The Great Jobs Recession Goes On

The recession is officially over but unemployment remains high

February 11, 2011 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (40)

There is no life in our jobs market. The recession officially ended in June 2009, but the Great Jobs Recession continues apace. Not since the government began to measure the business cycle has a deep recession been marked by such high levels of unemployment and underemployment, and followed by such anemic job growth. More jobs were lost in the recession of 2007-09 than in the previous four recessions combined—and this time it is an agonizingly slow business to replace them. Of the 8.8 million jobs lost during the downturn, roughly 900,000 were recovered in 2010, and many of these were temporary census positions. Since last June, employers have added a net of only about 284,000 jobs.

The recent headline news that the unemployment rate has fallen by 0.4 percentage point to 9 percent reflects somewhat more activity in manufacturing and retail, but less work in construction, transportation, and warehousing. The 9 percent was thus not bad news, but it was not good news either, since we need 130,000 new jobs each month just to meet the needs of new entries to the labor force and we gained only a dismal 36,000 in January. That comes on top of last year's disappointing monthly job creation rate of only 75,000 on average. Altogether, the 9 percent headline figure is an illusory portrait of the situation across the country, representing 13,863,000 men and women out of work. What happens if you add to that the 8.4 million "involuntary" part-time employed, whose hours have been cut back? Then you get a household unemployment rate slightly under 17 percent.

[See the 10 best cities to find a job.]

Turn the percentages into people again. In January, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, we had 2.8 million people only "marginally attached" to the labor force. A million or so of these are counted as the "discouraged," people who have given up altogether. The other 1.8 million have looked for work in the last 12 months without success but are not counted in the labor force because they haven't tried to get a job in the last four weeks for any number of personal reasons, such as family sickness, school responsibilities, weather, and travel problems. While the headline unemployment figure is down, the number of "marginally attached" increased by 300,000, and the decline in the rate from 9.4 to 9 percent is primarily because these workers have just dropped out of the market. But they haven't dropped out of life in America. They represent a colossal waste of energy and talent, as well as a loss of spending power.

It all adds up to a shocking figure: More than 25 million Americans are now either jobless or underemployed. That's nearly twice as many Americans out of work as there were in the black year of 1933—13 million then. (Only in one year before 1940 and the war did unemployment dip below 8 million.) Of course, the labor force was much smaller then, so the unemployment rate was higher. In the Great Depression, between one third and one quarter of the working population didn't have jobs.

Our real unemployment rate in 2011 is almost twice what it was before the onset of the recession in 2007, and at the current pace, it looks as if it will take until late 2016 to make up for the net job loss to date of 7.5 million. What is normal at this stage of the typical recession cycle is not only that job losses would be reversed, but that a new record high would be reached. As the economist David Rosenberg points out, after the dot-com bubble burst and with far less government stimulus in the last so-called jobless recovery, we had already recouped 62 percent of the aggregate decline in unemployment. This time around we have managed to recoup a mere 12 percent, despite the most stimulative fiscal and monetary policy in the history of America.

[See editorial cartoons about the economy.]

The detailed statistics are even more depressing. Here are some highlights:

•The number of full-time jobs, the critical factor in rebuilding personal confidence and spending, is down by roughly 10 million. Those suffering from long-term unemployment, who have collected benefits for 27 weeks or more, now amount to more than 4 percent of the labor force compared to the previous post-Depression peak of 2.6 percent in 1983. This is the highest since these records were started in the late 1940s.

•The mean duration of unemployment increased from 30.5 weeks in January 2010 to 36.9 weeks in the most recent tally.

•One third or more of the new jobs over the last year have been in temporary help services, formerly a good leading indicator of future labor demands but today a sign of dismal times. These jobs reflect businesses trying to cut the benefit costs of full-time employment and using just-in-time hiring and part-time hiring to improve the bottom line.

•Long-term unemployment is approximately 44 percent of the total, the highest of any in the past 10 recessions, when it never exceeded 30 percent.

•The jobs hard-to-get index, as of the end of last year, was 46.8 percent, while the jobs-plentiful index, another measure of consumer confidence, dropped to 3.9 percent.

•The recession has primarily affected young and adult males, the traditional family breadwinners, and especially blacks. As of December, the proportion of men age 45 to 54 in the labor force—working or looking for work—was down to 86.2 percent, while for men ages 35 to 44, it was 90.9 percent. For men 25 to 34, the proportion in November was 89 percent. These are the lowest since the government began issuing these statistics in 1948.

•The average workweek for all employees in private, nonfarm payrolls is at a low of 34.2 hours and dropped last month. Employers normally increase the hours for their existing workforce before hiring, for history shows that hours lead bodies as a forward-looking barometer to hiring, so this is a signal that bodes badly for future employment.

•Real hourly compensation dropped in the first four quarters after this recession officially ended, compared to a more typical gain averaging 2.5 percent during the first four quarters of expansion after the previous 10 recessions.

•State and local governments, which comprise 15 percent of the total jobs pie, are in a major downsizing mode, which will be a drag on employment throughout this entire year.

•Work stoppages involving 1,000 or more employees have fallen to the lowest levels since records began in 1947; there were only five strikes or lockouts in 2009, and 11 last year. It is good news in its way, but it reflects increased job insecurity.

Other characteristics of the job market are gloomy, too. Many of the job gains are in lower-paying leisure, hospitality, education, and health service industries.

Longer-term trends have accelerated in ways depressing for the American worker. There is more outsourcing abroad, more automating, more conversion of full-time jobs to temps and contracts, and a stagnant median wage. Information technologies are advancing dramatically, doubling every couple of years, and increasingly are being employed to eliminate jobs of all types.

This underscores the downside of advancing technologies, which together with globalization have been the primary forces depressing wages and diminishing opportunities, especially for those jobs that are fundamentally routine and repetitive in nature. The risk that semi-intelligent machines may destroy so many jobs that this trend could literally destabilize the whole society is one of the greatest challenges facing governments in all countries as they seek to find work for the millions of graduates coming into a labor market that has nothing for them.

The risk we may face in the United States is that the high unemployment rates may become chronic if, for the next several years, we average real GDP growth of only 2 percent, as many predict. The rate necessary to keep the unemployment rate stable is 3.3 percent. The lower growth rate would increase the average unemployment rate by about 10 percent of the previous rate, year over year. Nothing yet has appeared on even a distant horizon to alleviate Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke's citing of the job market as a chief source of national concern.

Generating new jobs for a growing population is a challenge to the left, right, and center of all our political parties and their entrenched positions on economic issues. They need to think beyond the arguments about this year's budget or the next. Millions of men and women are willing and eager to work, but their skills, brainpower, and energies are wasted. It doesn't make sense.

 

Tags:
deficit and national debt,
unemployment

Reader Comments Read all comments (40)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

I fought these idiotic policies from the very beginning with NAFTA. BTW, for those that don't know, NAFTA guarantees profits to companies that relocate to those enterprise zones. That's right. They don't have to even be good businessmen/women under NAFTA.

The issue of immigration is also linked to trade policies. Before NAFTA destroyed Mexico's domestic companies, there were jobs in Mexico. Go look at the state of the Mexican economy when they had tariffs to protect their internal industry. There was not immigration problem.

FREE TRADE IS A RED HERRING. THIS IS ALL ABOUT TRANSFERRING WEALTH FROM THE MANY TO THE FEW. Wealth in the top tier (1 to 10 percent) has QUADRUPLED OVER THE LAST 12 YEARS WHILE THEIR TAX RATE HAS BEEN CUT TO 15 PERCENT.

Read the list of books that I am putting up. Then go sign up to the tradereform.org, the agendaproject.org, patrioticmillionaires.org and public banking (I don't know their site)

Use these books to ground your arguments on this subject and don't be intimidated by the blather put out by your politicians. They don't know what they are talking about. For example, "comparative advantage," the idiotic theory that they base their allegedly free trade laws on? It was taken from the writings of a 17th century economist from Brazil and was written about AGRARIAN economies with little free flow of currency. It doesn't fit today's situation at all.

BOOKS:

Why Free trade doesn't work and what should we replace it with--Ian Fletcher

Perfectly Legal David Cay Johnston (best and easiest read on taxes that you will ever buy)

Free Lunch David Cay Johnston (about how we finance rich people's richness)

MK of TX 4:28PM April 20, 2011

Gifting jobs to other nations to preserve profits for managements may have helped the world, but it did little for America at a time when government was already accused of decades of mismanagement.

Jobs are not possible in a society committed to helping others rather than itself, and where the powerful easily place themselves as the pipeline through which cash flows to other nations, siphoning the wealth of what would otherwise be survivor dollars for either nation. This transition fraud amounts to fencing illicit funds regardless of the title and position of the transferors.

Massive deception, massive power to alter traditional laws, and absence of enforcement of laws still in tact creates the havoc that is the equivalent of jumping off the American cliff, and hoping that there is a net to jump into. There may not be. It may simply be a ravine from which there is no return.

It would not be the first time the American government could be accused of transition fraud under the disguise of necessity.

Pat of MA 8:09AM March 15, 2011

Novel concept, Mort.

Anyone with sense knows that the fastest recoveries come from manufacturing jobs. Every healthy economy out there in the world is big into manufacturing. Since Reagan, and particularly from Bush forward - The corporations moved many of them offshore, and the GOP applauded because all they could think about was shrinking the unions. Politics was more important than American jobs. Shareholders became more important than workers.

In Europe if times are tough - they cut back hours so fewer are laid off. More people work, unemployment benefits are lower, and skilled employees keep their skill sets current. Lawyers and agents and middlemen are fewer, all which lowers the costs of operations. Unions are commonplace, and they work WITH management AND the government. Companies have less debt, so they pay less debt service. Tax laws are more uniform, and financial issues are less politicized. And the public - they are pretty loyal to local brands. They don't buy cheap imported products to save 50 cents. Local brands cost a bit more, but external tariffs keep them on a more level laying field from a price perspective.

The next argument against their way is usually that it is more expensive. A bit - but if more are employed, more can afford it. They also don't need huge savings, as their healthcare, education and public transportation are all covered, so no catastrophe wipes out their finances.

So maybe - instead of trying to compete for the cheapest wage industries and driving our workers into poverty, instead of trying to eliminate jobs to cut off the unions, instead of firing or laying off some when a reduction in hours for all would cover the budget needs, instead of doing all we can to save $1.42 by buying cheap products imported,

perhaps we can get manufacturing back, have the GOP stop trying to bust the unions by shutting companies here, we can target the markets to compete with Europe (more like us in lifestyle) instead of India and China, and Americans can realize the value of paying an extra buck for goods when it means they have a good job as a result.

Jobs aren't coming back because the GOP doesn't WANT them to. Hard to believe - but their policy positions make it clear. No unions. No government workers. No protection for manufacturing jobs (look at the screams about GM). No desire to fund infrastructure projects and defund military spending. Super-rich bosses and no increases to the minimum wage (the Dems finally did something about that).

We could build many plants and roads and bridges and high-speed rail for the cost of one missile system. It's all about priorities.

DeeToo of SC 6:45PM February 17, 2011

advertisement

Debate Club

Should There Be Such a Thing as 'Reporter's Privilege'?

Experts debate the ability reporters to protect their sources even in the face of a government investigation.

Latest Videos

advertisement

Thomas Jefferson Street Blog

President Obama's Code Pink Heckler Medea Benjamin Was Plain Rude

It's become acceptable for people to interrupt the president while he is delivering a formal speech on a deadly serious topic.

Obama Commerce Nominee Penny Pritzker’s Tax Problem

Obama’s Commerce Department nominee has some Romney-esque tax issues.

Oklahoma Tornado Reminds Us of the Value of Teachers

The Oklahoma tornado reminds us of all the roles teachers take on.

IRS, AP and James Rosen Scandals Strike at the First Amendment

The Obama scandals paint a picture of an administration at odds with the First Amendment.

Anthony Weiner Is Too Liberal to Be New York City Mayor

New York City doesn't need another Democratic mayor.

Organizations Masquerading as Tax-Exempt is the Real IRS Scandal

The real scandal at the IRS is electioneering groups getting tax-exempt status.

E.W. Jackson Proves the Tea Party Learned Nothing

By nominating E.W. Jackson, Virginia Republicans hope extremism will save them.

IRS, AP and Benghazi Are Not Obama Scandals

The word "scandal" doesn't appropriately describe anything going on in Washington these days.