06 February 2009

A Little Alarming

I've kept my yap pretty well shut about the economic apocalypse unfolding in slow motion and the politics of the federal governments' response.  (Yes, you're welcome.)   But this kind of caught my eye.jobloss900109

The blue line shows job losses in the 1990 recession; the red line is job losses in the 2001 recession, and the green line is the job losses in the current recession, so far.  This looks very bad, to me.   I wonder how it would compare to previous recessions.   Still, not good.  not good indeed.

If you need me, I'll be at the store stocking up on ammo and canned goods.

11 comments:

  1. Pretty soon, we'll have as bad of an unemployment rate as the usual rate in France!

    ReplyDelete
  2. I would like to see a more standardized measure like % jobless rate of population over the age of 18 or percentage of jobs lost. This seems like it could be swayed by a larger population. Granted, I have no idea what the difference in population size is between 1991 and now.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yeah....I was thinking the big "D" word months ago...

    ReplyDelete
  4. medstudentitis is correct, the data need to be adjusted for the population. The adjustment was done properly here.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I am so glad we elected the Messiah

    ReplyDelete
  6. I was always taught that about 3.2% of the population "couldn't" work. This figure included folks that were crippled and mentally challanged. So if that figure is really true; then there is in actuallity only a 3.5-4% jobless rate. Granted those folks are real breathing humans that are deserving of sympathy....yet I can't help but think that if we hadn't had a societal mind set of "me me me", if it feels good do it,or I want it so I'm gonna charge it....that maybe we wouldn't be in the mess that we are in.
    I remember my grandparents cajoling us grandkids to "put away for the rainy day". Maybe, if we HAD, then we wouldn't have such a blooted economy that could crash this severe.

    Steve

    ReplyDelete
  7. "I am so glad we elected the Messiah"

    Just as long as the moron is back in Texas

    ReplyDelete
  8. I was always taught that about 3.2% of the population "couldn't" work.

    Unemployment is defined as 'people who are actively looking for employment but can't find one'. Med students (and other full-time students who aren't working for that reason), the retired, mentally retarded, housewives, etc, are not unemployed.

    ReplyDelete
  9. So Nurse K, if you lose your job and say "Screw it, I am going to hang out and play guitar hero and drink til I get hepatitis!" you are not considered "unemployed"?

    ReplyDelete
  10. It pains me to say this, but Nurse K is right. When the Department of Labor calculates the unemployment data, they only count those who are actively looking for work. So as unemployed people drop out of that pool (and I forget how they count it, but there is a time span or some qualifier) they fall out of the "unemployed" pool and into the "unemployable" pool (or some such lumpenproletariat category). Also, the students & such are not counted.

    ReplyDelete
  11. The adjustment for population size has been taken into account here, which shows clearly how this round of job losses differs from past losses.

    ReplyDelete