Most of the unemployed no longer receive benefits

Source: AP

The jobs crisis has left so many people out of work for so long that most of America's unemployed are no longer receiving unemployment benefits.

Early last year, 75 percent were receiving checks. The figure is now 48 percent — a shift that points to a growing crisis of long-term unemployment. Nearly one-third of America's 14 million unemployed have had no job for a year or more.

Congress is expected to decide by year's end whether to continue providing emergency unemployment benefits for up to 99 weeks in the hardest-hit states. If the emergency benefits expire, the proportion of the unemployed receiving aid would fall further.

The ranks of the poor would also rise. The Census Bureau says unemployment benefits kept 3.2 million people from slipping into poverty last year. It defines poverty as annual income below $22,314 for a family of four.

Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45173949/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/

---

Do account for those whose benefits period expired as well as the 100,000 jobs or fewer growth when considering how the unemployment rate lowered by 0.1% monthly.

Scary is one word I would use. OMG!!! comes readily to mind...

As of the middle of December (yeah, imagine Christmas with no income), I will have exhausted my unemployment benefits. I'm already behind in my rent. I cannot pay one of my bills this month.

Forget about getting the two big holes in my teeth fixed!!!

The 1% can kiss my shiny hiney...

Sickening. K&R

EVERYTHING in the entire WORLD.

They're the ones who have wanted to end extended unemployment benefits.

And thank President Obama and the Democrats that these extended benefits ever existed in the first place.

That's how they calculate unemployment rates.

Well less people are 'participating'. Despite that they might WANT to. Also you need to look at the U-5 rate and not the U-3.

We will see bigger demonstrations and more violent ones. People get angry and desperate when they are hungry and have to sleep outside. This growing number of unemployed combined with easy access to fire arms, coupled with Americans belief in violence to solve problems, is a ticking time bomb.

Comedian Bill Engvel was talking to bill and the panel, and he was stating this his financial adviser was telling him to make investments in apartment buildings, as the banks will not be lending to people so they can buy homes anymore. Even though there are many homes that are sitting on the market, for one fourth the amount they would have gone for four years ago.

The banks are going to make sure that no one in the Middle Class profits from the current situation.

I didn't catch the show, but that sounds like what I've been observing. Banks simply aren't able to finance more home ownership until they stop foreclosing and dispose of the inventory. The middle class is on its deathbed. Now that people don't have easy access to credit, they can't even borrow and pretend anymore.

they will nothing more than a statistic that politicians don't really care about.

:woohoo:

:patriot:

Even U5 is vastly underestimated.

ARE NOT COUNTED AS SUCH. They are invisible.

9% my ass.

in the official unemployment figure; nor do they count those who have given up looking for work. For a more realistic assessment of US unemployment...I saw a study from...2008? that found that as many as 25% of men of working age (18-60) were unemployed or "underemployed" (only in part-time temporary work, etc).

add to that a 330% increase in unemployment among women 55 and older over the past three years...

http://contraryinvestor.com/2011archives/mosept11.htm

"Finally, as a result of the inability of the system to generate credit creation, which clearly affects the real economy and manifests in very slow to no growth in aggregate demand, in generational deleveraging events unemployment remains stubbornly high. And again this exactly characterizes the current cycle so far.

Never in modern history have we faced the type of domestic labor market circumstances we face today. As we've tried to describe, monetary policy is powerless to change this. If Mr. Bernanke was the true student of history he would fully realize exactly the circumstances we've described. It's not that we don't have precedent. The US in the 1930's and Japan over the last two decades are the model. Looking at the Depression years and claiming the issue was that the Fed was not loose enough misses the key fingerprint character points of a generational deleveraging cycle completely. Again, the refusal of Bernanke and friends to even acknowledge Austrian or Kondratieff economic constructs has been and will continue to be their policy making downfall. Who knows, maybe all of this will find its way into the economics textbooks of tomorrow. Let's hope so anyway for future generations. But as the old market saying goes, people don't repeat the mistakes of their parents, they repeat the mistakes of their grandparents."

also known as "Screwed R Us"

The basic idea is to starve the poor to death.

Slobodan Milosevic did ethnic cleansing.

Our leaders do economic cleansing.

This is a slow death due to neglect and malnutrition.

That this is happening in the largest economy of the world is unforgivable.

x(

People who have worked for 20 years and paid into unemployment.. will now not get it (thanks to Republican Banker Whores)

They can renig on a contract.. but don't you dare!

They are going to drug test, harass, nit-pick, lie, cheat.. anything to discourage the unemployed and keep the Republican Bankers from keeping their end of the deal.

Seriously if you are a Capitalist, and think Capitalism is "the shit," then fix this.

It allows us who are victimized by Capitalism to survive.

Unless you think we should all die...

They think we should all die.

That solves so many problems for them.

The US Census does a monthly survey, sampling from the population.

It is explained here at the BLS site: http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm#unemployed

At the "Unemployment" paragraph their explanation begins...

"Persons are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work. Actively looking for work may consist of any of the following..."

Note that there are no questions about receiving benefits, and the calls are not selected based on who is or is not getting benefits.

Major areas of questioning are listed.

Whether one believes the survey is accurate or not is certainly a valid question, (though no one has definitively proved otherwise - except for a few blogs that know more than anyone else but have no real evidence, like a census-sized survey) but it has nothing to do with who is or is not getting unemployment.
_____________________

That is a separate discussion from the lack of unemployment benefits. Those benefits were intended to provide a backstop between jobs, not replace them. But 99 weeks (some states limit them to as little as 42, I believe) is nearly two years, and for some they were extended.

At this point, and considering that we are unlikely to return to anything near the 5% or 6% unemployment we had just a few years ago until AT LEAST 2020 or so, benefits have now become a replacement for working. Not intentionally, because MOST people really would rather work, but there are no real alternatives.

That's a real problem, because it just adds to our state "debt". Those benefits are paid by the state, and states borrow the money from the Feds to do this when their revenues are not sufficient. Now, however, states are running into the red, so that is no longer, really, a viable option.

Until, and unless an entity with enough of a bankroll invests in our people again, in our infrastructure, but most importantly in the research and development (which is being cut) and, in higher education (which is becoming unaffordable for large numbers of people) and in creating whatever jobs will carry us into the next century, the person who threw the McDonalds applications down on the OWS rally was exactly correct. (An asshole, but correct). Minimum wage jobs are the absolute fastest-growing of all jobs, and part-time minimum wage jobs are the fastest-growing of all. (Check the job report from Friday - we not only didn't create enough jobs to provide just for those that are entering the work force (about 127K a month needed) but we didn't create enough to take any of the unemployed out of the workforce, and a chunk of the jobs that were created were part-time.

Millions of people who were making 40-80,000 a year now make 14, 20, 27,000, while housing prices have declined, (more to come, btw), food prices have inflated by about 4 1/2%, energy costs have not gone down appreciably, up in some cases - in other words, it is still very nearly as expensive to live in 2011 as it was in 2008, yet pay for many has dropped to less than half of what they were making, or to none.

We cannot fix that by paying unemployment benefits for 10 or 20 years, and the people will not be better off if we try to substitute that for the real fixes we have to pursue.

For very many people, there will be a new normal, and it's not going to be anything like the old normal.

One thing about those BLS surveys: In my 35 years in the workforce, I've never been asked to participate in one, either while I was working, or while I was not. Seems kind of funny, doesn't it?

how choosing the population or the sample affects our odds of being called on that one, (I have never been contacted either, and they have had 40+ years to do it <G>). IIRC they chose 50,000 people at some point, and a few are refreshed periodically. I think they really do try to get a statistically accurate picture, though no one knows what the "black box" calulations do.

I try to take into account the various surveys (trimtabs, bls, adp), and look at trends over time rather than monthly results. Facts are we could be at 6% unemployment today and because of the crappy jobs and inequality there would still be millions of people facing foreclosure and a sustained increase in the working poor, not enough real educational opportunity), 40+ million people on food stamps, with all those numbers increasing, a slowly eroding amount of assets for all but 1% of the population.

It all combines to make me think the only thing likely decided by the next election is whether we continue to sink slowly or speed it up.

That unemployment benefits keep the unemployeed from seeking work. This shows conclusively just how wrong that argument is, in case some people were dumb enough to believe it in the first place.

It completely torques me that ANYONE can believe that a family of four can live on anything APPROACHING $22,314!!! The bar should be set much higher for "poverty level income."

:eyes:

It certainly did for me. I was denied unemployment due to being classed a "contractor" by the state of Maryland. (I was actually a postdoctoral fellow, sort of a journeyman scientist). After getting my Congressman's office involved and six weeks of all out warfare, they reversed themselves and granted it.

The alternative would have been me losing my health insurance and dying shortly thereafter. I was actually considering whether to go to their offices in Maryland and set myself on fire, ala the Arab Spring, so my death'd mean something.

U6 is 16.2%

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm

I didn't want to believe
it, but I no longer question that more than ideology has driven the
Republican obstruction. I'm now convinced it is not just to obstruct, it's
a deliberate attempt to sabotage the economy to ensure Obama's turned out.


Can you imagine how much pain will be among us by 2012?

How long can the Occupy movement give people an opportunity
for a voice in peaceful opposition before the most desparate
and most angry speak and act?

Can the politicians and powers-that-be truly not understand
the risks they are running by maintaining their steadfast
course?

Whether the Republicans regain the White House or not, that's
a hell of a gamble - - -

I can't believe we've come to this. I weep for my country
and my countrymen.

a thing. It would just all go to line the pockets of the greedy 1%.

I wonder what the President is going to have to give up to get the Rethugs to extend them? Last time around, it was a full two year extension of the Bush tax cuts.

My husband's six months will be up very soon, in December I think. We are already almost completely living on EDD, what happens when that's gone? I know it'll be extended somehow, but what will be given up?

Very sobering and scary. I think that I'm not the only one thinking, "There, but for the grace of God, go I".

:scared:

My husband is unemployed, and I was shocked to learn how little unemployment payments are.

The MAXIMUM weekly benefit that someone in our state can receive--for a family of four--is $378 per week.

So, that's about $1,500 per month.

Because we lost health-insurance benefits--we had to purchase health insurace. We shopped around
and purchased one of the middle-range plans. It covers the basics, and we still must pay co-pays,
and 20 percent on any hospitalizations.

That healthcare plan cost us $600 per month.

So---that leaves a grand total of $900 per month to spend. Good thing our mortgage is only $1,700 per month. Whew! :sarcasm:

I don't know how people are living, and making it. I really don't.

We are very fortunate because my husband is now doing contract work. The company that laid him off
has him contracting. So, we are fine.

However, I don't understand how people are making it on unemployment for extended periods. You can't
live on it. Republicans and other jerks position people on unemployment as lazy people sitting home
and living off the government. Sorry, you can't LIVE on unemployment.

Again, $1,500 per month is the maximum benefit. And that benefit is based on the income you were earning
at the job at which you were laid off.

some unemployed people have friends/family who can pitch in. Recent college grads might have parental support if unemployed. And as for Repuggalos (stole this from here), usually that "bums living off the government" message comes from those who've never had to rely on unemployment insurance ever.

I finally found a job just as tier 3 benefits were running out. For roughly a year, my fiancee and I survived on my unemployment. I had to forgo health insurance, we found a rental for $400/month, and lived off cereal, ramen noodles, spaghetti and the like. We rarely left the apartment, while I carpet bombed the country emailing job applications for every position I could find.

It sucked, and I was borderline suicidal by the end. In addition to the loss of self esteem and depression that comes with not being able to find meaningful employment, I had to skip badly needed dental work and meds for anxiety, bipolarism and PTSD. My fiancee is still looking for a job after 2+ years of unemployment, and still suffers from the depression that comes with that. We're both finally recovering some health eating genuine meals now, instead of whatever happened to be cheapest on the shelves.

Things are going to get increasingly ugly in this country as people fall off the unemployment rolls. That, I think, is going to be the last straw for entirely too many people who are already hanging by a thread.

January should see a huge drop in unemployment, when benefits are dropped for folks on extension. Plus even more in the following months as people fall off the federal tiers. That's great news right?

because the unemployed are only unemployed and not looking for jobs b/c of the unemployment benefits. Thus accordingly - that 48% should all be finding work.

The human tragedy continues and once again reality conflicts with a right wing "truth" talking point.

Mission Accomplished! :sarcasm:

The article asserts that,"Early last year, 75 percent were receiving checks.". The rate at which the unemployed are also "insured" and receive an unemployment check has never been more than 35 or 40 percent in the very best states. In Michigan the percent of "insured" unemployed has never gotten above the mid 30%. Last month the insured unemployment rate in Michigan was at 2.9% (very similar to other mid-western states). While at the same time the official unemployment rate increased to 10%, (so currently in Michigan only 29% of unemployed individuals are receiving an unemployment check). I believe that what the author is attempting to explain is the vast numbers of insured unemployed who have exhausted any further entitlement to benefits. Some where between 65% to 75% of the unemployed never receive an unemployment insurance check. With the current long down turn in employment, the numbers of long term unemployed are growing. So I believe the article is stating, that 75% of those who were receiving checks a year ago are now part of the growing numbers of uninsured unemployed. In addition many who have received benefits are now facing actions by the state to "recoup" improper payments. Last month over 90,000 demands for restitution were issued by Michigan's Unemployment Agency. Similar activity is happening in most other states

that's the republican plan to reduce the unemployment rate.

goes right up there with their die quickly health care plan.

We need to be reminded of this!:kick: