Unemployment Rate Highest Since 1983: Comments Claim It's Good News

On Friday, the Labor Department announced terrible, terrible news: more than a quarter million people lost their jobs in May. But in a sign of how bad things are, commentators from all quarters are heralding the news as good.

The U.S. unemployment rate hit 9.4 percent in May as employers shed 345,000 jobs -- the highest since the recession of 1983, the Labor Department announced. The "silver living" is that the losses announced today are about half the monthly average for the past six months.

Friday's unemployment numbers came as a surprise. Private payroll firm ADP estimated that U.S. companies lost 532,000 jobs in its National Employment Report on Wednesday. Economists had made similar predictions.

"Job losses continued to be widespread in May, but the rate of decline moderated in construction and several service-providing industries," said Keith Hall, commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, in a statement.

"The loss of 345,000 jobs in May -- 0.3% of employment -- makes this jobs report the second worst in a quarter century not including the current recession, but in today's economy a loss of only 345,000 jobs is welcome news," said Heidi Shierholz, an economist with the Economic Policy Institute.

Of course, in a Wednesday conference call to help reporters throw cold water on overly cheery reactions to bad numbers, Shierholz stressed that regular folks wouldn't be seeing any economic benefit for a long time.

"After the 1990 recession unemployment rose for another 15 months, and after the 2001 recession, unemployment rose for another 19 months," Shierholz said. "If last two recessions any indication, unemployment will rise for at least another year."

A lot of people are unemployed now.

"The number of unemployed rose by 787,000 to 14.5 million," said Commissioner Hall. "Since the recession began, the jobless rate has increased by 4.5 percentage points, and the number of unemployed persons has grown by 7.0 million."

The number of long-term unemployed is also discouraging: "Among the unemployed, the number who have been out of work 27 weeks or more increased by 268,000 in May to 3.9 million. These long-term unemployed represented 2.5 percent of the laborforce, the highest proportion since 1983."

HuffPost readers: Been out of work 27 weeks or more? We want to hear your stories. Send e-mail to [e-mail].

Comments

[stuporman]

02:27 PM on 06/07/2009

the corporate view is "look at how much (payroll) expense we have eliminated; we must be more efficient". reality: "look how much work isn't getting done".

[themodernleader]

11:05 PM on 06/06/2009

Layoffs in manufacturing increased last month. Any recovery has to be centered in manufacturing and agriculture and mining. In such failure in these enterprises the government must be employer of last resort with purposeful jobs for tens of millions of the enemployed. To factually claim that we have a job stimulus program of any significance is to live in a world of delusion. And to think that the banking bunch have been cleansed of their bad loans is to further that delusion. Hope, not rational policy, is directing good money after bad. (It is true that may civil and education jobs would have been lost by now if it were not for the "stimulus program". But the program does not do anything to create, grow and sustain private enterprise jobs. Public bureaucracy is already out of control for the size of our revenue. Throwing more monies that way is not "stimulus".)

[kstuff]

10:08 PM on 06/05/2009

So fewer jobs are being lost. But none are being created. This is the recovery?

[mnich13]

02:18 PM on 06/05/2009

Maybe I just need to clean my glasses and I can't see clearly, but the graphs included with this story don't make the upward trend towards more unemployment look like it's slowing at all. If I were to compare it with a picture of a roller coaster ride's first big climb before the ride takes off, I'd say the cars still have a ways to go before they crest that first big hill.

[FINDASILVERLININGdotCOM]

02:11 PM on 06/05/2009

As difficult as these times are, there are many stories of individuals overcoming adversity and find a silver lining. We need to share these stories of optimism to inspire others facing difficult times...

[WorkingClass]

04:35 PM on 06/07/2009

Not me. I'm gonna cry in my beer.

[Torsin]

01:02 PM on 06/05/2009

When are those green jobs going to become available?

[kendraro]

12:45 PM on 06/05/2009

My husband just applied for unemployment for the first time ever - the business he worked for went bust - they really never had a shot as they started up last fall AND the franchisor did not uphold their end of things (advertising.) While I agree that the help to the banks has been overdone especially in light of what they have been prepared to do for ordinary people, I think we must keep in mind that this is not just Obama but also Congress, and for those of you set on BLAMING Obama for where we are- we all wish he could effect change that quickly, but get real.

[highplainsdrifter]

12:13 PM on 06/05/2009

Welcome to Obamunism. Unemployment will continue to rise until Obama and his cast of incompetent clowns in congress are thrown out on their heads.

[iblogleft]

12:20 PM on 06/05/2009

Get a grip. How does it feel to be so brutally ignorant? I seriously want to know.

[highplainsdrifter]

12:23 PM on 06/05/2009

I just looked up "brutally ignorant" in the dictionary and found your picture.

[land2341]

12:27 PM on 06/05/2009

Are you familiar with history? The lean mean republican presidencies of fiscal responsibility Reagan and Bush both ran the country into HUGE deficits. Massive government spending that make Obama look like an cheapskate.

Unemployment will continue to rise until the economy starts to recover the play money people were dealing that simply did not exist.

[Jboss26]

12:40 PM on 06/05/2009

BHO is planning to increase the deficit more than all former administrations combined. Only you could somehow think that his spending will make him look like a cheapskate. You're clueless.

[conserv47]

11:52 AM on 06/05/2009

Hows that stimulus working for you now????

History shows that tax cuts are what stimulates the economy. Just imagine that IF Congress had given all the stimulus and bailout money BACK to the people where it belonged in the first place what the economy would be doing now.

Lets see. 10 trillion / 150 million taxpayers = 67,000/ taxpayers

I wonder if THAT would have stimulated the economy. I think so!

[iblogleft]

12:10 PM on 06/05/2009

Tax cuts do NOT stimulate the economy. Small business tax cuts help, but cuts to wage earners does nothing in a recession, as the money is saved. That is a fact sir.

You are correct in saying that a bottom up approach would have worked better, but only if it was given to the poorest of the poor, the people that would actually spend the money. Giving taxpayers 67k a piece would only be 1/2 as effective as giving 30k to everyone, and even less effective than giving 67k to only the poorest of the poor..

History, Mr. Bush, shows us that cutting taxes to the wealthy doubles the debt in 8 years, and destroys the economy. The only reason tax cuts helped at all during Regan, was we started with a 90% tax, now corporations pay 35% (which means they pay NOTHING).

This argument has long been debunked. Do you read anything?

[Jboss26]

12:14 PM on 06/05/2009

Obviously you don't read anything. Tax cuts did not cause the recession. People living beyond their means and purchasing houses they couldn't afford caused the recession.

[highplainsdrifter]

12:27 PM on 06/05/2009

Yeah it would stimulate the economy! Every crack dealer in the nation would have a new caddillac.

[lompe]

11:51 AM on 06/05/2009

Now I'm starting to believe that the recession could end this year.

[Jboss26]

12:30 PM on 06/05/2009

Do you believe in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny and the Tooth Fairy too?

[lompe]

06:31 PM on 06/05/2009

No, facts, my friend, just facts.

[Read Books]

11:44 AM on 06/05/2009

...And the $700 BILLION porkulus package has done nothing so far besides make the deficit more grim.

Meanwhile, U.S. corporate taxes are among the highest in the world--the consumer ultimately pays these taxes.

We should have cut corporate taxes so American companies are not disadvantaged against global competitors. But, since job-creating businessmen are vilified by career gov't bureaucrats, that will not happen!

[iblogleft]

12:11 PM on 06/05/2009

What is this alternate reality called where you live?

I know that its a wonderful place where opinion is oblivious to common fact, but what do you call it?

[Read Books]

11:14 PM on 06/09/2009

It is called living in the real world, not an idealized version of the world or reality as I wish it.

Just where are my "common facts" wrong?

[Chace Haynes]

12:16 PM on 06/05/2009

What planet do you live on? Corporations are paying a small fraction of what they should be paying, and hiding the money in offshore accts. Corporations need to be taxed heavily on any goods they produce outside the country.

[Read Books]

11:22 PM on 06/09/2009

Planet cold, hard reality!

Steve Balmer of Microsoft stated that the policy you advocate would shift more Microsoft jobs OUT OF the U.S.

Carefully read the Fair Tax book (pp. 64-64) to understand why heavy taxes on "outside the country" goods will harm American companies.

Fair Tax link:
http://books.google.com/books?id=nj2A8v9swMwC&pg=PA63&lpg=PA63&dq=cadillac+fair+tax&source=bl&ots=r0qBOkcARO&sig=2UYgKca9C3uoxqymwcpRFbEx-uw&hl=en&ei=DyYvSu3MMYqUMtbJ6YEK&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#PPA63,M1

[winstonian22]

11:42 AM on 06/05/2009

Thank God we had all those bailouts, otherwise this news could have been bad. Let the onslaught of disappointments in Obama begin. By 2012, we won't be able to hear over the roar of the disillusioned masses that voted for him and SURPRISE! didn't get what they voted for. I can think of least 9.4 % of the population that will not vote for him a second time.

[SocialistDistortion]

11:46 AM on 06/05/2009

Ok, so let me see if I get your logic:

Recession - 100% Obama's fault

Recovery - 0% credit for Obama

Reaganomics works...

That sound about right?

[highplainsdrifter]

12:17 PM on 06/05/2009

Ok, so let me see if I get your logic:

Communist red star: good
Capitalism: bad

That sound about right?

[conserv47]

11:59 AM on 06/05/2009

Funny you seem to forget that the Bush tax cuts are what pulled the country out of the Clinton recession.
Reagan tax cuts are what pulled the country out of the Carter recession.
JFK CUT taxes while he was in office.
History does NOT support you view.

[SocialistDistortion]

12:11 PM on 06/05/2009

Then why did a recession start AFTER Bush was in office? In 2001, 2003, and again in 2007 that has lasted to this day. Clinton left us with a strong economy and a surplus...and well, we all know what Bush did to that.

I'm sorry, but history does not support YOUR view, pal.

[iblogleft]

12:18 PM on 06/05/2009

Funny, you seem to forget that bush doubled the debt in 8 years. He created more debt than all other presidents combined.

[SwingingFromCenter]

11:35 AM on 06/05/2009

The only reason the pace slowed is because tons of people got hired to do the 2010 census. It was temp work. And now it's over. And now those people are unemployed again. Expect an "unexpected" surge in unemployment next quarter.

[HerCabinBoy]

11:29 AM on 06/05/2009

Well, I no longer think it's sad that Carradinedied. Seems he died with pleasure.

[iblogleft]

11:26 AM on 06/05/2009

I really don't understand how people can be surprised by this. Unless you deny reality, everything is in place for the "perfect storm". People laughed when I told them 10% by the end of June.

Again, the stimulus was misplaced, and too small. The centrist approach and infighting over deficits is mirroring the mistakes we made in 1936. Industrial growth is the only option to save American families, and without trade balance, and a balanced playing field in labor rates, benefits, safety and healthcare (this country has not that had in decades) the next stop is not any prettier.

Obama is on the right path, but his failure to demand substantive changes from congress and the senate, and holding them accountable by name, is costing this country dearly.

[Chace Haynes]

12:18 PM on 06/05/2009

Well said!

[mismicma]

07:48 PM on 06/05/2009

Agreed. There will not be a true recovery until a fair trade policy is enacted---and I do not expect that to happen anytime soon.