Sept. jobless rates down in 31 states, up in 8; payroll jobs up in 39 states, down in 10
Last edited Tue Oct 21, 2014, 01:35 PM - Edit history (1)
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
For release 10:00 a.m. (EDT) Tuesday, October 21, 2014 USDL-14-1963
Technical information:
Employment: (202) 691-6559 sminfo@bls.gov www.bls.gov/sae
Unemployment: (202) 691-6392 lausinfo@bls.gov www.bls.gov/lau
Media contact: (202) 691-5902 PressOffice@bls.gov
REGIONAL AND STATE EMPLOYMENT AND UNEMPLOYMENT -- SEPTEMBER 2014
Regional and state unemployment rates were generally little changed in September. Thirty-one states had unemployment rate decreases from August, 8 states had increases, and 11 states and the District of Columbia had no change, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Forty-two states and the District of Columbia had unemployment rate decreases from a year earlier, five states had increases, and three states had no change. The national jobless rate declined to 5.9 percent from August and was 1.3 percentage points lower than in September 2013.
In September 2014, nonfarm payroll employment increased in 39 states and the District of Columbia, decreased in 10 states, and was unchanged in South Dakota. The largest over-the-month increases in employment occurred in Texas (+36,400), Illinois (+19,300), and Colorado (+14,600). The largest over-the-month decrease in employment occurred in California (-9,800), followed by Pennsylvania (-9,600) and Virginia (-7,400). The largest over-the-month percentage increase in employment occurred in the District of Columbia (+1.1 percent), followed by Alaska (+0.9 percent) and West Virginia (+0.8 percent). The largest over-the-month percentage declines in employment occurred in Indiana, Pennsylvania, Vermont, and Virginia (-0.2 percent each). Over the year, nonfarm employment increased in 49 states and the District of Columbia and decreased in Alaska (-0.2 percent). The largest over-the-year percentage increase occurred in North Dakota (+5.1 percent), followed by Texas (+3.7 percent) and Utah (+3.6 percent).
Regional Unemployment (Seasonally Adjusted)
In September, the West continued to have the highest regional unemployment rate, 6.5 percent, while the Midwest had the lowest rate, 5.7 percent. The Northeast had the only statistically significant over-the-month unemployment rate change (-0.1 percentage point). Significant over-the-year rate decreases occurred in all four regions: the Midwest and West (-1.4 percentage points each), Northeast (-1.3 points), and South (-0.7 point). (See table 1.)
Among the nine geographic divisions, the East South Central had the highest jobless rate, 7.0 percent in September. The West North Central again had the lowest rate, 4.7 percent. Over the month, the Middle Atlantic and Mountain had the only statistically significant jobless rate changes (-0.2 percentage point each). Eight divisions had significant rate changes from a year earlier, all of which were declines. The largest of these decreases occurred in the East North Central (-1.9 percentage points) and Middle Atlantic and Pacific (-1.4 points each).
Read more: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/laus.nr0.htm
Good morning, Freepers and DUers alike. I especially welcome our good friends from across the aisle. You're paying for this information too, so you ought to see this as much as anyone. Please, everyone, put aside your differences long enough to digest the information. After that, you can engage in your usual donnybrook.
Depending on where you look, you can find something to like or something not to like in the data. Knock yourselves out.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)$10/hr here in Austin is subsistence level. Rents are skyrocketing. People are living 5 or more in a 3-br place so they can keep a roof over their heads.
progree
(10,901 posts)Maybe you should move.
Nationally, the average hourly earnings of production and nonsupervisory employees was $20.67 in September, up 31% from 10 years ago:
AVERAGE HOURLY EARNINGS OF PRODUCTION AND NONSUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES:
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000008
Adjusted for inflation, it seems to be keeping up -- better than in the Bush Years anyway:
AVERAGE HOURLY EARNINGS OF PRODUCTION AND NONSUPERVISORY EMPLOYEES, [font color=red]1982-84 DOLLARS:[/font]
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0500000032
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)Look in the Austin want ads-there's a few that pay $50K+ a year and a shitload that pay under $10/hr.
I'm going by what I see around here in town.
mahatmakanejeeves
(57,393 posts)I'm guessing most jobs will be online at company website these days, like Intel, Texas Instruments, or Apple. I'm not sure who's in Austin these days. Companies might try to work through a Texas employment commission too, but bypassing the middlemen will probably be to your advantage.
hobbit709
(41,694 posts)TI, IBM, Motorola, Sematech, Radian, AMD, even Dell doesn't make anything here. All we got is call centers and service jobs. Along with the cutbacks in state jobs since Gov. Oops and his cohorts took over.
Want to wait tables for $2.13/hr plus tips-lots of those jobs.
progree
(10,901 posts)azbillyboy
(56 posts)I call b.s. on the "figures" from the BLS. Kind of like the unemployment numbers. Total crock. Come on out to Phoenix and try living on our $8 and $9 an hour telemarketing/call center/sales jobs. Those are the bulk of any new jobs being created. Junk jobs. Revolving door ads from companies posting over and over again. Wanting employees with "talent on load from God" (to quote a rather nefarious reich wing blow hard).... so you can go to work for $360 a week?
It's easy to spike numbers when averaging. It only takes a few high numbers. Didn't you ever get graded on the "curve?"
Spare me. High Tech is NOT going to put people back to work. What kept this country great were union jobs. Have you noticed? They're gone. We're now a nation of service workers. And students in debt up to their eyeballs. And the over 40 crowd left with few options and facing rampant discrimination. Period. End of discussion.
I don't fault President Obama nor do I credit him for any so-called "improvement." He doesn't makes the laws. That's Boner and Turtle Man's job. And in case you haven't noticed, Congress - specifically the Repukes - has not done anything to advance the economy. Just the opposite.....
progree
(10,901 posts)Last edited Tue Oct 21, 2014, 11:09 PM - Edit history (1)
[font color = blue]>> "I call b.s. on the "figures" from the BLS. Kind of like the unemployment numbers. Total crock" <<[/font]
I agree. Them thar socialist guvmint bureaucrats rigging the numbers.
On the unemployment numbers, which myth is it that you want me to debunk? That they don't count people that are no longer getting unemployment benefits? Nope, not true. That they don't count the long-term unemployed? Nope not true. You can read about that at http://www.democraticunderground.com/111622439#post2
I am particularly heartened that the U-6 unemployment rate has come down by almost one third. In that very broad measure of unemployment rate, they count part-time workers wanting full time work as unemployed, and they count any jobless person who has looked anytime, even just once, for work in the last 2 years as unemployed.
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS13327709
[font color = blue]>> "Come on out to Phoenix and try living on our $8 and $9 an hour telemarketing/call center/sales jobs. Those are the bulk of any new jobs being created." <<[/font]
How do you know? I'm not supposed to believe figures from them thar guvmint bureaucrats, but i'm supposed to believe what some message board pundits assert with absolutely no kind of documentation? (to put it kindly)
[font color = blue]>> "Revolving door ads from companies posting over and over again." <<[/font]
The job numbers in the OP and the hourly earnings in #2 are not a count of job postings. I don't put any weight on the want ad numbers either.
[font color = blue]>> "It's easy to spike numbers when averaging. It only takes a few high numbers. " <<[/font]
Yup, even in a workforce of 146 million, it only takes a few high numbers. OK.
By the way, the series I gave in post #2 are wages and salaries for production and nonsupervisory employees, not CEOs or business owners or anything like that. And they don't include investment earnings or capital gains.
I also compare the numbers to previous periods like the supposedly glory days of the Bush administration.
[font color = blue]>> "Didn't you ever get graded on the "curve?" <<[/font]
Yes, but the BLS is not "grading on the curve", at least I haven't heard that one before.
[font color = blue]>> "High Tech is NOT going to put people back to work. <<[/font]
OK. (Memo to myself: high tech is NOT going to put people back to work). Thank God for DU. I learn something new every day.
[font color = blue]>> "We're now a nation of service workers. And students in debt up to their eyeballs. And the over 40 crowd left with few options and facing rampant discrimination. Period. End of discussion. <<[/font]
Guvmint statistics show the employment rate (employment to population ratio) and the labor force participation rate for the over 40 crowd has been growing for years. So yes, I hear a lot of, and believe these anecdotal stories. But am not seeing it in the guvmint statistics.
I think more jobs will help, as well as increasing the employment to population ratio, which has been happening since the jobs low point of early 2010 (despite boomer retirements). And electing more Democrats. Certainly trash-talking the economy is NOT going to turn out people to vote Democratic during these midterms. But you probably know that.
[font color = blue]>> I don't fault President Obama nor do I credit him for any so-called "improvement." He doesn't makes the laws. That's Boner and Turtle Man's job. And in case you haven't noticed, Congress - specifically the Repukes - has not done anything to advance the economy. Just the opposite..... <<[/font]
Well, I do credit Obama a lot, and the Democrats in Congress in the first 2 years especially. Obama has the bully pulpit and the veto pen, and the pen that signs bills into law. Very little gets into law without the president's support in this or any previous administrations that I know of. And I'm sure glad he appointed Kagan and Sotomayor to the Supreme Court, and not Scalia II and Thomas II. He sure as heck has a lot more influence than any congressperson.
Obama inherited an economy that lost 4.3 million jobs in the last 10 months of the Bush administration, and 800,000 jobs in the last month of the Bush administration. Obama and the Democrats deserve no credit for turning that around, with 10 million net new jobs in the last 55 months? (We've already talked about inflation-adjusted average hourly earnings of production and nonsupervisory employees being higher than under Bush, according to the guvmint).
But then I'm not the type to spend the last 2 weeks before the election trashing the Obama administration. And then wondering, Guk Guk, why don't people vote Democratic in the midterms?
You and I, and most DU-ers know its the Republicans who are responsible for keeping the recovery in the slow lane. But most of the electorate associate the economy with the Democrats.
strawberries
(498 posts)in TX. Most of our data centers also moved down there
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)I looked through the charts and didn't notice if any 'jobs created' are work by prison labor crews, who do work for several large Corps in the USA.
I also didn't notice if the 'jobs created' include the jobs for American owned corps, where factories are in USA 'trade free zones' and employees are Mexican citizens.
Does anyone know if any states job numbers use those 2 categories of 'jobs'?
mahatmakanejeeves
(57,393 posts)which I will add to the original post:
For release 10:00 a.m. (EDT) Tuesday, October 21, 2014 USDL-14-1963
Technical information:
Employment: (202) 691-6559 sminfo@bls.gov www.bls.gov/sae
Unemployment: (202) 691-6392 lausinfo@bls.gov www.bls.gov/lau
Media contact: (202) 691-5902 PressOffice@bls.gov
progree
(10,901 posts)so that would exclude prison labor.
As for USA 'trade free zones' and employees are Mexican citizens, if the jobs aren't in the U.S., they aren't counted in these statistics. If they are in the U.S., they are, regardless of citizenship, as far as I know.