Politics

Can we finally take the 'jobless' out of 'jobless recovery'?

Recent reports nationally and in Washington seem to indicate real job growth, but uncertainties about the economy remain.

Can we finally take the 'jobless' out of 'jobless recovery'?
Advertisement

by

Stephen H. Dunphy

Recent reports nationally  and in Washington seem to indicate real job growth, but uncertainties about the economy remain.

Statistically, the economic  recession that officially began in December 2007 has been over for more  than a year — gross domestic product is now rising at about 2 to 3 percent  a year. GDP was rising at an annual rate of 2.8 percent in the  fourth quarter last year — and most economists believe that pace of  growth will continue for the rest of this year. Even the Federal  Reserve upped its forecast for the rest of the year recently, to  a range of 3.3 to 3.9 percent.

The recession lasted 18 months, which  made it the longest of any recession since World War II. Previously  the longest postwar recessions were those of 1973-75 and 1981-82, both  of which lasted 16 months.

Employment reports of the past  few weeks seem to point toward a move beyond the "jobless recovery" that  has made any economic improvement an illusion to many unemployed workers. State officials said in their first report for 2011 (issued March 1) that the  state economy produced more than 11,000 jobs in January, getting the  year off to a good start. The unemployment rate dropped to 9.1  percent that month, from 9.3 percent in December.

Last Friday (March 11), the national  report for February was equally upbeat. More than 190,000 jobs  were added nationwide in February, and the unemployment rate dropped below 9 percent — to 8.9 percent — for the first time since last summer, when a positive blip turned out to be cause for false enthusiasm.

While the numbers are good on the surface, there is still a long way to go before the so-called jobless recovery  is even statistically over, and longer still for it to be a memory for  many individuals and groups. For some, like older workers and  those without at least a high-school education, the recession will remain  painful for some time to come. The length of unemployment for a worker  over 55 is now more than 45 weeks.

Economic statistics always  seem to have a “yes, but” element to them. The jump in February  employment is tempered by the fact that January was a particularly slow  month mainly because of the severe winter weather in much of the nation. Taken together, January and February are not that much better than a  year ago.

A Crosscut commenter on one  of my recent economic stories had a good idea: Just  do the math. So the national economy lost about 8 million jobs  in the downturn. That means the improvement we saw in February would  have to continue unabated for nearly four years to even get us back to  where we were before the recession. Taking January and February together pushes the date  out more than five years.

The same is true here. The growth of 11,000 jobs in January was great 11,600 jobs added  in the private sector and 600 lost in the public sector for the overall  gain. But take the average for December and January and the  total gain shrinks to just more than 6,000 jobs. With 340,000  unemployed, it would take more than four years to put everyone back  to work.

And that’s just getting back to where we were. It does not begin to account for the new jobs needed to accommodate  the natural growth in the workforce — the new workers coming of age  who want to work. Mark Zandi, chief economist with Moody’s Analytics,  told Congress last summer that consistent job growth of more than 150,000  positions a month is needed to reduce unemployment.

Earlier this week, the state  Employment Security Department released unemployment figures for the  counties of the state. Starting with this month’s release, county  unemployment rates and employment data are being released the Tuesday  after the state numbers are released. The Employment Security Department  said the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), wants more uniformity  in how the states report their labor statistics. So it will no longer  allow Employment Security to release preliminary county-level data on  the same day as the state data.

The numbers here are a bit  more sobering as well since they are not seasonally adjusted. King County’s  rate is 8.4 percent compared with 8.3 percent in December. Snohomish  County is at 10.1 percent vs. 9.8 percent, and the Tacoma/Pierce County  area is at 10.4 percent vs. 9.1 percent in December.

The state’s 8.9 percent rate, reported March 1, is seasonally adjusted. That’s an important  concept to keep in mind when looking at these kinds of numbers. Seasonal  adjustment is a way of smoothing out the usual peaks and valleys in  any statistical economic series. This time of year, for example, because  of weather conditions, road construction slows, there are hardly any  logging operations and most food-processing employment is at a low point.

During the holiday season,  retailers hire more people for a few weeks, and then drop them in January.  Jobless rates typically fall in December and rise in January. Economists  take historical figures for various industries, try to figure out what  regular patterns exist, and then adjust rates to match the patterns.  That’s seasonal adjustment.

So, just where is the economy?

The honest answer is no one  knows for sure. Oil prices are surging and gasoline is nearing  $4 a gallon. In the past that price has usually been the tipping  point for people changing behaviors because of high gas prices — more  taking the bus, delivery prices rising, and so forth. All  have an impact on the economy.

The continuing budget problems of state and local government also is a factor. The BLS said in its  March report on national unemployment that the “local government”  category has lost 377,000 jobs since its peak in September 2008. In this state, in just the past year alone (January 2010 to January 2011), government showed a loss of  3,800 jobs, second only to construction  (down nearly 10,000 jobs).

There are positive signs. Manufacturing is up, with Boeing a good example of a company adding jobs — though not as many as in past cycles — as production increases. There was the headline about Amazon.com the other day and its openings  for 1,900 workers, though nearly half the openings are for tech-savvy  workers.

Nonetheless, Washington still  ranks relatively high when the “alternative” measures of unemployment  are used. The Bureau of Labor Statistics’ U-6 rate, which is the most  inclusive including groups called discouraged workers, marginally attached workers,  and workers who are working part-time for economic reasons, was at 18.1  percent in the last report, little changed from the previous report.  Washington was lower than California and Oregon, yet higher than Alaska,  Idaho and Montana.

Employment Security said the  gap between the basic seasonally adjusted unemployment rate — 8.9  percent in January — and the more inclusive rate has increased more  for Washington than for the nation.

“The implication is that  the ranks of discouraged workers, marginally attached workers, and those  working part-time involuntarily in Washington have risen even more dramatically  than the number of unemployed,” the department reported.

Keep in mind that these monthly  reports are snapshots, quick views of what is happening. Important,  yes, although more important to the daily movements of the stock market  (pay little attention to this by the way) and to the politics of the  situation. There already is talk about what the unemployment rate  has to be in 2012 to influence the presidential election.

Even we ordinary, amateur economists  can get a better handle on numbers by smoothing out the peaks and valleys. For job growth, a three-month rolling average might be the best way  to view what is really happening in the economy.

For Washington state, the rolling  three-month average (November, December, January) shows a gain of 4,400 jobs  per month. The three reports have increased each month with a  strong increase in January — the largest jobs total in three  years. Nationally, the rolling three-month average (December,  January, February) shows a gain of 135,000 jobs — not that far from Zandi’s  job-growth base. The December and January job-growth totals were revised  upward.

So maybe, just maybe, things  really are looking up. Or, as one reporter speculated in the past  week, we’re just where we were last year when things were starting  to look up, only to slump once again. Now oil prices, the situation  in the Middle East, the disaster in Japan, a continued weak housing market, federal shenanigans around the budget and debt ceiling — and who knows what else — could derail the economy again.

Donation CTA
Stephen H. Dunphy

By Stephen H. Dunphy

Stephen H. Dunphy writes on business and economic issues for Crosscut. He was a business editor and columnist for a number of years at The Seattle Times.