Home » Money » State of Jobs

State of Jobs

In a world with a short attention span, the long grinding story of our economy rarely comes up for any significant discussion except when there is something new.  Lately the only genuine “news” related to financial conditions is how states are being dragged down and how their problems can be used as a bludgeon.  While today’s fights play out in state capitols and the streets around them, tomorrow’s stories might be a bit different.  Those stories won’t change until we see improvement in jobs.

While there are some good signs, we’re still in a holding pattern near what looks like a bottom.  Here is a detailed explanation of the problem – and what to look for.

No one has the state of our economy more solidly written into his job description than Ben Bernanke, Chairman of the Federal Reserve.  The best place to start is always what he has to say.  This is from his Feb 9 testimony to the US House:

“Following the loss of about 8-3/4 million jobs from 2008 through 2009, private-sector employment expanded by a little more than 1 million in 2010. However, this gain was barely sufficient to accommodate the inflow of recent graduates and other new entrants to the labor force and, therefore, not enough to significantly erode the wide margin of slack that remains in our labor market. … Until we see a sustained period of stronger job creation, we cannot consider the recovery to be truly established.”

That may sound a bit sour, given the recent drop in the headline unemployment rate.  As we all know, however, that number is dropping more because people out of work for too long no longer count.  The ongoing problem is better shown by the total employment participation rate, this graph from the St Louis Fed:
There are several important features in this graph.  The decline in the percent of the adult population working is steep after 2008, but there is another sickening plunge during the supposed “recovery” in 2001-2003.  If the job market is the key indicator of our economy, something awful has been happening for a solid decade – which is why the key inflection point of our Managed Depression has to be set about then, especially if we all agree that employment is what bears the closest watch.

The other important feature can be found longer ago, between 1970 and 1990.  We used to get by with a much lower labor participation rate than we do now, suggesting there are other social arrangements that are part of our trouble.  Some of this is, in fact, a matter of expectations when it comes to standard of living.

A closer look at the total number of jobs more recently shows us the immediate hole that has Bernanke’s attention right now:
There’s the gap of about 7.5M jobs that have to be created to get us back where we were before 2008.  From Bernanke’s statements we can be sure that watching that number is his top concern.

That brings us naturally back to the headlines as state governments convene across the nation.  State governments are very likely to shed workers in order to balance their budgets – and these newly unemployed will only add to the problem.  The key thing to watch as all the demonstrations play out is how many state and local employees wind up on the unemployment roles – and that’s what Bernanke is likely to be looking at.

That may sound like terrible news, and after a year of not much it may be.  It’s all a matter of how the private sector grows jobs to absorb whatever job loss is coming.  So far, there’s not a ton of hope that this will go well, but it may be improving.

11 thoughts on “State of Jobs

  1. “Some of this is, in fact, a matter of expectations when it comes to standard of living.”

    Whoah! You’re on to something here but I have no idea what it is. Could you explain more? Thanks.

  2. Yes, Anna, you caught me. There is a lot more to this than simply counting jobs. The big gain in participation from 1970-1990 has a lot to do with women entering the workforce in large numbers, but that’s probably not the whole story. More to the point, the increases in productivity per worker have to factor into this somehow. On top of it, we see growing income disparity in the same period.

    It’s a lot to absorb and I don’t want to make one feature on a graph into way too much without thinking it through a bit. But this is one helluva feature, ain’t it?

    I’m not through contemplating the 1970s, if that’s what you’re getting at. 🙂

  3. Annnnd then there are those of us collecting Social Security at 62 who would much rather be working…only decent-paying jobs with employers actually interested in older workers are practically impossible to find. I figure I have some good, productive years still ahead.

  4. i didn’t think about this, thanks. If we lose like a million jobs at the state level we are probably going to see another ‘downturn’. People can rant all they want about state workers but if we lose a lot of jobs at once we are really sunk.

  5. The end of that total jobs graphs is bad looking. It goes up and down without really changes over a small range. I see what you mean about 2010 being not much of a year.

    Is that what the bottom looks like in a depression?

  6. Jim, I don’t think it will add up to a million jobs at the state and local level – but it could. I know that number has been tossed around, and it works out to 20k per state. It’s possible, but I think that’s high – and it won’t be until the end of the year for some of them.

    Dale, I hope that’s what the bottom looks like! But it’s sure not the “V” shape you get from a typical recession. The loss during the supposed “recovery” in 2002-3 shows that in this kind of economy I don’t think anything is really “typical” – events like this are a bit rare through history. That’s prolly what has Bernanke so cautious.

  7. Lee, I disagree – jobs are jobs. By your reasoning we can’t really count private sector jobs in fields like medical care. Now, whether or not they are desirable is another thing, and you might argue that a big dose of unemployment is preferable if it leads to a serious restructuring. I’ve certainly called for a major restructuring simply because I think it’s inevitable – so the sooner we get on with it, the better.

  8. Pingback: Post Imperial | Barataria – The work of Erik Hare

  9. Pingback: Obama Doctrine | Barataria – The work of Erik Hare

  10. Pingback: American Jobs Act | Barataria – The work of Erik Hare

Like this Post? Hate it? Tell us!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s