I hate to be a stickler here, but saying that going from 10.2 unemployment rate to a 9.9 unemployment rate is a '34 percent drop' is so so wrong on so many levels. I am assuming you meant to say a '.34 percent drop' (that's only off by a factor of 100), then we could get into the semantics of what you stated versus what you meant. I believe you meant to say that the unemployment rate decreased by an absolute .34 percentage points, whereas an 'X percent drop' implies (X/10.2)*100. In this case going from 10.2 to 9.9 percent unemployment is equivalent to a (0.34/10.2)*100 = 3.33% drop.

I hate to be 'that guy', but I guess I am.

report 2 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

"Sorry, it was supposed to just be the largest decline in 34 years, not a 34 percent drop. "

Not your fault. Your chief editor is too busy penning trivial subject manner -- e.g. mirrors at gyms, the dearth of aggravatingly fanatical sports junkies in Atlanta. We can't expect the man to go around editing shit with all that on his plate, can we? But thank gawd we've got trained commentators with sharp journalistic skills to fill that void.

report 3 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Was the 3% drop in unemployment, because the ones that were on unemployment were dropped because their unemployment benefits ran out?

report 2 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Hold your breath for January, when the November and December numbers are quietly adjusted upwards.
Then wait for February when the January numbers are released and show a sharp rise above December because the seasonal workers lost their jobs.
If we can get more people to drop out of the workforce, we can make the numbers look better still.
If you get the impression that it's a con game, you're correct.

report 2 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

BB: Are you also willing to share what the stock market will do so the 1% can buy and sell appropriately?

report 1 like, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

@ Question Man
I don't play the stock market because it's too risky, but employment "statistics" are pretty easy to figure out.
Georgia DOL and the Federal Government are under pressure to show reduced unemployment. They issue a preliminary statistic based on estimates, then come back with an adjusted number later. Lately, the preliminary number is lower than the later adjusted number. That accounts for November and December forecast.
Seasonal workers were hired in November and December and will lose their jobs in January. That accounts for January forecast.
As far as the con game, you should recognize that our population continues to increase, and the number of potential workers continues to increase. Then you realize the claim of the number of people in the work force declining is smoke and mirrors. If I'm unemployed but not drawing unemployment insurance, I am not counted in the work force number.

report 0 likes, 1 dislike   like  dislike

Well, you do know many firms hired seasonal workers in the month of November. There were ads all over the place. Yeah, you may think those are shitty jobs nobody wants. However, I know many people who were educated and the whole nine found themselves slinging boxes for UPS, taking on ringing up customers at the mall and etc to ensure they have Christmas money for their kids or simply to catch up on bills.

Don't you just love how government wants you to think they are so great?

report 0 likes, 1 dislike   like  dislike

@ CLReaderSWATL
You hit two nails on the head.
1. For most people, if they want a job badly enough, they will find a job. There's nothing demeaning about a seasonal job and manual labor.
2. Government wants us to think they are great so they can expand government. They want to be a growth industry. The most feared words in the US are, "I'm from the Government and I'm here to help."

report 0 likes, 1 dislike   like  dislike

"1. For most people, if they want a job badly enough, they will find a job. There's nothing demeaning about a seasonal job and manual labor."

bullshit

http://www.epi.org/publication/job-seekers…

just in case you have trouble reading this graph, it demonstrates the ratio of job-seekers (first number) to jobs (second number)

for most unemployed people, they can't get a job because there just aren't enough jobs

report 2 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Burr meant "most people" figuratively. Kind of unfair for you to attack his whimsey with facts and graphs and shit.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

i just don't like middle aged people who haven't had to look for a job in years complaining about how others are lazy for not being able to find jobs in a recession. or pointing out how there's nothing demeaning about manual labor, which is just projection on the part of a soft-ass office drone who thinks that people turn down manual labor jobs because of sweat or something.

report 1 like, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

@ eric pfeifer
Once again, you put your fingers in gear before your brain. You know nothing of importance about me, yet you presume to know my employment history. Everything you wrote is incorrect.
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

@ Eric - good link you provided. But I read nowhere in there about seasonal or odd jobs. I mention those two specifically, because back when slamming mexicans was all the rage, there was an article talking about how Cali farmers were offering more pay and benefits for american citizens to fall in the farming rank and file job sector and no one came. I'd cite it, but don't exactly remember the date but it was in USA Today. Also, with odd jobs, it may seem menial to some but it's still a source of income. I've gotta agree with Burr on this one: if people are so desperately in need of income, the jobs are there, what there needs to be more is creativity and sacrifice and less entitlement. I'm sure there are many, many people out there looking for jobs, but a "legal" manual/farming labor force is lacking. Why is that? I don't have the answers but if there is availability in that field and so many looking for work, why the gap? Necessity is the mother of invention. If I missed some kind of detail in that article, let me know.

report 0 likes, 1 dislike   like  dislike

"@ Eric - good link you provided. But I read nowhere in there about seasonal or odd jobs."

I read nothing about specific numbers of "seasonal or odd jobs" going unfilled in the report you provided. Probably because you didn't provide anything...just some vague recollection of something you read about some shit that happened in California at an unspecified point in time.

"I've gotta agree with Burr on this one: if people are so desperately in need of income, the jobs are there, what there needs to be more is creativity and sacrifice and less entitlement."

I suppose that report on the jobs that are there is forthcoming in your next comment. Cuz without that, it seems like you're just talking directly out of your ass.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

"Once again, you put your fingers in gear before your brain. You know nothing of importance about me, yet you presume to know my employment history."

i know two important things about you

1) you're stupid
2) you're boring

this is the best response you can come up with? hurr 'you don't know me' garbage? lame

"But I read nowhere in there about seasonal or odd jobs."

this number includes people with odd jobs who report their income. it does not include agricultural positions. all BLS statistics are adjusted for seasonal hiring patterns

however, the usa only issued 103k H2-A visas in 2010. even if all those jobs were filled, there are 13.3 million (as of november) unemployed people in america. unemployment wouldn't be significantly impacted assuming somehow that americans took these jobs

"there was an article talking about how Cali farmers were offering more pay and benefits for american citizens to fall in the farming rank and file job sector and no one came. "

it's because these jobs suck and only really desperate poor people take them

seasonal farm labor takes place in the middle of nowhere, for crushing hours and low pay. do you really think a middle aged suburban sysadmin with two kids and an underwater mortgage is going to drive five hours to pick cucumbers fourteen hours a day for fifty bucks?

"Also, with odd jobs, it may seem menial to some but it's still a source of income."

there are opportunity costs at hand. how much of your below-minimum-wage income are you willing to spend on gas to get to the jobsite? over half? would you rather say goodbye to your family for a month to earn next to nothing, or would you rather spend that time looking for jobs? if you're thirty-five with no health insurance, how much time are you willing to spend blowing out your lower back? is your time better spent on an internship, or volunteering, or entrepreneurialism?

"I'm sure there are many, many people out there looking for jobs, but a "legal" manual/farming labor force is lacking. Why is that?"

because the wages and benefits the farmers offer aren't acceptable to the legal labor force. because american crops sold at the full value of labor can't compete with cheaper foreign crops. supply and demand. live by the free market, die by the free market

there are plenty of americans in manual labor jobs. i'm one of them. i strongly advise you not to denigrate others as lazy until you really try to understand what the labor market is like

as i recall it, you're sixteen - right? are you willing to pick pecans all summer? do you think a thirtysomething with a degree and a kid is?

"I don't have the answers but if there is availability in that field and so many looking for work, why the gap?"

because the jobs available in the fields are very hard physically, pay very little, are located very far away from where most people live, and wouldn't have a significant impact on unemployment rates even if legal laborers took every single position

you're engaging in a dogwhistle argument which simply serves to tarnish all unemployed people as lazy failures. really we should be asking why our society can't provide enough work, not why people are unwilling to beg for rotten scraps

"the jobs are there, what there needs to be more is creativity and sacrifice and less entitlement."

no. the jobs aren't there. i just showed you a graph which demonstrates that there are four job seekers for every job. even if every available job were filled tomorrow american unemployment would still be over six percent.

it's very easy to call for 'creativity and sacrifice and less entitlement' when you're not the one out there hunting for jobs which don't exist

report 2 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Eric, I never once said the word lazy nor ever inferred it. If that's your interpretation, I'm not going to change your mind. You made some great points btw. But please don't assume I at one point wasn't in those shoes. Since you made a pecan example at 16, you want to know what I did at that age? Went to high school with honors and worked 2 jobs. I know what sacrifice is and what it isn't. All I'm saying is that if desperation is truly there, people will do whatever is necessary. Seasonal jobs don't pay much? It's unfortunate and hopefully it'll change soon, but I know MANY people, albeit mostly Hispanics, that work their asses off everyday for what we would consider menial pay. Yet they have a roof over their heads and food on the table for their families. They're working their asses off for what may not be much, but is something. I agree with you that some middle aged suburbanite may not jump at the chance to work out in some kind of position like that or many other ones, but then with that statement, aren't you hinting at the reason for arrogance as to why suburbanites don't chase down these jobs? Labor jobs aside, one can work under the table doing many things, from bussing tables to yard work to hauling things away. All I'm saying is that when one is truly that desperate, they will do absolutely anything to stay afloat. If you think I'm talking about laziness, you're wrong. Arrogance? Now that may be closer. Btw, give me the pecan picking job any day of the week; one of my jobs at 16 was chopping down trees and breaking cement with sledge hammers.

Also great point on the opportunity costs. I gotta say I agree with you there too, but at the same time, take let's say a single parent household with kids. That one parent, as unfortunate as it may be, may not be able to see their kids often because they have to keep their family afloat doing what they need to do. Is that fair? Not for me for a whole slew of reasons, but it's people like that who I truly respect. Those who know that they don't have the option to wait for an opportunity; they take the first one or however many come along and do something with it. Perseverance, desperation, hope.... alot of emotions run through the minds of these people when they have kids to raise on their own. That's just some random example, but people in situations like that show us all that it can be done. Life unfortunately comes with struggle, and many people are struggling, many have in the past and I'm sure in the future to come; yet things can be done. Lemons can be turned into lemonade. I'm really enjoying the discussion, even though we'll probably never see eye to eye on it. But differences are what make life interesting. :-P

@ Chuckie - usually I don't let myself get strung along on arrogant and sarcastic replies, but I'll bite this one time. In lieu of being able to find that article that I mentioned, I found a few more talking about labor shortages in the agricultural sectors: these articles specifically talking about Washington state, Alabama and Georgia. Now if you can actually read them and reply in a way that doesn't make you sound like an arrogant teenager, I'm all ears. You're actually a pretty intelligent guy, but this wannabe tough internet persona of yours gets pretty annoying.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/12/0…

http://www.ajc.com/news/georgia-politics-e…

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/loca…

But I am still looking for that article, because I know it's out there. ;-)

But yea, a question for anyone. Why are there labor shortages in certain sectors, yet so many people without jobs? It's a rhetorical question because I doubt that any of us, even in a collaborative effort, will have the answer.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

"Now if you can actually read them and reply in a way that doesn't make you sound like an arrogant teenager, I'm all ears."

Oh my. Please forgive me for not explaining this previously, but using data that doesn't support your shitty assertion is just as stupid as not using data to support your shitty assertion: We could knock a whole 0.005% off the unemployment rate if people would just get over their damn senses of entitlement pick some goddamn blueberries for shit pay.

Sorry, I tried. I must have typed that about 400 different ways, but I just couldn't find a way to leave my contempt for your half-baked labor theory out of it. It's rhetorically impossible.

"You're actually a pretty intelligent guy"

Correct.

"but this wannabe tough internet persona of yours gets pretty annoying."

This wannabe enlightened internet persona of yours is pretty entertaining

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Well I guess you're wrong about me chief. I'm not a wannabe anything. I'm someone who actually tries to hold discussion with folks without feeling the need of trying (key word being trying) to demean anyone, realizing that none of us is all knowing. Your arrogance and teenage attitude is probably why so few people respect anything you say on here.

Now let those who actually want to contribute to this conversation keep it going.

report 1 like, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

"probably why so few people respect anything you say on here. "

Now how many people we talking here? Like 0.005% of people? I'm sorry, but I can't take your informal poll seriously, given your difficulty with very simple math.

report 0 likes, 1 dislike   like  dislike

"Eric, I never once said the word lazy nor ever inferred it. If that's your interpretation, I'm not going to change your mind."

i didn't say you were calling anyone lazy. i just said that you were using the exact same argument that people do when they want to call unemployed people lazy let me show you an example:

"Yet they have a roof over their heads and food on the table for their families. They're working their asses off for what may not be much, but is something. I agree with you that some middle aged suburbanite may not jump at the chance to work out in some kind of position like that or many other ones, but then with that statement, aren't you hinting at the reason for arrogance as to why suburbanites don't chase down these jobs? "

see? only here you're calling them arrogant

"I'm really enjoying the discussion, even though we'll probably never see eye to eye on it. But differences are what make life interesting."

sure whatever

would you like to respond to my sourced assertion that even if all these vaguely defined 'seasonal, odd job, manual labor' jobs were filled tomorrow, millions of americans would still be out of work and unemployment would still be high?

i mean we can argue endlessly about the moral failings of the poor but none of that is going to help the american economy. it's just blame seeking, not problem solving

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Thanks for clarifying the laziness comment, my bad. But in my opinion there is a difference between laziness and arrogance. Laziness is doing nothing and arrogance is doing nothing due to being too prideful. I already told you I was siding more with arrogance than with laziness, which I can quote myself; I've done nothing to hide that fact. Never once did I say I was arguing against your cited info, I just posed some questions; I actually find it quite alarming, but at the same time, would you prefer that people not earn any income or earn something, although you may consider them scraps? One man's trash is another's treasure sir. I know people who travel dozens of miles for a job that may be considered menial by others, but again, they're just making things happen because they have no other option at the moment. Are they happy about it? Not really, yet atleast the people I know are grateful for the income, especially since we are going through some rough economic times. I look at the older generations with a lot of respect, because it seems as if back then, they had what seemed to be a tougher go get them and make no excuses attitude. Just because I studied for 5 years in my degree or whatever and haven't been able to find a job in that field, does not mean I can't find another way of obtaining income aside from committing crime. You're coming from a more statistical POV, which I admit I've never been good at. From my experience in life, I never had the luxury of facing the numbers, I had to do what I had to do to stay afloat. I'm sure there are many other people who are doing the same thing, but to answer your question on how we should fix this, I don't know. I try to have faith in the govt to help resolve this situation, but at the moment, the govt is a freaking joke and the only people suffering are the US citizens. No matter how anyone spins it, the only thing that politicians lose are our votes, compared to citizens who lose jobs, homes, etc... How to fix this? Hmm, I'd say replace everyone in office with those who truly have altruistic reasons for being there for starters.

From your "sure whatever" comment, I can't help but feel some cynicism from your end. If that's the case, perhaps we just agree to disagree on this one particular topic.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

Burrough: When will we see the adjustments to the unemployment numbers you promised on Dec. 15? Or are the January numbers just another chapter in the con game?

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike

@ Question Man
Working on it - depends on when I can find the data. I will be pleased to be wrong on this one.

report 0 likes, 0 dislikes   like  dislike