Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

4 Bumps

Unemployment down, only 36,000 new jobs out of a projected 100,000?

I heard this on the news this morning. They said bad weather prohibited companies from hiring. How does this work? In my mind I thought maybe the unemployment is down because maybe some of those people who have been receiving this benefit the time may have ran out. And why blame the weather? Sure it has been crazy bad in a lot of the country, but, not the entire month of January. I am just having random thoughts, what do you think?


Asked by Noosa at 9:16 AM on Feb. 4, 2011 in Politics & Current Events

Level 20 (8,483 Credits)
This question is closed.
Answers (15)
  • Canada is doing good.

    Answer by Carpy at 9:33 AM on Feb. 4, 2011

  • The reason why unemployment went down is because once your unemployment benefits run out you are no longer part of the unemployment number. So even if you havent found a job and have run out of unemployment you are not part of the governments monthly unemployment number. Sad but i believe the number to be way higher then there saying.

    Answer by mrssundin at 9:40 AM on Feb. 4, 2011

  • I agree with the PP. Those on 99 weeks are starting to lose their benefits. That doesn't mean they found work. When you base the numbers only by those RECIEVING benefits, it's inaccurate.


    Answer by Anonymous at 9:55 AM on Feb. 4, 2011

  • Rather fishy numbers I think. For those of you who think the unemployment rate going down to 9% is a great thing, don't get to excited. There is no way with the small amount of jobs gained the rate went down on that. Looks to me like many many many people quit looking for jobs. I wonder what spin will come out of the Obama administration. Will they crow about the 9% or will they blame the weather because the expected numbers were so off?

    Answer by itsmesteph11 at 9:44 AM on Feb. 4, 2011

  • We have had a moderate winter here and our unemployment rates have remained somewhat steady...and they are high..more than 14%.

    What good is a recovery if it doesn't include jobs. Millions of people cannot live off the taxes of a few forever.

    Answer by yourspecialkid at 9:56 AM on Feb. 4, 2011

  • If you want a real idea of what u/e is, look for a number called the U6 unemployment. That accounts for all the people who are excluded from the "official" u/e numbers because they're not collecting benefits anymore, or weren't eligible to collect them when they lost their job. It usually comes out a few weeks after the regular numbers are released, and depending how bad they are, you'll see a lot of attempts to bury it. It may be easier to find regionally - look for U6 for month xyz for state abc or county abc. Lately it's been running double or more what the official number is.

    Answer by NotPanicking at 10:06 AM on Feb. 4, 2011

  • Here is a list of states and all 6 rates.  It is a couple of months behind, but quite shocking imo.

    There are 4 at or above 20% and a bunch hovering close to it.



    Answer by yourspecialkid at 11:11 AM on Feb. 4, 2011

  • I can see how the weather will affect hiring. If the business can't open due to inclement weather they certainly can't hire. To that end, it is equally as likely the unemployed did not apply due to the same inclement weather. Add in your rationale and I agree the true number is higher than that.

    Answer by sopranomommy at 9:59 AM on Feb. 4, 2011

  • There are 4 at or above 20% and a bunch hovering close to it.

    That really highlights the states that get downplayed. We hear tons about CA's unemployment - but how many hear about Oregon's nearly as often, even though it's just as bad? A friend of mine works for the state there, and has been taking unpaid furlough days for over a year now. His mother had to close her business and sell her house before the economy buried her. But, since their "regular" u/e is closer to normal, most people who don't live there probably don't even realize how bad it is.

    Answer by NotPanicking at 11:28 AM on Feb. 4, 2011

  • Found this interesting,

    • Change in Private Payrolls (Jan) M/M 50K vs. Exp. 145K (Prev. 113K)

    • Much more importantly, Not-seasonally adjusted U-6 surged from 16.6% to 17.3%

    • The civilian labor force declined from 153,690 to 153,186

    • Government workers: from 20,759K to 20,740K

    • Labor force participation at 64.2%, the lowest since March March 1984

    Is the Labor Force Shrinking?


    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 11:37 AM on Feb. 4, 2011