What’s Good About Rising Unemployment

More people are lining up for jobs via Reuters

The Department of Labor reported August job numbers on Friday, and the numbers appeared to be another bad sign for the recovery. The economy lost 54,000 positions in the last full month of summer. Worse, the unemployment rate rose for the first time in four months to 9.6%, from a rate of 9.5% the month before.

So is this jobs report the latest sign that we are headed for a double dip? Probably not. Actually it’s the opposite. Despite what it looks like, today’s jobs numbers are good news for the economy. Mark Zandi, a closely watched economist, had this to say on CNBC when the job report was announced, “It solidifies the idea the economic recovery is going to remain intact.”

What’s going on here? First of all, a good part of the job losses came from the government. If you just look at the private sector, the economy actually added 67,000 positions. People getting off government payrolls and being hired by corporations or small businesses is a good sign. That’s the handoff hopefully between the stimulus and economic growth kicking in. But the bigger point may be this: The unemployment rate, probably the most famous of economic gauges, may actually be a very bad indicator of how healthy the economy is.

What economists know very well, but most of the rest of us do not is that the unemployment rate never hits 0%. It never even gets close. In fact, even in good times, the unemployment rate has been creeping up over time. During the 1960s, the unemployment rate was below 4% for nearly four years, going as low as 3.5%. During the amazing late-1990s-early-2000s economic boom, though, never got as low as that. The unemployment rate touched 4%, dipping below that only briefly for just a few months. In 2008, the rate dropped to around 4.5% and that was the best it got. In fact, for most of the time during the housing market and credit boom that was the late 2000s, the unemployment rate stood at 5%-7%.

The unemployment rate peaked in late 2009 at just above 10% and has been mostly falling ever since. But the hiring numbers, or less firing numbers, have only been improving recently. So what was going on? The unemployment rate tracks not just how many people have jobs, but how many people are looking for jobs. And, up until August, the number of people looking for jobs was dropping rapidly. When people give up looking for work, essentially giving up on the economy, that indicates a really bad drop in confidence, something a recovery feeds on. So the reason the unemployment rate was rising dropping has less to do with more people getting jobs, and more to do with fewer people looking.

What went on in August was exactly the opposite. According to today’s report, 550,000 people entered the workforce in August. That’s a huge jump of new people looking for work, either because they haven’t worked before or because they decided that this was the month to get back off the couch and start looking. With that many people entering the workforce, the fact that the unemployment number only rose 0.1% is quite a good thing. In fact, more than half of those people who began looking for work in August, or 290,000, landed a job in August.

It is possible that coming at the end of the summer an uptick in people looking for work is not as positive as it appears. This is the time of year, after two hot months, when recent graduates start to actually think about their future and send out resumes. And you can image many other out of work people deciding to take off looking for a job in the summer. In August, with the summer ending, some of those people started looking again in earnest. But you would expect the big uptick in post-summer people searching for work to come in September. So the fact that it is coming early is a good sign.

Related Topics: Economy & Policy, jobs, unemployment, Economy & Policy
  • Latest on Business

    Shannon Stapleton / Reuters

    Facebook, Wall Street Banks Sued Over Pre-IPO Financial Forecasts

    Just days after its controversial IPO, Facebook and its Wall Street bankers have been hit by shareholder lawsuits alleging that the social networking giant and its underwriters concealed the company’s decelerating revenue growth from investors. The lawsuits come amid a growing furor about whether Facebook’s banks selectively disclosed information that gave favored clients an unfair advantage over other investors. Top U.S. regulators have begun examining the IPO, and now the U.S. Senate Banking Committee and other lawmakers want answers from Facebook about issues raised in the offering’s aftermath, according to The Hill newspaper.

    Why Greece Isn't Leaving the Eurozone YetSlate

    Associated Press

    Small Dairies Go Under as Milk Prices Sink Again

    PLAINFIELD, Vt. — The MacLaren brothers are third-generation dairy farmers, but they will likely be the last in their family.

    After working all their lives on the hillside farm in Vermont that their grandfather bought in 1939, rising to milk cows at 3 a.m., even in blizzards and sub-zero temperatures, they decided to call it quits, auctioning off their roughly 200 cows and equipment ranging from stalls and hoof trimmers to tractors and steel pails.

  • http://stephenpoo.wordpress.com stephenpoo

    Question?
    Who exactly is counted as unemployed ( what list do they sign up for) and who may be unemployed but never counted in those figures?

  • Stephen Gandel

    I believe the unemployment number is based on a survey and it is self-reported. So they go out or mostly call and ask a number of people whether they are employed, unemployed or looking for work. Then they use that sample to come up with the overall rate. Please correct me if I am wrong.

  • http://www.124monkeys.com Sean DeCoursey forgot his password

    It depends which unemployment number you’re talking about. There are several, the most commonly used in the media is the U3 but the U6 is generally considered more accurate. And yet again I miss Justin posting here.

  • geaugailluminati

    there’s two surveys, one is as gandel descibed, the other is the employer survey, i believe coducted by mail mid-month…then BLS uses some kind of fudge factors to combine them…

  • keninmontana

    I find it almost laughable to be touting 67,000 jobs added,when the total number of unemployed in the nation is hovering at about 14.5 million,as an indication of a recovery. Especially when one considers the fact that the Federal government just released over 100,000 from temporary census employment back into the ranks of the unemployed.

  • onemarine

    Ummmmm. This is one of those stories that’s just formatted to “look” like a real story in a national news magazine – right? It’s not a real story that someone truly wrote and then submitted to an editor and then, subsequently, published?

    I mean he is not really saying that the unemployment numbers are “good” news is he?

    It gets to be old and trite and a bit boring to say it but can you for one minute imagine a similar handling of such news for poor old GWB? Snowstorms in h*ll and flying pigs come to mind.

    The actual and real unemployment numbers are not skewed by the fact that we never get to 100% employment (as the author uses) but rather the numbers are much worse than reported because the people who have “stopped looking for worK” (an admittedly weird statistical group) keep the number low because they disappear from the ranks of the “unemployed”.

    Bizarre take on terrible economic news – “It’s good!”

    The “Curious” capitalist should join the ranks of the unemployed. His doing so woould both help the numbers (remember: more unemployment is good) as well as the state of journalism and commentary in this country.

  • reedwall

    If an increase in unemployment is seen as a measure of an improving economy, then we clearly are using the wrong parameters to gauge this. High unemployment is obviously bad for the working class, and anything that contributes to increased hardship for our middle class, who rely on steady employment for their well being, should never be regarded as a good sign.

  • http://stephenpoo.wordpress.com stephenpoo

    Thank you all for your input I had no idea thats the way it worked. Can’t say however I could put much faith in the numbers.
    May be a new unemployed census would be a good idea. Thanks

  • jaeson1234

    So if rising unemployment is good, and the Stimulus was designed to slow or halt rising unemployment, does that mean the Stimulus was bad?

    And if unemployment would have been worse without the Stimulus, then wouldn’t it have actually been better since rising unemployment is good?

    And wouldn’t a second stimulus stifle the goodness of rising unemployment?

  • chekflow

    And if this scenario played out EXACTLY under a Republican President, administration and Congress, chances this article would be authored: ZERO

    Chances that dozens of articles would be written that are severely damning: 100%

    You don’t have to be the Amazing Kreskin to have anticipated an article like this from TIME right after the August numbers came out.

    It is astonishing to see the overt campaigning and water-carrying by this publication for whom, at this point, almost appears to be their employer.

    Knowing TIME is lost in the miasma of adoration and cult-like devotion to this President and administration, it has become simply this: boring.

    We get it. They can do no wrong and bad=good.

    Write about something else now, please?

  • tinkerbrendie

    “The “Curious” capitalist should join the ranks of the unemployed. His doing so would both help the numbers (remember: more unemployment is good) as well as the state of journalism and commentary in this country.”

    Best. Suggestion. Ever.

    TinkerBrendie

  • http://eddiebear.wordpress.com Eddie The Bear

    Wait. Back in 2002-8, when the unemployment percentage was low, the left mocked a jobless recovery. When the percentage was low, the left claimed it was dispirited ones who gave up looking. When the jobs added wasn’t “good enough”, the left mocked that. When the percentage went up, the left mockingly asked where the jobs were.

    And now, in the age of Skittles and Rainbows, rising percentage is good? Less negative growth and stagnation is good?

    Oh well. Your spinning and shilling for The WON only means that November will be even sweeter.

  • tinkerbrendie

    “Write about something else now, please?”

    Here’s an even BETTER idea…

    STOP writing now, please?

  • tinkerbrendie

    “But you would expect the big uptick in post-summer people searching for work to come in September. So the fact that it is coming early is a good sign.”

    Tell me this, Kreskin… what makes you think September’s numbers won’t be EVEN WORSE than August’s?

  • ohiopapa

    August’s U6 is 16.7%, up from 16.5% the previous month, and the highest since April. How exactly are higher unemployment numbers a good thing? They aren’t!

  • http://zisianthus.blogspot.com Nhan Tran

    Of course all of us know that rising unemployment is obviously bad. However, I find this article interesting since it mentions an aspect of unemployment rate that I do not often think about: confidence (A decrease in unemployment rate could be resulted from the lack of confidence of people). And if we try forgetting about unemployment rate in general for a while to think situationally, the article has done a good job in explaining what is good in the 0.1% rise in unemployment rate from last month. He definitely did not mean that rising unemployment is generally good, but he just wanted to point out the good side in the 0.1% increase in the rate from last month (The bad side is there are now more people wanting jobs yet having none). The article has given me the thought that we may need to look at all the related rates: unemployment rate, employment rate, voluntary unemployment rate… in order to have a better view of the economy.

  • kbrown2225

    “It solidifies the idea the economic recovery is going to remain in tack.” What does “in tack” mean, does the writer mean “intact”? You know I have come to expect this sort of lousy writing and editing on the internet but this is supposed to be Time Magazine for God’s sake.

  • kbrown2225

    You know when I read phases like “because they decided that this was the month to get back off the couch and start looking (for work)” It makes me wonder in what world the author of this ariticle lives on. You see in the real world it is not a matter of do I want to work or do I want to stay on the couch. To real working class Americans if I don’t work I don’t have a couch, or a home or food, so we take whatever piece of crap work is available to keep our families clothed and fed.

  • masanf

    Anyone want to guess what the odds are that an article like this would have been written if Bush were in office? I put the odds slightly south of 0%.

    Trying to argue that an increase in unemployment and and yet another month of net job losses is a good thing is an absurdity too far. This is especially true when you consider that the private sector hiring was LESS than the previous month. Kind of hard to argue that private sector hiring is moving in the right direction when less people are hired.

    Last month we were told the 71K number was absolutely terrible. Now we are being told an increase in the umemployment rate and a number that is less than 71K is actually good? Give us a break. Claiming that an increase in the unemployment rate and a meager 67K jobs in the private sector is good news is almost as disingenuous as claiming this article wasn’t written in attempt to help the Democrats get out in front of the weak numbers.

  • Stephen Gandel

    You are definitely right I was being a little flip about that one. In the real world people are making much harder choices than whether to watch more TV or go and look for a job. Didn’t mean to paint it that way. Also, thanks for the copy check on intact. Was typing from my notes, and didn’t correct my shorthand. Thanks for reading the post.

  • onemarine

    Question – what would have been the tone and timbre of this article had the unemployment rate DROPPED by .1 percentage points?

    My take: Clouds parting, floods receding, sun and warmth across the land, small children skipping….

  • arableland

    The author needs a basic course in critical thinking: the sentence, “So the reason the unemployment rate was rising has less to do with more people getting jobs, and more to do with fewer people looking”, makes no sense. Rising unemployment means more people are out of work, and the natural interpretation would be that fewer, not “more”, people are getting jobs. His second clause uses the same faulty premise and so suffers the same nonsensical conclusion.

    Even if you were to assume the author made a mistake by typing unemployment rather than employment thereby establishing an accidentally bad premise for the subsequent claims, it still doesn’t make much sense. If people stop looking for work because they can’t find any, it doesn’t legitimize writing them off of unemployment stats. They are still passively looking for work, they simply can’t find any. That doesn’t mean they are unavailable for work.

    Moreover, what nonsense is this: “a recovery feeds on” … “a really bad drop in confidence”. Huh? That is such a bizarre statement. If recovery feeds on discouragement and passivity, then everyone should just cower at home. But of course, then there would be no recovery.

    Whoever this author is, he must not have proof read or edited his thoughts, because much of it is gibberish.

  • thinkingdownstream

    “So is this jobs report the latest sign that we are headed for a double dip? Probably not.”

    Let’s be kind and not call this article a pathetic and desperate lie perpetrated solely to prop up Obama and the Democrats.

    We’ll assume instead that it’s just this hour’s Governmental Big-Media complex’s attempt at finding and a “Big Lie” that is anywhere near believable .

    And in that case it’s an epic fail…

    Key Question: If increasing unemployment is “A Good Thing!” for the economy, how high will it have to go before the economy is doing great and we have full employment?…

    Exactly.

  • http://datatroll.wordpress.com Mike O

    I always wondered where all of Pravda’s old writers went.

    Baghdad would be embarrassed to write something like this.

  • http://datatroll.wordpress.com Mike O

    Baghdad *BOB*

  • sojarky

    Let me guess. Stephen Gandel’s next article will be “What’s Great About the Gulf Oil Spill.” It will explain how the oil spill disaster was the best thing that could ever happen to the Gulf economy.

    Mr Gandel, please notify me when you write it. Thanks!

  • kbrown2225

    Wow, Stephen, pretty impressed with the response. Sorry if I was a little harsh in my criticism. It is nice to see someone taking such a dedicated interest in their work to read and respond in such a way.

  • repletus2

    “What’s Good About Rising Unemployment”
    Great work, Time magazine. Obama’s press office couldn’t have put out a better byline spin on the bad unemployment news if they tried.
    How about this one:
    “What’s Good About Only 25% of Americans Trusting Print News” according to Gallup.
    75% of the people have figured out that they are not going to be duped anymore by the crap that is being put out by the mainstream media.

  • bwshook

    Time, you have become a worthless news magazine. Don’t your people work anymore and write articles based on research?

    “What’s good about unemployment rising” and “What’s good about the gulf oil spill” (as another reader suggested) seems to be just about all you folks can handle these days.

    Hey, Time, make a contribution to the unemployment rate and fire most of your writers. You can then help reduce the rate of unemployment by hiring competent authors. MAKE SOME CHANGES, TIME!

  • headybrew

    First off, this is a blog, not an article that will show up in the print version of Time Magazine on some newstand and shouldn’t be considered “the official opinion of Time”. Second, if you read the Curious Capitalist on a regular basis I think you’ll see that they do a pretty good job staying away from politics and instead focus on the economic policies of the US and other countries while trying to occasionally pontificate on, and read the tea leaves of the market. They don’t cheerlead for one party over the other and are usually more concerned with the big picture of the globalized economy as a whole. But again, as it is a blog, its generally that particular writers take on things and does sometimes have a personal bias. And if you truly feel that Time is just a liberal rag paid for by the DNC, then why are you reading it? Just to get yourself fired up and whipped up into a frenzy? And third, I don’t think the author is suggesting that the unemployment rate, by itself, rising is a good thing but rather that the underlying factors that led to the increase are showing some positives. IMO, he basicaly asserts that its a wonder the unemployment rate wasn’t higher because of the large increase in people entering the workforce (550,000 according to his source). And he concedes that new college grads probably contribute to that roughly half a million. But, he argues that the larger contributor is an increase in confidence as many who had previously given up on the economy now feel that maybe the chances of finding work have improved. And increased confidence is a good thing. And nowhere does he attribute it to the actions of the current administration or blame it on the previous.

  • stewartiii
  • tucsonterpfan

    Does George Orwell write for “Time” too?

  • geaugailluminati

    Every month the BLS puts out a report that discusses the difference between the household and establishment surveys: Employment from the BLS household and payroll surveys: summary of recent trends

    http://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/ces_cps_trends.pdf

    The Unemployment Rate comes from the Current Population Survey (CPS: commonly called the household survey), a monthly survey of about 60,000 households.

    The jobs number comes from Current Employment Statistics (CES: payroll survey), a sample of approximately 390,000 business establishments nationwide.

    These are very different surveys: the CPS gives the total number of employed (and unemployed including the alternative measures), and the CES gives the total number of positions (excluding some categories like the self-employed, and a person working two jobs counts as two positions).

    The linked monthly report from the BLS discusses the differences, and adjusts the household survey to “an employment concept more similar to the payroll survey’s”.

    http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2010/09/reconciling-household-and-payroll.html

  • http://stephenpoo.wordpress.com stephenpoo

    Thanks for a litle grounding.
    Many scan the artical and form an opinion without thinking what was actualy said.
    Once in a while on my home page there is a headline tha looks interesting from a local paper, after reading it I see readers comments below. Many of their comments are hostile & hate filled often with racial comments. Makes me wonder why there is a place for reader comments. Makes me wonder what kind of a place we really live in, and what kind of people populate it, Maybe blogging has run its course, if I were a writer I wouldn’t do it unless I got ordered to, even then I would never go back and read the comments, why suffer the greif.
    But my thanks and admiration to the writers who have to brave it.

  • http://unemploymentrates.wordpress.com Roosa

    As economy is growing steadily. After recession unemployment rate is coming down and payroll employment is increasing but still it is not stable. The stock market is in fluctuating position in last 3 months and going to peak in US.
    http://www.mikeastrachan.com/

blog comments powered by Disqus