UNEMPLOYMENT AT 10%

The more the media starts to report unemployment numbers as "good" news instead of bad news, the faster things will start to become "really" good news.

I'm happy to see any headline that starts with, Good News.

I wonder if people in Detroit and the midwest feel that reporting 10% unemployment stats helps them or hurts them in their need for urgent help. Is there any good news for them?

Besides, where I live, as I ask or look around my neighbors, more than 10% are out of work.

I don't want good news nor bad news from the media...just the real news....as in the truth!

I knew that, if we put opur minds and hearts to it, we could accomplish this goal.

AM I misunderstanding something?

I would like to see a histogram for the unemployement percentage, so I can see the level of unemployment for each age class (bracket). Since this unemployment rise came just as the first boom babies were nearing the age of 60, I wonder how many of those folks will just accept a 25% cut in Social Security at age 62, and forget about employment? If there is a population of unemployed that will be accepting Social Security at age 62, due to their financial circumstances, then Social Security benefits. In effect, due to the size of the boom baby population, that will be continually hitting the point where Social Security at age 62 might look like the more acceptable "job prospect," then the old unemployment percentages of 5% or 6% might be a thing of the past, and a higher normal average might have to be accepted?

If one remembers the story line from Saturday Night Fever, an early 1970's movie, the father was unemployed at around age 50 (or a little older?), having had 25 years of steady employment in the construction industry. So, going back to the 1970's it seemed to ring true that many businesses wanted the young and spry?

I think I caught the gist of your post. I have misplaced my cheat-sheet on how to do links. Perhaps someone else could post it here using these directions:
>google U.S. Umployment Rate By Age
>look for the link titled The Jobless Rate For People Like You...
It is a series of interactive graphs and stats looking at unemployment by age, race, gender and level of education as of 9/09.

Does it matter if its 10.1 or 9.9 or 11 or 9?

Or is this a thread on statistical science? Let me know then I'll see ya later.
I hate math!

Well, down to 10% is better than up to 10%. I do think the trend is more important than a few tenths of a percent.

i don't even bother with on foot apllication job hunting.

NOBODY HAS ANY APPS LEFT!

or they do them online only

Foofie, Unemployment by age class will tell us that high school and college students are having great difficulty even finding part-time jobs; the worst since the sky-rocketing unemployment numbers continues its upward trend.
As you well know, the older generation stays longer on their jobs when they can, because their IRA savings have been decimated in 2008, and those who were planning to retire last year couldn't.
Many will opt for social security at 62, because they have little choice in the matter. If there are no jobs "out there," they're not going to keep pounding the streets to look for any job, and accept social security that'll at least provide them with a steady income.
This is a different kind of economy after the great recession, and we're not even sure it's over.

I believe we have a very long ways to go before our economy becomes stable.

tell me about it, ima college kid hah.

I just did.

It'll be a long time before we see any dramatic improvement in the stock market.

Famous words of Judge Judy: If you can't do anything else, at least you can go out and collect cans and bottles.

How do you think the market will perform next year? Is your cyrstal ball better than mine? I'm looking at a huge bear market, and plan to sell off more of my 2009 gains at the beginning of the year, and putting that money into my bank account.

Have you even got a chance at an interview?

I haven't gotten a single bite yet. <<sigh>>

I know you're not going to take this seriously, but I would much rather have money in the bank instead of those bond funds you used to like so well. Interest just has to rise, and bonds move inversely to interest rates, or such is my understanding.

Stock market? Your guess is probably better than mine has been since the early '80s. I am baffled by the gains in the past 6 months or so. I don't mess with stuff that baffles me, excepting wimmen on rare occasions.

It's a raw deal, alright. Are you targeting your resumes and cover letters? I'm pretty sure the shotgun treatment isn't working, anymore.

I like to think that I'm aiming in the right direction.

We're going to see a very slow recovery in the stock market. As far as annuities, I won't put any more money into variables and many of the fixed rate anuities are now paying only 2.65% ( see vanguard ).

I-bonds are paying 0% interest ( for the next 6 months) and the fixed rate is of the order of about 3.2%.

CDs pay very little. I have an 18 year CD that pays 6% because I bought it almost 17 years ago. You won't find a CD in the US paying anything close to 6% today.

Interest rates are slowly increasing, but at a very slow rate.

I think keeping your cash in the bank is a good idea...At least it's safe, if nothing else.

As far as the DOW is concerned, I suspect you and I will both be dead by the time the DOW 's back to 14000, if it ever is.

With employment at 15% in many parts of the US, with the ever increasing cost of health care and the non-ending war, I think Obama will not be re-elected in 2012. He's tried to change too much too soon and has basically ended up with a huge mess on his hands.