Geography of a recession: Animation, sobering

[rhody]

Source: "[URL of labor statistics for periods: 01/01/2007 - 05/31/2010
[/URL]
Somebody spent a lot of time breaking this down by every county in the country.
Review this Unemployment map of the United States.
This is hard to wrap your head around. I had to review this map a couple of times to grasp the enormity of it.
Displayed this way sure brings the perspective up close and personal.
Be sure to click the PLAY button in the middle of the map and take note of the dates above the US map as it advances month by month!

Rhody...

P.S.

Funny how the central/northern bread basket has been spared the worst of the recession. Looks like everyone still needs to eat, small consolation though.

 

[lisab]

Wow that's really amazing.

Keep in mind this recession is hitting those without higher education a lot harder:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t04.htm

There's a lot of people out there who are really in a bad situation .

 

[Vanadium 50]

Pity they clipped the animation at 10%.

 

[rhody]

Wow that's really amazing.

Keep in mind this recession is hitting those without higher education a lot harder:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t04.htm

There's a lot of people out there who are really in a bad situation .

Lisa,

I agree, someone who saw this said it would be interesting to project the rest of the world's countries/counties in the same way, we could see if we contributed to the beginnings of recessions in other countries or if they led the way due to the complex global economics that rule the world today. It is hard to argue with data, if in fact it is truly valid, and not being manipulated for political reasons. Once I have two or three sources of data, and they all basically agree, I am satisfied that what you are seeing is a fairly honest picture of a recession. Does anyone have more data the agrees/refutes with what is presented here ? V_50 perhaps ? I know, stop trolling, lol.

Rhody...

P.S.

edit: 10:05 pm

This is really quite a coincidence, I posted not realizing that V_50 posted after Lisa, now that I know this data has got your attention, where would we go for further corroboration or refutation of it ? I trust your sources.

 

[Evo]

Rhody, for raw facts without animation you can check out the CIA World factbook.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/

 

[medgar]

"Oh, the humanity!"

 

[Danger]

There is a truly frightening amount of purple and red on that thing.

 

[rhody]

There is a truly frightening amount of purple and red on that thing.

Danger,

I try to remain positive, however, we are into the second, third year now, many young people out of college are not getting jobs, some are going back to school for other degrees further adding to their debt, because of their youthful optimism they are not pissed off enough to do anything in an organized way about it. On the other hand, the aging population, say 30 - 55 with debt, family obligations, etc, they have less patience with the whole situation. The older folks 60+ many of which are really upset and have free time on their hands are trying to do something about some of it now, to their credit.

I think that something bad or a series of chain reaction events based on a single event (fueled by instant media) will burst the frustration felt by the millions affected shown in this map. I can only hope in the aftermath that something good results because of it. The potential bankrupcy of at least five states, California and New York at the top of the list could be enough to spark it.

Rhody...

 

[rhody]

Rhody, for raw facts without animation you can check out the CIA World factbook.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/

Evo,

I found the index to unemployment mostly lists 2009, 2008 stats, but some third world countries do not report or are all over the map.

Here's the https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2129.html?countryName=&countryCode=&regionCode=%C3%82":

A few countries for comparison:

Afghanistan 35% (2008 est.), 40% (2005 est.)
Argentina 8.4% (2009), 7.3% (2008)
Australia 5.6% (2009 est.), 4.3% (2008 est.)
Brazil 8.1% (2009 est.), 7.9% (2008 est.)
Canada 8.3% (2009 est.), 6.2% (2008 est.)
China 4.3% (September 2009 est.), 4.2% (December 2008 est.) Note: official data for urban areas only; including migrants may boost total unemployment to 9%; substantial unemployment and underemployment in rural areas
Colombia 12% (2009 est.), 10.6% (2008 est.)
Croatia 16.1% (2009 est.),13.5% (2008 est.)
Denmark 4.3% (2009 est.), 3.4% (2008 est.)
France 9.1% (2009 est.), 7.4% (2008 est.)
Germany 7.5% (2009 est.), 7.3% (2008 est.) Note: this is the International Labor Organization's estimated rate for international comparisons; Germany's Federal Employment Office estimated a seasonally adjusted rate of 10.8%
Hong Kong 5.3% (2009 est.), 3.5% (2008 est.)
Iran 11.8% (2009 est.), 10.3% (2008 est.) Note: data are according to the Iranian Government
Iraq 15.2% (2008 est.), 18% (2006 est.) Note: official data; unofficial estimates as high as 30%
Israel 7.6% (2009 est.), 6.1% (2008 est.)
Kenya 40% (2008 est.), 40% (2001 est.)
Liberia 85% (2003 est.)
Mexico 5.5% (2009 est.), 4% (2008 est.) Note: underemployment may be as high as 25%
Namibia 51.2% (2008 est.), 36.7% (2004 est.)
New Zealand 6.2% (2009 est.), 4.2% (2008 est.)
Norway 3.2% (2009 est.), 2.6% (2008 est.)
Pakistan 14% (2009 est.), 12.6% (2008 est.) Note: substantial underemployment exists
Poland 8.9% (January 2010 est.), 6.5% (December 2008 est.)
Russia 8.4% (2009 est.), 6.4% (2008)
Saudi Arabia 11.7% (2009 est.), 12% (2008 est.) Note: data are for Saudi males only (local bank estimates; some estimates range as high as 25%)
South Africa 24% (2009 est.), 22.9% (2008 est.)
Sweden 8.3% (2009 est.), 6.2% (2007 est.)
Turkey 14.1% (2009 est.), 11.2% (2008) Note: underemployment amounted to 4% in 2008
United Kingdom 7.6% (2009 est.), 5.6% (2008 est.)
United States 9.3% (2009 est.), 5.8% (2008 est.)
West Bank 19% (2009 est.), 17.7% (2008 est.)
Zimbabwe 95% (2009 est.), 80% (2005 est.)

World 8.7% (2009 est.), 7.2% (2008 est.) Note: 30% (2007 est.) combined unemployment and underemployment in many non-industrialized countries; developed countries typically 4%-12% unemployment

Rhody...

P.S. Seems like from CIA's data the US unemployment grew roughly 30% between 2008 to 2009.

 

[rootX]

Europe quick view:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10150118

 

[Danger]

Thanks for the info, Rhody. Our situation is pretty crappy as well. Not nearly as many unemployed as the US, of course, but that's because we have approximately 10% of your population. The ratio is probably about the same.
I've never even thought of this before, but are non-working adult students counted as unemployed?

 

[Astronuc]

I've never even thought of this before, but are non-working adult students counted as unemployed?

No. Students are not considered unemployed. Neither are part-time workers who wish to work full-time. The latter are considered under-employed. The discouraged workers who give up looking are not considered in either category.

In the US there is about 220 million people in the age range of traditional employment, or about 235 million of age 16 year and older. However, there are about 80 million people not in the labor force.

ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/lf/aat3.txt[/URL]

[URL]http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t01.htm[/URL]

 

[Monique]

Source: "[URL of labor statistics for periods: 01/01/2007 - 05/31/2010
[/URL]
Somebody spent a lot of time breaking this down by every county in the country.
Review this Unemployment map of the United States.
This is hard to wrap your head around. I had to review this map a couple of times to grasp the enormity of it.
Displayed this way sure brings the perspective up close and personal.
Be sure to click the PLAY button in the middle of the map and take note of the dates above the US map as it advances month by month!

Rhody...

P.S.

Funny how the central/northern bread basket has been spared the worst of the recession. Looks like everyone still needs to eat, small consolation though.

There was an article I read that said that the data in the animation is a misrepresentation of reality and that it should be corrected by population density.. now if I only knew where I read that..

 

[Monique]

I really can't find it, but they gave an example of the presidential elections and that I can find:

Here are the 2008 results by county:

From the map you'd conclude that the republicans (red) won, but obviously the democrats (blue) won by a large margin.

This is a better representation:

http://www.dashboardinsight.com/art...he-2008-us-presidential-election-results.aspx

 

[BobG]

There was an article I read that said that the data in the animation is a misrepresentation of reality and that it should be corrected by population density.. now if I only knew where I read that..

It depends on what you're trying to depict.

If you want to see where unemployment is worst, then the animation is fine.

If you want to see who's most responsible for the nation's unemployment rate, then you're right that the animation won't tell you.

Just as one map tells what parts of the country voted for McCain/Obama and the other tells you what parts of the country were responsible for the Obama victory.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

There was an article I read that said that the data in the animation is a misrepresentation of reality and that it should be corrected by population density.. now if I only knew where I read that..

Why would the population density have any significance when the unemployment rate is given as a percentage? In the case of the Presidential election map, we see only the result of the totals for each county, in which case the population does matter.

Oh, I see, you mean that is misleading as an indicator of the total problem. However, given that we have been hovering just below 10% unemployment nationally, and given that the map only goes up to 10%, the results are not so highly skewed as a function of population as they would be if they showed umeployment exceeding 10%.

That may be why they clipped it at 10%.

 

[turbo]

Unemployment in my part of Maine is WELL over 10%, but it does not register in Bureau of Labor statistics because so many people here are self-employed as loggers, truck drivers, skidder operators, etc. They cannot apply for unemployment insurance and so don't get counted, even though they are either under-employed or fully unemployed. I presume there are many parts of the country that are in similar straits.

Tourism is 'way down in these parts, so the people who try to subsist on seasonal jobs (rafting guide in the summer, ski-lift operator/snow-maker in the winter, etc) are out of luck, and they aren't counted either. It's pretty sad.

I have a friend who makes his living buying and selling big rigs. So many owner-operators are losing their trucks that he is over-stocked with them, and can't justify buying another truck unless it is a steal, because he has so much money tied up in inventory with no end-of-the-recession in sight, and no expectation of being able to turn a profit on his inventory anytime soon. His wife used to run his office, field calls, etc, but she had to go back to work for someone else full-time so they can make ends meet. He's not unemployed, but he's paying taxes and overhead on a small business that is bringing in almost no cash.

 

[russ_watters]

Why would the population density have any significance when the unemployment rate is given as a percentage?

Example:

County 1: 10% unemployment
County 2: 20% unemployment

If county 1 is twice the population of county 2, then the total unemployment rate is 13.3% but if county 2 is twice the population, then the total unemployment rate is 16.7%.

It's just a matter of knowing what you are looking at and getting data that is useful to you/what you want and when people look at maps they often forget that population density and area aren't corellated. The election example shows how looking at a mostly red map might (unintentionally) mislead one to think the republican won when in fact the democrat did. It's exactly the same problem.

Oh, I see, you mean that is misleading as an indicator of the total problem. However, given that we have been hovering just below 10% unemployment nationally, and given that the map only goes up to 10%, the results are not so highly skewed as a function of population as they would be if they showed umeployment exceeding 10%.

That may be why they clipped it at 10%.

Maybe, but I think it would be instructive to know where the unemployment is way above 10% too.

 

[russ_watters]

Unemployment in my part of Maine is WELL over 10%, but it does not register in Bureau of Labor statistics because so many people here are self-employed as loggers, truck drivers, skidder operators, etc.

That's the usual caveat that applies to all unemployment stats. Obviously, to gain the most knowledge possible from looking at stats, one must know what exactly they are saying. So I'll expand on the issue a little:

Unemployment rate doesn't reflect students, those not looking for work due to disillusionment/complacency and underemployed. Because these psychological factors all increase with increasing unemployment, the higher the unemploment rate gets, the larger the rate of these not-included groups. What that means is that it is much harder to drop from 10% unemployment to 9% unemployment than it is to drop from 5% unemployment to 4% unemployment because as the employment outlook improves, those groups will move back into the job market. Right now we have:

-People who stayed in/went back to school because they didn't expect to be able to find a job.
-People who dropped out of the employment market.
-People who retired early (sometimes forced out or given incentives).
-People who are underemployed.

People from all 4 of these groups are going to be moving [back] into the job market as unemployment starts to go down.

Economically, this is the same phenomena that is keeping and is going to keep housing prices down for some time to come: a backlog of supply that doesn't necessarily register in common statistics.

 

[mheslep]

Source: "[URL of labor statistics for periods: 01/01/2007 - 05/31/2010
[/URL]
Somebody spent a lot of time breaking this down by every county in the country.
Review this Unemployment map of the United States.

Paraphrasing Lincoln, looks like we need find out what N. Dakota, S. Dakota and Nebraska are drinking and give it to the rest of the states. Similarly, we need to find out what http://www.google.com/publicdata?ds...ST460000:ST170000:ST310000:ST440000:ST120000" are drinking and pour it all down the drain.

 

[rhody]

Seems as though Germany is on the rebound in Q2 of this year, anyone have an idea why ?

From PF members who live there ?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-10962017"

Gov't subsidies, BMW Sales Bonanza ?

According to the article:

"The German economy mainly benefited from two factors - a catching up in the construction sector after the harsh winter and strong foreign demand for German goods.

I guess I wasn't too far off, I guessed then finished the article. God, if only we could use their engineering prowess to help us build an Autobahn in the US, that would help jump start us (bad pun intended) for sure.

Rhody...

 

[rhody]

After watching a 60 minutes segment tonight on those who have been unemployed more than 99 weeks and are currently not employed or are underemployed it is really distressing to watch, in CA the high tech mecca of the US, combined unemployment and underemployment is estimated at 22%. No country can sustain a viable economy with numbers this high.

I am no economist, but the combined one two punch of unemployment combined with a devalued currency inevitably leads to inflation, only compounding the problem. So far that has been kept at bay, but barely, I read that our currency has been devalued about 8% recently and that in turn has turned into higher fuel prices at the gas pump.

I don't live with my head stuck in the sand, pretending that things are better than they really are. I consider myself a pragmatic realist. That said, I can only take "raw doses of the new economic reality" in smaller and ever smaller chunks these days. I would like to think there is light at the end of this tunnel, but don't see it happening in the next two to six years. (At least two full Presidential election cycles). IMHO, voter anger without facing of the facts of what we are up against is divisive and destructive. I grew up in the 60's and saw a natural rebellion against mainstream culture in full bloom. There still exists a small rebel in me as a result of that period today. The best I can do is to keep my plans for the short/medium term simple, and have what assets I do have in as safe a place as is humanly possible. Local, State and Federal response to the current economic situation will run their course for better (hopefully) or possibly for worse (in that case my simple plan, comes into play).

Rhody...

 

[lisab]

I saw that segment on 60 Minutes, too, Rhody. It's just frightening. I'm atheist but I kept thinking, there but for the grace of god go I.

 

[edward]

I saw that segment on 60 Minutes, too, Rhody. It's just frightening. I'm atheist but I kept thinking, there but for the grace of god go I.

I saw that too. It is very worrisome. Jobs lost = homes lost and the whole thing is snowballing down hill.