Tag Archives: Joblessness

Unemployment rate is 10.5%, counting those who have stopped job-hunting

From Reuters.

Economists, analyzing government data, estimate about 4 million fewer people are in the labor force than in December 2007, primarily due to a lack of jobs rather than the normal aging of America’s population. The size of the shift underscores the severity of the jobs crisis.

If all those so-called discouraged jobseekers had remained in the labor force, August’s jobless rate of 8.1 percent would have been 10.5 percent.

[…]The labor force participation rate, or the proportion of working-age Americans who have a job or are looking for one has fallen by an unprecedented 2.5 percentage points since December 2007, slumping to a 31-year low of 63.5 percent.

“We never had a drop like that before in other recessions. The economy is worse off than people realize when people just look at the unemployment rate,” said Keith Hall, senior research fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University in Arlington, Virginia.

[…]The economy lost 8.7 million jobs in the 2007-09 recession and has so far recouped a little more than half of them.

[…]Americans of all ages are leaving the workforce, but the problem is most acute in the 20-24 age group, where the participation rate has plunged by 4.4 percentage points since December 2007.

[…]”Because of delays to their career, the skills set accumulation that normally happens in the first or third job is not happening,” said Paul Conway, president of Generation Opportunity in Washington, a non-profit, non-partisan organization that works with 18- to 29-year-olds on economic issues.

Last month, the proportion of 20- to 24-year-olds in the labor force was its lowest since 1972. Other age categories are faring little better. The 25-54 age group has seen a decline of 1.8 percentage points since December 2007.

Meanwhile, from the radically left-wing Newsweek, of all places. (H/T Defeating Obama)

Excerpt:

[T]he total number of private-sector jobs is still 4.3 million below the January 2008 peak. Meanwhile, since 2008, a staggering 3.6 million Americans have been added to Social Security’s disability insurance program. This is one of many ways unemployment is being concealed.

Can anyone look at numbers like this and explain to me why anyone – especially young people – would vote for this man?

Report: Obamacare regulations will cost taxpayers and businesses $1.8 trillion

The Washington Examiner explains.

Excerpt:

Current federal regulations plus those coming under Obamacare will cost American taxpayers and businesses $1.8 trillion annually, more than twenty times the $88 billion the administration estimates, according to a new roundup provided to Secrets from the libertarian Competitive Enterprise Institute.

And it could grow, warned the author of the report, Clyde Wayne Crews, a CEI vice president.

[…]”While OMB officially reports amounts of only up to $88.6 billion in 2010 dollars,” said Crews, “the non-tax cost of government intervention in the economy, without performing a sweeping survey, appears to total up to $1.806 trillion annually.”

But, he added, “according to back of the envelope surveys and roundups, with gaps big enough to fit the beltway through, that up to $1.806 trillion annually and in many categories perhaps even considerably more, is a defensible assessment of the annual impact on the economy.”

His estimate is close to the $1.7 trillion estimate from the Small Business Administration which the White House distanced itself from. For comparison, the total U.S. GDP is $15 trillion.

How might higher taxes and heavier regulations affect those who want to start businesses or expand them?

Breitbart reports on a new report from the Hudson Institute:

Startup businesses represent the heart of the American economy, but a new report by the Hudson Institute shows the rate of startup jobs during the last two years has been at a record low.

According to the report, Under President George H.W. Bush, who essentially won Ronald Reagan’s third term, there were 11.3 startup jobs per 1000 Americans. Under President Bill Clinton, there were 11.2. Under George W. Bush, there were 10.8. But under President Barack Obama, there have been 7.8 startup jobs per 1000 Americans.

The study “documents a disturbing weakness in startup job creation,” but “does not explain the cause of decline,” even though “there is anecdotal evidence that the U.S. policy environment has become inadvertently hostile to entrepreneurial employment.”

The American Enterprise Institute highlighted four key findings of the report.

First, the report found that “at the federal level, high taxes and higher uncertainty about taxes are undoubtedly inhibiting entrepreneurship, but to what degree is unknown.”

Second, Obamacare created a “sweeping alteration of the regulatory environment that directly changes how employers engage their workforces.” The report notes it will take time until employers and scholars understand those changes.

Third, since 2009, the Internal Revenue Service has engaged in more vigorous crackdowns on “U.S. employers that hire U.S. workers as independent contractors rather than employees, raising the question of mandatory benefits.” This directly impacts startup businesses and potentially has a chilling effect on those thinking about beginning new business ventures.

Fourth, the report cites barriers to entry at the local levels, including “the rise of occupational licensing” that “is destroying startup opportunities for poor and middle class Americans.”

“The state of entrepreneurship in the United States is, sadly, weaker than ever,” the report concludes.

What happens when we burden our employers with huge tax increases and costly regulations? They stop hiring us and they ship their businesses out of the United States. Obama is doing everything he can to discourage businesses from starting up, hiring and expanding here at home.

Egan Jones cuts U.S. credit rating again, this time from AA to AA-

Story from CNBC.

Excerpt:

Ratings firm Egan-Jones cut its credit rating on the U.S. government to “AA-” from “AA,” citing its opinion that quantitative easing from the Federal Reserve would hurt the U.S. economy and the country’s credit quality.

The Fed on Thursday said it would pump $40 billion into the U.S. economy each month until it saw a sustained upturn in the weak jobs market.

In its downgrade, the firm said that issuing more currency and depressing interest rates through purchasing mortgage-backed securities does little to raise the U.S.’s real gross domestic product, but reduces the value of the dollar.

In turn, this increases the cost of commodities, which will pressure the profitability of businesses and increase the costs of consumers thereby reducing consumer purchasing power, the firm said.

In April, Egan-Jones cuts the U.S. credit rating to “AA” from “AA+” with a negative watch, citing a lack of progress in cutting the mounting federal debt.

Moody’s Investors Service currently rates the United States Aaa, Fitch rates the country AAA, and Standard & Poor’s rates the country AA-plus. All three of those ratings have a negative outlook.

Could this have anything to do with the decision to print $40 billion a month to “stimulate” the economy? Once you’ve given up on letting businesses create jobs by lowering their taxes and removing burdensome regulations, then printing money is all you have left. But no one mistakes that for economic growth, least of all credit rating agencies.