More on unemployment numbers
Published August 29, 2015
by John White, Raleigh, August 28, 2015.
I appreciated the most recent broadcast and, in particular, the comments about unemployment and 5 contacts.
Rob Christensen of the N&O had an excellent column explaining that the GA cut the unemployment insurance rate to the lowest in the country, helping friends in business. Then in order to live within the reduced revenues, it was necessary to cut, in a drastic manner, the amount of unemployment compensation per week and further, to cut the number of weeks.
So I disagree with your panelists that increasing the required contacts to five will cause major issues for business. The number of unemployed who are eligible for unemployment compensation has been dramatically reduced—thanks to prior actions by the GA. There will not be large crowds of people besieging business to “make a contact.”
I do agree with several who stated that unemployment numbers are used for political statements. John Hood was correct that a small sample size is used by the Bureau of Labor (BLS) statistics to gauge the level of unemployment. Of course, those who are no longer eligible for unemployment are no longer counted in these numbers of “actively seeking.” WOW—the GA really improved the picture when they reduced the number of weeks that a person could collect! Clearly the NCGOP can claim credit for “lowering the unemployment rate.”
An excellent (but somewhat dated) article is at the following link:
http://www.newsobserver.com/opinion/op-ed/article10106771.html
However, John Hood also compared North Carolina’s unemployment rate to the national rate. Now, I trust, you can understand we have apples and oranges. Regional economics is really a significant factor. Reports from the Federal Reserve regions show that different areas of the country move at completely different paces.
A better comparison of unemployment is look at North Carolina versus Virginia versus South Carolina – over time. The issues of small sample size that John Hood mentioned are not significant when viewed over a span of time (such as 2-3 years).
This is a complex arena—one filled with numbers and different sides taking credit. It would be most helpful to have a labor economist review the issues. The GA, however, has made known their feelings about professors who go against the current political majority. So, finding an academic to throw on this subject will be difficult.
The comment that wages are not growing and, indeed, are lower is a real problem that no politician is ready to address.
As always, I enjoy the show.
August 29, 2015 at 9:54 am
Richard L Bunce says:
Nobody owes anybody a job, other than themselves, at any level of compensation.
There is no issue for politicians to address there... they could (continue?) to lower Federal, State, and Local taxes and regulations on business owners. As the barriers to entry into business are lowered many of these employees who cannot find an employer to pay them more will have an opportunity to become their own employer. The new on demand/online economy is built for such a movement to grow.
Of course there is no minimum wage for the business owner and no guarantee of success... customers must be found and convinced to voluntarily purchase the businesses products and services. As government is downsized many government bureaucrats will be out of a government job. They will have a hard time with the notion of voluntary customers instead of armed government agents confiscating the desired revenue.
