Click to enlarge:


Source:
Fisher Investments

Category: Employment

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

5 Responses to “Recessions And Unemployment Rates 1929-2011”

  1. JohnnyVee says:

    Unemeployment is calculated differently today then it was in 1929 to x. If unemployment was calculated like it was in and around th 1930s, wouldn’t it be close to 20%? So I am not sure how helpful it is to compare today with historical numbers.

  2. Futuredome says:

    Sorry, John, but no. Barry should have shaded the graph between the origin of the modern statistical technique and the previous “estimated” numbers.

    The estimated numbers had a “U-3″ and “U-6″ with the U-6 hitting about 37-39% at the top of the 30′s contraction.

    From the amount of contraction, where are you going to get 20% on the U-3 side John? Literally, people either need to think or learn to let blogging intellectualism go. We have the potential to hit 20% and maybe need too. But there we are not close yet.

    ~~~

    BR: I work with standard recession datings . . .

  3. crunched says:

    Uh-huh. Yeah. Just enjoying the recovery here. The unemployment is completely normal.

    Certain things stand out to me from 2008 that I’ll never forget. Dylan Ratigan standing outside in front of the NASDAQ on one of the worst market days, telling the viewers how the bill for the last fifty years was finally coming due. (not long after he went missing from CNBC’s airwaves). Or the two Bear Stearns hedge fund guys who were hounded by the press on the way to their car after the fund went belly up.

    But one of the main things I’ll never forget is that guy from Fisher Investments… the one who used to have the commercial that ran on CNBC before the crisis… he was on CNBC one day in the Spring of 08 and he told the viewers that he was convinced the markets were only experiencing a correction, similar to that of summer 1998. (LTCM?) Anyway, the rest is history. Suffice it to say, his commercial disappeared and hasn’t been seen since.

  4. leveut says:

    “Jobless Recoveries”

    So far, so good.

    “Unemployment Typically Rises Even After Recessions End” (emphasis attempted to be supplied on “Rises”)

    The chart is somewhat compressed, but it does not appear to support that headline for 7 of the 13 recessions.

    “Unemployment typically remains high after recessions” is a different proposition, and I don’t know that the graphs supports that very well either as there are a number of very quick drops in unemployment after the recession.

    So one must ask, what is the purpose of this particular presentation? If it is just routine chartporn tossed out for the masses, it’s one thing.

    If it is to justify the Obama Administration unemployment numbers, it is quite another…and doesn’t do the job. And in that case, Hail Ritholtzia!

  5. kaleberg says:

    If you read contemporary sources from the early 30s, you’ll be surprised at how poorly unemployment was measured. Even in 1932, an estimate of 10,000,000 unemployed cited a University of Chicago professor, not a government agency. (Unemployment was rising rapidly in ’32.) The Bureau of Labor Statistics didn’t really start measuring unemployment statistically until FDR came in.

    Another big difference nowadays is that women are generally in the work force. In the 1930s, if the man lost his job, it was a disaster. In the 1980s, the wage decline pushed a lot more women into the work force, so a lot more families can survive with one breadwinner, though not able to maintain the lifestyle of a double income family.