<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Citizen Economists &#187; unemployment</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/tag/unemployment/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs</link>
	<description>Citizen Economists is an online economics magazine written by citizen journalists. These ordinary citizens provide reports and commentary on the current events affecting the economics of the fields they work in.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 20:10:41 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Is Foreign Trade a Big Deal?</title>
		<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/23/is-foreign-trade-a-big-deal/</link>
		<comments>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/23/is-foreign-trade-a-big-deal/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 23 Dec 2011 17:40:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Simon Grey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[U.S. Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[foreign trade]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GDP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[manufacturing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/?p=10269</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Walter Williams: <p>Hale and Hobijn find that the vast majority of goods and services sold in the United States are produced here. In 2010, total imports were about 16 percent of U.S. gross domestic product, and of that, 2.5 percent came from China. A total of 88.5 percent of U.S. consumer spending is on <span style="color:#777"> . . . &#8594; Read More: <a href="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/23/is-foreign-trade-a-big-deal/">Is Foreign Trade a Big Deal?</a></span>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><a href="http://lewrockwell.com/williams-w/w-williams107.html">Walter Williams</a>:</div>
<blockquote><p>Hale and Hobijn find that the vast majority of goods and services sold in the United States are produced here. In 2010, total imports were about 16 percent of U.S. gross domestic product, and of that, 2.5 percent came from China. A total of 88.5 percent of U.S. consumer spending is on items made in the United States, the bulk of which are domestically produced services – such as medical care, housing, transportation, etc. – which make up about two-thirds of spending. Chinese goods account for 2.7 percent of U.S. personal consumption expenditures, about one-quarter of the 11.5 percent foreign share. Chinese imported goods consist mainly of furniture and household equipment; other durables; and clothing and shoes. In the clothing and shoes category, 35.6 percent of U.S. consumer purchases in 2010 were items with the &#8220;Made in China&#8221; label.</p></blockquote>
<div>Foreign trade sound much less important when discussed as a percentage of GDP instead dollars.<span> </span>16% sounds like a relatively small amount, but once you put that in dollar terms it becomes $2.24 trillion dollars.*<span> </span>Obviously, this is a significant chunk of change, roughly equal to the mandatory spending of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_United_States_federal_budget">2010 federal budget</a> (and equivalent to roughly two-thirds of the total federal budget).<span> </span>Given that <a href="http://portalseven.com/employment/unemployment_rate_u6.jsp">unemployment</a> wavered between 16.5% and 17.1% that year (and was likely higher, given how the government manipulates those statistics), it seems reasonable to conclude that it having even half of those imports produced at home would have had a pretty positive impact on unemployment.**</div>
<blockquote><p>Much of what China sells us has considerable &#8220;local content.&#8221; Hale and Hobijn give the example of sneakers that might sell for $70. They point out that most of that price goes for transportation in the U.S., rent for the store where they are sold, profits for shareholders of the U.S. retailer, and marketing costs, which include the salaries, wages and benefits paid to the U.S. workers and managers responsible for getting sneakers to consumers. On average, 55 cents of every dollar spent on goods made in China goes for marketing services produced in the U.S.</p></blockquote>
<div>But why not have, if possible, one hundred cent of dollars be paid to Americans?<span> </span>Saying that the effects of foreign trade aren’t that bad is little consolation to those who are unemployed.</div>
<blockquote><p>Going hand in hand with today&#8217;s trade demagoguery is talk about decline in U.S. manufacturing. For the year 2008, the Federal Reserve estimated that the value of U.S. manufacturing output was about $3.7 trillion. If the U.S. manufacturing sector were a separate economy – with its own GDP – it would be tied with Germany as the world&#8217;s fourth-richest economy. Today&#8217;s manufacturing worker is so productive that the value of his average output is $234,220, three times higher than it was in 1980 and twice as high as it was in 1990. That means more can be produced with fewer workers, resulting in a precipitous fall in manufacturing jobs, from 19.5 million jobs in 1979 to a little more than 10 million today.</p></blockquote>
<div>The problem with the technology argument is that it fails to account for the impact of governmental interference.<span> </span>Of course, it is impossible to tell with any degree of certainty how much the government, by its interference, has encouraged manufacturers to pull forward their demand for machines to replace workers.<span> </span>It also fails to account for foregone manufacturing in light of a) regime uncertainty, b) the regulatory thicket that is the federal code, and c) the monstrosity that is the corporate tax code.<span> </span>Basically, there is no reason to assume that manufacturing would be as automated if there was actually a free market, nor is there any reason to assume that there would be as few manufacturing jobs if there were no federal regulations.</div>
<div>Now, as has been mentioned at this blog many times before, federal policy has been directly responsible for the current economic malaise.<span> </span>The federal government has hamstrung domestic businesses while simultaneously giving foreign businesses a free pass for trade.<span> </span>The direct effect of this schizophrenic policy has been to subsidize foreign businesses at the expense of domestic businesses.<span> </span>This has also contributed to a high unemployment rate.<span> </span>While free trade is the undoubtedly preferable state of being, it makes no sense to allow this while simultaneously hamstringing domestic businesses.<span> </span>The government must level the playing field, most preferably by deregulating domestic businesses.<span> </span>In the event this cannot be accomplished, the government should ensure that foreign businesses adhere to same labor and environmental regulations faced by domestic businesses or at least pay the difference.</div>
<div>As Walter Williams states:</div>
<blockquote><p>The bottom line is that we Americans are allowing ourselves to be suckered into believing that China is the source of our unemployment problems when the true culprit is Congress and the White House.</p></blockquote>
<div>* The <a href="http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/2011/pdf/gdp3q11_3rd.pdf">GDP of the united states for 2010</a> was approximately $14 trillion; 16% of this is $2.24 trillion.</div>
<div>** Keep in mind that, during 2010, the welfare/unemployment budget was nearly $600 billion.<span> </span>Half of the imports would have been $1.12 trillion, nearly double the welfare budget.<span> </span>I’ll let you draw your own conclusions from this.</div>
<div><img src="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/wp-content/plugins/wp-o-matic/cache/9aed2_2117539497559662097-5150688204846583629?l=cygne-gris.blogspot.com" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/23/is-foreign-trade-a-big-deal/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Unemployment Claims Continue to Plummet</title>
		<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/16/unemployment-claims-continue-to-plummet/</link>
		<comments>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/16/unemployment-claims-continue-to-plummet/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Dec 2011 14:40:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eldon Mast</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[U.S. Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jobless claims]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[labor market]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/?p=10164</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p> </p> <p>Fewer Americans filed for their first week of unemployment benefits last week. So few in fact, that the number of initial claims fell to its lowest level since May 2008.</p> <p>About 366,000 people filed initial jobless claims in the week ended Dec. 10, the Labor Department said Thursday. That was a decrease <span style="color:#777"> . . . &#8594; Read More: <a href="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/16/unemployment-claims-continue-to-plummet/">Unemployment Claims Continue to Plummet</a></span>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/xKiJdcGWNHfuF_a0_mHEV25tQ2w/0/da"><img src="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/wp-content/plugins/wp-o-matic/cache/8a98e_di" border="0" alt="" /></a><br />
<a href="http://feedads.g.doubleclick.net/~a/xKiJdcGWNHfuF_a0_mHEV25tQ2w/1/da"><img src="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/wp-content/plugins/wp-o-matic/cache/8a98e_di" border="0" alt="" /></a></p>
<p>Fewer Americans filed for their first week of unemployment benefits last week. So few in fact, that the number of initial claims fell to its lowest level since May 2008.</p>
<p>About 366,000 people filed initial jobless claims in the week ended Dec. 10, the Labor Department said Thursday. That was a decrease of 19,000 from the prior week.</p>
<p>The report continues to signal that the unemployment rate will come down further in December. Even the most pessimistic of economists often look for the weekly tally to stay below 400,000 to signal that job growth is strong enough to lower the unemployment rate.</p>
<p>The drop in claims last week and the drop in the unemployment rate last month was the complete opposite of what a majority of economists had expected. (Remember the <a href="http://mast-economy.blogspot.com/2008/12/remembering-1975-majority-was-wrong.html">majority is always wrong</a>?)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/16/unemployment-claims-continue-to-plummet/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>More Proof</title>
		<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/09/more-proof/</link>
		<comments>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/09/more-proof/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Dec 2011 17:55:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Simon Grey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economic Theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[labor market]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[migrant workers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/?p=10075</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I while back I noted how the claim that there were jobs “Americans wouldn’t do” was false. Apparently my general theory that migrant workers are largely unnecessary to the functioning of an economy has more proof, this time from Russia via John Derbyshire: <p>You notice a trace or more of Asia in the features <span style="color:#777"> . . . &#8594; Read More: <a href="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/09/more-proof/">More Proof</a></span>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>I while back <a href="http://cygne-gris.blogspot.com/2011/11/jobs-americans-wont-do.html">I noted how the claim that there were jobs “Americans wouldn’t do” was false</a>.<span> </span>Apparently my general theory that migrant workers are largely unnecessary to the functioning of an economy has more proof, this time from Russia via <a href="http://takimag.com/article/down_but_still_russian/print#axzz1fulKalen">John Derbyshire</a>:</div>
<blockquote><p>You notice a trace or more of Asia in the features among workers in the lowest occupations. I suppose some are remnants of the Mongolian peoples who once ruled much of the country; some are part-aboriginal like our room cleaner; and many come from the Muslim Stans of Central Asia.</p></blockquote>
<blockquote><p>Does this tell us that there are Jobs Russians Won’t Do? I doubt it. There are plenty of fair, blue-eyed Russians down there among the Kyrgyz and Buryats doing the drudge work. The overwhelming impression in central Moscow is of a city populated almost entirely by Russians. I have not had the opportunity to call any major firm or government office in Moscow, but I feel fairly sure that if I did, I would not be instructed to press “1” for Russian.</p></blockquote>
<blockquote><p>To see how striking all this is, imagine yourself wandering around central London, Manhattan, Los Angeles, or even—more rapidly this past few years, it seems—Washington, DC.</p></blockquote>
<div>Once you strip away all the market distortions, particularly wage floors and lax immigration policies, you’ll see quite clearly that natives, as a group, are willing to take any every job available.<span> </span>Federal policies have a distortive effect, to be sure.<span> </span>For example, the education bubble likely reinforces the current generation’s distaste for manual labor.<span> </span>Also, welfare encourages people to avoid marginal jobs, which are also generally distasteful.<span> </span>And I’ve <a href="http://cygne-gris.blogspot.com/2011/03/reality-of-minimum-wage.html">already harped on</a> the effects of <a href="http://cygne-gris.blogspot.com/2011/11/cheap-labor-is-not-solution.html">weak immigration policy coupled with minimum wage</a>.<span> </span>But, strip away these things and you no longer <em>need</em> immigrant labor to keep the economy afloat.<span> </span>Anyone who says otherwise is either ignorant, stupid, or a liar.</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/09/more-proof/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How to Make Money in a &#8216;Fugly&#8217; Stock Market: Bob Moriarty</title>
		<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/08/how-to-make-money-in-a-fugly-stock-market-bob-moriarty/</link>
		<comments>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/08/how-to-make-money-in-a-fugly-stock-market-bob-moriarty/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 08 Dec 2011 15:00:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>The Gold Report</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Financial Markets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[banking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bankruptcy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[default]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[gold]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government debt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[investing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mining]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[stocks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[US dollar]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/?p=10066</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p> Despite the &#8220;fugly&#8221; future that Bob Moriarty, founder of 321gold.com, talks about in this exclusive interview with The Gold Report, he&#8217;s downright bullish on the U.S. dollar for the time being. He says it&#8217;s not only a safe haven but &#8220;the best investment to be in for the last six months.&#8221; As for <span style="color:#777"> . . . &#8594; Read More: <a href="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/08/how-to-make-money-in-a-fugly-stock-market-bob-moriarty/">How to Make Money in a &#8216;Fugly&#8217; Stock Market: Bob Moriarty</a></span>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><img style="padding-top: 5px;" src="http://www.streetwisereports.com/images/MoriartySmall_rev.jpg" alt="Bob Moriarty" hspace="10" width="82" height="102" align="left" /> Despite the &#8220;fugly&#8221; future that Bob Moriarty, founder of 321gold.com, talks about in this exclusive interview with <em>The Gold Report,</em> he&#8217;s downright bullish on the U.S. dollar for the time being. He says  it&#8217;s not only a safe haven but &#8220;the best investment to be in for the  last six months.&#8221; As for equities, Moriarty makes it clear that he takes  no pleasure in watching a company lose 25% of its value in a week when  there is nothing wrong with the company. At the same time, he&#8217;s alert to  bargains. Any time you have the opportunity to buy cash at a discount,  he advises, &#8220;throw money at it.&#8221;</p>
<p><em><strong>The Gold Report: </strong></em>Since the last time we chatted in <a href="http://www.theaureport.com/pub/na/10335" target="_blank">July</a>, Bob, a lot has happened. Congress raised the debt ceiling, as you predicted.</p>
<p><strong>Bob Moriarty: </strong>Right.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong>Then the Super Committee failed to produce an agreement so we can look forward to the automatic debt reduction of $2.2 trillion.</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> The Super Committee was totally illegal and unconstitutional in the  first place and it was totally ineffective. They couldn&#8217;t reduce  spending by $1.5 trillion over a 10-year period. Give me a break.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> Okay. Moving on. . .Unemployment remains at about 9%.</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> You say 9%? I don&#8217;t think so. How about 23%?</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> The list goes on. Occupy Wall Street protests have sprouted up all over  the country. And of course, Newt Gingrich is the leading Republican  candidate.</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> That anyone could even consider Newt Gingrich for anything above the role of dog catcher is pretty terrifying.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> There&#8217;s more. We&#8217;ve seen riots in Europe, with the epicenter in Greece. We&#8217;ve got a weak German bond market.</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> Weak? It was a total failure; 39% coverage is a disaster. Germany is  the bedrock of the EU, and if they can get bids for only 39% of bonds  it&#8217;s over—over—for the EU.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> The Italian bonds coming up should test that theory.</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> Italian bonds are paying 8% or something like that. It can&#8217;t do it. The  Greek two-year bond is paying 160%. The one-year bond is paying 270%.  Greece has defaulted. Italy, Spain and France are going to default. It  will be a series of cascading bank defaults. Dexia Bank failed a month  ago. The banking system is under water. I&#8217;ve been saying that for years.  It&#8217;s true.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> So looking at this whole developing  picture, from the crisis in Europe to the U.S. debt debacle, from  stubborn unemployment, protests and riots to the upcoming presidential  election—what do you make of all of this?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> The piece I wrote in early October captured it. I said things were about to get &#8220;fugly&#8221; and it&#8217;s time to head for the bunker.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> In your Nov. 11 article, you stated specifically that you&#8217;d climb out  on a limb and suggest that 2012 will go down in history as the year of  bank failures. How do you see that scenario playing out?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> Okay. Here&#8217;s what&#8217;s important to understand and very few people  understand this. If you start off with $1 million and loan it from one  institution to another to another to another, you may have a net of $1  million. But if somebody defaults and that $1 million asset disappears,  you get cascading defaults of every institution that had that $1 million  asset. It&#8217;s really simple. The Greek default—and Greece has defaulted  even though they won&#8217;t admit it—will cause a default in Spain and Italy,  and that&#8217;s going to cause a default in France and that&#8217;s going to cause  a default in the U.S.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> And what happens when they default?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> The banks close. What can we do? We have more debt in the world than  assets, so we have to write off the bad debt. Unfortunately, no  government in the world is talking about that. The only people talking  about it are Gerald Celente, Kyle Bass and me.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> But bank foreclosure is more than writing off bad debt. That creates catastrophic. . .</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> It&#8217;s a good thing if a business fails, because that means somebody who  is efficient comes along and picks up the slack. We do not need to  reward failure in the banking system. We need to reward success.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> Could the banking system write off a portion of the debt?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> Nah, they are under water now. It&#8217;s a zombie banking system and has  been since about the middle of September 2008. Just a while ago, at the  end of November, the Federal Reserve disclosed $13 billion in profits to  the banks from the trillions in loans they made back in 2008 that  they&#8217;ve been lying about ever since. They were bailing out Barclays,  Royal Bank of Scotland and lots of other banks that had nothing to do  with the United States.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> Is there a banking system that will survive these cascading defaults?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> The question should be: &#8220;Can you have a banking system that is sound  and secure?&#8221; And the answer is yes. The Canadian banks are in a lot  better shape than the U.S. banks. A sound, secure bank cannot have those  zombie assets, such as the mortgages that we know people are not paying  off. Half the mortgages in the United States are under water, with 25%  in default. Those mortgages must be written off.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> Couldn&#8217;t a component of the banking system—some of the regional banks in  the U.S., particularly those that have written off some of those  mortgages and are really more about loaning to local businesses and  local communities—survive a banking system failure?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> The banking system in the United States is a network of giants and the  regional banks really don&#8217;t exist anymore. I don&#8217;t have specific numbers  but I think the big five banks probably represent 90% of the banking  system. That leaves no fallback, really.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> When the U.S. banks close, you&#8217;re in the Cayman, but what happens to the rest of us?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> Since Bretton Woods in 1944, governments have been spending money they  don&#8217;t have and it&#8217;s time to pay the piper. A lot of people&#8217;s  &#8220;assets&#8221;—Social Security, pensions, Medicare, Medicaid—will evaporate.  They&#8217;ll disappear. We need to go back to a real world economy where  people produce things of value. We need reasonable taxes. And we need a  reasonably sized government that doesn&#8217;t spend beyond its means. This is  true of individuals as well as governments.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> How do people waiting in line for pensions, Social Security, Medicaid, etc. . .</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> That money has to come from somewhere. Anything the government gives  one group has to be taken from another group. The net is it costs you  money to have the government provide healthcare, Medicare, Social  Security. We would be far better off if the government didn&#8217;t provide  these things. We didn&#8217;t have Social Security 100 years ago and people  were fine. When I started working 40 years ago, people still had  pensions from their employers. By and large they don&#8217;t have much of that  anymore.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> Unless they&#8217;re government employees.</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> Yeah. Then you are going to get paid twice what the private sector is getting paid.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> Your November article also said what you have been suggesting for  months that cash is the best investment people can hold. In fact, you  concluded with these words: &#8220;It&#8217;s time to stay in cash and head for the  bunker.&#8221; As you mentioned before, &#8220;times are about to get fugly.&#8221;</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> Right.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> Do you include cash equivalents such as gold or precious metals under that &#8220;cash&#8221; umbrella?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> No, I mean cash. The best investment to be in for the last six months  was cash, U.S. dollar cash. Even Gerald Celente had a six-figure account  with MF Global and the money simply evaporated. Without cash, people  who go to bed wealthy will wake up poor.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> All the goldbugs say that will happen if you keep your money in fiat currencies too.</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> That&#8217;s not necessarily true. At times, investing in fiat currencies is a  good deal. If you were investing in U.S. dollars in March 2008, you  would have been better off that fall than you would with any other  single investment. Gold went from about $1,200/ounce (oz) to $700/oz,  while silver went from $21/oz to $9/oz. The stock market crashed. The  gold juniors crashed. Sometimes being in cash, U.S. dollars, is a good  investment. It&#8217;s been a particularly good investment for the last three  or four months.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> Because your analogy goes back to  2008, when we had a severe crash, is it fair to extrapolate that you&#8217;re  predicting another severe crash?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> We are going through a crash right now.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> If that&#8217;s the case, why should anyone be in equities?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> You can&#8217;t ever invest 100% in anything. No one can guarantee the  future. All you can do is hope you get it right 55% of the time. Cash,  U.S. dollar cash, has been a good investment since this past April, and  it&#8217;s still a good investment. Europe is about to blow up and the dollar  is a safe haven. There is a lot of deleveraging going on. And, as in  2008, the U.S. dollar is a good place to be. And cash is better than  having the money in T-bonds, with a negative interest rate.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> You are expecting the banking system to collapse, and banks typically hold cash. What value is the cash if the banks fold?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> You can buy things with it.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> So you&#8217;re saying people should physically hold their cash in their homes?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> I do. I have some money in the banks to pay bills, but mentally I have  written off every cent in the bank. I accept the fact that I will go  down to the bank one day and the ATM won&#8217;t work anymore and the bank  will be closed. You can have cash sitting in the bank, too, but at the  same time you have to understand the great danger with the banks. While I  wouldn&#8217;t sit on a half million dollars in cash at home, if I had it in a  bank I would be prepared. I think everybody should keep three to six  months in liquid assets, and that certainly would involve cash and gold  and silver. Cash and gold and silver will be very valuable when the  banking system collapses.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> If the banking system collapses, how long will it be before new banks emerge to take over the fundamental role of banking?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> It&#8217;s not &#8220;if&#8221; the banking system collapses; &#8220;when&#8221; would be more  accurate. You simply cannot justify the banking system today. The sooner  we get to whatever comes next, the better off we&#8217;ll be. My opinion is  that all fiat currencies will crash, and when they do, we&#8217;ll go back to a  gold standard.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> How quickly can we develop a gold standard from the annihilated banking system?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> It depends on how big the riots are. Governments never act. They only  react. If we have riots in every major city in the United States and  hundreds or thousands of people a day are being killed, the government  may actually take some action that would make sense. That would be to  say, &#8220;We have a financial system that doesn&#8217;t work. We need to go to a  financial system that does work.&#8221; Gold and silver work and they have  worked for 5,000 years.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> Do you see a situation where the government would start a national bank?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> God, I hope not. That would be adding fuel to the fire. I think that  &#8220;unlimited stupidity&#8221; and &#8220;government&#8221; belong in the same sentence. But  if the government started a national bank, that wouldn&#8217;t be unlimited  stupidity―that would be infinite stupidity.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> Earlier  you made a point about having to be right only 55% of the time to move  forward with a balanced portfolio. Let&#8217;s assume that an investor has  some hard assets now, in safe havens, with some at home. At that point,  does this investor turn to the market?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> Yes. I just  bought 100,000 shares of a company that did a financing at $0.80 in  April. It now has $0.46 per share in cash and its stock is selling at  $0.23. If I can buy cash at $0.50 on the dollar, I&#8217;ll do it.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> So you are looking for opportunities with a company&#8217;s value below its cash balance.</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> Any time you can buy at a discount, that&#8217;s a good deal. If you can buy a  dollar for $0.50, the upside is $0.50. We see this happening every 10  or 15 years. In the summer of 2001, a number of stocks that were selling  for less than the cash they had on hand doubled or tripled or  quadrupled when the market turned around. In September and October of  2008, something like 200 companies were selling for less than their cash  on hand. A Russian silver company was selling for $0.20 on the dollar.  You simply cannot get a more favorable environment than buying cash at a  discount. Any time you have that opportunity, you should throw money at  it.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> So, what companies are you finding that have cash at a discount?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> People are going to have to look for them themselves. All the figures are available to everybody. I use <em>Stockhouse</em> and <em>StockWatch </em>and look at the ratios.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> We&#8217;re hearing that capital is so hard to come by, yet we found at the  San Francisco Hard Assets Investment Conference at the end of last month  quite a number who were getting capital.</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> Those deals  had actually been set up for months. The last few weeks the financings  literally just stopped. Everybody is in a total panic now. I watched  stocks drop 25% and I have to tell you, it was pretty scary even though I  was one of the guys forecasting it. When a company loses 25% of its  value in a week and there is nothing wrong with the company, it&#8217;s scary.  A lot of times I see things happening that scare me and I don&#8217;t want  them to happen. I talk about them because I have an obligation to talk  about them.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> Could you talk about the kinds of companies that are actually building their value?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> In August 2008 the Philadelphia Gold and Silver Index, which is a  measure of pure psychology, went to the lowest level it had ever been in  history. Stocks were cheaper in August, September and October 2008  relative to gold than they had ever been. But gold was $700/oz. Silver  was $9/oz. And they got clobbered. So it&#8217;s natural that big gold and  silver shares got clobbered too.</p>
<p>Now, we have $1,700/oz gold and  $32/oz silver, and stocks are cheaper today than in 2008. That is  totally irrational. Those kinds of circumstances do not continue for  very long. In 2008 platinum came down to the same price as gold.  Platinum is $210/oz cheaper than gold today and that has never before  occurred in my lifetime. I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s occurred in history. That&#8217;s  an example of something that would be a very good opportunity.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> So if the juniors are on sale, are the majors also on sale?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> Yes.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> How should investors begin looking at the whole plethora of mining companies to decide which ones really create the value?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> My priority would be junior production stories. You&#8217;ve got <a href="http://www.theaureport.com/pub/co/623" target="_blank">Timmins Gold Corp. (TMM:TSX.V; TMM:NYSE.A)</a>, <a href="http://www.theaureport.com/pub/co/546" target="_blank">Fortuna Silver Mines Inc. (FSM:NYSE; FVI:TSX; FVI:BLV)</a>, Endeavour Silver Corp. (EDR:TSX; EXK:NYSE; EJD:Fkft), First Majestic Silver Corp. (FR:TSX; AG:NYSE; FMV:Fkft; FRMSF:OTCQX), <a href="http://www.theaureport.com/pub/co/331" target="_blank">Great Panther Silver Ltd. (GPR:TSX; GPL:NYSE.A)</a> and Rio Alto Mining Ltd. (RIO:TSX.V; RIO:BVL; RIOAF:OTCQX). There are  dozens, dozens of good production stories. Nobody quite knows where the  price of gold and silver will go, but anybody in production now is  literally minting money. You would have to be profitable. You couldn&#8217;t  possibly not be profitable.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> You wrote about <a href="http://www.theaureport.com/pub/co/3745" target="_blank">Meadow Bay Gold Corp. (MAY:TSX.V; MAYGF:OTCQX)</a> back in October. Is that still an interesting story to you?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> It&#8217;s a really funny story. It totally screwed up its drill program. It  was drilling for an epithermal vein system and hit a porphyry system.  The significance of that is that porphyries are really big, so instead  of having potentially 1–2 million ounces (Moz), literally overnight it  went to having 3–4 Moz potential.</p>
<p>When I made that same comment  about screwing up the drill program with Meadow Bay&#8217;s chief geologist,  he laughed, because if you&#8217;re going to screw up by finding a much bigger  deposit than you thought you had, that&#8217;s a really good deal.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> You&#8217;d called it a no-lose drill program. Did you know it was going to come out the way it did?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> It had announced one hole—a porphyry hole. As soon as I knew it was  porphyry I understood the future was bright indeed. That&#8217;s a really good  company and it is doing a really good job.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> Do you have a preference toward production of gold versus silver?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> Silver has attracted a lot of attention with people who simply don&#8217;t  know what they are writing about. And they attract all the nutcases. You  can make a lot more money shorting silver than you can going long  silver because people get totally irrational. There is no shortage of  silver. We are not about to run out of it. The ratio over 100 years has  been 47:1—47 ounces of silver per ounce of gold. In a financial  collapse, the ratio actually goes higher. I could see silver going to  100:1 before it goes 30:1. But, the primary factor in the price of  anything is the cost of production. Silver costs $6–8/oz to produce, so  $32/oz silver is pretty expensive.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> So you would want to look at junior production companies that would still be profitable with silver at $10/oz?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> The silver companies would still be extraordinarily cheap even if silver went to $15/oz.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> Do you have any other companies with no-lose drill programs or other nice surprises in store on your radar?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> Dozens of companies have done exceptionally well. I just came back from  two weeks in Colombia, where virtually everything is a slam-dunk. <a href="http://www.theaureport.com/pub/co/2783" target="_blank">Sunward Resources Ltd. (SWD:TSX.V)</a> is going to be announcing really extraordinary results. It already has  about 8.6 Moz. That&#8217;s an extraordinary amount of resources for a company  only two years old.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> If Sunward is still drilling, how big might that get?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> A lot bigger.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> Double?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> Could be.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> In what timeframe?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> Two years.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> Any others you&#8217;d care to mention in Colombia?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> Colombia Crest Gold Corp. (CLB:TSX.V; EAT:Fkft), <a href="http://www.theaureport.com/pub/co/3653" target="_blank">Red Eagle Mining Corp. (RD:TSX.V)</a>, <a href="http://www.theaureport.com/pub/co/819" target="_blank">B2Gold Corp. (BTO:TSX; BGLPF:OTCQX)</a>, Bellhaven Copper and Gold Inc. (BHV:TSX.V), Solvista Gold Corp. (SVV:TSX.V) and <a href="http://www.theaureport.com/pub/co/2406" target="_blank">Continental Gold Ltd. (CNL:TSX)</a>. But, there are 36 listed companies in Columbia, and I don&#8217;t think you could go wrong investing there.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> So Colombia as a region is a good play.</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> It&#8217;s a phenomenal play.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> You&#8217;re also big on Africa.</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> I used to be, but Africa is getting really stupid. Tanzania&#8217;s come up  with suggestions and changes to the mining laws. Ghana&#8217;s started getting  greedy. In every business cycle when the cost of the commodities goes  up countries start thinking, &#8220;You know, we hate to see these guys making  all this money so we need to make sure it won&#8217;t happen.&#8221;</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> So Africa&#8217;s fallen out of favor.</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> Australia, Peru and Argentina are also getting stupid.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> Do you hold better hope for the U.S. on the mining front?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> The U.S. has some really wonderful properties in Arizona, Nevada, Idaho  and Oregon. The western part of the country was wealthy due to mining  and we are going to go back to that. I think the U.S. will split up into  a series of five or six nation states. Florida has nothing in common  with California and California has nothing in common with New York. But  again, the U.S. as we know it might not exist a year from now.</p>
<p>Take  a look at what I said a few years ago about riots in the United States.  Occupy Wall Street started in September. It was a peaceful  demonstration. There was no crime. There was no violence. The police  started it by barricading young women behind the net and then spraying  them in the face with pepper spray.</p>
<p>Occupy Wall Street hit a  nerve in Americans and spread all over the country. When it got to  Oakland, the police decided they needed to up the ante, so they started  firing teargas grenades in the face of an Iraqi War veteran from 10 feet  away. If I did that, I&#8217;d be in jail for attempted murder. Since a  policeman did it, he got away with it. They beat another protester so  severely with batons they put him in the hospital in critical condition  with a damaged spleen. They have pepper-sprayed priests, 84-year-old  women and pregnant women. And these are all peaceful protesters.</p>
<p>The  key to understanding what is going on is the police continue to  escalate the violence. The next thing will be something similar to Kent  State, where they plant an agent provocateur who will fire a gun into  the air and the police will take that as permission to start shooting  protesters. When that happens, it will literally start a civil war—and  it could happen any day.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> That&#8217;s not like citizens of one state going against citizens of another state because they have fundamental differences.</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> No, it would be a civil war of peaceful citizens against a violent,  corrupt, out-of-control government. We have every bit of that now. The  police are the ones doing the escalation, and sooner or later Americans  will start defending themselves. If it had been my son or daughter who  was shot in the face, I don&#8217;t know what my reaction would be. Those  protestors all have parents and brothers and sisters and friends. I&#8217;m  shocked at the willingness of police to escalate violence against people  who are no threat to them at all. It could get really bloody really  quickly.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> Why do you think this is Occupy Wall Street and not Occupy Pennsylvania Avenue?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> The term should be AWA—Americans with an Attitude. I think that these  protests are underway in 113 cities, so obviously a lot of Americans in a  lot of locations are angry.</p>
<ul>
<li>23% of Americans are angry because they&#8217;re unemployed.</li>
<li>46 million Americans are angry because they are on food stamps.</li>
<li>50% of mortgage holders are angry because their mortgages are under water.</li>
</ul>
<p>Everyone  knows they have been raped by Wall Street and the government. The  common theme is anger. We are angry at big business and we are angry at  government.</p>
<p>Big business owns government. You have to go after  big business. Barack Obama and this administration are totally  controlled by external forces. They are controlled by Israel, Wall  Street and the media. But we do not have an activist government that&#8217;s  actually doing anything. It&#8217;s totally corrupt, bought and paid for.  Everyone in Congress, with the exception of Ron Paul, has turned into a  pimp.</p>
<p><strong>TGR:</strong> That&#8217;s why congressional approval is as low as what―18%?</p>
<p><strong>BM:</strong> 7%. The devil does better than that. Someone did a survey a week or so  ago comparing Congress to Satan and Satan came up with an 8% approval  rate.</p>
<p><em>Convinced that gold and silver were at their bottoms, and wanting to give others a foundation for investing in resource stocks, <a href="http://www.theaureport.com/pub/htdocs/expert.html?id=3">Bob</a> and Barb Moriarty brought <a href="http://www.321gold.com/" target="_blank">321gold.com</a> to the Internet 10 years ago, and later added <a href="http://www.321energy.com/" target="_blank">321energy.com</a> to cover oil, natural gas, gasoline, coal, solar, wind and nuclear  energy. Both sites feature articles, editorial opinions, pricing figures  and updates on relevant current events. Before his Internet career,  Moriarty was a Marine F-4B pilot and O-1C/G forward air controller with  more than 820 missions in Vietnam. A captain at age 22, he was the  youngest naval aviator in Vietnam and one of the war&#8217;s most highly  decorated. He holds 14 international aviation records, and once flew an  airplane through the Eiffel Tower&#8217;s pillars &#8220;just for fun.&#8221;</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/08/how-to-make-money-in-a-fugly-stock-market-bob-moriarty/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Tale of Two Recessions</title>
		<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/05/a-tale-of-two-recessions/</link>
		<comments>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/05/a-tale-of-two-recessions/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 05 Dec 2011 17:30:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Christopher Briem</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[U.S. Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[labor market]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pittsburgh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[recession]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/?p=10015</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>So I wind up often getting into an agument that boils down to me disagreeing with a common belief that the recent recession for Pittsburgh is a slightly milder, but still very similar experience to the recession of the early 1980&#8217;s.  Nationally it was actually two recessions officially (January to July 1980 followed by the longer <span style="color:#777"> . . . &#8594; Read More: <a href="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/05/a-tale-of-two-recessions/">A Tale of Two Recessions</a></span>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So I wind up often getting into an agument that boils down to me disagreeing with a common belief that the recent recession for Pittsburgh is a slightly milder, but still very similar experience to the recession of the early 1980&#8217;s.  Nationally it was actually two recessions officially (January to July 1980 followed by the longer period July 1981 to November 1982), though I think most would agree that the two recessions really were one big recession for the Pittsburgh region.</p>
<p>So as the national news parses the good unemployment numbers yesterday, the nabob version focuses on the drop in the labor force participation the numbers seem to show.  It lead me to making the graph below.  I took the labor force trends in Pittsburgh and made a comparable index from a period early in the two recessions.   So from January 1982 and from January 2008 forward, the graph shows what happened to the national and Pittsburgh region labor forces over the subsequent 4 years.  The graph shows the change from those baseline months.  Lot&#8217;s to parse from it, but just take a look:</p>
<div><a href="http://4.bp.blogspot.com/--Gy2kEd4ct8/TtomczllCvI/AAAAAAAABjE/UXAehUPBezA/s1600/lfrecession.jpg"><img src="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/wp-content/plugins/wp-o-matic/cache/ff1b9_lfrecession.jpg" border="0" alt="" width="400" height="230" /></a></div>
<p>The extreme differences for Pittsburgh in the two recession (1980s vs recently) go way beyond what that graph shows. That decline in labor force in Pittsburgh actually masks the decline in the male labor force a bit as women entered the workforce in record numbers to replace the men who were out of work. The drop in the labor force clearly correlate with the net migration that spiked from the region and the drop in population it caused. The folks who were leaving both the regional labor force and leaving the region period were predominantly younger workers who were the folks most capable of adapting and changing to new jobs in new industries.  Those who stayed were far more likely to be older workers who had been displaced from the occupations they had had for decades and for many would never find new employment.  Today we know that in recent years we have seen the first net migration into the Pittsburgh region in decades and changes in migration patterns almost entirely reflect changing migration patterns of young workers.   It is folks in their 20&#8217;s who dominate migration flows with rates of migration dropping as folks get into their 30&#8217;s, 40&#8217;s and older.. until there is a bit of a spike in early retirement years. So if net migration for the Pittsburgh region flipped from net negative to net positive just a few years ago, it has to reflect changes in the flow of younger workers into the region.</p>
<p>So, just as the incredibly high unemployment rates of Pittsburgh in the early 1980&#8217;s persisted even though so many workers were leaving the region which would have taken a lot of potentially unemployed folks out of the regional labor force&#8230;  masking how bad the employment situation really was; today the regional unemployment rates are being impacted by more workers, or those seeking work, flowing into the region and potentially making local labor force metrics look worse than they appear otherwise.</p>
<div><img src="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/wp-content/plugins/wp-o-matic/cache/5dbc6_28045666-7763825016588171913?l=nullspace2.blogspot.com" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/05/a-tale-of-two-recessions/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Lies, damn lies, and context</title>
		<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/01/lies-damn-lies-and-context/</link>
		<comments>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/01/lies-damn-lies-and-context/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Dec 2011 20:25:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Christopher Briem</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[U.S. Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jobs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Marcellus Shale]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[natural gas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pennsylvania]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/?p=9976</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>First off,though  it has nothing to do with what I started writing except that it talked about Bradford County and the international attention Pennsylvania shale gas development is getting.  BBC looks at the whole Marcellus thing:  How fracking affects a community in Pennsylvania</p> <p>What really got me going was a far less read piece that <span style="color:#777"> . . . &#8594; Read More: <a href="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/01/lies-damn-lies-and-context/">Lies, damn lies, and context</a></span>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First off,though  it has nothing to do with what I started writing except that it talked about Bradford County and the international attention Pennsylvania shale gas development is getting.  BBC looks at the whole Marcellus thing:  <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-15919248">How fracking affects a community in Pennsylvania</a></p>
<p>What really got me going was a far less read piece that also looked at some Marcellus impacts.  A publication called Area Development has this:  <a href="http://www.areadevelopment.com/EnergyEnvironment/November2011/Natural-Gas-Boosting-Regional-Economies-11255409.shtml">Natural Gas Boom Boosting Regional Economies</a>.  Iin passing they have a neat little factoid also about Bradford County.  It says with clear implication that it is all Marcellus related</p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;In Bradford County, Pa., the 2009 unemployment rate of 10 percent has been  halved because of Marcellus Shale gas development. &#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Half?  I was like.. really?  I had to go check.  So here is the unemployment rate in Bradford County back a few years:</p>
<div><a href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-uME4YU7dLKw/TtZDTObOOWI/AAAAAAAABik/ZRqJObU-VH0/s1600/bradford1.jpg"><img src="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/wp-content/plugins/wp-o-matic/cache/9532a_bradford1.jpg" border="0" alt="" width="400" height="302" /></a></div>
<p>So it is true that Bradford county had one month, one, where the local unemployment rate hit 9.9%.   Problem is that the current unemployment rate is 6.4%, so half is quite a stretch.  Skipping that the 9.9% was just one month and that the average unemployment rate in 2009 was 8.3% you really are getting further away from justifying that half claim.  The  kindest I could is that there was one month in April of 2011 that the county&#8217;s unemployment rate was 5.1%.  So really cherry picking two specific months I&#8217;ve highlighted there with the two recent extremes in the unemployment rate might get you to justifying that <em>half</em> comment.  But it raises a bigger question then does it not?  Bradford County, the heart of Marcellus, has seen its unemployment rate go up a lot this year?  Further, what is the best baseline to really judge the impact on the local labor force up there?  One month in 2009, or all of 2009, or some earlier year. The average unemployment rate for 2008 was 5.3%.   So yes, the current unemployment rate in Bradford county is up from what was the end of the recession technically. How about 2007? 4.7%.   So now go back and think about that <em>half</em> claim.  Methinks it all may be a bit more complicated than that.</p>
<div><img src="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/wp-content/plugins/wp-o-matic/cache/9532a_28045666-1599161447952627883?l=nullspace2.blogspot.com" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/01/lies-damn-lies-and-context/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Jobs Americans Won’t Do?</title>
		<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/01/jobs-americans-won%e2%80%99t-do/</link>
		<comments>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/01/jobs-americans-won%e2%80%99t-do/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Dec 2011 15:00:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Simon Grey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Economic Theory]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[government spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[illegal immigrants]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[immigration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[labor market]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[minimum wages]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[taxation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/?p=9963</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It looks like that canard is just plain wrong: <p>Unemployment rates have fallen in Alabama amid new legal pressure on companies to comply with a popular immigration reform law.</p> <p>September was the first full month that the reform was in force, and the unemployment rate fell from 9.8 percent in September to 9.3 percent <span style="color:#777"> . . . &#8594; Read More: <a href="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/01/jobs-americans-won%e2%80%99t-do/">Jobs Americans Won’t Do?</a></span>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div>It looks like that canard is <a href="http://dailycaller.com/2011/11/21/unemployment-drops-as-alabamas-immigration-reform-enacted/">just plain wrong</a>:</div>
<blockquote><p>Unemployment rates have fallen in Alabama amid new legal pressure on companies to comply with a popular immigration reform law.</p></blockquote>
<blockquote><p>September was the first full month that the reform was in force, and the unemployment rate fell from 9.8 percent in September to 9.3 percent in October, according to a Nov. 18 report from the state government.</p></blockquote>
<blockquote><p>The rates fell from 9.9 percent to 9 percent in Etowah County, from 8.8 percent to 8.1 percent in Marshall county, and from 11.6 percent to 10.6 percent in DeKalb county. [Hat tip: <a href="http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?singlepost=2798613">Karl Denninger</a>.]</p></blockquote>
<p>As <a href="http://cygne-gris.blogspot.com/2011/11/cheap-labor-is-not-solution.html">I’ve written before</a>, illegal labor and minimum wage don’t go together because illegal labor prices legal labor out of the market.<span> </span>This is very simple economics.<span> </span>If you increase supply of something without increasing demand, prices will drop.<span> </span>And, if there is some sort of price floor in that market (think minimum wage), then that which has a price floor will be priced out at the margin.<span> </span>Therefore, when you decrease supply of something while demand remains stagnant, price will rise and marginal purchases will occur again.<span> </span>Incidentally, that’s precisely what happened in Alabama, and that’s what should happen in every state.</p>
<p>If there are any governors who might be squeamish about the idea of booting illegals back to the third-world, dirt-ridden country from which they came, let me offer you three benefits, beyond the simple reduction in unemployment rates, for your consideration.</p>
<p>First, government expenditures will decrease because you will no longer have to pay for free-riding illegals.<span> </span>Education costs, medical care costs, law enforcement costs, etc. will all decline because you won’t have to pay for social programs for illegals, or police them.</p>
<p>Second, tax revenues will increase.<span> </span>If people earn money, they will have taxable income.<span> </span>They will also inevitably spend some of it, which means increases in sales tax revenue.<span> </span>There might even be indirect increases in property tax revenue, since increased employment should increase demand for property at the margins.</p>
<p>Finally, this will head off potential political unrest.<span> </span>In spite of multi-culturists’ best attempts at convincing people that people from different cultures are all the same, the simple fact of the matter is that people from different cultures are different from one another.<span> </span>Another simple truth:<span> </span>People hate people who are different from them (just ask the Jews what the Germans thought of them in the 30’s), and they love to scapegoat people from other countries and cultures.<span> </span>Sometimes this can be violent.</p>
<p>If, however, you kick illegals out your state, they won’t be around to be scapegoated, which means that you have likely prevented bloodshed.<span> </span>Also, with increased employment as a result, you have a population that will not be as inclined to view violence against other ethnic groups as necessary.</p>
<p>Frankly, if this is not enough to compel you to implement a policy similar to Alabama’s, then you are simply unfit to be a governor, and will deserve the wrath of the voters during the next election or uprising, whichever comes first.<span> </span>Don’t say I didn’t warn you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/12/01/jobs-americans-won%e2%80%99t-do/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Occupy That!</title>
		<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/11/11/occupy-that/</link>
		<comments>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/11/11/occupy-that/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Nov 2011 20:10:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Simon Grey</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[U.S. Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[bailout]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Capitalism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jobs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Occupy Wall Street]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[protests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[regulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[TARP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/?p=9667</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Austin Hill, ladies and gentlemen: <p>Will you allow this question to “occupy” your minds for a moment? Seriously, what would happen to our country if we all chose to do nothing but take up space on “public” property (or even on other people’s private property as some of you have done), consume resources at <span style="color:#777"> . . . &#8594; Read More: <a href="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/11/11/occupy-that/">Occupy That!</a></span>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div><a href="http://townhall.com/columnists/austinhill/2011/10/16/occupy_this!/page/full/">Austin Hill</a>, ladies and gentlemen:</div>
<blockquote><p>Will you allow this question to “occupy” your minds for a moment? Seriously, what would happen to our country if we all chose to do nothing but take up space on “public” property (or even on other people’s private property as some of you have done), consume resources at other people’s expense, and spend several days in a row not producing things? Have you even thought of what might happen, if the rest of us followed your “example?”</p></blockquote>
<p>Well, I suppose it would first depend on who all quit their jobs.<span> </span>If every politician, bureaucrat, and bankster quit their jobs, I would be willing to bet that everyone would considerably better off.<span> </span>Toss in superfluous workers that are only necessary because of government interference, like tax lawyers, compliance officers, safety managers, CPAs, etc., and suddenly this country wouldn’t be shackled in economic regression.<span> </span>As for everyone else, point taken.</p>
<p>However, it should probably be pointed out that many OWSers are able to OWS because they don’t have jobs.<span> </span>See, the funny thing about recessions, even those caused by massive government intervention leading to housing bubbles which are then exploited for massive profit by Wall Street banks who are defrauding home owners as well as Americans by using the Fed as an ATM machine, is that jobs tend to be more scarce.<span> </span>And when that recession turns into a depression, those scarce jobs don’t come back for a while.<span> </span>So, for the most part, Occupy Wall Street is not a matter of people quitting their jobs as much as it is a matter of people not having jobs in the first place because the government, acting as a pawn of the banks, decided to wreck the economy.</p>
<blockquote><p>Participants in the nationwide “occupy” movement would probably be shocked to know this. But the fact is, their oh-so-important demonstrations are able to occur as they do because the majority of us in America do not think and act the way they do. In fact, to be even more precise, <strong><em>their choices are enabled in no small part by – gasp!- American-styled Capitalism!</em></strong> Yet just as those who burn the U.S. flag fail to understand that the object they desecrate is emblematic of the freedom they exercise, the occupiers fail to see that the “C-word” which they loathe is precisely what makes their occupying possible. [Emphasis added.]</p></blockquote>
<div>Actually, it is the distinctly American form of crony capitalism, as typified by TARP and other recent bailouts, that led to the current set of choices OWSers face.  The banks have looted the American economy, quite illegally, it should be noted (and note that the linked article only concerns itself with judicial rulings, not investigative allegations, which means that the assertion of fraud was either proved in a court of law or admitted to by the perpetrators!)  Jobs are scarce because politicians had to tax small business and mid-sized businesses to death in order to fellate pay off the major banks that have bought them contributed to their campaigns in the past election cycles.  And the cost of those taxes have been jobs that would have otherwise be filled by those currently OWSing.Quite simply, the free market is dead in America, and has been for decades.  The result is exceedingly high unemployment—the U6 index indicates it’s been in the high double digits for some time—which is the direct result of massive government intervention in the economy, for the benefit of enriching the banks.  This is in no way free-market capitalism.  In fact, a certain someone has noted quite acutely that America doesn’t actually have a free market, in practice.  Yet, said someone wants to act as if suddenly the market is perfectly free and all the decades of government intervention no longer have consequences and therefore all those who are currently OWSing are simply socialists who want to redistribute the wealth.</p>
<p>But yes, American-styled capitalism has not only made OWSing possible, in that it has eliminated productive jobs, but it has also made it necessary because the system is corrupt and redistributionist.</p>
<p>Also, in regards to the burning of American flags, could Mr. Hill please provide proof of this occurrence?  I searched on Google for photographic evidence of OWSers burning the American flag, but all I could find was the occasional desecration, and a few instances of burning the Israeli flag, presumably in honor of Ben Bernanke.  I would very much like proof that OWSers are actually the anti-American protestors that the conservative media make them out to be.</p>
<p>(For those who are interested, Karl Denninger has a rather <a href="http://market-ticker.org/akcs-www?post=196938">thorough takedown</a> of Thomas Sowell’s <a href="http://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2011/11/02/democracy_versus_mob_rule/page/full/">article on OWS</a>.)</div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/11/11/occupy-that/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Weekly Jobless Claims Break Below 400,000</title>
		<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/11/04/weekly-jobless-claims-break-below-400000/</link>
		<comments>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/11/04/weekly-jobless-claims-break-below-400000/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2011 13:50:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Eldon Mast</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[U.S. Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jobless claims]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[labor market]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/?p=9653</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Jobless claims continue to come down and this week initial claims fell 9,000 to 397,000. The four-week average is now also approaching the 400,000 level, down 2,000 in the week to 404,500. This level is more than 10,000 lower than the month-ago comparison and offers a positive indication for the October employment report to <span style="color:#777"> . . . &#8594; Read More: <a href="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/11/04/weekly-jobless-claims-break-below-400000/">Weekly Jobless Claims Break Below 400,000</a></span>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Jobless claims continue to come down and this week initial claims fell 9,000 to 397,000.  The four-week average is now also approaching the 400,000 level, down 2,000 in the week to 404,500. This level is more than 10,000 lower than the month-ago comparison and offers a positive indication for the October employment report to be released on Friday.</p>
<p>The report comes on the heals of an ADP report release Wednesday that showed October private payrolls rose 110,000 six digit growth that mirrored September&#8217;s growth of 116,000.</p>
<p>The Wednesday Challenger Job-Cut Report also showed corporate layoff rates to be significantly subdued.</p>
<p>The doomsters have long pointed to a jobless claims level of 400,000 as the mark that indicates robust hiring is on the way&#8230; of course don&#8217;t look for the perma-pessimists to change their tune even though the recovery has now produced this number.</p>
<p>The is no doubt however that if the jobless claims levels continue their current trends, that both private and government payroll nets will continue their healthy rise.</p>
<span class="sfforumlink"><a href="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/forum/us-economics/weekly-jobless-claims-break-below-400000"><img src="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/wp-content/plugins/simple-forum/styles/icons/default/bloglink.png" alt="" /> Join the forum discussion on this post</a> - (1) Posts</span>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/11/04/weekly-jobless-claims-break-below-400000/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Unstats for Unemployment</title>
		<link>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/11/02/unstats-for-unemployment/</link>
		<comments>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/11/02/unstats-for-unemployment/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2011 16:50:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Christopher Briem</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[U.S. Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[labor market]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pittsburgh]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[unemployment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/?p=9627</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>So just poking a bit at the news with the latest labor force data that came out yesterday..</p> <p>PG headline: Region&#8217;s jobless rate falls a little.   The drop was 4/10ths of a percent was one of the largest month over month drops in a decade.  The only bigger drop was what is reported between <span style="color:#777"> . . . &#8594; Read More: <a href="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/11/02/unstats-for-unemployment/">Unstats for Unemployment</a></span>]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So just poking a bit at the news with the latest labor force data that came out yesterday..</p>
<p>PG headline: <a href="http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11305/1186546-28.stm">Region&#8217;s jobless rate falls a little</a>.   The drop was 4/10ths of a percent was one of the largest month over month drops in a decade.  The only bigger drop was what is reported between Dec 2010 and Jan 2011 where there was a -0.7 point drop.  I bet that has more to do with some revisions in 2010 more than anything else.  Might forbode some similar out of pattern shifts at the end of this year as well.  So if that was<em> a little</em>, I just wonder what would constitute a <em>moderate</em> drop in the unemployment rate?  Honestly, it is a sampling artifact most likely, but so was the jump in unemployment rate reported last month.   Wait until the next revision when the data gets matched to more complete payroll data and I bet there will be some surprises for the region.</p>
<p>Trib also tried to discount it with this line of explanation &#8220;<a href="http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/business/s_764828.html">The jobless rate fell mainly because schools reopened and rehired staff, adding  7,200 jobs, state and area economists said</a>. &#8220;  Which just isn&#8217;t true.  These are seasonally adjusted numbers being reported on.  So let&#8217;s go back over a decade and look at all the month over months changes between respective Augusts and Septembers. I am pretty sure schools always open up again in September, yet there rarely is a drop in the unemployment rate.. sometimes even an increase. So that isn&#8217;t the story at all. See:</p>
<table border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
<col width="64"></col>
<col width="84"></col>
<col span="5" width="64"></col>
<tbody>
<tr>
<td width="64" height="61"><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><span> </span></span></p>
<div><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><span> </span></span><fieldset> <a title="Sort by Year" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/qslabforcedata.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;areaname=Pittsburgh%2C+PA+MSA&amp;rollgeo=&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20110309:20110308:20100309:20100308:20090309:20090308:20080309:20080308:20070309:20070308:20060309:20060308:20050309:20050308:20040309:20040308:20030309:20030308:20020309:20020308:20010309:20010308&amp;adjusted=1&amp;rndtotal=0&amp;showgrid=True&amp;showgraph=False&amp;showmap=False&amp;cboCharts=GeosolChart1&amp;cboChartTypes=Column&amp;orderby=2A">Year</a></fieldset></div>
</td>
<td width="84"><a title="Sort by Period" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/qslabforcedata.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;areaname=Pittsburgh%2C+PA+MSA&amp;rollgeo=&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20110309:20110308:20100309:20100308:20090309:20090308:20080309:20080308:20070309:20070308:20060309:20060308:20050309:20050308:20040309:20040308:20030309:20030308:20020309:20020308:20010309:20010308&amp;adjusted=1&amp;rndtotal=0&amp;showgrid=True&amp;showgraph=False&amp;showmap=False&amp;cboCharts=GeosolChart1&amp;cboChartTypes=Column&amp;orderby=8A"><span>Period</span></a></td>
<td width="64"><a title="Sort by Civilian Labor Force" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/qslabforcedata.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;areaname=Pittsburgh%2C+PA+MSA&amp;rollgeo=&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20110309:20110308:20100309:20100308:20090309:20090308:20080309:20080308:20070309:20070308:20060309:20060308:20050309:20050308:20040309:20040308:20030309:20030308:20020309:20020308:20010309:20010308&amp;adjusted=1&amp;rndtotal=0&amp;showgrid=True&amp;showgraph=False&amp;showmap=False&amp;cboCharts=GeosolChart1&amp;cboChartTypes=Column&amp;selectall=&amp;orderby=3A"><span>Civilian Labor Force</span></a></td>
<td width="64"><a title="Sort by Employment" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/qslabforcedata.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;areaname=Pittsburgh%2C+PA+MSA&amp;rollgeo=&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20110309:20110308:20100309:20100308:20090309:20090308:20080309:20080308:20070309:20070308:20060309:20060308:20050309:20050308:20040309:20040308:20030309:20030308:20020309:20020308:20010309:20010308&amp;adjusted=1&amp;rndtotal=0&amp;showgrid=True&amp;showgraph=False&amp;showmap=False&amp;cboCharts=GeosolChart1&amp;cboChartTypes=Column&amp;selectall=&amp;orderby=4A"><span>Employment</span></a></td>
<td width="64"><a title="Sort by Unemployment" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/qslabforcedata.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;areaname=Pittsburgh%2C+PA+MSA&amp;rollgeo=&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20110309:20110308:20100309:20100308:20090309:20090308:20080309:20080308:20070309:20070308:20060309:20060308:20050309:20050308:20040309:20040308:20030309:20030308:20020309:20020308:20010309:20010308&amp;adjusted=1&amp;rndtotal=0&amp;showgrid=True&amp;showgraph=False&amp;showmap=False&amp;cboCharts=GeosolChart1&amp;cboChartTypes=Column&amp;selectall=&amp;orderby=5A"><span>Unemployment</span></a></td>
<td width="64"><a title="Sort by Unemployment Rate (%)" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/qslabforcedata.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;areaname=Pittsburgh%2C+PA+MSA&amp;rollgeo=&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20110309:20110308:20100309:20100308:20090309:20090308:20080309:20080308:20070309:20070308:20060309:20060308:20050309:20050308:20040309:20040308:20030309:20030308:20020309:20020308:20010309:20010308&amp;adjusted=1&amp;rndtotal=0&amp;showgrid=True&amp;showgraph=False&amp;showmap=False&amp;cboCharts=GeosolChart1&amp;cboChartTypes=Column&amp;selectall=&amp;orderby=6A"><span>Unemployment Rate (%)</span></a></td>
<p>&lt;!&#8211;   <a href="http://nullspace2.blogspot.com/qslabforcedata.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;areaname=Pittsburgh%2C+PA+MSA&amp;rollgeo=&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20110309:20110308:20100309:20100308:20090309:20090308:20080309:20080308:20070309:20070308:20060309:20060308:20050309:20050308:20040309:20040308:20030309:20030308:20020309:20020308:20010309:20010308&amp;multiselect=&amp;selectall=&amp;adjusted=1&amp;rndtotal=0&amp;orderby=7A">&#8211;&gt; </a></p>
<td width="64"><strong><span>Report</span></strong></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="64" height="35"><span>2011</span></td>
<td width="84"><span>September</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,227,200</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,136,000</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>91,200</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>7.4</span></td>
<td><a title="Time" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/unemp_data.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;rollgeo=&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20110309&amp;adjusted=1"><span>Time</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="64" height="20"><span>2011</span></td>
<td width="84"><span>August</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,229,700</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,133,500</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>96,200</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>7.8</span></td>
<td><a title="Time" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/unemp_data.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;rollgeo=&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20110308&amp;adjusted=1"><span>Time</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="64" height="35"><span>2010</span></td>
<td width="84"><span>September</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,214,100</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,118,700</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>95,400</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>7.9</span></td>
<td><a title="Time" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/unemp_data.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;rollgeo=&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20100309&amp;adjusted=1"><span>Time</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="64" height="20"><span>2010</span></td>
<td width="84"><span>August</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,215,600</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,119,900</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>95,700</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>7.9</span></td>
<td><a title="Time" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/unemp_data.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;rollgeo=&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20100308&amp;adjusted=1"><span>Time</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="64" height="35"><span>2009</span></td>
<td width="84"><span>September</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,213,200</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,118,000</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>95,200</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>7.8</span></td>
<td><a title="Time" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/unemp_data.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;rollgeo=&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20090309&amp;adjusted=1"><span>Time</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="64" height="20"><span>2009</span></td>
<td width="84"><span>August</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,218,100</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,124,400</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>93,700</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>7.7</span></td>
<td><a title="Time" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/unemp_data.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;rollgeo=&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20090308&amp;adjusted=1"><span>Time</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="64" height="35"><span>2008</span></td>
<td width="84"><span>September</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,231,800</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,165,800</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>66,000</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>5.4</span></td>
<td><a title="Time" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/unemp_data.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;rollgeo=&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20080309&amp;adjusted=1"><span>Time</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="64" height="20"><span>2008</span></td>
<td width="84"><span>August</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,231,100</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,165,800</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>65,400</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>5.3</span></td>
<td><a title="Time" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/unemp_data.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;rollgeo=&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20080308&amp;adjusted=1"><span>Time</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="64" height="35"><span>2007</span></td>
<td width="84"><span>September</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,210,000</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,155,900</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>54,100</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>4.5</span></td>
<td><a title="Time" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/unemp_data.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;rollgeo=&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20070309&amp;adjusted=1"><span>Time</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="64" height="20"><span>2007</span></td>
<td width="84"><span>August</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,207,400</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,154,800</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>52,600</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>4.4</span></td>
<td><a title="Time" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/unemp_data.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;rollgeo=&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20070308&amp;adjusted=1"><span>Time</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="64" height="35"><span>2006</span></td>
<td width="84"><span>September</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,204,600</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,149,200</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>55,400</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>4.6</span></td>
<td><a title="Time" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/unemp_data.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;rollgeo=&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20060309&amp;adjusted=1"><span>Time</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="64" height="20"><span>2006</span></td>
<td width="84"><span>August</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,202,600</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,145,200</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>57,400</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>4.8</span></td>
<td><a title="Time" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/unemp_data.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;rollgeo=&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20060308&amp;adjusted=1"><span>Time</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="64" height="35"><span>2005</span></td>
<td width="84"><span>September</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,201,800</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,138,700</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>63,100</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>5.3</span></td>
<td><a title="Time" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/unemp_data.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;rollgeo=&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20050309&amp;adjusted=1"><span>Time</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="64" height="20"><span>2005</span></td>
<td width="84"><span>August</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,200,700</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,139,500</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>61,100</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>5.1</span></td>
<td><a title="Time" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/unemp_data.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;rollgeo=&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20050308&amp;adjusted=1"><span>Time</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="64" height="35"><span>2004</span></td>
<td width="84"><span>September</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,199,100</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,132,000</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>67,100</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>5.6</span></td>
<td><a title="Time" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/unemp_data.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;rollgeo=&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20040309&amp;adjusted=1"><span>Time</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="64" height="20"><span>2004</span></td>
<td width="84"><span>August</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,198,700</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,130,600</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>68,100</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>5.7</span></td>
<td><a title="Time" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/unemp_data.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;rollgeo=&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20040308&amp;adjusted=1"><span>Time</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="64" height="35"><span>2003</span></td>
<td width="84"><span>September</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,199,000</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,128,400</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>70,600</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>5.9</span></td>
<td><a title="Time" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/unemp_data.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;rollgeo=&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20030309&amp;adjusted=1"><span>Time</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="64" height="20"><span>2003</span></td>
<td width="84"><span>August</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,197,400</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,127,800</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>69,600</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>5.8</span></td>
<td><a title="Time" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/unemp_data.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;rollgeo=&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20030308&amp;adjusted=1"><span>Time</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="64" height="35"><span>2002</span></td>
<td width="84"><span>September</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,218,900</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,150,800</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>68,100</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>5.6</span></td>
<td><a title="Time" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/unemp_data.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;rollgeo=&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20020309&amp;adjusted=1"><span>Time</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="64" height="20"><span>2002</span></td>
<td width="84"><span>August</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,218,900</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,150,600</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>68,300</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>5.6</span></td>
<td><a title="Time" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/unemp_data.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;rollgeo=&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20020308&amp;adjusted=1"><span>Time</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="64" height="35"><span>2001</span></td>
<td width="84"><span>September</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,210,000</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,151,000</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>59,100</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>4.9</span></td>
<td><a title="Time" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/unemp_data.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;rollgeo=&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20010309&amp;adjusted=1"><span>Time</span></a></td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td width="64" height="21"><span>2001</span></td>
<td width="84"><span>August</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,204,800</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>1,146,200</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>58,600</span></td>
<td width="64"><span>4.9</span></td>
<td><a title="Time" href="http://paworkstats.geosolinc.com/analyzer/unemp_data.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;rollgeo=&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20010308&amp;adjusted=1"><span>Time</span></a><span style="text-decoration: underline;"><span> </span></span></td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><a href="http://nullspace2.blogspot.com/qslabforcedata.asp?geo=4221038300&amp;session=LABFORCE&amp;subsession=99&amp;areaname=Pittsburgh%2C+PA+MSA&amp;rollgeo=&amp;cat=HST_EMP_WAGE_LAB_FORCE&amp;sgltime=0&amp;tableused=LABFORCE&amp;time=20110309:20110308:20100309:20100308:20090309:20090308:20080309:20080308:20070309:20070308:20060309:20060308:20050309:20050308:20040309:20040308:20030309:20030308:20020309:20020308:20010309:20010308&amp;multiselect=&amp;selectall=&amp;adjusted=1&amp;rndtotal=0&amp;orderby=7A">and just something to ponder a bit..  Other than for September 2008, the regional labor force is the highest it has ever been in any September ever.  All while at least nationally labor force participation is </a><a href="http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000">down significantly over the last few years</a>.</p>
<p>Anyway&#8230; just an update on my graphic showing the difference between the local and national unemployment rates.  Now at 60 straight months of faring better than the nation.  Well into historic territory for Pittsburgh where this has never been recorded before over such a long period of time.</p>
<div><img src="http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/wp-content/plugins/wp-o-matic/cache/280c0_28045666-2145239580180428881?l=nullspace2.blogspot.com" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2011/11/02/unstats-for-unemployment/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

