Unemployment Rate % Change versus Prior Recessions
By Barry Ritholtz - July 3rd, 2009, 12:30PM
After yesterday saw unemployment tick up t0 9.5% (and U6 hit 16.5%!) I thought it might be a good time to do a little compare and contrast: Let’s compare job losses during this recession against prior recessions:
This is a different way to look at the ob loss situation: This chart reveals the change in Unemployment across the past 7 recessions :
>
(thanks to RM for the eye candy!)
>
Chart does of the Day takes a look at this recession, the last recession and the average recession from 1954-2006:
>
via Chart of the Day
The current job market has suffered losses that are nearly three times as much as the average. If this were an average recession/job loss cycle, the number of jobs would have begun to increase three months ago.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:37 pm
Nice article on BBC on banks’ performance and bankers’ compensations:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/2009/07/why_bankers_arent_worth_it.html
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:50 pm
Ouch! And no bottom yet.
Just more evidence this ones’ different.
July 3rd, 2009 at 12:54 pm
The So-So Depression continues unabated. And miles to go before I sleep….
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:24 pm
we have already lost the jobs that were added since 2000
There are now 131.7 million jobs in the United States, the department of labor said. That’s fewer than in May 2000, when companies reported 131.9 million jobs.
http://www.philly.com/philly/business/20090702_ap_meltdown101unemploymentbythenumbers.html
http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=1752178
so much for all of those jobs added by those tax breaks we had since 2001.
and all those tax breaks added in this years stimulus package.
July 3rd, 2009 at 1:44 pm
I am surprised no one has mentioned this:
http://trueslant.com/matttaibbi/2009/07/02/nyse-halts-transparency-feels-goldman-program-trading-disclosure-is-unnecessary/
Seems like it would raise a lot of questions, No?
~~~
BR: Mentioned in Thursday’s reading
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:00 pm
@CJ:
ZH posted that a couple of days ago. Try explaining the issue to your non-financial friends. Sucks.
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:05 pm
It’s undoubtedly impossible to compute but it would be interesting to know how many of the job losses in each of these recessions were lay off/furloughs where people were called back to their jobs (manufacturing, construction, etc.) and how many were “permanent.”
I’d guess that the percentage of “permanent” job losses (i.e. actual job destruction) is much higher this time, and in ‘00-’01, than in the previous post-WWII recessions. And thus makes for a much more apples to oranges comparison. Particularly pertinent for those who would like to compare this recession/bear mkt to the one in ‘73-’74
We all know that the FIRE sector of then economy created huge numbers of jobs that have now evaporated and won’t come back (until the next time we go through a debt bubble; 70 years or so?). And that’s why “it’s different this time.”
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:33 pm
Ha, wasn’t Dennis Kneale just talking about how this is a garden variety recession? That black line says otherwise.
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:39 pm
Matt:
Did BR mention Kneale’s meltdown this week? If he did, I missed it. Is it me, or do most of the CNBC anchors come off as extremely unprofessional?
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:45 pm
Onlooker from Troy:
“Permanent” job losses are higher this time. We have less of a manufacturing base to call them back to. And do you think housing is coming back anytime soon? I don’t. Too much inventory(both unsold and foreclosures). And not enough people buying(Job losses … bad credit .. you name it). If you read Krugman, it sounds like he is becoming more convinced we have a “Lost Decade(Japanese style)” coming. Which is on top of the one we’ve basically had this decade.
July 3rd, 2009 at 2:52 pm
Really good article in Barron’s by Randall Forsyth:
http://online.barrons.com/article/SB124648901375282891.html
Words out of my very own mouth. These desperate programs like Cash for Clunkers are just more pulling forward of future demand. We’ve done so much of that, particularly over the last decade, that it just won’t work anymore. And to the degree that it does, it just creates more problems for “tomorrow.”
But we can’t face up to what we’ve wrought, so we “have to do something”, even it it’s utterly stupid.
July 3rd, 2009 at 3:02 pm
another take on the employment numbers
http://www.businessinsider.com/richard-bernstein-why-is-weak-employment-a-surprise-2009-7
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:07 pm
willid3
That’s a really excellent article by Bernstein in that link. He elucidates the important employment factors in a succinct manner.
Thanks
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:32 pm
Zero Down Is a Foreclosure Factor (Duh)
…Recognize this? This is Barry’s post from earlier today..OK?
Let me show you how easy this is…..
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/MOUNTAIN-OF-DEBT-Rising-debt-apf-140105975.html?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=main&asset=&ccode=
MOUNTAIN OF DEBT: Rising debt may be next crisis
Uh, I see your duh and raise you one…this is called Duh-Squared!!
“The country first got into debt to help pay for the Revolutionary War. Growing ever since, the debt stands today at a staggering $11.5 trillion — equivalent to over $37,000 for each and every American. And it’s expanding by over $1 trillion a year.
The mountain of debt easily could become the next full-fledged economic crisis without firm action from Washington, economists of all stripes warn.”
….No kidding, Sherlock. Hello? Anybody home? This is like so, you know, last fall, eh?
July 3rd, 2009 at 4:55 pm
By the way, retail sales in Europe stunk.
http://www.rttnews.com/CorpInfo/EconomicCalendar.aspx
7/03/09 5 am…
July 3rd, 2009 at 5:48 pm
Bruce in Tn Says: MOUNTAIN OF DEBT: Rising debt may be next crisis
I got your post and raise you.
Financial sector debt is larger than federal government debt
Something that the financial pundits and Republicans / Libertarians who talk about “too much federal government debt” fail to mention.
July 3rd, 2009 at 8:41 pm
You know, I wanted to mention this yesterday. Analysts were looking for a loss of 367K jobs and the unemployment rate to climb to 9.6%. So Hampton reports that we lost another 467K jobs which was more than 100K over the consensus and the unemployment rate ticked up to 9.5%. WTF? 100K more jobs than the consensus and the rate is .1% less than the consensus? Only in America.
July 3rd, 2009 at 9:37 pm
With all the unemployed milling around by the end of summer, homelessness rising precipitously, what will become of the “fabric of our civilization”? Should we expect chaos and anarchy to arise? With the vast majority of our citizenry losing their standard of living as a result of the deepening “recession”, job security vanishing, money becoming worthless, unaffordable health care, food and energy prices set to rise and the shenanigans of the politicians doing nothing to help, what should we expect going forward?
On another note, i see even Harvard is basically screwed:
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/daily/2009/06/harvard.html
July 3rd, 2009 at 10:03 pm
Here’s a good analysis of the employment situation by David Rosenberg via TPC’s blog:
http://pragcap.com/the-recession-isnt-over
Addresses the questions I posed above.
July 4th, 2009 at 8:00 am
The Rosenberg piece is excellent.
July 4th, 2009 at 10:30 am
Trace the chart backwards in time and Obama’s stimulus makes perfect sense.
The chart was tracking perfectly to previous recessions when the stimulus bill was written. If the trend had held, the Dems could have borrowed and burned the $787B on the south lawn and looked like heros. Disaster averted.
The Dems must have figured that Bush did all the heavy lifting and now it’s time to cash in.
Now we have a real problem… The stimulus didn’t stimulate (since it wasn’t designed to) and the country needs a REAL stimulus bill, however why would anyone trust the Dems given a chart like this.
Time for some real leadership in DC… Hopefully Obama steps up.
July 4th, 2009 at 11:20 am
Only the easily-led could find a “green shoot” in that chart. See you at SPX 150.
July 4th, 2009 at 12:22 pm
@lw: the idea that Bush did any heavy lifting on any issue is laughable at best. The idea that an Democratic administration would even think that is even more laughable.
July 5th, 2009 at 7:51 am
[...] Let’s compare job losses during this recession against prior recessions: This is a different way to look at the job loss situation: The % change in Unemployment across the past 7 recessions : (Source.) [...]