Employment to population numbers
Calculated Risk revisits the employment to poulation ratios:
…What happens to the participation rate is an important question. If the Civilian noninstitutional population (over 16 years old) grows by about 2 million per year – and the participation rate stays flat – the economy will need to add about 100 thousand jobs per month to keep the unemployment rate steady at 8.9%.
If the population grows faster (say 2.5 million per year), and/or the participation rate rises, it could take significantly more jobs per month to hold the unemployment rate steady. As an example, if the working age population grows 2.5 million per year and the participation rate rises to 65% (from 64.2%) over the next two years, the economy will need to add 200 thousand jobs per month to hold the unemployment rate steady.
That is why forecasting the participation rate is important – and why reports of the number of jobs needed to hold the unemployment rate steady are all over the place (and can be very confusing – and I’m guilty of using different numbers).
Here is a look at some the long term trends (updating graphs through February 2011)…
Worth a visit this weekend. It also points to questions regarding other types of policy questions for planners.
Dan:
Pardon me if I say baloney.
Thoma, CR, Naked Cap, etc. did not care about Participation Rate a year or so ago. It is the popular meme today and a laughable one at that. If it was not for bloggers like Laurent Guerby, Participation Rate would never have been exposed as the true measure of the Civilian NonInstitutional Civilian Population in the Civilian Labor Force. This is the measure we should be watching today as everyting else is derived from it.
run75441: that’s ridiculous. read the comments at CalculatedRisk, that’s where the attention to the participation rate began years ago.
AngryBear: you should read the comments at CalculatedRisk for the last two posts he did on the participation rate
run75441 – Yesterday (Saturday), 11:18:10 PM – “Pardon me if I say baloney. Thoma, CR, Naked Cap, etc. did not care about Participation Rate a year or so ago.”
run75441 – Sat, 12/4/2010, 7:01 pm – Calculated Risk blog – “Baloney Calculated Risk: Other than Laurent Guerby and myself over the last decade, few economists have addressed the demise of the Participation Rate. Not even you tocuhed the topic that far back.”
Comment: http://www.hoocoodanode.org/node/11606#comment-1592500
Main post: http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2010/12/participation-rate-of-25-to-54-age-men.html
The bold claim that run75441 is throwing out at Angry Bear is similar to the personal slap in the face claim that run75441 puked up to Calculated Risk in December 2010 (shown above).
The blogger, run75441, has posted three comments regarding labor participation rates at Calculated Risk, the above snotty comment being the last. Bill McBride, CR, never responded to any of run75441’s remarks on the subject. No one would blame Bill McBride for not ever responding after the lie that run75441 told on December 4, 2010 at CR’s blog.
Here are a few facts that this arrogant, self-promoting blogger didn’t share:
The blog Calculated Risk did not exist in 2001, 2002, 2003, and 2004.
Bill McBride created his blog, Calculated Risk, in January 2005 and was a frequent contributor at Angry Bear until his outstandin blog gained national attention and exploded into the broadly read blog it is today. Bill’s third main post at Calculated Risk in January 2005 included three paragraphs which discussed the civilian labor force participation rate. Bill posted 7 main posts in 2005 and 2006 that addressed the labor force participation rate. Here is the record:
CALCULATED RISK:
Jobs, Jobs, Jobs
by CalculatedRisk on 1/13/2005 09:29:00 PM
http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2005/01/jobs-jobs-jobs.html
EXCERPT:
“In Jan 2001 there were 132.388 million Americans employed. Unemployment was 4.2% with a civilian labor force participation rate of 67.2%. In Dec 2004 there are 132.266 million Americans employed. Unemployment is 5.4% with a civilian labor force participation rate of 66.0%.”
“The average unemployment for the 10 year period before Bush took office was 5.6% so it is not unreasonable to expect the unemployment rate to rise during Bush’s first term from the historically low rate of 4.2%. But what is surprising is the significant drop in the civilian labor force participation rate – the average for the same 10 year period was 66.7%.”
“We would expect, with averages of 5.6% unemployment and 66.7% participation rate, approximately 1.2 million more jobs today. And that estimate is probably low since we are 3 years into a recovery (the recession ended in Nov 2001) and usually unemployment is falling (it is) and the participation rate is rising (it is not). For example, with 67% participation and 5% unemployment we are 2.6 million jobs short of expected employment. So job creation is disappointing (by 1.2 to 2.6 million jobs) and I guess that defines “sluggish”.”
A Recovery Built on a Marshland of Debt?
by CalculatedRisk on 2/22/2005 12:12:00 AM
MG:
Very Good C&P as usual