The Unemployment Game Show: Are You Really Unemployed?
Organize your financial life.
Use Mint.com to see where your money goes, get bill reminders and alerts, track your investment performance, and find extra savings. It’s FREE!
Find Out MoreHow Mint Can Help
See Where You Spend
Mint.com auto-categorizes all of your transactions so you’ll always know where your money goes. Find out more »
Popular Articles
34 Comments so far
leave a commentthis is exactly how my brother felt about the so-called unemployment office
Exactly. http://www.2009depression.com and its going to get much worse. Same thing happened in 1930’s and is happening now.
BTW, congrats mint on the buyout!
Learned all this in economics class, boring.
Well, there’s some common sense here.
If you are not even looking for work, then you are not in the labor market. I know people say “nobody is hiring” but there are fields or markets where finding good employees is very hard. When using a status like “Unemployed” to give out benefits I think its a good thing that people have to be actively looking for work to get benefits.
If you have a job, even if it pays less than you want to make, I dont think you are really unemployed.
Matt, that is right but the point is that the 10% unemployment advertised shows a rosy picture. The job market is much weaker than the gov’t hype.
It makes a difference if you left your job vs. if you were let go, too. I left my job last year due to location and stress; long story short, I couldn’t stay and needed something different. Needless to say, it’s been difficult to find a new job. I’m making ends meet by working odd jobs, but I can’t find a full time job, and thus, my wages vary from month to month, I’m having to dip into my savings, and I don’t get benefits. Many Americans are in this same situation; not “unemployed,” but still struggling, especially if they don’t have a spouse who works. So the numbers are misleading. Just because someone is “employed” according to the Department of Labor doesn’t mean everything is fine and dandy with that person.
Ah the beauty of our jobless recovery, the ones who put is into the mess are making money again but the average citizen is still getting screwed and will be until beyond 2012.
Sad. And painfully true. I was layed off for the same feeble downsizing excuse for poor management, yet the company wastes money left and right. Then to hear the economy is recovering makes me want to lose my lunch… Unlike many, I am counted in the inaccurate statistics because by gum, I’m going to take every last dime I have earned in my nearly 30 years working my *** off.
So…what your saying is, the government dosen’t count these people in the official statistics, except for the official statistic where they are counted?
These mint articles really are awful. I get what your trying to say here, you just do it in an overcritical fox news kinda way. The rest of mint is still awesome though.
Unemployment is as much of a problem as it is a solution.
Case in point – I needed to have a freelance IT guy work for two weeks for my company while I was on vacation. After three weeks I went through SIX freelancers who ended up telling me that they would ONLY work if paid under the table because it would cancel out there unemployment benefits.
We ended up not being able to hire anyone for the temporary position.
While mint.com is correct, the government also publishes the statistics for the “other” unemployment rates as well. You can’t compare those other rates to the unemployment rate directly because they’re apples and oranges. You can only compare them to themselves over time and then maybe look at correlations between them. The 17% rate in the video needs a little context.
For thirty-three years I worked in business and finance where my employers paid into unemployment on my behalf. Unfortunately, three years ago I accepted a position on a contract basis that lasted twelve months. For that one year, there were no unemployment contributions made on my behalf. I have been unemployed since then, actively looking for work but I cannot even get in the door for an interview. Most upsetting to me is the fact that I and hundreds of thousands like me are not counted among those unemployed because we are not eligible for unemployment benefits. The thirty plus years contributions were made on my behalf to provide me with security mean nothing. The unemployment figures do not reflect any of the contract workers, laborers, self employed etc., that are unable to apply for benefits. We need to be counted, then and only then will these figures be more accurately reflected!
I think its a travesty that when someone is out of work and are on unemployment, especially if its for some time they risk losing unemployment if they go to school or take up training they risk losing unemployment. the only thing more stressful than situations at work is the stress of being out of work. You would think that unemployment would encourage going back to school, even if its a few classes a week to stay occupied and have structure. I would also like to add that the Unemployment check you get is not a handout, it was earned when you were working.
Love the video. My wife is Deaf, please use YouTube’s new upload a transcript feature to let the video be captioned so all can watch it.
Thanks!
@ Matt: You’re sort of missing the mark a bit with a few of your comments. Of course there are “fields or markets where finding good employees is very hard,” but those are typically specialized fields that require some sort of technical or specific training. Everybody has limited job opportunities for which they can apply based on their work experience, training and education. Any job for which NO previous experience or training is necessary is, simply put, not the kind of job where it’s “hard to find good employees.” Really, it’s not like you can get laid off from your job as a customer service rep and then start applying for jobs as a web developer.
Secondly, while I would agree with you to some extent that you can’t claim unemployment simply because your new job “pays less than you want to make,” you’re once again missing the point. We’re not talking about people who go from making $50k/year to $35k/year. We’re talking about a sector of people classified as “underemployed”: people who were previously full-time workers who are now only able to find part-time work. A job working 20 hours a week as an assistant manager at Starbucks isn’t going to come anywhere close to “making ends meet,” but once you take such a job, you become ineligible for unemployment benefits.
And speaking of underemployment, there is another trend these days of employers cutting hours to the point where people are no longer making enough money to survive. I have friends whose employers will not fire them, but routinely call them up and say, “Hey, don’t come into work today, we don’t have any work for you.” If you are an hourly employee, this is financially devastating. You aren’t eligible for unemployment benefits because you’re technically employed, but you can’t quit because that would disqualify you from receiving unemployment benefits, since you left that job by choice.
These are the people who don’t get counted as “unemployed.” Even if you agree that that they shouldn’t be counted as such, it’s pretty misleading to count them as “employed” instead. Many people would argue that “employed” should be reserved for people who are working full time and making a salary that enables them to support themselves if spent wisely. If you are legitimately unable to make ends meet on the salary you’re making, you may as well be unemployed. And the whole point of this video/article is to point out that when you include people in that very situation in the “unemployment” statistic, our economic situation suddenly looks considerably worse.
What software did you guys use to make the cartoon?
I was truly impressed that finally someone is reporting the truth about the unemployment statistics. In addition, there is another factor that isn’t being released to the public. There are many individuals(60,000+ in California alone awaiting Appeals court cases) who didn’t qualify for extension benefits inacted on July 2008. During the worst jobless/economic period since the depression, the Federal government raised the established standards by the EDD to receive additional benefits. These people in LIMBO STATUS, aren’t part of the calculations either. I’ve written numerous media outlets to encourage disclosure of this fact, but the only reports are about the backlog in the Appeals Court blaming the governor’s mandatory furlow days. Here’s a plea from 1000’s for assistance in getting this out.
Unemployment checks given are not handed out from nothing. the people get the checks have been paying into the unemployment system, so they are earned. Tell a skilled ( or educated) worker who had a career that they are not “unemployed because they are now working a retail job. Under employed hurts America and the worker. The only thing worse than the stress involved in ones job is the stress (and stigma) of being unemployed. Why is it that the Unemployment agency cuts off ones unemployment check if they go back to school or training? even if you are only taking a few recreational classes at a community college you Unemployment claim can be denied. yea lets deny someone something they put into becouse they want structure or to improve their chances of employment! this should be encouraged, not something to be penalized for.
This is stupid. The unemployment rate isn’t being calculated any differently now then it was before the recession. You have have to be with out a job but actively looking for one. Plain and simple.
The latest government figures show that “unemployment” dropped from 10.2% to 10.0% of the workforce, while at the same time payrolls declined by 11,000 jobs. This makes no sense in the real world. Everybody knows that this could only happen if the base for the percentages declined even more than the “decline” in the percentage. To say that someone stops being unemployed because he gets so discouraged about finding a job that he stops looking and goes back to school or moves in with his parents makes sense only to a bureaucrat. He’s still unemployed. Figures don’t lie but liars, oops, I mean politicians (but I repeat myself) can figure.
TrimTabs which has been far more accurate in measuring job losses says government has understated job losses by about 1 million people since the recession began. They also dispute the “good news” reported Friday… for a reality check see:
http://www.fundmymutualfund.com/2009/12/trimtabs-continues-to-dispute-us.html
I was shocked to see the 11,000 figure and unemployment still at 10. I gotta feel sorry for those who got pump and dumped today in the stock market.
Great way to show what is really happening!
How is the 17% calculated? Is it only out of people who were considered employed/unemployed before and considers everyone who isn’t employed as unemployed now ( versus neither )?
Matt: Taking a huge pay decrease should count as you’re effectively not able to meet your potential anymore. Going from $30 to $10 an hour is a really large change to a person. That said I believe some states will not require you to take an offer if it is below some % of your original salary.
Dear Government. Please dont lie to me, I pay your bills. Dear Media. Please dont lie to me. The government already does.
The video does a great job of getting attention, but is misleading. The flowchart graphic is factually incorrect. It’s a shame they wasted their neat graphics and jokes. If they really wanted to educate, they would get their facts straight (and ratchet down the snark).
The 10% figure is the unemployment rate. This is how unemployment is (and has over time been) measured. The U-6 estimate of 17.2% is not a measure of unemployment. It’s a broader measure that can be useful to show those negatively impacted in the labor market. There are also many other estimates that can be used. This is why there is a whole report (and tons of numbers online) instead of just one number and an emoticon to describe the labor market. (And just how high do you want it to be before it’s “real”?)
The gov’t material can be a bit technical, but it is readily available online. Read about how the unemployment is measured at http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm. Unemployment is not based on getting unemployment benefits, since they are not available to everyone. People aren’t allowed to classify themselves, because there would be no consistency. A standard set of questions have been used to classify people based on specific objective actions. The questions haven’t really changed much over time and are in line with international standards of measuring unemployment.
People with a job are employed. Trying to define them as unemployed is absurd (and insulting to those who are looking for work). However, data are available to describe characteristics of the employed (industry, occupation, hours, wages, etc). It shouldn’t really be up to the government to decide what a “good” job is.
Underemployment can be a very subjective measure and hard to define. (If you base it on pay, how much is enough? If you base it on skill, who decides what is appropriate?) One objective measure is a time-based estimate of people working involuntary part time (what the gov’t calls part time for economic reasons) – people who had their hours cut by their employer (or slow business for self-employed) and those who would prefer to work full-time but could only find part time work. See information online at http://www.bls.gov/cps/lfcharacteristics.htm#pter.
If you aren’t looking (or haven’t looked) for work, it is hard to describe you as unemployed. (That definition would also include my retired father, a stay-at-home mom, and college kids.) Data on those who have given up looking for work are reported each month, as are numbers for people who say they want to work (whether they have looked or not). These questions identify those not in the labor force that have some “attachment” to the labor force from the others that do not want a job now. http://www.bls.gov/cps/lfcharacteristics.htm#discouraged
Contestant number four is not unemployed. She is not ACTIVELY seeking employment; scanning the classifieds is a passive search, and therefore is not in the labor market.
The national unemployment number doesn’t matter when it comes to unemployment benefits. The concepts are similar, but you can be officially unemployed and not get benefits, and you can get benefits and not be officially unemployed.
@Adam: Not only does the government publish the alternative measures of unemployment, they publish it in the SAME news release.
@Linda: You would be counted as unemployed in the national survey, even if you were a contract worker or self-employed. Even if you don’t qualify for benefit.
@Robert Speirs: Many states (and it is states, not the federal govt, who adminsters unemployment payments) will still provide benefits if you are getting training or job transition assistance, if you go through them. Also, just living in your parents’ home doesn’t make you unemployed.
Finally, @Richard is absolutely right. Nothing has changed in how the unemployment rate is calculated. This is not some Obama trick or Bush trick or even Clinton trick.
Do you want to know if you are officially unemployed, as per this survey? Are you working? No? Are you actively looking for work? Yes? Then you’re unemployed.
By going to http://www.bls.gov, you can find “Labor Force Statistics”. Series ID LNU03327707 shows the historical special unemployment rate (U-6) from 1999 to 2009. Here are the yearly averages:
1999: 7.4
2000: 2.0
2001: 8.1
2002: 9.6
2003: 10.1
2004: 9.6
2005: 8.9
2006: 8.2
2007: 8.3
2008: 10.5
2009: NOV rate is 16.4, highest is 16.8, lowest is 15.4
Unemployment rates have consistently risen from OCT 2008 to MAR 2009 (nowhere else in the series do you see this kind of consistency, it’s usually all over the place with ups and downs).
You can replicate this data yourself by going to http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpsatab12.htm and checking U-6 / Not Seasonally Adjusted. For the curious, Seasonally Adjusted rates spike at 17.5 in OCT 2009, and saw a consistent increase for a much longer time series: NOV 2007 to OCT 2009, with one small blip (.2% decrease) in JUL 2009. The most recent date (NOV 2009) is possibly (okay, probably) another such blip, showing a .3% decrease.
Ironically, the JUL 2009 blip seems to be a miscalculation, since it dropped below the previous month figure and then topped that previous month figure the following month. This could be a spot effect of what “Seasonally Adjusted” means (more seasonal work in JUL?), though the historical JUL numbers don’t justify that conjecture.
What’s the takeaway? 2009 is very abnormal with regards to with U-6 unemployment (the real unemployment rate). So what happened in JUL 2007 that’s effecting our employment rate to this day?
Great cartoon. It would have been nice to see a section with someone who is self-employed but has lost their business get dropped from the statistics too, because that is another part of the puzzle.
For more parts of the unemployment and jobless recovery puzzle, including possible solutions, you can look here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jobless_recovery
Self-employed working for a negative rate of pay. Should count as 2 x unemployed, but I’m neither in the govt statistics nor the flow chart.
They could add another contestant… the worker who has been unemployed for over 1 1/2 years, and even with all the UI benefit extensions, is now no longer able to collect unemployment since the extensions have run out. No job, no UI benefits, but still looking for work. However, no longer being counted in the unemployment stats. I think this kind of “contenstant” will increase in numbers over the next 6 months.
I am really impressed with this. At least some one reporting the truth about the unemployment statistics.
This goes back to “Reaganomics” and all the other maniacs and their trade pacts!
Unfortunately, irreversible damage and no one is going to get any credible change.
Our best hope is to wage war in those places where our jobs went!
Excellent video. Very helpful for teaching purposes. My students and I liked it a lot.
I just found a little flaw at the end. The last contestant, who is the only one consider unemployed is actually not doing active job searching as the BLS would specify, thus she will not be considered unemployed. If you go to the following link: http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm#why. And look at the question: Who is counted as unemployed? You will see that since she was only looking at internet adds (passive job search method), and not necessarily sending a resume, she will be not considered as actively looking for a job.