Jobless Numbers Don’t Reflect Reality
Maybe I’m wrong, but I think “Big Rethink on Levels of Joblessness†(Sept. 20) missed one big reason that our current low level of unemployment is not causing inflation: The numbers are basically faulty.
I am not an economist but it is my understanding that the unemployment numbers are based on the number of people on the government unemployment rolls.
These numbers do not reflect the people who were on unemployment and are no longer eligible for benefits but have still not found jobs. The numbers do not reflect the people laid off who do not bother applying for unemployment for various reasons.
The numbers also don’t reflect the “underemployedâ€--people who used to work a full-time, good-paying job who have now been reduced to part-time status. Does the fact that one person now has to work two part-time jobs to make ends meet mean that unemployment is low and job growth is active?
As a person who has worked in the banking industry for the last 10 years, I have seen constant downsizing and merger activity. Ask Bank of America or Wells Fargo how many of their employees are full time versus part time now, and compare those numbers with 1986--or 1976, for that matter!
The bottom line: Unemployment numbers do not reflect the true condition of the economy. Job growth numbers do not reflect the fact that we are trading high-paying jobs for burger flippers. It is no surprise to me that there is no inflation: There is nothing on the horizon forcing it.
GEORGE KAHN
Woodland Hills
More to Read
Inside the business of entertainment
The Wide Shot brings you news, analysis and insights on everything from streaming wars to production — and what it all means for the future.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
