Shake Shake Shake! Shake Shake Shake!

[rah]

[MrFun]

[MrFun]

Unemployment Rate Falls To 8.1 Percent As People Give Up On Looking For Work
Posted: 05/04/2012 8:32 am Updated: 05/04/2012 2:14 pm

While the U.S. unemployment rate in April was the lowest it's been in more than three years, the unemployed may simply be falling off the government's radar as they give up looking for work.

Meanwhile, job growth has slowed sharply after a fast start to the year, suggesting another bump in what has been an agonizingly long road to recovery for the job market.

Unemployment fell to 8.1 percent in April, the lowest since January 2009, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Friday morning. But the decline was mainly due to 342,000 people leaving the labor force, meaning the BLS had stopped counting them as unemployed. The number of employed people in the nation actually fell by 169,000.

Nonfarm employers added 115,000 jobs to their payrolls in April, according to a survey of businesses that is different than the household survey that generates the unemployment rate. That job growth was lower than the 170,000 or so economists had expected, though the BLS revised upward the number of jobs that were created in February and March, adding about 53,000 additional jobs to payrolls.

About 12.5 million people are still unemployed, and a record 88.4 million people are considered "not in the labor force," according to the BLS. The labor-force participation rate -- the percentage of the work-age population either working or looking for work -- dropped to 63.6 percent, the lowest since December 1981.

"It's hard to see the good news here," David Semmens, senior U.S. economist at Standard Chartered, wrote in a research note.

The stock market reeled on the news, which suggested the economy is still sluggish, but not so weak that the Federal Reserve will leap to its aid any time soon with fresh stimulus. The Dow Jones Industrial Average was recently down more than 120 points, or 0.9 percent, to about 13,083, while the Standard & Poor's 500-stock index was down more than one percent.

The sluggish recovery is an obstacle to the re-election chances of President Obama this fall and a boon to his Republican challenger, Mitt Romney, who told Fox News the April jobs report was "terrible and very disappointing."

The White House pointed out that the job recovery is the legacy of a recession that started on the Bush administration's watch.

"Much more remains to be done to repair the damage caused by the financial crisis and the deep recession," wrote Alan Krueger, chairman of the White House's Council of Economic Advisers, in a statement. "It is critical that we continue the economic policies that are helping us dig our way out of the deep hole that was caused by the severe recession that began at the end of 2007."

Critics on the left, such as Princeton economist Paul Krugman, have argued that the Obama administration has not done enough to spark demand, while critics on the right, including Romney, argue the administration has hindered the recovery with too many regulations. Many economists tend to believe such a sluggish recovery was perhaps inevitable following the bursting of the housing bubble and a severe recession.

"While some would like to attribute the lack of hiring to uncertainty and regulatory roadblocks, the fact is that demand for goods and services simply has not reached a level that warrants accelerated hiring," John Challenger, CEO of consulting firm Challenger Gray & Christmas, wrote in an email. "In areas, where demand has improved, so has hiring."

Whatever the reason, U.S. payrolls are still nearly 5 million jobs lower than they were when the recession began. This labor-market recovery has been arguably the most sluggish since World War II -- though the job losses in the recession were also the deepest.

More than 5 million people have been unemployed for 27 weeks or more, and the average length of unemployment is more than 39 weeks, according to the BLS.

Many workers are leaving the labor force because of retirement or to collect Social Security disability checks. But an untold number have simply given up looking for work after long months or years of unemployment.

"If someone spends two years sending out resumes with almost no response, don't I give up or go back to school?" Bank of America Merrill Lynch economist Neil Dutta wrote in a note.

A broader government measure of unemployment, which includes people described as "marginally attached" to the labor force -- people who have given up looking but would still like a job, or who are working part-time because they can't find anything better -- held steady at 14.5 percent. The situation is particularly grim for African-Americans, with a 13 percent unemployment rate, and teens, with a 24.9 percent unemployment rate. The unemployment rate is 13.2 percent for Americans aged 20 to 24, suggesting a particularly tough job market for college graduates.

And the prospects for work seem to have weakened abruptly in recent months. Monthly job gains have slowed in each month of the year, from 275,000 in January to 259,000 in February and 154,000 in March.'

Many economists believe that unusually warm winter weather made hiring stronger than usual in the winter months, pulling activity forward from the early spring. Recent disappointing job numbers may be payback for the earlier months' strength, in other words. According to this theory, job growth should pick back up again once the weather effects wane.

The three-month average of job growth has been 176,000 jobs per month, the Economic Policy Institute pointed out. While that's more than enough to keep unemployment from rising, it's still not good enough, given the deep hole the job market is still in.

"The labor market continues to very slowly improve," the EPI wrote in a press release, "but it is a far cry from the 300,000 or 400,000 jobs we would need per month to get back to full employment in a reasonable timeframe."

Some economists took heart at some signs of strength in the business survey. Retailers added 29,000 jobs, while temporary services added more than 21,000 workers. An increase in temp workers is sometimes a sign that businesses are getting ready to make more permanent hires.

Other details of the business survey were less encouraging: The average length of the work week was flat at 34.5 hours, while average hourly earnings rose by just a penny to $23.38.

Over the past year, hourly earnings have risen by just 1.8 percent, the BLS said -- not even enough to keep up with inflation.

"Weak job growth and weak income growth is most unwelcome," Dan Greenhaus, chief global strategist at BTIG, a trading firm in New York, wrote in a research note, "especially at a time when so many were banking on the exact opposite."

Update: This story has been updated with additional quotes and details throughout along with the stock-market reaction. It has also been corrected: There were 12.5 million people unemployed in April. An earlier version of the story incorrectly said 11.9 million people were unemployed.

The government/Obama administration needs to more accurately track and report unemployment by taking into account those who have given up looking for work, and a category for the underemployed - such as myself.

[MrFun]

Some people have been sending out resumes for a couple years with no results - perhaps not even interviews. I can see why they've given up - I gave up for periods of time a couple times and now, I still am only underemployed.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

The government/Obama administration needs to more accurately track and report unemployment by taking into account those who have given up looking for work, and a category for the underemployed - such as myself.

By and large that bigger picture info is what you get from the labor particpation rate. Perhaps though the underemployed may not be accurately reflected.

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000

[Dinner]

The government/Obama administration needs to more accurately track and report unemployment by taking into account those who have given up looking for work, and a category for the underemployed - such as myself.

You know, they have different types of unemployment figures including one which counts discouraged workers?

[giblets]

The government/Obama administration needs to more accurately track and report unemployment by taking into account those who have given up looking for work, and a category for the underemployed - such as myself.

The BLS already has alternative measures of unemployment that take those into account. Look up U4, U5 and U6 unemployment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unemployment#United_States_Bureau_of_Labor_Statistics

Working minimum wage full time because your history degree isn't worth anything is not unemployment by any stretch of the imagination.

[DaShi]

The government/Obama administration needs to more accurately track and report unemployment by taking into account those who have given up looking for work, and a category for the underemployed - such as myself.

This thread is for articles that I find interesting.

[MrFun]

The BLS already has alternative measures of unemployment that take those into account. Look up U4, U5 and U6 unemployment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unemployment#United_States_Bureau_of_Labor_Statistics

Working minimum wage full time because your history degree isn't worth anything is not unemployment by any stretch of the imagination.

I'm underemployed, not unemployed. Reread my post.

[giblets]

I'm underemployed, not unemployed. Reread my post.

If you're a part time worker seeking full time employment, the BLS already has a definition of "unemployment" for you. Great suggestion.

[MrFun]

ZOMFG!! Gribbler used the rolling eyes in his post!!

[giblets]

ZOMFG!! Gribbler used the rolling eyes in his post!!

What does the "z" stand for?

[MrFun]

I just made it up.

[giblets]

When Mitt Romney Fired a Gay Staffer, 2004 Edition

Richard Grenell, Mitt Romney's newly christened foreign policy spokesman, stepped down from the campaign on Tuesday. Grenell, who is gay, had come under fire from social conservative activists who viewed his hiring as a slap in the face. Although a Romney spokesman claimed the campaign had wanted Grenell to stay on, Romney staffers had already begun to shut him out before his resignation, counseling the gay foreign policy spokesman to stay silent during a recent campaign press call on foreign policy.

The episode is reminiscent of a controversy that occurred when Romney was governor of Massachusetts: The 2004 dismissal of Ardith Wieworka, longtime head of the state's Office of Child Care Services, who alleged that she had been terminated because of her decision to marry her partner.

In May of that year, the same month same-sex marriage was legalized in the Bay State, the Northeastern University press office published a story announcing that Wieworka intended to marry her longtime partner, Carol Lyons, who worked at the school as the dean of career services.

The next month, Romney traveled to Washington, DC, to testify in support of a federal constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. "Marriage is…a fundamental and universal social institution that bears a real and substantial relation to the public health, safety, morals, and general welfare of all the people of Massachusetts," he told the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Two weeks later, the Boston Globe reported that Ronald Preston, Romney's state health and human services commissioner, asked Wieworka to resign.

A veteran of three previous Republican administrations, Wieworka was at a loss about why she was fired. (She declined to comment for this story.) She told the Boston Globe later that month that, absent any clear motive, she suspected her ouster may have been a result of marriage:

Earlier this week, Wieworka strongly suggested that her firing was connected to her recent marriage to her lesbian partner. She said yesterday that she was not saying that was the reason, but that she wanted to raise the question in the absence of other credible explanations.

"When you accuse someone of something, you've reached a conclusion," Wieworka said yesterday. "I want to look into the motivation."

Wieworka noted that Preston's explanation for the move changed considerably over time. He initially said it was due to restructuring, but later suggested that Wieworka had also been uncooperative. He never offered a clear, specific reason for the termination. Romney and Preston vehemently denied Wieworka's firing had anything to do with her marriage, however. The governor told the Globe that Wieworka's sexual orientation was something he only learned about after she had been fired. Preston called the idea that Wieworka was fired for her marriage "an outrageous allegation with no foundation whatsoever." (Preston now teaches medicine at the University of Massachusetts Medical School.)

Whatever the explanation, the move was divisive. "[T]hose who have worked with Wieworka express shock and dismay at her departure," Boston Magazine reported. The Boston Globe editorial board—making no mention of Wieworka's charge of discrimination—panned the firing, writing "It is unfortunate that Preston could not work out a way to make use of Wieworka's considerable experience and talent."

In the eyes of Massachusetts's LGBT community, the firing had a certain resonance. The state's LGBT monthly, Bay Windows, noted the firing in a January 2012 piece detailing Romney's record on gay issues as governor. Whether or not Wieworka's marriage played a part in her termination, the timing of her departure was fitting: The episode came as Romney was in the midst of his political evolution from a gay-friendly, pro-choice moderate into someone culture warriors could believe in—an evolution, as Grenell's resignation shows, that is far from finished.

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/05/mitt-romney-fire-gay-staffer-ardith-wieworka

Even when he was the governor of godless Massachusetts he was appeasing bigots.

[DaShi]

http://arstechnica.com/science/news/2012/05/anti-climate-science-group-experiments-with-trolling.ars

Anti-climate science group "experiments" with billboard trolling
By John Timmer | Published about 2 hours ago

Prior to this spring, the Heartland Institute was a relatively obscure think tank that was primarily known for organizing an annual conference of people who take issue with mainstream climate science. That changed when an environmental researcher tricked the group into sending him internal documents, setting off a public drama that ended up leaving both parties worse off (Heartland lost sponsors, while the researcher had to resign a number of his positions).

Apparently, the experience left Heartland craving more public controversy, and it responded with what can best be described as a bit of trolling. In advance of this year's climate-skeptic conference, Heartland paid for a billboard that showed a picture of the Unabomber accompanied by the text "I still believe in Global Warming. Do You?" In a press release, Heartland said future iterations would feature Charles Manson, Fidel Castro, and possibly Osama bin Laden.

Instead, the campaign was stopped after 24 hours as prominent conference speakers threatened to cancel and a number of the Institute's financial backers threatened to depart.

Teach Use the controversy

How did Heartland justify the comparison between murderers and tyrants and anyone who believed in global warming? "Because what these murderers and madmen have said differs very little from what spokespersons for the United Nations, journalists for the 'mainstream' media, and liberal politicians say about global warming," according to the press release that announced the ads. It went on to claim that "[t]he people who still believe in man-made global warming are mostly on the radical fringe of society."

This has not gone over well. Several of the speakers, including Representative Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI), threatened to withdraw unless the ads were pulled. So Heartland backed down and pulled them after only the first had run, claiming they were just an "experiment," one that only set the institute back $200. “This billboard was deliberately provocative, an attempt to turn the tables on the climate alarmists by using their own tactics but with the opposite message," the latest statement claims, going on to say, "We do not apologize for running the ad."

Their lack of apology may be the most sincere aspect of the entire effort.

A single billboard on the outskirts of Chicago, no matter how visually arresting it may be, would reach a very limited number of people. Heartland was clearly counting on the controversy associated with it to ensure that its message went much further than the billboard would take it.

Losing its grip on reality and sponsors

Although most of the outrage has focused on the comparison between those who accept the evidence for climate change and murderers, many of the statements in the release are simply false. Many of the people and groups who do accept the evidence are anything but "the radical fringe of society." And, despite what Heartland would like to think, there's absolutely no evidence that "[s]cientific, political, and public support for the theory of man-made global warming is collapsing."

In many cases Heartland has suggested that their difference with climate science is primarily an issue with scientifically questionable "alarmism" of the sort typified by James Lovelock. With these ads and the accompanying announcements, however, it's clear that Heartland's issue is with the very basics of climate science and anyone who accepts it.

This is now creating a problem for the Institute as a whole. Heartland is ostensibly focused on offering free-market solutions for various policy issues and has attracted a wide range of backing from corporations that favor limited regulation. But for both secondhand smoke and climate change, it has decided to attack the scientific evidence that is driving policy rather than offering a solution. And that is causing some of its backers to rethink their involvement with Heartland. Several of them dropped support when the internal documents were leaked, and others are doing so now. One report indicates that an entire initiative done in cooperation with the insurance industry is at risk.

Heartland's continued efforts in this area seem to risk turning it into a single-issue think tank. And that may actually make sense; the leaked financial documents indicate that some of its largest donations come from single individuals who are targeting money for climate efforts.

In any case, the Institute's climate conference will occur towards the end of this month and, now that the ads have been pulled, most of the planned speakers will still attend. If years past are any indication, it will feature opinions ranging from questioning of basic facts (some speakers have claimed temperatures and sea levels haven't gone up) to a general sense that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change estimates of temperature changes are probably overstated. About the only common theme among the speakers is the belief that scientific mainstream is wrong.