The graph showing the inactive raising linearly from 3% in 1948 to above 9% in 2008.
http://guerby.org/images/bls-usa-men-25-54.png Laurent On Fri, 2009-01-23 at 23:31 +0100, Laurent GUERBY wrote: > On Wed, 2009-01-21 at 14:54 -0800, Jim Devine wrote: > > Below, David Leonhardt prevents a more complete unemployment rate for > > the present which is "above 13 percent" and contrasts it to a > > similarly-calculated number for 1982 of 16.3 percent. [...] > > For male 25-54 in 1982 employed/civilian...population was 86.5% and > "unemployment" was 7.5% > > In 2008 those numbers are 86.0% and 4.5%. > > It speaks a lot about the meaningless "unemployment" number. > > Back to real numbers: employed/population was above 89% from 1948 to > 1981 peaking at 95.3% in 1953. Then it was under 89% > reaching three time a low in 1982, 2003 (85.9%) and 2008. > If we factor in the carceral population trend we're probably below 1982. > > If you graph 1948-2008, unemployment is very noisy > around a long term average of about 4%, while employment/population > displays a clear trend downwards starting at 94% with a floor at > around 86% we've tested three times in the past decades. > > For those interested in raw monthly data: > > http://guerby.org/ftp/bls-men-25-54.xls > > I used the "annual" columns for the numbers above. > > Data comes from http://www.bls.gov/data/#employment > click on "Labor Force Statistics" ONE-SCREEN DATA SEARCH. > > Laurent > _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
