State unemployment rate highest since 1941

[XemaSab]

Source: SF Chronicle

The state unemployment rate soared to 11.2 percent in March, the highest since before World War II, leaving a record 2.1 million Californians out of work, according to a report issued today.

Employment Development Department spokeswoman Patti Roberts said the March figure surpasses the 11 percent rate that occurred during the 1980s recession and brings California close to the jobless level of January 1941, when unemployment stood at about 11.7 percent.

Roberts said unemployment is estimated to have gotten as high as 25 percent during the Great Depression, but the highest reliable figure in state archives is the 14.7 percent rate of October 1940.

The U.S. unemployment rate for March stood at 8.5 percent.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/04/17/BUPQ174BVL.DTL&tsp=1

[David Dunham]

1. CA is in deep trouble.

[xchrom]

4. we sure are -- the multiplier on those numbers is going to

hit us hard for a very long time.

[Liberal_in_LA]

21. 'multiplier?

[someone else]

8. Kern County 15.9%

Some smaller surrounding towns as high as 28%

[CrawlingChaos]

22. feels like we're going off a cliff

And as if things weren't bad enough here in the Golden State, my Mom just got a letter from Arnold stating there will be no more postponement of property taxes for the low income elderly and blind (my Mom is all three). That program has been in place for 30 years! I'm sure my siblings and I will find the money somehow but what about the elderly poor who are alone? You can't get blood from a stone - are they really going to kick these people out on the street? Christ almighty.

It's only going downhill from here and clearly, we can expect no help.

[ben_jenne]

2. Anyone feel a draft?

Franklin Delano Obama?
by Paul Krugman
Published: November 10, 2008

What saved the economy, and the New Deal, was the enormous public works project known as World War II, which finally provided a fiscal stimulus adequate to the economy’s needs.

This history offers important lessons for the incoming administration.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/10/opinion/10krugman.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=krugman%20fdr%20obama&st=cse

[blue97keet]

14. no borrowing from China to finance World War II

Weren't they overrun by the Japanese?

[Viva_La_Revolution]

3. Oregon is in even deeper, 12.1% ...

PORTLAND (AP) - Oregon has recorded the steepest year-over-year rise in unemployment rates among the states, and now its jobless rate ranks second among them.

This week, the state Employment Department said the Oregon unemployment rate jumped to 12.1% in March, matching the highest rate of the recession of the early 1980s.

The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics said Friday that put the state second to Michigan, whose unemployment rate is 12.6%. South Carolina is third at 11.4%. The national rate is 8.5%.

The federal agency says that Oregon's unemployment rate has risen 6.6 percentage points points since March of last year, the largest increase in the nation. South Carolina's rate has increased 5.5 percentage points.
http://www.ktvz.com/Global/story.asp?S=10203550

swirl, swirl, glug.. swirl, swirl...




At least I can spend my excessive free time growing edibles.. sure would like to get back to work though. :(

[xchrom]

6. nothing like having a job -- even when it's one you don't like. nt

[northernlights]

11. what I don't understand is

given Oregon's unemployment levels, why isn't their foreclosure level up there near the top as well?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

5. Stop trying to smear Arnold!

:grr:

[cufford]

7. Underestimating the problem

Of course, the logical reciprocal of unemployed is employed. But unlike in the past, today's employed includes millions of "under-employed" because just because you have a job doesn't mean it's paying a living wage. And in today's America, that an awful lot of jobs that won't even keep you from being homeless.

The point is, these numbers way down-play the reality of today's increasing depression. And it's in many ways apples and oranges from the last big one. Unemployment stats, while revealing that a big problem exists, fails to even come close to illustrating just how big a problem really does exist.

Under-employment is far more significant today than unemployment is, because it's really just as bad. So you don't just have people out of work and currently filing for benefits, but probably twice as many who do have jobs but which don't even cover the rent each month, let alone the other necessities of life.

Under-employment is the major factor in our economic collapse. Not enough people make enough money to purchase goods and services, i.e., the economy.

It's not just those completely out of work, but the many, many more who might as well be but aren't counted in these misleading numbers.

And we're only just seeing the tip of the iceberg. Not only is nothing going to turn around for at least a decade, but probably never since the war against paying living wages to employees continues at full pace today. The war that got us here in the first place.

We ain't seen nothing yet. And the reason so many people don't realize it, is because they only here this kind of stuff, which mostly ignores the larger reality at play here.

And if anyone believes that a few rallies on Wall Street has anything at all to do with our economy over the long term, while we see underemployment skyrocketing, is completely nuts.

[Viva_La_Revolution]

9. Got that... I technically still have a job, I just haven't logged any hours since November.

so, no unemployment for me :(

[roamer65]

16. The U6 rate measures people like you.

[tomm2thumbs]

10. I think the numbers are a little bit off - with extended unemployment benefits in effect, I think

...folks who had been out of work for a long time, long off the books and still looking for work went back in for the extended unemployment benefits granted by the federal government. The numbers show people 'unemployed' even if the situation has not changed so much on the ground. Not saying it is good or bad, just don't believe this number is based on a bunch of new people hitting the unemployed - just those claiming new benefits now that they were extended.

[grahamhgreen]

12. ohio hits 12.6 - NO 'FREE TRADE', GATT, NAFTA, WTO, BRING BACK PROTECTIONISM! Protect your family.

[blue97keet]

13. Amen

[WoodyM]

18. South Carolina’s rate is officially 11.4%.

There are counties in the State where the textile production went overseas that have unemployment in the 20+-percentage range.

[roamer65]

15. The U6 unemployment rate is more representative...

of what unemployment measurement was in 1941. Nationally, the U6 is around 15%. So the U6 in CA is probably around 17%.

[grahamhgreen]

19. or 1 in 6 people/families who need food housing and healthcare, but have no income

[Zynx]

20. Point me to where it says that's how it was measured in 1941.

In the Great Depression they counted people as employed who only worked 10 hours a month who had worked full time, just like now. U6 would count them as underemployed. Don't get me wrong, U6 matters and the headline number is useless since discouraged workers aren't counted, but there are numbers that count discouraged workers. Counting underemployed is not historically how it has been done at all.

[roamer65]

23. U6 counts discouraged workers.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t12.htm

See the part about "marginally attached workers". While the 1941 rate and the present-day U6 may not be exactly the same, they are close enough for comparison, IMHO.

[WoodyM]

17. South Carolina’s rate is officially 11.4%.

There are counties in the State where the textile production went overseas that have unemployment in the 20+-percentage range.