Share

America's 20 Percent Unemployment Rate

by: Carlton Meyer  |  Sanders Research Associates

photo
Employment center in Miami, Florida. Visible unemployment is only part of the problem. (Photo: Joe Raedle / Getty)

    Measuring unemployment is an art that can result in widely varied rates. Not surprisingly, the U.S. Government uses a method that excludes millions of Americans seeking employment. This lower rate is used to prove that America's economic system is superior to those in Europe. Their higher unemployment rates are blamed on unions and socialism, which guarantee workers health care and paid vacations. The implication is that while many American workers lack such benefits, at least they have jobs. This argument is faulty since unemployment is measured differently.

    In the USA, 35% of healthy Americans ages 16-64 are unemployed, but what does that word mean? Millions of women are unemployed as they choose to stay home to raise families. Nevertheless, 25% of healthy American men ages 16-64 are unemployed, yet the U.S. Government reports an unemployment rate of just 8.1%.[1]

    The 25% rate is from an annual federal survey last conducted in June 2008, well before the current economic slump added millions to the "official" unemployment rate of 8.1% for March 6, 2009. The 25% rate is the ratio of healthy American men ages 16-64 not working. This is misleading because it includes the two million Americans behind bars, while most 16 and 17-year olds remain in school. It also includes millions of Americans who voluntarily retire before age 65 and house-husbands who care for children while their wife works.

    Nevertheless, an honest man would count anyone who would like to work as unemployed. The U.S. Government compiles data on these uncounted unemployed Americans, but does not mention it in news releases. It can be found in Table A-12 on the Department of Labor's website where it shows an unemployment rate of 16% for Feb. 2009.[2] It explains why these unemployed Americans are not included in their official unemployment rate:

    "Marginally attached workers are persons who currently are neither working nor looking for work but indicate that they want and are available for a job and have looked for work sometime in the recent past. Discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached, have given a job-market related reason for not looking currently for a job. Persons employed part time for economic reasons are those who want and are available for full-time work but have had to settle for a part-time schedule."

    In typical government doublespeak, it notes they are not "looking for work" but want work and "have looked for work in the recent past." As a result, these people who want to work are not counted as unemployed. This 16% figure does not include a few million Americans who excluded by the survey parameters for these reasons:

  • Students seeking work are never counted as unemployed. So anyone taking college classes at night and seeking a full-time day job is not counted as unemployed.
  • Pensioners seeking work are never counted as unemployed. This includes those who receive a minimal monthly pension because they retired early, often forcibly. Soldiers in the U.S. military can retire with a small pension as young as age 37, yet they must find work to support their family. However, they are classified as retired and not counted as unemployed.
  • Anyone seeking a full-time job who works a few unpaid hours a week at a family farm or small business is not counted as unemployed.
  • People seeking their first job, such as recent high school and college graduates, and housewives are excluded. The logic is that since they were never employed, they are not unemployed.
  •     These games allow the U.S. Government to report a current unemployment rate of just 8.1%, even though its own data of unemployed Americans who want to work indicates an unemployment rate of around 20%. This should concern all Americans because the unemployed burden society by collecting welfare or resorting to crime. A recent surge in Social Security Disability claims indicates another path the desperate unemployed are seeking.

        Temp Jobs

        The Obama administration is boosting economic activity with a massive spending package that will add two million jobs. Unfortunately, most of these are temporary jobs. President Obama and the U.S. Congress have dismissed the idea of a future stimulus since this year's trillion dollar spending package has resulted in objections from America's major creditors.

        While America's trade balance improved as Americans spend less, foreign nations hold trillions of dollars in American notes and bonds. China is the largest creditor, and has openly stated that it would like to reduce its holdings of dollar-based securities. The U.S. Congress has appropriated a trillion dollars in extra spending for 2009, yet most of the money has not been spent so the U.S. Treasury has yet to borrow all the funds.

        There were concerns the Treasury would have to offer sharply higher interest rates to attract enough money to cover this year's planned borrowing. Concerns ended when the U.S. Federal Reserve recently announced that it would buy another $300 billion in U.S. Treasuries.[3] The Fed can create all the money it desires with a few computer keystrokes, which is normally described as "the power of the printing press." This made foreigners uneasy and dollar fell sharply.

        Unemployment is expected to increase this year, despite the benefits of the current economic stimulus. Moreover, these jobs are temporary while the economy is threatened by a continued decline in home prices, a fall in commercial real estate values, and increasing consumer bankruptcies. As a result, the Obama administration must look at other options to increase employment.

        American Jobs for American Workers

        President Obama can instantly create 65,000 high-paying jobs for Americans each year by eliminating the H1-B visa program. An Internet search turns up hundreds of stories about corporate abuse of this program. It allows them to import skilled workers without proving they are unable to find American workers. Thousands of Americans have been laid off after corporations imported foreign workers, who are paid less and can't complain about long hours because their work visa is only valid for the corporation that sponsored them. In cases where shortages of skilled American workers exist, like nursing, federal money should be devoted to training Americans.

        Over 500,000 jobs would open for U.S. citizens if visa programs for unskilled foreign workers are eliminated. H2 work visas have been issued for decades at the request of major corporations, who claim that a shortage of American labor hampers their operations. There is obviously no labor shortage now, so visas should no longer be issued. Running these programs requires intensive manpower to review and conduct background checks of applicants, and to ensure that employers do not abuse their "indentured servants."[4] If this burden were eliminated, Department of Labor employees could help American citizens find work with these corporations.

        Corporate interests pressured the Bush administration to encourage the flow of illegal cheap labor over the southern border with amnesty efforts and limited enforcement. As the recent stimulus package was debated, some Congressmen expressed concern that up to 300,000 of the estimated two million jobs it would create may go to illegal aliens. However, Democratic leadership in Congress stripped a measure requiring employers who receive stimulus money to use the new federal Internet-based E-Verify program to ensure they hire only legal workers.[5] While this was explained as concern for minorities, it will deny jobs to thousands of poor minorities who are U.S. citizens.

        Campaign contributions from corporations to keep cheap labor flowing is the real reason the millionaires occupying seats in Congress favor open borders. While compassion for desperate foreign economic refugees is understandable, every job they fill is a job denied to a poor American citizen. With 25% of American men ages 16-64 not working, it is impossible to argue that workers cannot be found. To evade debate, corporate spinmasters invented a derogatory term for those who believe Americans should be given preference for American jobs - Nativists. This implies they are anti-immigrant, racist, and ignorant, so rational dialogue is unnecessary.

        Given the dismal economic situation in Mexico, President Obama is foolish to encourage more illegal immigration with talks of another amnesty, disguised as "immigration reform." Requiring employers use the simple E-verify system would open millions of jobs for citizens and encourage illegal immigrants to return home. A study of factories raided by U.S. Immigration enforcement in 2006 found that illegal workers were promptly replaced by higher paid legal workers.[6]

        The federal government could create thousands of good jobs for American citizens by pressuring federal agencies and contractors to hire U.S. citizens when possible. The State Department staffs most its embassies with foreign workers. Some of this is necessary because of language requirements, but in most cases it is easier or cheaper to hire locals. Even if Americans must pay relocation expenses, the State Department could fill thousands of positions with Americans. The Department of Defense employs thousands of foreigners at its overseas bases; some 18,000 in South Korea alone. It should review each position with the idea of hiring U.S. citizens for these jobs, even if costs are slightly higher. A better idea is to close hundreds of outdated Cold War military bases overseas and move those jobs and related spending back to the USA.[7]

        Tweaking the Workforce

        There are systemic methods to reduce unemployment. For example, France cut its workweek to 35 hours, with the idea that employers must hire more people. The results are difficult to measure. Economists and businessmen prefer to measure success based on Gross Domestic Product (GDP), but that is a measure of economic activity, not quality of life. For example, the U.S. Government could boost GDP, reduce spending, and improve productivity by eliminating the 12 federal holidays, which provide paid days off for half of American workers. The economic benefits are indisputable, yet American workers would object to this "improvement."

        At one time, elderly Americans had their social security payments reduced if they continued working. This saved the system money and discouraged them from working, which opened jobs for younger workers. This was unpopular and eliminated as unfair, but it should be resurrected. A law that would ban social security retirement payments to anyone earning over $2000 a month in wages would save billions of dollars annually. This would be unpopular, but those who continue working in higher-paying jobs past age 65 do not need social security "retirement" checks. Those who object can retire so their job opens for others.

        Some 20% of Americans are unemployed and want to work. As this number grows, governments are burdened by greater welfare costs and higher crime rates, while the unemployed pay little in taxes. Moreover, mass unemployment threatens the lives of all Americans with more crime, riots, and possibly a violent revolution. President Obama must demonstrate the leadership to help enact laws unpopular with small groups in order to help the entire nation.

        --------

        [1] "Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey", U.S. Dept. of Labor, June 2008.

        [2] "Table A-12. Alternative measures of labor underutilization", U.S. Dept. of Labor, Mar. 6, 2009.

        [3] "Dollar plunges after Fed plan to buy Treasurys", MarketWatch, Mar. 18, 2009.

        [4] "Indentured Servants, Circa 2009", Consortium News, Mar. 18, 2009.

        [5] "More Puget Sound area employers are checking if workers are legal", Seattle Times, Mar. 15, 2009.

        [6] "Study shows wages rose after immigration raids", The Hill, Mar. 18, 2009.

        [7] "The Generals Have No Clothes", SRA, Nov. 25, 2008.

      

    »


    Comments

    This is a moderated forum.  It may take a little while for comments to go live. Be civil and on-topic, don't threaten or advocate violence, please keep it under 300 words. Thanks for participating.

    An excellent article and

    An excellent article and excellent propositions overall, except for one small part... the $2000 cap on earnings in order to receive SS payments seems to me to be a bit restrictive as a blanket amount, especially considering the cost of living in some areas of this country. Where I live, if you had some kind of public medical coverage and your house was paid for you might get by on $2G a month somewhat uncomfortably, but many places this would leave seniors below the poverty line. I understand and accept the concept but the amount seems to be impractical.

    I disagree with Curt - Many

    I disagree with Curt - Many wage workers where I live - So California, one of the undisputedly most expenses places to live, earn less than $2000 a month AND pay over half of that just for rent. And no health care. It's not fun, but we do it. If I made $2000 and had a home that was paid for, it would be paradise.

    I live in Los Angeles where

    I live in Los Angeles where the average rent for a two bedroom apartment exceeds $2000. There is no way possible for one individual, much less a family, to even marginally subsist on unemployment benefits.

    In addition to the problems

    In addition to the problems listed already, there is no way that the embassies in other countries would be able to hire American workers. The lack of language skills is but a minor point. The lack of cultural skills, the amount of "babysitting" they would need to survive daily life, the lack of general knowledge about State Dept. are all much greater problems. As it is now, the only jobs that aren't held by Americans are either the janitors (or similar jobs) or receptionists and others who deal with locals as part of their job. Americans could not perform the latter, and the expense of sending some guy overseas to empty wastebaskets is prohibitive.

    Interesting article,

    Interesting article, especially because it steps on the toes of many popular -- even justified -- sentiments and argues against many popular policies, such as those governing retiree earnings. I don't necessarily agree with these things, but it's refreshing to see them stated plainly and dispassionately without rightwing fear-and-hatred stridency. A few comments: - The author glosses over deep problems with the e-Verify system, which reportedly entraps many rightful workers. e-Verify is arguably not ready for prime time. - Unintended consequences of the current crisis on US retirees: many may have to opt for starting Social Security benefits years earlier than planned, permanently locking these people in to a lower monthly payout and thus potentially keeping them in relative poverty for the rest of their lives. Result: cost-shifting of support for these lifelong hard workers now retired, from Social Security (which will enjoy many years of lower payouts) to community systems (which must take up the slack or let these older folks live in squalor and possibly starve). - Judging from their website, Sanders Research Associates sounds like an interesing organization. Would like to see a Truthout interview with its founders.

    Thank you. I will not hear

    Thank you. I will not hear the word nativist the same way from now on, though I don't discount the danger of xenophobia. The complexity of what Pres. Obama has to deal with is staggering. Too much power has been vested in D.C., and they cannot know the details of local areas. A local service organization, Sisters of the Road, has a saying about gentle personalism. I don't expect that of the federal government, but I do expect it of local officials. One of the biggest challenges of our current situation is breaking promises and the use of force. We may have to come up with ways to solicit and receive voluntary and ad hoc channeling of care and things to those in need. Even if our statistics lie, things are not perfect in Europe either. Many young people are distressed and unemployed and smoking and drinking too much.

    Informative indeed, as for

    Informative indeed, as for the first poster Curt, SSA pays $867/mo SSD/SSI $674 my fellow peers & I exist 300% BELOW POVERTY LEVEL in this economically starved region! http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/08/08125.html Regardless of federal & state family of 4 bs shell games it costs $500/mo rent & non subsidized utilities for one person in the most depressed region which is 37 miles one way to nearest limited amenities where salaried county government gets all the funding that their urban corridor counter parts do which mysteriously evaporates as administrative costs and at that the greedy hogs are still not appeased they have even taken our cola raises! I got a $47/mo federal increase that has thus far penalized me $122/mo in reduced food stamps and home care allowance! I have to wonder how they will manage to use the one time $250 stimulus payment to further inflict hardship on my 3 times beneath poor brethren.

    Superb article. 20% is

    Superb article. 20% is correct with many parts of the country actually at over 50% unemployed. America needs to know the truth, not skewed propaganda.

    I don't like the

    I don't like the anti-immigrant tone of this article. Moreover, infringing on other nations' sovereignty with American bases, AND refusing to hire locals for jobs as partial compensation for this, makes for lousy and cynical foreign policy. America's economic problem is not undocumented ("illegal") Mexican work. It is the culture of narrow-minded consumerism, the corporate control of the rules of the game, etc. As long as the US exploits and colonizes Mexico economically and politically, I have no problem with Mexicans coming to work here, with or without permit. Rather, workers' rights should be universally enforced regardless of the worker's residence status. In that sense, Obama's stimulus - flawed and short-term as it is - is far better than most of what the author suggests, which is little more than cosmetic games to make unemployment look a bit lower. At least the Obama plan encourages further investments on the right things. The only suggestion I agree with is shortening the work week while making sure that workers still make living wages.

    Re: How the unemployment

    Re: How the unemployment count is made Another VERY significant group is NOT counted: Those persons who have exhausted their benefits are NOT counted. In fact, they are not even estimated! In other words, If you use up your "dole," You drop off the charts Into a "deep black hole!"

    E-Verify is simple, free,

    E-Verify is simple, free, Web-based system that works by electronically comparing new employee information taken from the Form I-9. It works, and maybe that’s why the open border zealots have amassed against the application ? Opponents of E-Verify have resorted to charges that it is full of errors, when in truth it has an average a 99.5 success rate. More than 425 million records in the Social Security Administration’s database and more than 60 million records in the Department of Homeland Security’s immigration data base can then be verified. In March E-verify was further enhanced by using a picture tool that helps patriotic businesses to identify illegal foreign workers. It allows an employer to compare identical photos – the worker's photograph on the EAD or green card against the image stored in USCIS’ databases, which contains nearly 15 million images of individual documents. The tool is designed to help an employer determine whether the document presented reasonably relates to the individual presenting it and contains a valid photo. Typos and similar problems are cured on line, so legal workers usually only have problem only if they changed their names or citizenship status--but failed to inform Social Security of the change. Others have to do something more to establish that they are lawfully authorized to work by approaching the SSA. While certain individuals do nothing--disappearing into the woodwork. It works! So--THE PEOPLE--should make it a permanent addition to our arsenal against illegal aliens stealing jobs of Americans. If a business hires illegal labor and have not used E-verify, they should be subject to severe penalties. Two legislators have remained instrumental in trying to dismantle E-Verify, the REAL ID act, police enforcement (247(g) and ICE raids. Sen. Harry Reid and Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Remind your Senators and Congressman--who they work for? Washington switchboard. 202-224-3121 Reid's Carson Office: 775-882-7343/ Vegas: 702-388-5020 House Speaker Pelosi: 202-225-0100 / San Francisco: 415 556-4862

    yep............ a 25 year

    yep............ a 25 year mortgage of $100,000 at an interest rate of4.5% will cost you$66,040.13. Don't waste your time looking for transparency in economics, there is no such thing.

    the last job fair here

    the last job fair here produced 3000 applicants(the rest were turned away at the door) for 300 jobs. These were mostly unskilled minimum wage jobs. However in this state the powerful international corporations are able to claim they have an insufficient workforce and will be importing laborers. for seasonal work!? I have been unemployed for three years and am using up my retirement monies at age 51. Meanwhile my skills are atrophying, but its so nice 'those' people will do the jobs we just won't do! sic

    Brittanicus needs to read

    Brittanicus needs to read history. Not only American history, wherein Europeans invaded and occupied this country, displacing the population that was already here, but also what was happening in Berlin in the 1930s. REALID and E-Verify are first steps on the way to a Fascist state requiring internal passports. It is completely un-American (European ancestry notwithstanding). Brittanicus also needs to publish a disclosure; who's paying you to tout these egregious programs?