Want this question answered?
The NM unemployment rate is higher than what the government says, if they did it the right way we would be in the high 7's , there aren't nearly enough jobs and that's why thousands of people show up for minimum wage jobs, when they only have 100 to 200 positions available
If we add up all the unemployed, those working part-time but are looking for full-time work, and those who have given up looking for work we would find that over 24 million Americans are out of work or under employed.
Probably because, in the US for instance) with over 300 million people and people moving in and out of employment, its hard to keep accurate records. The only really known figures are those drawing unemployment benefits. The rest can only be guessed and government statisticians would rather be accurate than have guesstimates.
Household data: (202) 691-6378 http://www.bls.gov/cps/ THE EMPLOYMENT SITUATION: AUGUST 2008 The civilian labor force, at 154.9 million, was about unchanged in August, and the labor force participation rate remained at 66.1 percent. Total employ- ment, at 145.5 million, was little changed from July. The employment-population ratio fell over the month to 62.1 percent in August, down 1.3 percentage points from its most recent high of 63.4 percent in December 2006. (See table A-1.) ---------------- BLS is the first place I check for numbers about our economy usually.
Yes, that is correct. In the calculation of a nation's unemployment rate, individuals who have stopped receiving unemployment benefits are still considered unemployed if they are actively seeking work. They would be classified as part of the labor force and counted in the unemployment rate.
Yes, it is possible. The unemployment rate is calculated by dividing the number of unemployed people by the number of people in the labor force. The labor force does not include people who are not actively looking for work because they are discouraged by the job market. If over the month, some of the unemployed get jobs, and some of those who were discouraged rejoin the labor force so that they get counted in the "unemployed", employment would go up and the unemployment rate could go up. It would depend on the net effect on the "unemployed" group - if there are more people who rejoin the labor force than those who move from "unemployed" to "employed" then the unemployment rate would go up while employment also increases.
The "Unemployed" rate would be 12 million / 260 million = 12/260 = 4.6 %. In fact the unemployed rate does not use the whole population as a denominator, but a smaller value. The part of the population that, for whatever reason, is currently unemployable - such as children, retired people, terminally ill people - are excluded from the equation.
As there were only slightly more than 2 billion people in the entire world in 1932 and the worldwide unemployment rate was under 33% the total was not even near one billion worldwide. Also a significant number of the people in the world at that time would never have been counted as unemployed as they did not have jobs to lose (e.g, housewives, children, the very old) and were dependants on others.If we account for these nonworking people (likely well over half the world population), then total worldwide number of unemployed persons was likely well under a couple hundred million. Many of these never gotten counted as actual unemployed as they had given up and quit looking for jobs. Therefore the total worldwide actually counted officially may not have even been one hundred million.
Yes it would as the people who are unemployed may resort to prostitution as a form of income, which would increase their exposure to AIDS
The rate actually factors in people dropping away from looking for a job. According to the recent job report, over 1.9 Million people were long-term unemployed. And 532,000 of them are discouraged from working.
By unemployed, economically active people, if you mean they are engaged in income generating endeavors, the more power to them. They would be considered self-employed and not participating in receiving unemployment benefits, leaving more for those who need them.
It would be both Nevada and California because Nevada has the highest unemployment percentage, while California has the highest number of people unemployed.
In GENERAL- unemployment benefits are for when you are unemployed thhrough no fault of your own. Doing illegal drugs would be considered misconduct.
Empirical research would involve experimentation. So, let us say that you have a theory that unemployment is related to high taxation. You could (if you were in a position of power) try lowering taxes, and see what happens to the unemployment rate. Or you might believe that the unemployed just need more training, so they are better qualified to work. You could create a training program that offers free education to the unemployed, and see how that affects unemployment. And so forth. That concerns the causes of unemployment. Empirical research on the impact of unemployment would involve taking away people's jobs and seeing what happens to them. That would be a less reasonable type of research.
Of the three types, the least severe kind of unemployment is frictional unemployment. This is the unemployment caused by people switching from one job to another, or by those entering a new job field. For example, people would be considered frictionally unemployed when they are graduating from college and searching for a job, or if they used to be a teacher and now they are trying to look for work as a manager. People are considered to be in structural unemployment when their work skills do not match the skills needed for a specific job. As an example, factory workers who are replaced by machines are out of work, but now all factories don't need workers, but mechanics to fix the machinery. The natural rate of unemployment, or full employment, is comprised of the number of people in the work force that are structurally and frictionally unemployed. The worst kind is cyclical unemployment. People are in this type of unemployment because of the recessionary phases of the business cycle. Companies cannot afford to keep every worker, so many are laid off.
yes. the adoption of ICT will lead to unemployment because the machines are manily brought in to do the work of the human being. Therefore, the human being would have to be sacked due leaving him unemployed and jobless.
Yes. Just means that people are replacing others, so for every one unemployed, one is employed.Another answer:No. In the above case, the status (rate) would stay the same as 1 merely replaces the other, but the ratio of unemployed to the total available work force remains the same. For example, if you have 50 unemployed and 50 employed workers, the unemployment rate is 50%. 51 unemployed and 51 employed is still 50%. Adding one more worker (i.e. just graduated from school), and you still have 50 unemployed, but now there is 51 employed. The rate now changes from 50% unemployed to 49.5% unemployed, so the unemployment RATE decreased by adding the one employed person. You CAN have unemployed NUMBERS, but not rate, increase at the same time as the employed NUMBERS increase, however.