click for interactive calculator

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta

 

From the wonks at the Federal Reserve Bank in Atlanta, comes this very cool calculator.

You enter your target unemployment rate (i.e, 6.25%) and how many months until you expect your target unemployment rate to be achieved, and the calculator tells you the average monthly change in payroll employment needed to achieve that target rate.

You can also fiddle with Labor force participation rate and average monthly population growth rate.

I’d like to be able to switch up two things — enter the monthly NFP gains to see how long it will take at that rate.

Also, the impact of other variables on the entire employment system — GDP, Retail Sales, Corporate profits, etc. — would be another set of variables that would be interesting to visualize.

Category: Digital Media, Employment, Federal Reserve

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.

4 Responses to “FRB Atlanta Jobs Calculator”

  1. CTMike says:

    Hmm. I wanted to see how long it would take to get to 6.5% if labor force participation goes back to 66% and we create jobs at the pace we did last month. I did not tweak the population growth rate.

    153 months.

    Leaving participation alone, would take +262k jobs per month to get to 6.5% by 2014.

    Sort of puts it all in perspective.

  2. Tarkus says:

    So there really is a causative effect on lower unemployment and low interest rates?

    And if those jobs are in China and India instead of the closed-loop system of the US in the 1950′s, does the feedback loop still hold? Or is the lower unemployment rate in China and India?

    What if they just kept the rates low until the economy/employment came back because of other factors, does that mean it still was the low rates? Because for some reason the low rates aren’t really helping, and they’ve been doing it for a while….

  3. AHodge says:

    nice
    its basically a cutout of anyones good big US macro model

    the key item recent history is the massive drop in participation rate
    which let the U rate fall over 2 points
    while econ growth otherwise
    given growing labor force and productivity
    would have resulted in very little u rate improvement if not for lower participation

  4. AHodge says:

    make that demographically available labor force growth,
    its the lower participaion rate that kept it down