Unemployment reaches 16 percent. Worst since 1940.

[stephendare]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/04/unemployment-hits-97-as-e_n_277218.html

The national unemployment rate rose to 9.7 percent -- the highest level since June 1983 -- as the U.S. economy shed 216,000 jobs in August, the government announced on Friday morning. That's up from 9.4 percent in July.

By a broader measure that includes forced part-timers and people who'd like to work but aren't looking, the national unemployment rate reached 16.8 percent -- up a staggering 6 percent from this time last year.

The pace of job cuts has steadily slowed since the beginning of the year, when monthly losses exceeded 700,000 in January.

The total number of unemployed is 14.9 million, roughly double the number at the start of the recession in December 2007.

The number of long-term unemployed, those out of work 27 weeks or longer, edged up only slightly in August, from 4.96 million to 4.98 million. At the end of the year, nearly 1.5 million of those people will exhaust their extended unemployment insurance unless the government takes action to further extend their benefits.

And the picture isn't so great for people who are working, either. A report released this morning by the Economic Policy Institute concludes that many workers who have not lost their jobs during the recession have nevertheless taken a hit as a result of sluggish wage growth, reduced hours and involuntary furloughs. Private sector wages have grown at a rate of 1.3 percent over the last six months, less than half as fast as wage growth during 2007 and the first six months of 2008.

"It's an implosion of wage growth far beyond what you would expect" in an ordinary recession, said EPI's Larry Mishel, co-author of the report, in a conference call with reporters. Average wages rose 6 cents in August, according to the Department of Labor.

Other economic indicators this week brought better news. Retail sales fell 2 percent in August from a year earlier, the smallest drop since September 2008. And the Washington Post on Monday reported positive signs in the Men's Underwear Index, the metric reportedly favored by former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan. (The MUI outlook was less positive in April.)

Asked for his thoughts on the MUI, Mishel scoffed. "If Alan Greenspan were so wise, we wouldn't be in this mess," he said.

[Sigma]

And yet Joe Biden is publically stating "We've already created or saved one million jobs".  Where is the disconnect?

[Sigma]

So the stimulus has saved 1 million jobs?

Can you cite your source?  How is this calculated?  I can see the number of jobs the stimulus is supposedly creating, but less than 15% has been spent thus far, and even a smaller fraction of that has been on actual projects. 

So tell me, HOW is a saved job calculated?

[Sigma]

I did not have a point.  It's in the news (which is why I used quotes).  I did not make a point.  I asked a question. The VP made a claim. The real data does not support his claim.  I would like to know why.  That's all.

In your answer, you made a claim - which is apparantly paraphrasing the VP.  All I'm asking is that you support your claim. 

What is obvious, is that you can't.  I was hoping you could.

[Sigma]

Well we can agree on two things:  Unemployment is in the news.  And you didn't have a point.

And, you can't support your claims - again.

[Sigma]

No doubt.  I have read some reports about the coming commercial real estate crash.  We've got a  long way to go.  Hopefully though the unemployment will level off soon. 

[mtraininjax]

Direct Unemployment is 9.7%, the rest are people who are in Temp jobs or who have had a temp job and given up on finding a perm job.

When the temp jobs roll out for X-mas, can't wait to see the people on board claim the stimulus was the reason, they are seasonal jobs and will be gone in Jan.

Stimulus has had little effect of growing jobs. Most jobs lost were in manufacturing and there are little new manufacturing jobs being added.

[FayeforCure]

November. (which we predicted right here a year ago) is supposed to be the beginning of the commercial crash.

That places the smaller and primarily local banks at the most risk, so...commercial real estate agents, and offices, bank tellers security guards auditors and loan officers, plus the dining establishment and nail technicians and clothing shops.

I think we are going to be seeing another wave of unemployment that lasts at least until February.

February should be the absolute nadir of the downturn in the near future.

So far it is acknowledged that the stimulus averted a repeat of the great depression of the 1930's. Because whether you like it or not,.......any dollar invested in the economy has a multiplier effect. Some multiplier effects are greater than others, but it is undeniably there.

So, if private industry is shrinking rather than investing, the consumer has stopped spending,...........who is left to shore up the economy? Who is left to create the spending necessary to avert a great depression repeat?

Well, like it or not, it is our US government, which has a duty to do all it can to avert our economy slipping into the great depression state that we found ourselves in in the 1930's.

Really economics 101.

[Dog Walker]

Both my family and my wife's family lost everything in the bank failures of the 1930's.  FDIC and the "bailouts" of the big banks saved us all from a repeat of that, thank goodness!

Deficit spending to stimulate the economy is necessary, but gets really scary when it is on top of routine deficit spending which was not necessary.  Deficit spending to try to impose our form of government on people who don't want it on the other side of the world is CRAZY!