Comments on: Why Are Workers Unhappy, With Only 5.0% Unemployed? Almost 5 Million Have “Opted Out” of the Labor Force http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2008/04/29/why-are-workers-unhappy-with-only-51-unemployed-2-%c2%bd-million-have-dropped-out-of-the-labor-force/ Views on the Economy and the World Mon, 13 Oct 2008 09:47:34 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: White House Confidence that US is Not in Recession is Misplaced | Jeff Frankels Weblog | Views on the Economy and the World http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2008/04/29/why-are-workers-unhappy-with-only-51-unemployed-2-%c2%bd-million-have-dropped-out-of-the-labor-force/#comment-995 White House Confidence that US is Not in Recession is Misplaced | Jeff Frankels Weblog | Views on the Economy and the World Mon, 12 May 2008 19:57:55 +0000 http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2008/04/29/why-are-workers-unhappy-with-only-51-unemployed-2-%c2%bd-million-have-dropped-out-of-the-labor-force/#comment-995 [...] the economy, but it has the advantage of being available monthly and with shorter lags.    The employment data suggest that the recession may have started in [...] [...] the economy, but it has the advantage of being available monthly and with shorter lags.    The employment data suggest that the recession may have started in [...]

]]> By: admin http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2008/04/29/why-are-workers-unhappy-with-only-51-unemployed-2-%c2%bd-million-have-dropped-out-of-the-labor-force/#comment-837 admin Mon, 05 May 2008 20:02:00 +0000 http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2008/04/29/why-are-workers-unhappy-with-only-51-unemployed-2-%c2%bd-million-have-dropped-out-of-the-labor-force/#comment-837 ... …

]]> By: jfrankel http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2008/04/29/why-are-workers-unhappy-with-only-51-unemployed-2-%c2%bd-million-have-dropped-out-of-the-labor-force/#comment-680 jfrankel Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:10:39 +0000 http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2008/04/29/why-are-workers-unhappy-with-only-51-unemployed-2-%c2%bd-million-have-dropped-out-of-the-labor-force/#comment-680 Reply to Tim, Yes, it is everybody over age 16. And the statistics in Abiel's post #11 are a good way of getting at the age-span issue. JF Reply to Tim,
Yes, it is everybody over age 16. And the statistics in Abiel’s post #11 are a good way of getting at the age-span issue.
JF

]]> By: calvin http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2008/04/29/why-are-workers-unhappy-with-only-51-unemployed-2-%c2%bd-million-have-dropped-out-of-the-labor-force/#comment-677 calvin Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:52:50 +0000 http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2008/04/29/why-are-workers-unhappy-with-only-51-unemployed-2-%c2%bd-million-have-dropped-out-of-the-labor-force/#comment-677 Is there any estimate on the number of hidden self employed? like someone starts business in the Ebay or Amazon market place but did not file tax? Does that somehow estimate in the employment figure? Thanks Is there any estimate on the number of hidden self employed? like someone starts business in the Ebay or Amazon market place but did not file tax? Does that somehow estimate in the employment figure?

Thanks

]]> By: Abiel http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2008/04/29/why-are-workers-unhappy-with-only-51-unemployed-2-%c2%bd-million-have-dropped-out-of-the-labor-force/#comment-676 Abiel Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:03:51 +0000 http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2008/04/29/why-are-workers-unhappy-with-only-51-unemployed-2-%c2%bd-million-have-dropped-out-of-the-labor-force/#comment-676 Ignore my last post, I accidentally gave the stats for the 20-24 year old group. For the 25-54 year old group, the employment/population ratio peaked at 81.9% in mid 2000, declined through late 2003, recovered to 80.2% at the start of 2007, and then fell to 79.7% in Mar 2008. Ignore my last post, I accidentally gave the stats for the 20-24 year old group. For the 25-54 year old group, the employment/population ratio peaked at 81.9% in mid 2000, declined through late 2003, recovered to 80.2% at the start of 2007, and then fell to 79.7% in Mar 2008.

]]> By: Abiel http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2008/04/29/why-are-workers-unhappy-with-only-51-unemployed-2-%c2%bd-million-have-dropped-out-of-the-labor-force/#comment-675 Abiel Wed, 30 Apr 2008 13:58:47 +0000 http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2008/04/29/why-are-workers-unhappy-with-only-51-unemployed-2-%c2%bd-million-have-dropped-out-of-the-labor-force/#comment-675 Following up on Tim's question and what rana said, a convenient way to get around the shifting age issue is to just look at the employment/population ratio for a fixed age group. A common one to look at is workers 25-54 years old. According to the BLS household survey data, the ratio for that group peaked at 72.9% in Sep/Oct 2000, declined through early 2005, recovered to a high of 69.5% in Dec 2006 and Mar 2007, then fell to 67.1% in Mar 2008. Following up on Tim’s question and what rana said, a convenient way to get around the shifting age issue is to just look at the employment/population ratio for a fixed age group. A common one to look at is workers 25-54 years old. According to the BLS household survey data, the ratio for that group peaked at 72.9% in Sep/Oct 2000, declined through early 2005, recovered to a high of 69.5% in Dec 2006 and Mar 2007, then fell to 67.1% in Mar 2008.

]]> By: Francois http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2008/04/29/why-are-workers-unhappy-with-only-51-unemployed-2-%c2%bd-million-have-dropped-out-of-the-labor-force/#comment-674 Francois Wed, 30 Apr 2008 13:31:50 +0000 http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2008/04/29/why-are-workers-unhappy-with-only-51-unemployed-2-%c2%bd-million-have-dropped-out-of-the-labor-force/#comment-674 Forgot to post this (hat tip Dean Baker) "Here's the rate of job growth for the administrations since 1960: Kennedy-Johnson 3.27% Nixon-Ford 4.93% Carter 3.06% Reagan 2.06% Bush I 0.60% Clinton 2.38% Bush II 0.59%" Bush Derangement Syndrome huh? I guess the facts suffer from it! Forgot to post this (hat tip Dean Baker)

“Here’s the rate of job growth for the administrations since 1960:

Kennedy-Johnson 3.27%
Nixon-Ford 4.93%
Carter 3.06%
Reagan 2.06%
Bush I 0.60%
Clinton 2.38%
Bush II 0.59%”

Bush Derangement Syndrome huh? I guess the facts suffer from it!

]]> By: Francois http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2008/04/29/why-are-workers-unhappy-with-only-51-unemployed-2-%c2%bd-million-have-dropped-out-of-the-labor-force/#comment-673 Francois Wed, 30 Apr 2008 13:27:02 +0000 http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2008/04/29/why-are-workers-unhappy-with-only-51-unemployed-2-%c2%bd-million-have-dropped-out-of-the-labor-force/#comment-673 Lee, You a denialist aren't you? Did Jeff disparaged the President? No! So what is you problem dude? Oh! I see! It just so happen that the period 2003-2007 took place during the Bush presidency. He inc illae irae? According to this logic of yours, ANY critic of what's going wrong in the USA during the Bush presidency MUST BE an attack on the President? Who is suffering from the Bush Derangement Syndrome here? You remind me of the politik komissars of the Confederation Generale du Travail, this Comunist pro-Moscow union the French had to suffer for too long. Exactly the same ayatollah-like zeal twith the same dogma: "If you disagree with 1% of what I believe, you are 100% against us." Get this Lee: people in this country are getting sick and tired of this coarsening of the political discourse in America. I, for one, came to this country precisely because I witnessed what this coarsening and dumbing down can do to the fabric of a democratic society. I don't need the same bullshit happening in my country of adoption. Lee,

You a denialist aren’t you? Did Jeff disparaged the President?
No!
So what is you problem dude?

Oh! I see! It just so happen that the period 2003-2007 took place during the Bush presidency. He inc illae irae?

According to this logic of yours, ANY critic of what’s going wrong in the USA during the Bush presidency MUST BE an attack on the President?

Who is suffering from the Bush Derangement Syndrome here?

You remind me of the politik komissars of the Confederation Generale du Travail, this Comunist pro-Moscow union the French had to suffer for too long. Exactly the same ayatollah-like zeal twith the same dogma: “If you disagree with 1% of what I believe, you are 100% against us.”

Get this Lee: people in this country are getting sick and tired of this coarsening of the political discourse in America. I, for one, came to this country precisely because I witnessed what this coarsening and dumbing down can do to the fabric of a democratic society. I don’t need the same bullshit happening in my country of adoption.

]]> By: rana http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2008/04/29/why-are-workers-unhappy-with-only-51-unemployed-2-%c2%bd-million-have-dropped-out-of-the-labor-force/#comment-671 rana Wed, 30 Apr 2008 13:20:16 +0000 http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2008/04/29/why-are-workers-unhappy-with-only-51-unemployed-2-%c2%bd-million-have-dropped-out-of-the-labor-force/#comment-671 Standard BLS data implicitly (establishment survey) or explicitly (household survey)looks at population and workers 16 and older. With the aging of the boomers the employment population ratio should begin to fall as those age 55 and older have lower to much lower participation rates than the younger set. This is a nontrivial factor and would lead to a 1 percent decline in the employment population ratio over the 2000-2007 period (holding the age specific rates constant and letting the pop shares move.) Standard BLS data implicitly (establishment survey) or explicitly (household survey)looks at population and workers 16 and older. With the aging of the boomers the employment population ratio should begin to fall as those age 55 and older have lower to much lower participation rates than the younger set. This is a nontrivial factor and would lead to a 1 percent decline in the employment population ratio over the 2000-2007 period (holding the age specific rates constant and letting the pop shares move.)

]]> By: Tim Worstall http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2008/04/29/why-are-workers-unhappy-with-only-51-unemployed-2-%c2%bd-million-have-dropped-out-of-the-labor-force/#comment-668 Tim Worstall Wed, 30 Apr 2008 10:19:41 +0000 http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/blog/jeff_frankels_weblog/2008/04/29/why-are-workers-unhappy-with-only-51-unemployed-2-%c2%bd-million-have-dropped-out-of-the-labor-force/#comment-668 This could be an entirely stupid question, so forgive me in advance for asking it. Are we looking at total population over 16, or total population 16-65? From the way you talk about pulling people out of retirement (and the BLS figures don't make it entirely clear in their press release...but total numbers of some 220 million including economically active and non active leaves room for 80 million children and given roughly 4 million births a year times 16 gives us roughly that number) I think you're using population aged 16- death. Which, given rising life spans makes comparing these figures over time a little odd really. Saying that the rising number of centenarians are discouraged from being in the workforce (to take an absurd example) is a sign of a bad labour market strikes me as, well, a little odd really. This could be an entirely stupid question, so forgive me in advance for asking it.
Are we looking at total population over 16, or total population 16-65? From the way you talk about pulling people out of retirement (and the BLS figures don’t make it entirely clear in their press release…but total numbers of some 220 million including economically active and non active leaves room for 80 million children and given roughly 4 million births a year times 16 gives us roughly that number) I think you’re using population aged 16- death.
Which, given rising life spans makes comparing these figures over time a little odd really. Saying that the rising number of centenarians are discouraged from being in the workforce (to take an absurd example) is a sign of a bad labour market strikes me as, well, a little odd really.

]]>