Think Oregon's 9.5 percent unemployment is bad? Try 19.6 percent
#1
I'm pretty sure they say unemployment at the peak of the Great Depression was 24%, measured by however it was they measured it then. This says in Oregon we're really at 19.6% now (and holding):

Think Oregon's 9.5 percent unemployment is bad? Try 19.6 percent, once everyone's counted
http://www.oregonlive.com/business/index...unemp.html

In the official world of government reports, Oregon's economy has stalled at 9.5 percent unemployment with almost no job growth since February. Economists call the July numbers, issued Tuesday, distressing.

And in the real world inhabited by Scott Pickard and many others no longer counted as jobless, actual unemployment is far higher. Pickard, 49, of Tigard, lost a human-resources job in early 2009, exhausted his unemployment benefits and moved in with his mother in February.

Pickard scrapes by. He earns a few bucks coaching other jobless people on interviewing skills. He falls into a broader government measure, called the U-6, of under- and unemployed people.

Some label this figure, a whopping 19.6 percent in Oregon during the year that ended March 31, the real unemployment rate. Oregon's "U-6" rate is fourth highest in the country, behind Nevada, California and Michigan. It's far above the national 16.5 percent U-6 level.

"There's very little hope, but still I'm not saying there's none," said Pickard, who hunts for work seven days a week. "There's certainly very little improvement for those of us who are long-term unemployed."

Oregon can take comfort in the fact that official unemployment dropped from 11.6 percent in spring 2009, seasonally adjusted, to 9.5 percent in July. The number of unemployed also fell, from 210,649 a year ago to 189,501 in July.

But the broadest measure of underutilized workers in Oregon, the U-6, remains stubbornly high at more than twice the official unemployment rate. It's only 1.1 percentage points below Oregon's U-6 peak of 20.7 percent in 2009.

...Unemployment, and how it's counted, is subject to widespread misunderstanding. Some critics contend the government uses the official definition of unemployment -- the U-3 -- to understate joblessness, making the economy appear healthier than it is..."
Reply
#2
Twenty percent of Oregon's work force is entitled to stay home and draw a check. They just gum up the works. The rest are marginal.
Reply
#3
(08-17-2011, 05:11 AM)PonderThis Wrote: I'm pretty sure they say unemployment at the peak of the Great Depression was 24%, measured by however it was they measured it then. This says in Oregon we're really at 19.6% now (and holding):

Snip...

What I don't know would fill volumes, but I suspect this is a down home fact Ponder. I once had to dig into stats from the Great Depression (before the Net) and after hours in the library found this: In 1934 the FDR administration was concerned about the unemployment "numbers". So, some smart kid from Harvard solved it. The numbers had included boys 14 - 18 years of age who were part of fruit picking families to be unemployed when there was no harvest. They simply removed this group, making the numbers look lots better.

And when we see all the people who had good paying jobs with benefits now working at low paying jobs without benefits, we have to be very, very concerned.

Below, is a link to last night's (Tue) PBS Newshour. This segment tells an important story about how we perceive our problems. (Video).

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/business/...08-16.html

Reply
#4
(08-17-2011, 07:33 AM)Wonky Wrote:
(08-17-2011, 05:11 AM)PonderThis Wrote: I'm pretty sure they say unemployment at the peak of the Great Depression was 24%, measured by however it was they measured it then. This says in Oregon we're really at 19.6% now (and holding):

Snip...

What I don't know would fill volumes, but I suspect this is a down home fact Ponder. I once had to dig into stats from the Great Depression (before the Net) and after hours in the library found this: In 1934 the FDR administration was concerned about the unemployment "numbers". So, some smart kid from Harvard solved it. The numbers had included boys 14 - 18 years of age who were part of fruit picking families to be unemployed when there was no harvest. They simply removed this group, making the numbers look lots better.

And when we see all the people who had good paying jobs with benefits now working at low paying jobs without benefits, we have to be very, very concerned.

Below, is a link to last night's (Tue) PBS Newshour. This segment tells an important story about how we perceive our problems. (Video...Starts with a clip from W. Buffett but the "meat" of the story follows)

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/business/...08-16.html

Reply
#5
Buffett. Now, that's rich. How come he's lumping so many others in with himself? Does he want some help with the load? Just in case we ever thought of doing what he's suggesting.
Reply
#6
Buffett isn't being very honest.. He has bragged for years that his secretary pays more taxes than he.. Buffett draws a smaller salary than his secretary, and Berkshare Hathaway pays no dividends to shareholders like himself.. I suppose it is other billionaires that take out huge salaries, that Warren is encouraging to "Pony up"..

He has found the best loophole there is, and that is to keep his investments in his own company. He has never spoken for closing corporate loopholes..
Reply
#7
Great video Wonky. I hope you don't mind me putting it out so perhaps more will watch...

Reply
#8
(08-17-2011, 11:11 AM)Valuesize Wrote: Great video Wonky. I hope you don't mind me putting it out so perhaps more will watch...



Thanks V/Size. I would have. Too damn dumb to know how.

(NO! PLEASE. I BEG OF YOU. I DON'T WANT TO KNOW).
Reply
#9
(08-17-2011, 11:00 AM)hillclimber Wrote: Buffett isn't being very honest.. He has bragged for years that his secretary pays more taxes than he.. Buffett draws a smaller salary than his secretary, and Berkshare Hathaway pays no dividends to shareholders like himself.. I suppose it is other billionaires that take out huge salaries, that Warren is encouraging to "Pony up"..

He has found the best loophole there is, and that is to keep his investments in his own company. He has never spoken for closing corporate loopholes..

Did you view the video? What do you think of the pie charts that show wealth distribution in the US and Sweden?
Reply
#10
It's the behavior of the police that tell you if you are a member of a slave state or not.
Reply
#11
(08-17-2011, 06:37 PM)cletus1 Wrote:
(08-17-2011, 11:00 AM)hillclimber Wrote: Buffett isn't being very honest.. He has bragged for years that his secretary pays more taxes than he.. Buffett draws a smaller salary than his secretary, and Berkshare Hathaway pays no dividends to shareholders like himself.. I suppose it is other billionaires that take out huge salaries, that Warren is encouraging to "Pony up"..

He has found the best loophole there is, and that is to keep his investments in his own company. He has never spoken for closing corporate loopholes..

Did you view the video? What do you think of the pie charts that show wealth distribution in the US and Sweden?

I see no response, Clete.
It's difficult to have dialog when we won't accept the truth of our actual situation but rely on the spoon fed simple arguments of one sided pundits.

And with that in mind...

At least part of this problem with debt and wealth has been the behavior of those "wage earning", or "salaried" folks that most of us are.
Housing boomed. We used our homes as ATM's and took overvalued money for trips to far off places with strange sounding names.
We ran our debt past our ability to pay.
Now we can't buy anything.
So, investors won't put money into "plant" to make things.

Let's not blame it ALL on the rich.

Reply
#12
"Ink" and custom wheels. NASCAR "Collectables". I saw this coming a mile off. And, I thought..."I'm gonna need a barn for all the yard sale treasures". The farm will come in handy, too.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)