Unemployment is the one statistic that one would have thought is easy to
define: just total up the number of people on unemployment benefit and
there's your answer.
It is however much more complex, particularly in a large country like the
United States, whose potential labour force is estimated to be 250,080,000
across all 50 states plus Washington DC. Of this total 101,479,000 are not
currently employed, a ratio of over 40%, and of these only 8,575,000 are
deemed to be actually unemployed. The
relevant figures are here.
The reason this matters is unemployment is one of the three key variables macroeconomists
use to formulate policy, the other two being GDP and the rate of price
inflation. Indeed, the Fed's Open Market Committee has set the unemployment
rate as one of its two policy targets. This becomes questionable at best when
the officially unemployed are less than 10% of those who could be in work but
are not.
Looking at the distribution of benefits doesn't help either. With benefits
distributed on a rules-based system, many unemployed do not get benefits. For
example, in the US there are 2,472,547 "insured unemployed" at the
state level, compared with 8,575,000 officially unemployed, so less than one
in three are actually on benefits and less than one in forty of those in the
not-in-labour-force category, making this figure useless for policy guidance
as well.
Insured unemployed are announced weekly with the Initial Claims announcement
by the Department of Labor, while the number officially unemployed is
announced separately by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) monthly on the
first Friday of the month following. The BLS works on very tentative
estimates while the insured unemployed figure, which is the hard number,
forms only a small part of the overall picture.
Estimates for population growth add to the confusion. According to the BLS,
the total number of people not in the labour force has actually increased
over the last year to March by 279,000, though the number classified as
unemployed has fallen by 1,804,000. Even these figures will be revised long
after they are relevant in the light of the next population census; but on
the face of it the increase in jobs is not keeping up with the estimated
increase in the working population.
Job creation is an on-going process, admittedly hampered by the reluctance of
banks to lend to smaller businesses, which form the bulk of any economy's
activity. Despite what the GDP numbers say about growth or its absence,
economic progress continues with people buying better mobile communications,
new autos and flat-screen TVs. The tragedy of unemployment is that these
benefits are unaffordable to most of the unemployed. It's not that they are
work-shy: much of the problem is that in a zombie-like economy, scarce
capital resources are not being redeployed productively while debt is
mounting, so job creation becomes unnecessarily slow.
One would have thought disappointing unemployment numbers would add to the
evidence that the US economy is weakening, already foreshadowed by falling
commodity prices and the dramatic slide in shipping rates. We had such an
event over Easter when the BLS announced non-farm payrolls was 120,000 less
than expected, and the previous two months' figures were also revised
downwards by a further 69,000.
Is this confirmation of an economy about to slide? Maybe, but unemployment
statistics are too unreliable as an indicator and should never have been
adopted as a policy tool.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in the article are those of
the author and do not necessarily reflect those of GoldMoney, unless
expressly stated. Please note that neither GoldMoney nor any of its
representatives provide financial, legal, tax, investment or other advice.
Such advice should be sought form an independent regulated person or body who
is suitably qualified to do so. Any information provided in this article is
provided solely as general market commentary and does not constitute advice.
GoldMoney will not accept liability for any loss or damage, which may arise
directly or indirectly from your use of or reliance on such information.
