Con: We’re still 10 million jobs short of boom times

By MARK WEISBROT   Thursday, Jan. 19, 2012
ADVERTISEMENT
 

EDITOR’S NOTE: The writer is addressing the question, “Will the U.S. economy shift into the fast lane to recovery in 2012?”

The U.S. recession officially ended in June 2009, but most Americans don’t feel like we are in a recovery. That’s because it’s been a weak recovery, with the size of the economy barely bigger today than it was four years ago, when the recession started.

Since America is a rich country, it is not growth itself that matters most but employment and, of course, the distribution of income. And the employment numbers are just terrible.

The simplest measure is the percentage of the working-age population that is employed. That peaked at 63.4 percent in December 2006. It plummeted to a low of 58.2 percent last July and is hardly different now—58.5 percent in the latest figures.

What this means is that we need about 10 million jobs to get back to full employment.

There was a lot of happy talk earlier this month when the December job numbers were released. They showed 200,000 payroll jobs added in December, and the unemployment rate falling to 8.5 percent. Adding even 200,000 jobs a month is not very good for an economy that needs at least 90,000-100,000 jobs a month just to keep up with the growth of the working-age population.

And as my colleague Dean Baker pointed out, the latest jobs numbers have probably been over-optimistic. Realistically, he notes, at present trends of job growth we will not hit full employment until 2028. This would be an economic failure of disastrous proportions.

Looking at it from the unemployment side, the U.S. government has a broader measure of unemployment that includes people who are involuntarily working part-time and people who have given up looking for work. This is currently at 15.2 percent of the labor force, or 23.7 million people who need work.

To make matters worse, we have had record numbers out of work for more than six months—more than 40 percent of the unemployed over the last two years. Long-term unemployment is much more devastating for workers and their families. And recent research shows that even this measure underestimates the current long-term hardship in the labor market.

Although there has been some fear of the economy lapsing into recession again, the more likely scenario in the foreseeable future is slow growth with intolerable levels of unemployment, along with rising poverty and inequality, and accompanying social ills.

Of course, there are many things that the government could do to restore full employment.

The Obama administration’s 2009 Recovery Act, or stimulus, was only about one-eighth the size of the lost demand from the bursting of the housing bubble. It saved an estimated 1.2 million to 2.8 million jobs, not nearly enough.

Obviously a much bigger stimulus, and one more focused on creating employment, is needed—but the politicians are afraid to talk about it. And the likely Republican presidential candidate, Mitt Romney, promises to create much more unemployment through massive cuts in the federal budget.

Another way to reduce unemployment would be for the government to subsidize and encourage employers to allow for shorter hours, as an alternative to laying people off. Unemployment insurance funds, along with other money, could be used for this purpose. This has proved very successful in Germany, where unemployment has been reduced to 5.5 percent—lower than it was before the world recession.

Of course, so long as our political discussion is fixated on a non-existing “threat” from the federal debt, these solutions will be out of reach. The current net interest burden on the federal debt is 1.4 percent of GDP, about as low as it has been for more than 60 years.

The biggest burden we are carrying is the economic illiteracy of our leaders, for which Americans are paying a very steep price.

Mark Weisbrot is the co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research. Readers may write to him at CEPR, 1611 Connecticut Ave. NW, Suite 400, Washington, D.C. 20009; website: www.cepr.net.

reader COMMENTS
Click here to view reader comments
(3)
AndrewJackson
Jan 21, 2012 at 12:09 p.m.
Suggest removal

Maine- Excellent point, but much to cerebral for those in power today.

westorbust
Jan 19, 2012 at 8:27 p.m.
Suggest removal

The fact of the matter is, we were living on the edge of a bubble. This is the new normal, for the time being. There are opportunities out there for those that want it, you just might have to move though.

Maine2010
Jan 19, 2012 at 6:21 p.m.
Suggest removal

Making "double-dipping" in the pubic sector illegal would create a lot of jobs. This should have been done right at the onset of the Great Recession.
Comments: "I am 61 yrs. old, raised in the old school. If you decided to retire that meant you no longer choose or needed to work, so get up move along and give the job to someone who really needs it and get these kids off the system and get some money back where it belongs.
There are a few problems with double dippers. They are typically burned out and when they come back they are lazy and do less work. Also, they are hired in at the same pay they left at (topped out). Instead of hiring a new employee who would bust their butt to do a good job at 1/2 the cost, they bring back the lazy “good ‘ol boys” for full pay. Broken system
Let’s take the famous Union leader who just retired and see what he would make under the “double-dip” system. What’s the going rate 80% of wages X $ 122,000.00= $ 97,600.00 per year pension plus he turn around and when back to work @ same Rate of $ 122,000.00 per year. He would make $210,000.00 per year for a Union job where he makes “NO PRODUCT” @ ALL and if he did this for 10 more year that would be $ 2 million dollar’s for Nothing. Do you think WE have a problem in the USA!"

Before you post a comment, consider this:

Note: GazetteXtra.com does not condone or review every comment. Read more in our User Policy Agreement
  • Keep it clean. Comments that are obscene, vulgar or sexually oriented will be removed. Creative spelling of such terms or implied use of such language is banned, also.
  • Don't threaten to hurt or kill anyone.
  • Be nice. No racism, sexism or any other sort of -ism that degrades another person.
  • Harassing comments. If you are the subject of a harassing comment or personal attack by another user, do not respond in-kind.  Hit the "Suggest Removal" button on offensive comments.
  • Share what you know. Give us your eyewitness accounts, background, observations and history.
  • Do not libel anyone. Libel is writing something false about someone that damages that person's reputation.
  • Ask questions. What more do you want to know about the story?
  • Stay focused. Keep on the story's topic.
  • Help us get it right. If you spot a factual error or misspelling, email newsroom@gazettextra.com or call 1-800-362-6712.
  • Remember, this is our site. We set the rules, and we reserve the right to remove any comments that we deem inappropriate.

Post Comment

Commenting requires registration.

Username:
Password: (Forgotten your password?)

Comment:

ADVERTISEMENT