February 2014 Employment Data (in graphical form)

California December 2013 Unemployment Rate Compared to 49 Other States

California May 2013 Unemployment Rate

According the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), California's official unemployment rate continued to improve in May 2013, dropping by 0.4% from 0.9% in April to 8.6% in May. The national unemployment rate increased 0.1% to 7.6%. California's unemployment rate continues to lag the nation as a whole and is tied with New Jersey at the 5th-highest in the nation ahead of Nevada, Mississippi, Illinois, Rhode Island, and North Carolina.

SOURCE:  U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics:  Unemployment Rate for States, Seasonally Adjusted (April 2013, preliminary).

www.bls.gov/web/laus/laumstrk.htm

The current 8.6% unemployment rate is at its lowest level since October 2008, just before the 2008 Presidential election. The current 8.6% unemployment rate remains higher than the 7.0% peak during the prior recession although it currently is lower than the peak of the early 1990s recession.

Source: Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis: Unemployment Rate in California (CAUR)

research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/CAUR/

Total non-farm payroll jobs in California grew by 10,800 jobs and presently stands at 14,612,500 jobs.  The current levels is up 727,200 jobs since the bottom of the recession but is is down 529,600 jobs from January 2008. At the current growth rate of 10,800 jobs per month, total employment will reach January 2008 levels in approximately four yours.

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics:  California, Total Nonfarm, Seasonally adjusted - SMS06000000000000001.

data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost?sm+06

Approximately 1.6 million Californians remain unemployed, down 364,000 from May 2012.

At the national level, the civilian participation rates in the job market (CIVPART, EMRATIO) remain at their lowest levels in a generation and show no immediate signs of improvement.

The average (mean) duration of unemployment (UEMPMEAN) and the median duration of unemployment (UEMPMED) remain well above the highs set in prior recessions.  The average duration is for all those who are unemployed.  The median indicates that 50% of those who are unemployed had a longer duration, 50% had a shorter duration.  The difference between the mean and the median indicates that there are a large number of long-term unemployed people.  This may be a possible effect of providing 99 weeks of unemployment benefits.

Overall national unemployment rates exhibit their typical ethnic and education-level patterns.

Nationally, Black or African American unemployment is highest at 13.5%, followed by Hispanic or Latino unemployment at 9.1%.  White unemployment is 6.7% while Asian unemployment is lowest at 4.3%.

The unemployment rate is highest for those lacking a high school diploma, currently at 11.1%.  The data is only for those 25 and older, so it does not include teenage unemployment data. Those who are high school graduates, but no college have a 7.4% unemployment rate.  For those with a bachelor's degree or higher, unemployment stands at 3.8%.  In all categories, the overall unemployment rate is higher than historical averages.

Digging Deeper Into President Obama's Manufacturing Jobs Claim

During his 2013 State of the Union address, President Obama said ..

After shedding jobs for more than 10 years, our manufacturers have added about 500,000 jobs over the past three.

The 500,000 number sounds impressive!  Is it true? Fortunately, the government keeps good records for all this data, so I checked.

The following chart shows the number of those employed in manufacturing (MANEMP) from January, 2008 until today. The minimum over the last three years happened in January, 2010 when the manufacturing workforce fell to 11,460 thousands, or 11.46 million.  The peak manufacturing workforce in the last three years happened in July, 2012 at 11,957 thousands, or 11.957 million jobs.  The difference between the peak and the trough is 497 thousand manufacturing jobs, which is certainly close enough to the claimed 500,000 for government work. However, the current tally through January, 2013 falls slightly to 450,000.

Because I know what the definition of "is" is and I'm semi-fluent in how politicians sometimes manipulate statistical data, my spidey senses were all a tingle from the "over the past three" years statement.  President Obama has been in office longer than three years, right?  How many manufacturing jobs have we created since he took office?  Here's the same chart as before, but now let's measure from February, 2009, when he was first inaugurated as President, until today.  By picking slightly different data points, we've now LOST 436,000 manufacturing jobs.  That's only a difference of 933,000 manufacturing jobs--nearly a million jobs difference--between the President's best-case numbers and the President's term in office.

Yes, I'm quite aware that President Obama was standing way too close when the big chunks struck the proverbial fan after the subprime mortgage bubble collapsed.  I'm also aware that we've bailed out banks, purchased one of the world's largest auto makers (General Motors), spent $878 BILLION on a Stimulus program, spent $3 BILLION on the "Clash for Clunkers" auto rebate that also benefited foreign auto manufacturers, had interest rates near 0% for years, and the Federal Reserve purchased over $1 TRILLION in U.S. debt.  Excuse me for saying, but I would have expected a much bigger jump in manufacturing employment given that amount of rocket fuel.

Yes, it's good that we increased the number of manufacturing jobs in the United States.  But let's compare the ratio of all manufacturing jobs (MANEMP) to the number of all those on non-farm payroll (PAYEMS).  This ration was about 0.1 back in January, 2008 meaning hat about 1 in 10 jobs was in manufacturing.  After the global financial crisis, this number dropped to about 1 in 11.2 jobs and has remained fairly flat over the President's time in office.

How can we be adding jobs but be losing manufacturing jobs as a percentage of the workforce?  Fortunately, total non-farm payroll (PAYEMS) has been slowly clawing its way back after the global financial meltdown. So, despite more manufacturing jobs, their percentage of the total workforce remains roughly the same (and even falling slightly the last few months).

That's the "good" news.  What's the bad news?  The percentage of people participating in the civilian workforce (EMRATIO) remains fairly stagnant and near a 30-year low.  Yes, even after all that rocket fuel.

Likewise, the average duration of unemployment (UEMPMEAN) is at a 30-year high, well above previous levels.  This may be due, in part, to Congress extending federal unemployment benefits to 99 weeks.

In summary, yes, it's good that we have employment growth in the manufacturing sector.  However, that growth is not as robust as the President's claim might lead people to believe.  We still have a long way to go toward a healthy economy, despite the massive infusion of cash, stimulus, and aid into the system.  We've also been in a 30-year trajectory (MANEMP) of lower and lower manufacturing employment, especially after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.  There are many driving forces, including globalization (cost differences, tax policy, new competitors) and improved manufacturing technology (robotics) that lead to improved productivity.