Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

xchrom

(108,903 posts)
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 10:17 AM Feb 2014

Four-and-a-Half Years Since Recovery Began, No Jobs for More Than 60% of Job Seekers

http://www.epi.org/publication/years-recovery-began-jobs-60-job-seekers/

The December Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey (JOLTS) data released this morning by the Bureau of Labor Statistics mark six years since the official beginning of the Great Recession in December 2007 and four-and-a-half years since its official end in June 2009. Job openings declined by 43,000 in December, bringing the total number of job openings to 4.0 million. In December, the number of job seekers was 10.4 million (unemployment data are from the Current Population Survey and can be found here). Thus, there are 10.4 million job seekers and only 4.0 million job openings, meaning that there are only enough job openings for 38.5 percent of job seekers. This means that more than 60 percent of job seekers were not going to find a job in December no matter what they did. In a labor market with strong job opportunities, there would be roughly as many job openings as job seekers. We are clearly not in a strong labor market.

Furthermore, the 10.4 million unemployed workers understates how many job openings will be needed when a robust jobs recovery finally begins, due to the existence of 5.7 million would-be workers who are currently not in the labor market, but who would be if job opportunities were strong. Many of these “missing workers” will become job seekers when a robust jobs recovery begins, so job openings will be needed for them, too.

Rate of hiring has seen no improvement in nearly two years

One of the best ways to judge the relative strength of job opportunities over time is to examine the hires rate—the share of total employment accounted for by new hires. This is an important comprehensive measure of the strength of job opportunities because it incorporates two components: 1) net new hires, and 2) new hires that are due to churn (discussed below). Figure A shows the hires rate each month over time. It fell dramatically in the Great Recession, saw some very modest improvement between the middle of 2009 and early 2012, but has made no sustained improvement since February 2012, nearly two years ago.



Labor market churn

The JOLTS data are a regular reminder that there is always a great deal of churn in the labor market. In 2013, the labor market added an average of 194,000 jobs per month, but this is a net change, which masks a lot of shuffling. In particular, over the last year an average of more than 4.4 million workers were hired every month, and nearly 4.3 million workers either left their jobs voluntarily or were laid off every month. These hires and separations numbers, however, are currently very low; when the labor market is stronger, there is much more churn. For example, in 2006 and 2007, there were 5.3 million people being hired and 5.1 million people separating from their jobs each month on average. The reason there is less churn today is that job opportunities are so scarce that employed workers are much less likely to quit the job they have. In 2006 and 2007, nearly 3 million workers voluntarily quit their jobs each month. That dropped to a low of 1.6 million in September 2009. It has since increased, but is still extremely low relative to before the Great Recession. In December, 2.4 million workers voluntarily quit their jobs. Because leaving a job for a better opportunity can be an important way for workers to advance, this persistent depressed rate of voluntary quits represents millions of lost opportunities.
14 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

BlueCaliDem

(15,438 posts)
1. Which proves, in neon, that tax cuts DON'T create jobs.
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 10:55 AM
Feb 2014

Let's not forget that 40% of the Recovery and Reinvestment Act was for tax cuts that were supposed to stimulate job creation. Democrats consistently said "no", but Republicans pushed for those tax cuts claiming - with a straight face, no less - that it would stimulate job creation.

Democrats, once again, prove that tax cuts FAILED in creating more jobs, and Republicans once again prove what a bunch of know-nothing asswipes they are.

So, for a change around here, let's fault Republican ideology regarding tax cuts for this failure, not President Obama and not Democrats.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
2. Agreed ...
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 11:18 AM
Feb 2014
So, for a change around here, let's fault Republican ideology regarding tax cuts for this failure, not President Obama and not Democrats.


{The Prevailing DU-thought ...}

"It IS President Obama and the Democrats fault ... All they had to do is get tough and tell the republicans 'NO' to the tax cuts part and increase the infrastructure funding!"

BlueCaliDem

(15,438 posts)
4. Spot on as always, 1SBM.
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 10:16 PM
Feb 2014
{The Prevailing DU-thought ...}


It's as if they can't help themselves but to blame President Obama and Democrats first and foremost, instead of holding the Teapublican House accountable for the slow economy, slow passing of legislation, and watered-down bills. I blame a sever case of ODS amongst some very loud voices here at DU who are closeted Libertarians. Makes you wonder why they're on a Democratic Party supporting site, doesn't it?
 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
7. I think I found ...
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 10:50 PM
Feb 2014

The sole honest libertarian poster to this board, the other day. He/she did not run from the label; but rather, owned it and discussed continued the discussion.

But, as to why so many "democrats-as-a- 3rd - political descriptor" are on the board? I think the reason is obvious ... to depress the Democratic vote. That and because they have no where else to post, where their voice will be heard.

BlueCaliDem

(15,438 posts)
10. Nope. But you knew that the moment you decided to twist yourself into a pretzel
Sun Feb 16, 2014, 03:57 AM
Feb 2014

in order to find a way to take my words out of context for the heck of it.

Transparent, but you get an "A" for effort.

jwirr

(39,215 posts)
3. Wall Street recovered while the rest of us still do not have it. What we can buy with our money is
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 01:13 PM
Feb 2014

still the same or worse, cost of living has increased and is still increasing, many jobs are still all overseas, more jobs are minimum wage or part time and many are working more than one job to make even a living.

 

kelliekat44

(7,759 posts)
6. And they are holding onto investments until Obama is out of office so they can claim his faillure
Sat Feb 15, 2014, 10:20 PM
Feb 2014

and their success. There not only could be more jobs being created now there SHOULD be more jobs being created and Congress is not allowing the administration to create more jobs where the private sector is refusing to do so.

jwirr

(39,215 posts)
11. Absolutely. Hopefully we will get some majorities in congress that will allow us to do something in
Sun Feb 16, 2014, 10:32 AM
Feb 2014

the last two years.

They are the most unpatriotic bunch of idiots I have seen in my 73 years of life. This is nothing short of blackmail. And to think they called us all kinds of names because we protested the Vietnam War. There is no such thing as truth anymore it is just what they want us to think is true.

Le Taz Hot

(22,271 posts)
9. Because 95% of the recovery went to 1% of the population.
Sun Feb 16, 2014, 02:03 AM
Feb 2014

It's why this so-called "recovery" is just bullshit to most of us.

reformist2

(9,841 posts)
13. Repug policies are to blame, but Obama and the Dems bear some responsibility, too.
Sun Feb 16, 2014, 01:19 PM
Feb 2014

We need a bold new vision for the economy of the 21st century, and that includes a reworking of the safety net
to deal with the realities of a 20th century economy. Minimum wage and temporary unemployment insurance are
no longer enough.
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Four-and-a-Half Years Sin...