Top Menu

Follow Taylor on Twitter

Jobs Numbers Reveal 24.9% Unemployment Among Teens

In April, teenagers had a 24.9 percent unemployment rate, compared with a 7.5 percent for adult men and 7.4 percent among adult women. – ABC News

Labor Force Participation Rate Lowest Since 1981

PARTISANS, start your engines, though no one can spin the teen unemployment numbers, which are disastrous.

The unemployment rate is down to 8.1%.

Only 115,000 jobs were added.

There’s also reports revealing large numbers of people have left the workforce, revealing the reason behind lower unemployment number, which is reportedly the lowest since 1981.

You’re not going to change that with the Ryan plan, which is Mitt Romney’s biggest problem. Just ask David Cameron how well austerity has worked for him and you get the nut of just how disastrous Paul Ryan has been politically for Republicans.

With Chuck Todd this morning, Mark Zandi of Moody’s Analytics said that unemployment insurance running out for older Americans means these people are likely to retire, causing part of the exodus from the workforce. Zandi said manufacturing is going “great guns” and, for what it’s worth, he predicted that by the end of the year unemployment would be “definitively below 8%.”

The psychological impact of unemployment dipping below 8% or the mere fact it’s going in the right direction is very good news for Obama’s reelection chances, while giving Romney a real problem spinning can’t counter. When this subject hits the fall presidential debates it will make it even harder for voters to take a chance on Republicans.

, , , , , , ,

22 Responses to Jobs Numbers Reveal 24.9% Unemployment Among Teens

  1. Rick Roberts May 4, 2012 at 11:25 am #

    More fuel to this summer’s combustible mix. Hang on tight, people.

  2. guyski May 4, 2012 at 11:31 am #

    The psychological impact of unemployment dipping below 8% will be minimal. It is only one fundamental of the economy that effects a persons attitude about the economy. There is still the housing market, personal debt loads, decrease in income, savings rate, etc.

    As for high teen unemployment, it’ll be that way for a long time. Mark Zandi’s statement “that unemployment insurance running out for older Americans means these people are likely to retire, causing part of the exodus from the workforce.” Is that really true? A ‘retired’ person on social security can still be employed. And is this segment of the work force replacing/competing with the teen segment?

    • Cujo359 May 4, 2012 at 12:13 pm #

      The psychological impact of unemployment dipping below 8% will be minimal.

      And mostly for those inside the DC bubble. This is why I wrote “All Economics Is Local”. Eight percent, or ten percent, are just meaningless numbers. What matters to us out her beyond the beltway is whether our economy looks better. There’s not some magical unemployment number that’s going to make things look good. What matters is if we’re able to find jobs, and whether those jobs pay as well as the ones we had. For those about to “retire early”, all that matters, too, plus what shape the safety net is in, and whether they can get medical care when they need it.

      The Obama Administration has done practically nothing to help any of that. It’s still wringing its hands about “fiscal responsibility”, when what it should be doing is telling us that when money is this cheap (interest rates being essentially zero at the Fed), it’s time to invest in America. They should be having bankers doing the perp walk by the hundreds to show that no one gets to commit control fraud on such a massive scale and get away with it. They won’t do that, of course, because the people who matter don’t want it.

  3. fangio May 4, 2012 at 12:12 pm #

    If you want to see what hordes of unemployed young people results in you need only look to the middle east and Europe. You won’t have to worry about international terrorism much longer, there will be plenty of domestic terrorism to deal with. People with nothing to do cause trouble and that goes for all those older Americans leaving the workforce as well. It’s funny how no one seems to talk about where these people are going when they leave the workforce; are they going on vacation, collecting what’s left of their social security, living off relatives, sleeping in their cars or as RR suggests, taking minimum wage jobs from teenagers. Either way you slice it, it’s bad for the country. No income equals no social security taxes, no shopping, no car buying, no pensions, no medical care , no education, and an ever increasing army of angry, miserable and vengeful people; who have guns!

  4. mrpister May 4, 2012 at 12:34 pm #

    “Figures don’t lie, but liars figure…” so said Mark Twain.

    The way these statistics are laid out, which is more a half truth than the truth, then one can’t be blamed for drawing the following conclusion:

    If employers keep producing fewer and fewer jobs; hell, if the economy starts losing jobs again, then the unemployment rate should drop to 3 or4%!

    All TeamObama cares about is the published “unemployment” number, which is dropping. No thought to those who’ve given up; no thought to the suffering, the anxiety, the tattered dreams of Americans. God help us all, especially the young who are being shafted in ways not seen in 80 years.

    • jjamele May 4, 2012 at 12:38 pm #

      True enough. The “Progressive” (Democratic Party) yakkers- Bill Press, Ed Schultz, Stephanie Miller- are crowing about the new numbers as if they are something to be proud of. It’s disgusting.

      • Cujo359 May 4, 2012 at 1:09 pm #

        I’ll bet that not one of them is mentioning the employment to population ratio (commonly abbreviated as “EPOP”), and that’s the number they would be looking at if they were honest. If we’re recovering from an economic downturn, that number would be increasing. Instead, it’s decreasing. Things are getting worse, not better.

        Talking about unemployment, particularly the U-1 number that’s usually cited, is bubble-headed nonsense. It means nothing when so many people have either been unemployed so long that they don’t count, or they have given up looking for work.

        • mrpister May 4, 2012 at 1:59 pm #

          Cujo: Kind of reminds me of the ‘ole Soviet “non-person” ploy. If these people “don’t exist” then why worry?

          • Cujo359 May 4, 2012 at 2:25 pm #

            I suspect the impetus comes from a similar place, which is the willingness to ignore reality, combined with being in a position where it’s possible to do so and not experience the consequences.

        • RAJensen May 5, 2012 at 10:29 am #

          ‘I’ll bet that not one of them is mentioning the employment to population ratio (commonly abbreviated as “EPOP”), and that’s the number they would be looking at if they were honest. If we’re recovering from an economic downturn, that number would be increasing. Instead, it’s decreasing. Things are getting worse, not better’.

          Actually that ratio hasn’t changed much in decades.The large upturn of EOP occured in the 1950,’s and the 1960′s with an influx of married women entering the workplace.

          As far as current EPOP is concerned, you do realize that the influx of baby boomers to the social security system has already begun. Many baby boomers are electing to retire at 62 and accept lower monthly benefits. My wife and I have done exactly that. Here are the numbers, 10,000 people a day are applying for social secuirty, 300,000 a month who are out of the work force every month and are included in the EPOP figures

          Medicare is so successful that life expectancy has increased by more than ten years since 1964.Seniors continue to be a force that drives down EPOP numbers and has for decades. The only way to increase the EPOP figures is to repeal social security and Medicare and throw seniors into the street that would improve the EPOP numbers.

          • Cujo359 May 5, 2012 at 1:28 pm #

            EPOP fell precipitously back in 2007-2009, and is lower now than it was at the end of that fall. When that happens, EPOP must increase during a real recovery. Instead, it is lower still, though not by a lot. If times were prosperous, and everyone could find a job who wanted one, and wages were either steady or rising, I’d take a falling EPOP as a sign of prosperity. That is not the case here. Millions of people are out of work long term, and their wages are falling if they are working. They don’t choose to retire early when that is the case.

            Is there a statistic made that you can’t misunderstand?

          • RAJensen May 5, 2012 at 4:36 pm #

            Sorry cujo, keep trying.The EPOP stands to day exactly where it was in 1981. The Washinton Post explains why the retiring baby boomers will keep the EPOP level wherel it is at least until the end of the decade. 3.3 million baby boomers are retiring this year and 3 million left the work force last year.

            http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/the-incredible-shrinking-labor-force/2012/05/04/gIQANXAy1T_blog.html

            The only measure that is reliable is net new jobs created. In the last two years 4.5 million net new private sector jobs were created and the figure drops to 4 million whenyou deduct thr 500,000 public sector net job losses.

            Yoiu need to stop echoing the Fox Business Chanells talking point

  5. Cujo359 May 4, 2012 at 2:23 pm #

    My take on all this.

  6. mjsmith May 4, 2012 at 4:50 pm #

    Unemployment is a serious issue and I hope things get better. Hopefully our next President has better ideas than shovel ready jobs that don’t exist. Minorities, women, and the youth are the hardest hit.

  7. fairmindedindependent May 4, 2012 at 7:10 pm #

    These numbers do not look good, even if the unemployment rate falls below 8%. If they decide to close alot of the Post Offices, its going to put a hurting on the economy for sure. I think these numbers could go up and down during the summer and into the fall. There are many people that have given up looking for a job also. I still see a tough battle between Obama and Romney this election. There are other things that are going to factor in on this election, this happens to be the main issue.

    • mjsmith May 4, 2012 at 11:55 pm #

      I agree with you on this one. It’s going to come down to the economy. I am not going to vote for Romney or Obama. I am not sure who I will vote for this November. I am not sure how much of the blame for the financial hardship many Americans are going through right now belongs to which party. History shows that the person/party in office at the time gets the blame and the boot.

  8. Sandmann May 4, 2012 at 8:14 pm #

    What kind of employment are people hoping for? The whole economy is built on debt…millionaires became billionaires, and mathematically, those billionaires will become trillionaires (that money has to come from somewhere, right?) How can you create decent jobs in an environment where much of the wealth generated at the top is fed by increasing the number of IOU’s at the bottom? It’s the goddamn snake eating its tail.

    • Cujo359 May 4, 2012 at 9:18 pm #

      Building the things we need, or at least should be building. Transportation and Internet infrastructure, alternative energy and conservation, re-employing the state and local government workers who have been let go. That alone would employ millions productively, at least in two or three years.

      Unfortunately, government has to do that. Private industry isn’t seeing enough demand (which in this case means people willing to pay for it). Nevertheless, it needs to be done, and employing people doing them would increase demand for the sorts of things private concerns can and do deliver.

      Worrying about deficits is only going to make deficits worse, or break the economy. We’ve re-done that experiment enough times that people should have caught on.

    • Cujo359 May 4, 2012 at 9:26 pm #

      Almost forgot – you can deliver health care to the third of the population who aren’t getting it, or aren’t getting enough. That ought to employ a few hundred thousand professionals, as well. The only thing standing in the way of that that I can see is the way we fund the system. Implement single payer, and a lot of that accumulation of wealth and indebtedness you’re referring to goes away.

      • Sandmann May 4, 2012 at 10:55 pm #

        Careful with that Socialism, Eugene ;-) Of course, that doesn’t factor in derivatives and other time-bomb money for nothing wall-street gambling instruments, nor does it address how the economy can sustain the necessity for exponential economic growth in order to match the return on capital expected from the world’s largest pools of wealth. By design, the debt holders are going to have it all in the long-term unless something big changes. Just my opinion.

        I agree that government has a crucial role to play in creating new jobs of the future since many of them need to be based on science and technology without the profit motive.

  9. TPAZ May 4, 2012 at 8:36 pm #

    Unfortunately, the world of finance and politics are completely upside down. The lower the unemployment figure goes the the odds increase Obama will lose reelection. This economy is slipping back into recession. Fact. Only Quantitative Easing III (QE III), a liquidity package from the Fed will shore up the economy and the stock market. Politicly, the administration cannot justify supporting another QE round with improving employment numbers. Without it, voters will go into the polls with 3rd Quarter GDP numbers showing a contracting economy, 100k to 200k US Postal Service workers about to be laid off and up to 3,700 post offices being closed, and a 10% accross the board cut in the federal budget. This is not a recipe for reelection.

    • Cujo359 May 4, 2012 at 9:30 pm #

      Actually, that’s not a fact at all, but a supposition. It happens to be an erroneous supposition, too. QE can’t work, because the problem isn’t that there is no money available. The problem is that there is not enough demand, particularly consumer demand. That isn’t going to be corrected until more people are earning more. That means more jobs and better jobs. The banks and corporations are awash in cash. That’s one of the reasons the stock market is through the roof. No one wants to spend money on producing more, because they’re pretty sure they won’t be able to sell more than they are now.

.... a writer is someone who takes the universal whore of language
and turns her into a virgin again.  ~ erica jong