thanks conservatives, very poor employment picture, its even worse
than the advertised loss of 20,000 jobs, a huge jump in part time
employment
there are graphs that i could not include. for the less curious, you
need to go to the site to view the graphs.
http://www.suddendebt.blogspot.com/
SATURDAY, MAY 3, 2008
Unemployed Part-Time
Payrolls declined by 20.000 in April, lower than expected (-100.000).
However, looking just below the surface of the headline data reveals a
fast deterioration in other job measures.
The number of people employed part-time for economic reasons, i.e.
those that could not find full-time jobs or had to work part-time
because business was slow, swelled sharply by 306.000 in April to a
total of 5.22 million. This is the highest number since 1994 (see
chart below, click to enlarge).
Number of people employed part-time for economic reasons (chart: BLS)
Such part-time employment now accounts for 4.52% of all private jobs,
the highest percentage in 13 years and up from 3.4% two years ago (see
chart below).
The Bureau of Labor Statistics counts everyone who worked 1 to 34
hours per week as employed and includes them in the headline payroll
numbers, even though such employment clearly results in fewer hours
and lower pay.
Taking this analysis one step further, part-time employment for
economic reasons, i.e. forced part-time, accounts for 21% of all part-
time jobs. This is also the highest level since 1994.
In summary, while the headline employment numbers are not declining as
fast as during previous slowdowns, the qualitative job measures are
worsening and are already at multi-year points.
The most likely cause is that employers, particularly those in the
service sectors, are hoping the economy will rebound soon, so instead
of fully laying off people they are cutting costs by forcing employees
to work less, for less pay, i.e. forcing them into part-time un-
employment.
What does this mean for the economy? Let's combine the poor employment
picture with sharply higher costs for necessities such as food and
fuel, the zero/negative saving rate and record high debt: the result
is most likely going to be a continuing curtailment of discretionary
personal spending. With personal consumption accounting for nearly
three quarters of GDP, I believe we are in for a prolonged period of
weakness.
Looking at just the headline BLS numbers is currently pretty
misleading and may cause misplaced optimism.
|
