Tag Archives: Illegal immigrants

Drop in percent of population working easily explained, Not baby boomers, 1.5 million net new working age each year, Illegal immigrants, Not enough jobs added, Trying to replace jobs lost not keeping up with growth

Drop in percent of population working easily explained, Not baby boomers, 1.5 million net new working age each year, Illegal immigrants, Not enough jobs added, Trying to replace jobs lost not keeping up with growth

“What we are addressing is simple.
The percent of people employed in 2006 vs now.
It does not matter what the mix of age groups employed is.
The problem is that there are not enough jobs now of the right type to give the same ratio as in 2006.”…Citizen Wells email to economist Jan Hatzius

“Over the last six months, of the net job creation, 97 percent of that is part-time work,”…Keith Hall, former BLS chief

“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984″

 

This is a follow up to ongoing reports at Citizen Wells about the real jobs situation and remarks recently made Goldman Sachs chief economist Jan Hatzius on CNBC and in email exchanges with me this past weekend.

Jan Hatzius stated of the 4 percent drop in the percent of population working since 2006 that 2 percent is attributable to baby boomers.

I responded that was incorrect.

I stand by that assertion.

From Citizen Wells February 8, 2015.

“Following the January jobs report, Goldman’s chief economist Jan Hatzius appeared on CNBC but instead of joining Steve Liesman in singing the praises of the “strong” the report (which apparently missed the memo about  the  crude collapse), he decided to do something totally different and instead emphasize the two series that none other than Zero Hedge has been emphasizing for years as the clearest indication of what is really happening with the US labor market: namely the recession-level civilian employment to population ratio and the paltry annual increase in average hourly earnings.

This is what Hatzius said (2:40 into the clip):

The employment to population ratio is still 4% below where it was in 2006. You can explain 2% of that with the aging of the population that still leaves quite a lot of room potentially, and the wage numbers are telling us we are just not that close, although we are getting closer.””

“I sent the following email to  Jan Hatzius.

I have not yet received a response.

Hi.
I have a math, computer science & business background.
I am also one of the baby boomers.
You recently appeared on CNBC & stated:

The employment to population ratio is still 4% below where it was in 2006. You can explain 2% of that with the aging of the population that still leaves quite a lot of room potentially, and the wage numbers are telling us we are just not that close, although we are getting closer.”

Would you elaborate on:

“You can explain 2% of that with the aging of the population”

I am preparing an article

and want to be accurate.

Thanks

Wells

“Jan Hatzius did respond in less than 24 hours and we debated via email the validity of his statement:

“You can explain 2% of that with the aging of the population”

I will not present the entire exchange unless he requests it.

Here are our ending remarks.”

“Mine:”

“Apples and oranges.
The studies that you quote are projections done in 2006, not historical analysis.
I am not questioning the projections.
They are projections probably done by competent people using the best data available.
But they are projections, not history, done before probably the biggest anomaly in recorded US job history.

What we are addressing is simple.
The percent of people employed in 2006 vs now.
It does not matter what the mix of age groups employed is.
The problem is that there are not enough jobs now of the right type to give the same ratio as in 2006.
The problem is exacerbated by too many part time jobs which yield a result of too many people working multiple jobs.
Thanks
Wells”
Jan Hatzius:

“It is also true that there are not enough jobs. That’s why I said population aging accounts for 2 of the 4 percentage points of decline, not for the entire decline.
Best regards,
Jan””

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2015/02/08/economist-jan-hatzius-baby-boomer-impact-debate-with-citizen-wells-drop-in-percent-of-population-working-email-debate-both-agree-not-enough-jobs-2-percent-allegation-in-cnbc-interview/

The problem is clearly not baby boomers.

The problem is that the Obama administration has been focusing on trying to recover jobs lost during the recession.

What is not being addressed or reported is the number of new workers being added.

Each year since 2006 we have added a net average of approx. 1.5 million workers over age 16.

Each year we have added approx 3.9 new 16 year olds.

Each year we have averaged approx 2.4 million deaths.

That nets to 1.5 million.

That totals approx. 12 million new workers since 2006.

And God only knows how many new illegal alien workers we have.

Choose your own number.

This easily explains the drop in the percent of population working.

I would bet it is even worse.

Once again, the Gallup CEO tells it like it is.