Continuing High Unemployment

Today’s employment report for February is another set of contradictory results.  175,000 jobs were added to payrolls.  The number of long term unemployed has remained stubbornly high at 37% (or even higher) of the total unemployed since January of last year.  There were two months when the number dropped below this level but they were most likely statistical errors as they were not consecutive months.

Other nations would be happy with the unemployment rate that the USA is experiencing, 6.7%. That is not a fair comparison.  Americans are used to an unemployment rate of 5%.   That is a number that was last seen in April 2008.

Despite government optimism there is nothing on the horizon that says we will see any number near 5% in 2014.

Two issues make changes in unemployment likely. 1) Low cost labor in other countries.  2) Technology has reduced the need for so many workers.  Those long term unemployed need re-training into new careers that are experiencing labor shortages.

Conservative politicians won’t allow government funding of those kinds of programs.  They complain about welfare and long term unemployment benefits but won’t allow themselves to see the benefits of re-training programs.  If there was a conservative president making a case for re-training a conservative congress would enact the needed legislation.  Since Barack Obama is a Democrat no programs will be enacted.  It’s all about politics.

Where do we go from here? No where as long as there is a divided government.  Look for changes in 2017.  It makes me sad and dismayed.

Obama: Unemployed aren’t ‘lazy,’ they just need a hand

Obama: Unemployed aren’t ‘lazy,’ they just need a hand
http://www.latimes.com/nation/politics/politicsnow/la-pn-obama-unemployment-benefits-congress-20140107,0,6811727.story#ixzz2pplnAM47

The president is correct. The unemployed do need a hand. Is unending employment insurance the solution?

The total number of people unemployed for more than 26 weeks is estimated to be over 4 million. The number is decreasing very slowly. 1.3 million of those people no longer collect unemployment insurance aid. That number will increase to include all the long term unemployed by the end of 2014.

The likelihood of those unemployed for a year obtaining new jobs in their old profession is remote.

The question is, are they really unemployed or are they just going through the motions of job search to qualify for the aid? I know there are some in that category. The obvious reason is they were ready to retire when they experienced a layoff. A second reason is that they are not ready to retire but have an alternate source of income.

The remaining long term unemployed may be searching for jobs in vocations that now have limited opportunities. That situation has been created by outsourcing and automation.

Those people who really are part of the long term unemployed need re-training in a new profession. Unless they are willing to participate in a re-training program they should be denied unemployment compensation. The cost of that re-training will have to be supported by the government.

Will their new profession result in a lower annual income then they are accustomed to? Most likely the answer is “Yes.” This may not seem fair to some but in a free enterprise society there is no requirement that those with an income must support those not working for an indefinite period of time.

That is my idea. Where are the president’s ideas? Where are the Congress’s ideas? “No” to unemployment aid is not an idea.