If unemployment had reached its current level of 9.7% twenty years ago there would have been panic in the halls of the White House and Congress. Economists have traditionally felt that ~5% unemployment is "full employment," the point where those who want jobs can find them. If people are jobless it's a normal function of labor markets; they're retraining, moving to where jobs in their fields are more plentiful, or just entering the job market.
We have roughly 15 million unemployed Americans, and nearly half of them have been out of work for longer than six months (US Bureau of Labor Statistics, June 4, 2010).
Why, then, does Congress seem to be worrying about the federal deficit rather than the unemployed? Why is there no concern that Coxey's Army or the the Bonus Army might reappear on Pennsylvania Avenue in DC?
I wish I knew.
Posted by Linkmeister at June 14, 2010 09:01 AM | TrackBackI was laid of 2 1/2 years ago. And have decided to "retire" If I wanted a job, there are jobs available, but at a fraction of my previous salary. I worked for a major pharmaceutical company, and my skills are very focused.
Posted by: cassie-b at June 15, 2010 04:15 AMWhat of the stimulus? Isn't it working? What about that multiplier effect?
Keynesian economics are non-falsifiable. If the economy recovers, you can claim the stimulus worked; if it didn't, you can claim it wasn't big enough. I will never in my life understand this.
Posted by: Rob McMillin at June 15, 2010 05:55 AM