Display:
...ooh!  <waving hand in the air>  I think I found a fact!  

Or something close to factual in Bonddad's diary about the middle class.  The whole thing is excellent, but he says this about employment:

According to the Bureau of Labor Services, total nonfarm employment was 132,454,000 in January 2001 and 133,999,000 in August 2005 for a net 4.5 year gain of 1,545,000.  This breaks down to approximately 28,600 jobs/month over the period.  This is important because the economy must create 150,000 jobs/month to deal with natural attrition, people looking for new jobs, people entering the workforce etc....  In other words, Bush's economy has not created enough jobs to deal with the natural expansion of the population or generally economic conditions.  The next question to answer is "why is the unemployment rate so low?"  The unemployment numbers do not count people who have not looked for work in the last 4 weeks.  This is better documented by the labor participation rate which was dropped from 67.2% in January 2001 to 66.2% in August 2005.

I'm not sure, but I think that labor participation rate might have some bearing on things -- do we have other participation rates to compare them to?

Maybe we can eventually make language a complete impediment to understanding. -Hobbes

by Izzy (izzy at eurotrib dot com) on Mon Oct 3rd, 2005 at 02:59:05 PM EST
Coming up soon - I'm afraid I've had to withdraw from the world and reorganise myself over the last couple of days as things were getting away from me, but a major revision of this post is on my list.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Tue Oct 4th, 2005 at 01:11:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series