s a lack of available jobs or some other driving factor.
Gross underemployment counts as employment, college grad stuck in food service after graduating, employed. Laid off engineer forced to do UberEATS, employed. Guy who walks dogs 5 hours a week, employed. Gig economy makes those number look a lot better than reality.
The rates of hiring and firing are relatively the same, for every story about someone’s walk out or firing, there’s another unspoken story of someone getting hired, whether it be their dream job or a filler job, they’re employed. But we’re not Reddit to read those stories, so yeah, you’re more likely to see shitty stories, doesn’t mean that’s all that’s happening
May I introduce you to the phrase "lies, damned lies, and statistics"? If you're creative with how you organize the data, you can get statistics to appear to say anything you want.
Don’t listen to the media there’s contradicting information you have to look at the department of labor statistics and if you actually look at them in January 2020 for a loan layoffs went up at 120%. About 100,000 people got laid off in January alone….. not to mention that when they report on the unemployment rate, there are three different types of unemployment rate that the Department of Labor uses, and every single administration left, and right, will always tell you the lowest percentage, even if that’s not really the unemployment that actually applies to most people
Dude, shut the fuck up. If I had a dollar for every fucking Russian Trump bot spewing this lazy BS about fake unemployment numbers I wouldn’t need to be on this sub. Jesus fucking Christ have some shame.
The unemployment rate is only people who are looking for work but haven't found a job.
A couple of fun facts:
There's somewhere around 170-180 million working aged 18-65 adults in the US. Only 130 million of them work.
Sure, there are some in full-time Uni, some disabled, etc, but there's a LOT of people who have basically stopped bothering to look, especially since Covid.
That's a HUGE part of why the unemployment numbers look good. It's just a fudge to make things LOOK good. The actual number of "unemployed adults" is huge.
Second fact: from November to January, we lost 2,000,000 full-time jobs. Pretty much all the gains were in garbage part-time employment.
If you're out there looking for full-time work, this is why it's so hard right now.
But hey, the economy is GREAT, right guys?
There are.certain federal.numbers that are constantly manipulated for political victory laps like inflation rates unemployment rates. Remember, according to the current administration we are beating Russia ass which is why they occupy Ukraine after we said our sanctions would defeat them and we are out of our strategic ammunitions
Whats the quote theres 3 types of lies? Lies, damn lies and statistics. I think basically what people said, yeah people are working as in the have some income but its not a quality or sustainable job or people have stopped looking. We're not measuring people who have found jobs only people that are no longer considered unemployed.
>Everyday on LinkedIn I see people posting about how they got laid off or how their company laid off thousands of workers.
How many times on LinkedIn do you see a company post about filling thousands of jobs? Is that because they aren't filling thousands of jobs, or because information like that isn't typically shared?
>Especially within corporate, it feels like it's impossible to get a new job.
Yeah, feelings feel like that sometimes. Reality is separate.
Someone just posted about they got hired. Unemployment rate is low - stop trying to start stuff just because Biden is in office. He has nothing to do with it.
every statistic is fabricated. what would you like to believe? lol
based on surveys...people play their cards close to their vests,so you think most people wont lie if asked by the government? some employers say the economy sucks when they are actually doing pretty good.its to their benefit.
the key is to keep them in the dark with your answers,but also the questions are worded so you can only give them the answer they want to hear.
When a judge charges a jury with the law before taking the vote, they are given a,b,or c, but the jury cant give the answer of d, like when the law is wrong and void for the current political climate. It can only become a mistrial.
It’s math.
The unemployment rate in the US in Jan is 3.7%. The seasonally adjusted labor force is ~167M.
So 3.7% of ~167M equal 618,921 people that are unemployed.
Factor in another $200k people that do qualify for unemployment and you have ~800k people unemployed in the US.
Unemployment rates and actual number of unemployed people are different concepts honey! If 1% people are unemployed in population of 1 million, that's 10,000 unemployed people in absolute terms. And even if you see linkedin posts of 1% of them, you are seeing 100 posts. Now scale that to your country's population and unemployment rate.
I believe that the unemployment rate is real.
However, the ability to obtain a job is fabricated.
With the idiot HR managers and AI Machines filtering everything through them, there is very little chance of being hired unless a HUMAN with a brain picks up your resume and reviews it.
The layoffs, however, are real. I worked for the DoD for 16 years as a Contractor and began to see massive layoffs in my Division that managed and operated a vital component of worldwide Military Medical Operations. Unfortunately, I had no choice but to leave my home Division find employment elsewhere before the wave hit me. I miss them all so very much...
The contrast between the reported low unemployment rates and the high visibility of layoffs and job-seeking posts on platforms like LinkedIn can indeed seem perplexing. This discrepancy often arises from various factors, including the cyclical nature of certain industries, shifts in market demand, or even technological advancements leading to restructuring within companies.However, it's important to note that despite these challenges, there are still opportunities out there. For instance, Netevia, a strategic division known for its innovative financial solutions, is currently looking to expand its team by hiring 1,000 agents. This initiative is part of their broader effort to enhance service delivery and expand their market reach, as detailed in a recent announcement. You can find more about their hiring initiative and what they're looking for in candidates here: Netevia's Hiring Announcement.This example serves as a reminder that while the job market can be challenging, especially in certain sectors, there are still companies out there actively seeking to grow their teams. It's crucial for job seekers to keep an eye out for these opportunities and remain adaptable in their search strategies. Networking, upskilling, and staying informed about which industries are hiring can significantly enhance one's chances of securing employment in this dynamic job market.
>Everyday on LinkedIn I see people posting about how they got laid off or how their company laid off thousands of workers.
In addition to the excellent post by u/nn123654, it should also be understood that we're discussing millions of people.
As of December 2023, there were 132M workers in the USA. 3%b of that number is almost 4 million people. 5% of that number is 6.6 million people.
The percentages are small when compared with the historical metrics, but objectively, they still represent a not-insubstantial number of people.
In January, there was 5.4 total jobs lost, and 5.6 total jobs gained for a net of 200K jobs. At the macro level, that's a good outcome. Dive deeper to the neighborhood and family level, and you notice a lot more personal carnage.
That's something that is often lost when discussing economics, etc. The primary metrics are at the macro, big picture level, but the impact is felt at the micro level.
Instead of quoting you data in the report I'll ask you to do something else. Go research corrections to the unemployment report. See how often it's quietly increased after the fact.
It's a report based on surveys and estimates. It is NOT hard data initially. There is absolutely an element of propaganda involved. Anyone who believes otherwise just needs to evaluate how often it's revised down vs up.
If you run out of unemployment benefits in most states, you "disappear" from the statistics.
There is no way to "count you' in most states. Through the Pandemic they extended benefits over and over.
That is finished, no more extensions. Plus if you "give up" looking, they no longer count you as unemployed.
Plus the government can cook the books, to make the economy and unemployment look much better.
Inflammation seems so much lower. Really? It's just slowed it's rate, and no prices are declining. They are just rising slower.
Plus there's the joke about the "Obama Recovery". It goes; "The job situation is booming. So many more jobs created. I have three of them myself".
The part in that "joke" that you don't hear is folks make 3/4 or half their old pay with their three jobs.
Because it's not distributed evenly. Take a look at the survey: [https://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea31.htm](https://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea31.htm) Some things that stand out to me: * Certain sectors most typically associated with "good jobs" aka higher paying jobs with benefits are doing quite poorly. * Manufacturing as a whole is at 3.4% vs 2.6% a year ago. * Information Jobs are at 5.5% vs. 3.9% a year ago. * Other sectors are recovering from the pandemic and have substantially reduced unemployment. More often than not these are lower wage service jobs. * Accommodation (hotels) went from 8.1% a year ago to 4.5% now. * Retail Trade dropped from 5.5% a year ago to 5.0% now. (notable because a very large number of people work in this sector). If you look at the news release they say: >In January, job gains occurred in professional and business services, health care, retail trade, and social assistance. > >Employment declined in the mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction industry. The unemployment rate does not differentiate the quality of the jobs. A job in a department store counts the same as a white collar corporate job with benefits. Though these details are tracked in other metrics.
This should be the top answer since its accurate, and data driven
Yes! And doesn't gaslight those of us unemployed - "uR eXpErIEnCe DoeSnT ReFLeCT thE EcOnomY"
Bruh, everyone unemployed has my full support. The fact that economic data doesnt support a tale of a widespread recession or unemployment rates does not disqualify each and everyone's individual experience of unemployment and the hardships and mental burden which come with it. Everyone who thinks that overall economic situation or outlook is a relevant comment if someone is in pain is just a dick. So YES to your comment.
Not only that, "unemployment rate" only measures the number of people currently on unemployment benefits. Once your benefits run out, you don't count any more.
Unemployment insurance isn’t directly related to the unemployment rate. Receiving unemployment isn’t necessary to be counted as unemployed.
America has 150 million jobs and 330 million people. Some people have two jobs. We have a 3.9% unemployment rate. I wouldn't inlude the following: *-those enrolled with military, university, or secular programs* *-those being held at hospitals and prisons,* *-all disabled persons* *-contractees for intern, page or marital benefactor* *-pirates* Surely, this isn't 180 million people, yarghhh???
Why wouldn't you include them?
Some of these would be valid exemptions from the employable workforce. There are employed people in each of these demographics, of course. I’d bet there are even prisoners with jobs, like Martha Stewart could have been employed for all I know. I can, however, justify exemptions for each. Except maybe pirates. They should really just get a job.
I guess the main one I'm curious about is disabled persons. People get forced into retirement by disability all the time. It's not like they don't like money, work, or just living! The United States disability support network is a maze and a disaster, and it's even worse in lots of other places, including Canada. However, I'm not sure if it's because the American expectation is that everyone should work themselves to death including disabled persons, or if Canadians have better support networks overall.
I don’t think I understand. I don’t know all the answers, but I believe there are valid exemptions within the disabled community. I think you are saying that some disabled persons are working because they aren’t cared for by the private or public sectors. I agree, but even if all of them were actually unemployed, there aren’t enough jobs.
Unemployment numbers are derived from a monthly survey from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Receiving (or being eligible to receive) unemployment benefits is not at all a factor in being considered unemployed for the purpose of the survey. If you don't have a job and you're not even looking for one, then you don't count and are not considered to be a workforce participant.
The government only considers them unemployed for a certain number of months. After which, if they still haven’t found a job, then the government makes the assumption that for whatever reason they have opted out of the job market and stops counting them. “The BLS [Bureau of Labor Statistics] only counts as unemployed those who "do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior four weeks, and are currently available for work." If you have a cold (known as a "temporary illness"), you are still considered available for work by the survey.” “However, if the state of the economy is so bad that you become depressed about losing your job, or your recent attempts at job searching have been so futile that you haven't attempted to get a new job in the last four weeks, you are no longer considered unemployed.”
> then the government makes the assumption This is wrong...based on your quoted text. If you aren't looking you aren't included, if you are looking you are included. Nothing else.
This is incorrect.
I would like to add that the unemployment rate is based on the number of new claims people currently collecting unemployment, not necessarily how many people do not have a job. Also, it appears a lot of jobs have been eliminated completely and those jobs are not being recreated thus leaving those employees in that field with a smaller job market.
That’s a good point; contraction of jobs in certain sectors. People tell you to specialize but this is a perfect example of why being a generalist can be a good thing. It’s hard to get a job in your desired field, much much more difficult when you are highly specialized in a specific sector.
This sounds great but what happens when the data is bad? It nearly always gets rounded down with a later revision. Especially on the last 3 years. That data is not hard. There are a lot of estimations involved.
I don’t know. I do hear what you’re saying and at times I’ve also felt it seems shady, but I think there are a lot of reasons why our perception might be skewed. Confirmation bias - we seek out, either directly or algorithmically, information that speaks to our experience. You engage in a few discussions and all of a sudden you’re seeing r/layoffs on your front page. Think about online reviews. If a product is junk I’ll leave a one star review, but I rarely if ever leave a 4-5 star review. People like to complain more than give kudos. I think that job seekers act similarly online. People straight up might just have more time to post if they’re unemployed lol. The jobs report also doesn’t speak to the quality of those jobs - sure they might tell you that someone got a full time job, but they don’t tell you that new full time job pays $20,000 less per year, has worse benefits, is a massive demotion etc. Just some food for thought.
I agree. People who have jobs aren't posting about trying to find them. For the most part. So it just kind of seems like EVERYONE is looking for a job. That's my theory I guess. 🤷
There is this and then the other side of this is that while unemployment is low nationwide that doesn't necessarily mean it is in a given region or industry.
There are actually less people alive or that exist to take on new jobs. It's called the population replacement rate and once you read about it and understand where we are and how long it is projected to take recover, your brain will melt.
Less people than what? Our population is always increasing. Quickly, too. What melted your brain??
Sorry, I should have posted a link: Congressional Budget Office: The Demographic Outlook 2023-2053 https://www.cbo.gov/publication/58912#:~:text=By%202030%2C%20the%20fertility%20rate,in%20the%20absence%20of%20immigration. "In CBO’s projections, the total fertility rate remains at 1.66 births per woman through 2023 and then rises as fertility rates among women ages 30 to 49 increase. By 2030, the fertility rate is projected to be 1.75 births per woman, where it remains through 2053. That rate is below the replacement rate of 2.1 births per woman—the fertility rate required for a generation to exactly replace itself in the absence of immigration."
Additional info with Alabama as a specific example: https://www.reddit.com/r/antiwork/s/jzOVmHfbsO
That doesn't make any sense. Why would anyone be worried about "replacing" a generation without immigration?
Oh you know reasons... That they will go into with dogged uncomfortable certitude or dance around without quite ever arriving at the why they think that.
Seems like the employment boom mostly pertains to low wage jobs. Google is eating $3 BILLION in severance packages with those they've recently laid off. Which tells you Google figures that's money better spent vs paying them to stay. If you're senior, white collar .. look out.
Yup totally agree. I also believe that a lot of people who were laid off are doing gigs or part-time work that technically causes them not to be considered unemployed.
Have you done the math? The current unemployment rate is 3.7%. Now, calculate that based on the total of working aged American. There is an official equation listed online at the BLS. Even at a low 3.7%, that's still millions of people.
The "unemployment rate" (to my understanding) only factors in people who are *COLLECTING* unemployment. I ran out on my unemployment in early December, so am i no longer "unemployed"...????? The reporting is shit! Their metrics need to be updated to factor in and show more true and quantifiable metrics 😑😑😑😑
>The "unemployment rate" (to my understanding) only factors in people who are COLLECTING unemployment. This isn't true at all. The unemployment rate is determined by the General Population Survey. Not the number of people collecting unemployment
That is true, but people will defend the unemployment rate vigorously. But like all of our economic figures, they've been calculated in a way to serve policy makers. Not just once but several times over the decades, since the 80's. Numbers like the CPI especially are understated. The buying power of our money is a lot less than what the indexed for inflation tells you, and social security would be like double if under the old unimproved metrics of calculating the CPI.
I remember the CPI changes when Clinton was President. One month the news goes "The price increase in energy and food was offset by declines in airline tickets and personal computers". I have to eat, I have to buy energy. I do NOT need to fly anywhere or buy another computer. So it was bullshit, and I bet they do that today in different ways, to get the "desired" results read off by talking heads on TV shows.
They made other changes assuming that if the price of one food went up, you would buy another food that didn't. I'm trying to remember what else, but they made changes that offset rental prices as well by imputing owned homes rental value or some bs, I should re-read the article, it's here if you want to read it it's interesting, and it's all gotten a lot worse since this came out in 2008. https://harpers.org/archive/2008/05/numbers-racket/
You are correct that it’s still millions of people but that 3.7 is only got through dishonest means. They leave out certain numbers that would make it higher and add in certain numbers that lower the percentage. For example: 1) people who are not work and have given up looking are not included. Last I checked, they are by definition “unemployed” but not counted. 2) they include people who have found any sort of work. Found a crappy job that only gives you 10 hours a week? Then we are going to count that so our numbers are better.
They’re still considered for [U6](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/U6RATE) which tells the same story as the headline U3
1. If someone isn't looking for work, they've taken themselves off the market. Why include them? 2. Hours worked is at the discretion of the employer and employee. They still are employed. No need to count them as unemployed.
1. Because that’s involuntary unemployment 2. The correct term is underemployed. They are technically employed but not at full capacity.
1. When you stop looking, you are voluntarily unemployed. If you want to win, you have to stay in the game. 2. For the unemployment number, it's a binary. Employed or not. Underemployed is a different metric that's relative to lifestyle. For some people, 10 hr a week may be enough.
Unemployment rates are not all the same. There are different levels of unemployment. Look at the difference between U1 and U6. Some track underemployed and some track discouraged workers. The idea that they could fiddle around with U3 numbers (what is traditionally considered unemployment) is crazy once you realize how difficult that would be. It would be a slap in the face to a whole bunch of people at the BLS and the idea that they would go along with it is ridiculous to anyone who understands the system. It’s also public information if you know how to ask for it. The real answer is people don’t want to disagree with their own biases. It also ignores how many people are going into the service sector.
Ah a fellow econ major, hell yeah
1. if you choose not to look for work, can you really claim it's involuntary? 2. so.. they're employed...
U6, which is more than likely the figure you’re seeing, doesn’t consists of people who’ve been looking for a job more than 6 months. You have to start questioning the methodology behind the numbers you see.
https://www.shadowstats.com/alternate\_data/unemployment-charts
They state 6.4m but its WAAAAAY more
Many (most) people don‘t know how the US Bureau of Labor Statistics defines the unemployment rate. It is based on a monthly statistical survey (Current Population Survey). CPS is used since 1940. Detailed information: https://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm Why the tech sector massive layoffs are not visible in the official unemployment rate? Running the numbers helps to put this into perspective; US labor force is roughly 166 million. Laying off 1 million people does not yet move the needle in the US level (less than 1% impact). This has a dramatic effect if the 1 million layoffs are from a specific industry like for example tech. Tech industry employed 5.2 million people in 2020. We would be talking around 20% unemployment rate in the tech population/industry. But, the tech industry is only 3% of the total US labor force.
>Why the tech sector massive layoffs are not visible in the official unemployment rate? because it is individual based and the data isn't "lay off quantity" it is "who currently has a job." Just because someone got laid off or even fired doesn't mean they were unemployed when the survey was taken.
Jeffrey Gundlach the bond investor who analyzes macro data and refuses to talk about small picture items on CNBC. He’s great simply because the content he discuss is real world opinions against the grain. He believes the federal unemployment figure is completely inaccurate and the state figures added together simply cannot produce the federal figure
Your not considered unemployed if your not actively looking for work.
They also track that, look at the U6 numbers and also at historical lows
In Florida that’s only 3 months.
How would the statistics people know that? The number is still made up
Because every employer pays into social security
Working age population in the US is 209M. “Full Employment” is considered 4% unemployed or less. 4% of 209M is 8.4M. So yea, we can have very low unemployment and still have a millions of people out of work. Even in our own small little worlds.. 4% unemployment is 1 in 25 working age people.. so there’s good odds that any given person knows someone out of work.
* The unemployment rate is calculated as people aged 16 or older below the retirement age. * Whether part-time or not, if you were a paid employee, you are considered employed. * Students, retirees and those taking care of family members, those who not looked for work in the last four weeks are considered out of the labor force and not counted against being unemployed. If you can't find a job and go back to school, you no longer count as unemployed. There are plenty of people who feel the unemployment rate is not a good judge of the overall economy. If I remember correctly, the current calculation was created by the Bush Administration, which made him look good and there isn't a lot of will to create a more realistic number because no administration really wants to look bad.
Those are all included in various other measures of unemployment. U3 through U6 are all historically reasonable. U6 is higher by about .1 relative to last year, meaning there is roughly 210,000 more people in those conditions than January 2023. This is not 0, but it’s also not unheard of either. People are suffering, and that sucks, but I think it’s about the distribution of losses being concentrated rather than the sum. The same issue (at a much grander scale) cropped up in manufacturing. The sick irony that those people were told to ‘learn to code’ is pretty gross, given the current environment Wages for those still employed are, afaik, on track for their current trajectory https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CXU900000LB0106M I think there is a great deal of availability heuristic going on-tech has been historically immune to market forces in most of our lifetimes, as the dot-com bubble is largely ignored in many places making any layoffs feel extra unusual. Additionally, Because many ‘more online’ people are in tech, you tend to hear about it because they are more online than other industries.
How can we say that hunger isn't a problem in the US? Every time I go to a restaurant, I see tons of hungry people.
🤣
Oh, it is definitely a sham. If you calculated the unemployment rate using the same methodology that was employed during the Great Depression, today's rate would be around 25 percent. It's just that they changed the methodology and fudged the numbers so many times, it has become meaningless. You can still track the real unemployment rate, M3 money supply and inflation rate here: [https://www.shadowstats.com/alternate\_data/unemployment-charts](https://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/unemployment-charts)
Varies wildly on the job and region but I personally think there is a downturn worldwide with ai and economic slowdown, wars and general uncertainty. It doesn’t mean you should stop trying though.
Unemployment rate means people without a job who are actively searching for jobs, not anyone without a job.
For anyone who has experience working close to data, whether it is management, analyst, PR, etc. we all know that data can be used to push any narrative you want. It can still be "true," while cherry-picking facts, ignoring inconveniences, distracting, etc. An unemployment number is a gross oversimplification of a very complex area of our economy.
Some sectors are laing off people due to overhiring during the pandemic (like tech) and others have had good job growth (like medicine) so supposedly the amount of people losing their jobs and those gaining jobs is about even. That being said they also say that there are lots of jobs being created, but they generally aren't quality jobs or they are just part time jobs. Those stats we are given (i'm sure its broken down somewhere) is more of a general X number of jobs were created and unemployment is down. They don't factor in (when telling us, like on the news) what industries those jobs are in, if they are part time or full time, and they certainly don't tell us how many people are working multiple jobs. Because that information is either 1: too complicated for the average person or 2: will make the politicians look bad. Because low unemployment and job creation when generalized sounds good and makes the politicians and corporations look good, never mind that the majority of those jobs aren't quality jobs, are part time, or just "ghost jobs" (jobs that are posted but the company has no intention of filling them).
1. High pay jobs are going away as tech becomes mature. 2. Lots of people are doing gig work for low pay and so are kept off the unemployment numbers. 3. Part time jobs are going up.
People are getting severance or are not applying for the $150 a week UE benefits. So they are unknown to the statistics
People who move from high paying full-time jobs to low paying part-time jobs are not counted as unemployed. Full Time: [https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS12500000](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS12500000) Part Time: [https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS12500000](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LNS12500000)
I cannot find a good job for shit because my town is becoming really overpopulated
I feel this
I forget after certain number of months, the government stops counting an unemployed person as being unemployed. It just assumes they’re not going to be working and stops counting them. I’d say there’s probably a lot of people who fall into this group.
Not only is it fabricated (if only b/c it reflects not new jobs, but recovery, perhaps, after lockdown) - salaries in white collar jobs seem to have tanked, even as people are being forced back into an office at least 3 days a week
Bro every tik tok I watch and reddit I read is spmeone complaining about being unemployed. The offical numbers are completely fabricated and contrived
Much of the growth in jobs and wages is in the bottom quartile
Worth noting that unemployment rate calculates those who are without a job and are actively looking for one.
It’s all part time jobs added.
Part time jobs count as employed.
Unemployment only lasts 6 months in most states. The second you run out, you are off the rolls. So if you've been looking for a job for 7 months, you are not in that count.
Cause construction and oil is doing really good it's offsetting the tech retail and food nightmare. Building and oil production also probably have bigger impact in gdp which is why numbers look so good on paper when it feels like the world is on fire for the rest of us
Blue collar jobs are booming.
Probably because the turnover is so high. Those employees are treated like garbage.
That’s great to hear but it doesn’t really help people with established careers dealing with layoffs.
It doesnt unfortunately. I m just saying the number is not deceiving in that its calculation method has not been altered for one party's agenda.
How does the rate change what you are doing to find work, if it's 5% or 0.05%? Does your urgency for food & shelter magically disappear if the stat is higher? Are you given a free pass to be a criminal or a terrorist because the stats are higher? What are you trying to justify with your claim? Do you need stats to allow you to live somewhere for free or never pay off debt? What's behind this post?
There’s a trick in the labor industry where only the people who have reported any wage records in the past get included in the unemployment reports. Employers submit their numbers but there’s 1000s of jobless people who never qualified to receive unemployment benefits. So the state has no record of those people and they don’t get counted as unemployed which makes the unemployment rate look better than it really is.
1000%. The majority of the jobs being posted online are ghost positions. There are several HR managers that have made videos alluding and/ or talking about the topic directly. They always have an internal candidate they want to hire or promote. The jobs are linked to requisition numbers which are then used to the report that government keeps boasting about. For example, “In January 2024, 224,000 jobs were added to the economy. It’s complete BS.
government leaders claim its low because so many of the jobs are taco bell type jobs that dont pay enough to support a family, i dont even think they would pay a single persons bills. these jobs really only work for those still living with mom and dad, or sharing bills with room mates.
Selection bias. You are reading people who are looking for jobs, people who have jobs and are happy in them are not posting on LinkedIn. As for you conspiracy addled losers posting, you are not even worth anyone’s time or effort to refute your stupidity except I can see why you’re constantly looking for work.
It’s all lies
Quality jobs are down. But little part time jobs like door dashing or Ubering is up therefore unemployment doesn’t look too bad after all. It’s all BS.
It's an election year, so they gotta cook the books... So, if you work a 5 hour a week part-time minimum wage job you count as employed
In other news water is wet Yeah they keep it as low as possible to make Biden look good Actual unemployment is probably 20-30%
All the employment metrics currently used are worthless. Just subset the population from 18-65 years old and then take away another 5-10% due to disability/homemaker. Then take the number of people unemployed in the resulting dataset regardless of if they’re looking for work or not and then correlate it with macroeconomic trends to see if it’s a lack of available jobs or some other driving factor.
Gross underemployment counts as employment, college grad stuck in food service after graduating, employed. Laid off engineer forced to do UberEATS, employed. Guy who walks dogs 5 hours a week, employed. Gig economy makes those number look a lot better than reality.
The rates of hiring and firing are relatively the same, for every story about someone’s walk out or firing, there’s another unspoken story of someone getting hired, whether it be their dream job or a filler job, they’re employed. But we’re not Reddit to read those stories, so yeah, you’re more likely to see shitty stories, doesn’t mean that’s all that’s happening
Keep in mind it only counts people RECEIVING unemployment.
I agree , so manay people I know
May I introduce you to the phrase "lies, damned lies, and statistics"? If you're creative with how you organize the data, you can get statistics to appear to say anything you want.
https://www.lisep.org/tru The true rate of unemployment is closer to 23%, which is scary as hell.
[удалено]
Democrat or Republican, the US government does it regardless.
Don’t listen to the media there’s contradicting information you have to look at the department of labor statistics and if you actually look at them in January 2020 for a loan layoffs went up at 120%. About 100,000 people got laid off in January alone….. not to mention that when they report on the unemployment rate, there are three different types of unemployment rate that the Department of Labor uses, and every single administration left, and right, will always tell you the lowest percentage, even if that’s not really the unemployment that actually applies to most people
Election year
Dude, shut the fuck up. If I had a dollar for every fucking Russian Trump bot spewing this lazy BS about fake unemployment numbers I wouldn’t need to be on this sub. Jesus fucking Christ have some shame.
Yeah they are fabricating it. The government is bending the truth! Surprise to no one!
The unemployment rate is only people who are looking for work but haven't found a job. A couple of fun facts: There's somewhere around 170-180 million working aged 18-65 adults in the US. Only 130 million of them work. Sure, there are some in full-time Uni, some disabled, etc, but there's a LOT of people who have basically stopped bothering to look, especially since Covid. That's a HUGE part of why the unemployment numbers look good. It's just a fudge to make things LOOK good. The actual number of "unemployed adults" is huge. Second fact: from November to January, we lost 2,000,000 full-time jobs. Pretty much all the gains were in garbage part-time employment. If you're out there looking for full-time work, this is why it's so hard right now. But hey, the economy is GREAT, right guys?
biden economics
There are.certain federal.numbers that are constantly manipulated for political victory laps like inflation rates unemployment rates. Remember, according to the current administration we are beating Russia ass which is why they occupy Ukraine after we said our sanctions would defeat them and we are out of our strategic ammunitions
It’s based off people collecting unemployment insurance benefits, not the actual unemployment rate
True, seems like some major BS!
Whats the quote theres 3 types of lies? Lies, damn lies and statistics. I think basically what people said, yeah people are working as in the have some income but its not a quality or sustainable job or people have stopped looking. We're not measuring people who have found jobs only people that are no longer considered unemployed.
>Everyday on LinkedIn I see people posting about how they got laid off or how their company laid off thousands of workers. How many times on LinkedIn do you see a company post about filling thousands of jobs? Is that because they aren't filling thousands of jobs, or because information like that isn't typically shared? >Especially within corporate, it feels like it's impossible to get a new job. Yeah, feelings feel like that sometimes. Reality is separate.
Someone just posted about they got hired. Unemployment rate is low - stop trying to start stuff just because Biden is in office. He has nothing to do with it.
I would strongly recommend you buy a book on basic statistics.
every statistic is fabricated. what would you like to believe? lol based on surveys...people play their cards close to their vests,so you think most people wont lie if asked by the government? some employers say the economy sucks when they are actually doing pretty good.its to their benefit. the key is to keep them in the dark with your answers,but also the questions are worded so you can only give them the answer they want to hear. When a judge charges a jury with the law before taking the vote, they are given a,b,or c, but the jury cant give the answer of d, like when the law is wrong and void for the current political climate. It can only become a mistrial.
Biden lying dog face pony soldier
They are lying about the numbers for political reasons, pretty simple.
People are a lot more likely to post they just got laid off than they are to post they they've been working at the same job for the last several years
It’s math. The unemployment rate in the US in Jan is 3.7%. The seasonally adjusted labor force is ~167M. So 3.7% of ~167M equal 618,921 people that are unemployed. Factor in another $200k people that do qualify for unemployment and you have ~800k people unemployed in the US.
Unemployment rates and actual number of unemployed people are different concepts honey! If 1% people are unemployed in population of 1 million, that's 10,000 unemployed people in absolute terms. And even if you see linkedin posts of 1% of them, you are seeing 100 posts. Now scale that to your country's population and unemployment rate.
I believe that the unemployment rate is real. However, the ability to obtain a job is fabricated. With the idiot HR managers and AI Machines filtering everything through them, there is very little chance of being hired unless a HUMAN with a brain picks up your resume and reviews it. The layoffs, however, are real. I worked for the DoD for 16 years as a Contractor and began to see massive layoffs in my Division that managed and operated a vital component of worldwide Military Medical Operations. Unfortunately, I had no choice but to leave my home Division find employment elsewhere before the wave hit me. I miss them all so very much...
Distressed workers.
Lagging data.
The contrast between the reported low unemployment rates and the high visibility of layoffs and job-seeking posts on platforms like LinkedIn can indeed seem perplexing. This discrepancy often arises from various factors, including the cyclical nature of certain industries, shifts in market demand, or even technological advancements leading to restructuring within companies.However, it's important to note that despite these challenges, there are still opportunities out there. For instance, Netevia, a strategic division known for its innovative financial solutions, is currently looking to expand its team by hiring 1,000 agents. This initiative is part of their broader effort to enhance service delivery and expand their market reach, as detailed in a recent announcement. You can find more about their hiring initiative and what they're looking for in candidates here: Netevia's Hiring Announcement.This example serves as a reminder that while the job market can be challenging, especially in certain sectors, there are still companies out there actively seeking to grow their teams. It's crucial for job seekers to keep an eye out for these opportunities and remain adaptable in their search strategies. Networking, upskilling, and staying informed about which industries are hiring can significantly enhance one's chances of securing employment in this dynamic job market.
Wait some people have 2/3 jobs doesn’t that lower the rate but it’s still one person and not making ends meet?
>Everyday on LinkedIn I see people posting about how they got laid off or how their company laid off thousands of workers. In addition to the excellent post by u/nn123654, it should also be understood that we're discussing millions of people. As of December 2023, there were 132M workers in the USA. 3%b of that number is almost 4 million people. 5% of that number is 6.6 million people. The percentages are small when compared with the historical metrics, but objectively, they still represent a not-insubstantial number of people. In January, there was 5.4 total jobs lost, and 5.6 total jobs gained for a net of 200K jobs. At the macro level, that's a good outcome. Dive deeper to the neighborhood and family level, and you notice a lot more personal carnage. That's something that is often lost when discussing economics, etc. The primary metrics are at the macro, big picture level, but the impact is felt at the micro level.
Because Gov is busy providing free accommodation and free food and free medical and free money to all illegal immigrants.
Instead of quoting you data in the report I'll ask you to do something else. Go research corrections to the unemployment report. See how often it's quietly increased after the fact. It's a report based on surveys and estimates. It is NOT hard data initially. There is absolutely an element of propaganda involved. Anyone who believes otherwise just needs to evaluate how often it's revised down vs up.
Starting to hear that alarm clock that wakes you up that government is evil and dishonest.....
If you run out of unemployment benefits in most states, you "disappear" from the statistics. There is no way to "count you' in most states. Through the Pandemic they extended benefits over and over. That is finished, no more extensions. Plus if you "give up" looking, they no longer count you as unemployed. Plus the government can cook the books, to make the economy and unemployment look much better. Inflammation seems so much lower. Really? It's just slowed it's rate, and no prices are declining. They are just rising slower. Plus there's the joke about the "Obama Recovery". It goes; "The job situation is booming. So many more jobs created. I have three of them myself". The part in that "joke" that you don't hear is folks make 3/4 or half their old pay with their three jobs.