CMP Associates Regulation Blog

There is socio-economic stress in the combination of adverse events and cyclical performance:

Mediocre economic growth below potential and long-term trend, resulting in idle productive resources with GDP four trillion dollars below trend. US GDP grew at the average rate of 3.2 percent per year from 1929 to 2022 (https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/11/us-gdp-grew-at-49-percent-saar-in.html earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/10/us-gdp-grew-at-21-percent-saar-in.html), with similar performance in whole cycles of contractions and expansions, but only at 1.5 percent per year on average from 2007 to 2020 and 1.8 percent from 2007 to 2022. GDP in IIQ2023 is 16.5 percent lower than what it would have been had it grown at trend of 3.0 percent.
Private fixed investment stagnating initially followed by growth at 0.8 percent SAAR in IIIQ2023 (https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/11/us-gdp-grew-at-49-percent-saar-in.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/10/us-gdp-grew-at-21-percent-saar-in.html).
Twenty-one million or 11.9 percent of the effective labor force unemployed or underemployed in involuntary part-time jobs with cyclically stagnating or declining real wages (Section I and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/10/increase-in-sep-2023-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/09/the-federal-open-market-committee-fomc.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/08/increase-in-jul-2023-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/07/increase-in-jun-2023-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/06/federal-open-market-committee-fomc-of.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/05/increase-in-apr-2023-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/04/increase-in-mar-2023-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/03/the-consumer-price-index-of-united.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/02/the-consumer-price-index-of-united.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/01/the-consumer-price-index-of-united.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/12/federal-open-market-committee-fomc-of.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/11/the-consumer-price-index-of-united.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/10/the-consumer-price-index-of-united.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/09/us-consumer-price-increased-83-percent.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/08/increase-in-jul-2022-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/07/increase-in-jun-2022-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/06/federal-open-market-committee-fomc-of.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/05/us-consumer-prices-increase-83-percent.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/04/increase-in-mar-2022-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/03/increase-in-feb-2022-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/02/increase-in-jan-2022-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/01/increase-in-dec-2021-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/12/increase-in-nov-2021-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/11/increase-in-oct-2021-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/10/increase-in-sep-2021-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/09/increase-in-aug-2021-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/08/increase-in-jul-2021-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/07/increase-in-jun-2021-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/06/increase-in-may-2021-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/05/increase-in-apr-2021-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/04/increase-in-apr-2021-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/04/increase-in-apr-2021-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/03/increase-in-feb-2021-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/02/increasing-valuations-of-risks.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/01/decrease-in-dec-2020-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/12/dollar-devaluation-increasing.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/11/increase-in-oct-2020-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/10/increasingvaluations-of-risk-financial.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/09/exchange-rate-fluctuations-1.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/08/thirty-eight-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/07/increase-of-total-nonfarm-payroll-jobs.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/06/creation-of-three-million-private.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/05/fifty-two-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/04/lockdown-of-economic-activity-in.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/03/stress-of-world-financial-markets-fomc.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/02/increasing-valuations-of-risk-financial.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/01/rising-valuations-of-risk-financial.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/12/increase-in-valuations-of-risk.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/11/increasing-valuations-of-risk-financial.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/10/volatility-of-valuations-of-risk.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/09/increase-in-valuations-of-risk.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/08/dollar-appreciation-contraction-of.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/07/twenty-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/06/increase-of-valuations-of-risk.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/05/fluctuating-valuations-of-risk.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/04/flattening-yield-curve-of-treasury.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/03/dollar-revaluation-twenty-one-million.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/02/wait-and-see-patient-forecast-dependent.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/01/the-fed-will-be-patient-adjusting.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/12/fluctuation-of-valuations-of-risk.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/11/fluctuations-of-valuations-of-risk.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/10/twenty-one-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/09/twenty-on00000000e-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/08/fomc-policy-rate-unchanged-competitive.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/07/twenty-one-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/06/twenty-one-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/05/twenty-one-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/04/twenty-two-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/03/twenty-three-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/02/twenty-four-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/01/twenty-three-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/12/twenty-one-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/11/unchanged-fomc-policy-rate-gradual.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/10/twenty-one-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/09/twenty-two-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/08/data-dependent-monetary-policy-with.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/07/rising-yields-twenty-two-million.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/06/twenty-two-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/05/twenty-two-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/04/twenty-three-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/03/increasing-interest-rates-twenty-four.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/02/twenty-six-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/01/twenty-four-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/12/rising-yields-and-dollar-revaluation.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/11/the-case-for-increase-in-federal-funds.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/10/twenty-four-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/09/interest-rates-and-valuations-of-risk.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/08/global-competitive-easing-or.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/07/fluctuating-valuations-of-risk.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/06/financial-turbulence-twenty-four.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/05/twenty-four-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/04/proceeding-cautiously-in-monetary.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/03/twenty-five-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/02/fluctuating-risk-financial-assets-in.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/01/weakening-equities-with-exchange-rate.html and earlier (http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/12/liftoff-of-fed-funds-rate-followed-by.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/11/live-possibility-of-interest-rates.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/10/labor-market-uncertainty-and-interest.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/09/interest-rate-policy-dependent-on-what.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/08/fluctuating-risk-financial-assets.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/07/turbulence-of-financial-asset.html)
Stagnating real disposable income per person or income per person after inflation and taxes (https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/11/the-consumer-price-index-of-united.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/10/the-consumer-price-index-of-united.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/09/the-consumer-price-index-of-united.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/08/the-consumer-price-index-of-united.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/07/real-disposable-income-or-personal.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/06/real-disposable-income-or-personal.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/05/the-consumer-price-index-of-united.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/04/the-consumer-price-index-of-united.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/03/real-disposable-income-or-personal.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/02/real-disposable-income-or-personal.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/01/real-disposable-income-or-personal.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/12/us-gdp-grew-at-seasonally-adjusted_24.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/11/real-disposable-income-or-personal.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/10/real-disposable-income-or-personal.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/09/federal-open-market-committee-fomc-of.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/08/real-disposable-income-or-personal.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/07/consumer-prices-of-theunited-states.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/06/consumer-prices-of-theunited-states.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/04/increase-in-mar-2022-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/03/increase-in-feb-2022-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/02/increase-in-jan-2022-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/01/real-disposable-income-decreasing-02.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/12/increase-in-nov-2021-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/11/increase-in-oct-2021-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/10/increase-in-sep-2021-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/09/increase-in-aug-2021-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/08/increase-in-jul-2021-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/07/increase-in-jun-2021-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/06/increase-in-may-2021-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/05/increase-in-apr-2021-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/04/increase-in-apr-2021-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/03/increase-in-feb-2021-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/02/increasing-valuations-of-risks.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/01/recovering-gdp-of-major-world-economies.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/12/dollar-devaluation-increasing.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/11/increase-in-oct-2020-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/10/increasingvaluations-of-risk-financial.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/09/exchange-rate-fluctuations-1.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/08/thirty-eight-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/07/increase-of-total-nonfarm-payroll-jobs.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/06/creation-of-three-million-private.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/05/fifty-two-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/04/lockdown-of-economic-activity-in.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/03/stress-of-world-financial-markets-fomc.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/02/increasing-valuations-of-risk-financial.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/01/increasing-valuations-of-risk-financial.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/12/increase-in-valuations-of-risk.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/11/increasing-valuations-of-risk-financial.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/10/volatility-of-valuations-of-risk.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/09/increase-in-valuations-of-risk.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/08/dollar-appreciation-contraction-of.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/07/twenty-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/06/increase-of-valuations-of-risk.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/05/fluctuating-valuations-of-risk.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/04/flattening-yield-curve-of-treasury.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/03/dollar-revaluation-twenty-one-million.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/12/mediocre-cyclical-united-states.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/12/fluctuation-of-valuations-of-risk.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/11/fluctuations-of-valuations-of-risk.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/09/fomc-increases-policy-interest-rate.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/09/revision-of-united-states-national.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/09/twenty-one-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/08/revision-of-united-states-national.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/08/fomc-policy-rate-unchanged-competitive.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/07/twenty-one-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/06/stronger-dollar-mediocre-cyclical.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/05/twenty-one-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/04/twenty-two-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/04/twenty-two-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/03/twenty-three-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/02/twenty-four-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/12/dollar-devaluation-cyclically.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/12/twenty-one-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/11/unchanged-fomc-policy-rate-gradual.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/10/twenty-one-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/09/twenty-two-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/08/data-dependent-monetary-policy-with.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/07/rising-yields-twenty-two-million.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/06/twenty-two-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/05/twenty-two-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/04/twenty-three-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/03/rising-valuations-of-risk-financial.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/02/twenty-six-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/01/twenty-four-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/12/rising-yields-and-dollar-revaluation.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/12/mediocre-cyclical-united-states.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/12/rising-yields-and-dollar-revaluation.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/11/the-case-for-increase-in-federal-funds.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/11/the-case-for-increase-in-federal-funds.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/10/twenty-four-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/09/interest-rates-and-valuations-of-risk.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/08/global-competitive-easing-or.html and earlier (http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/07/financial-asset-values-rebound-from.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/06/financial-turbulence-twenty-four.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/05/twenty-four-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/04/proceeding-cautiously-in-monetary.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/03/twenty-five-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/03/twenty-five-million-unemployed-or.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/02/fluctuating-risk-financial-assets-in.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/12/dollar-revaluation-and-decreasing.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/11/dollar-revaluation-constraining.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/11/dollar-revaluation-constraining.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/11/live-possibility-of-interest-rates.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/10/labor-market-uncertainty-and-interest.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/09/interest-rate-policy-dependent-on-what.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/08/fluctuating-risk-financial-assets.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/06/international-valuations-of-financial.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/06/higher-volatility-of-asset-prices-at.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/05/dollar-devaluation-and-carry-trade.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/04/volatility-of-valuations-of-financial.html)

Output of manufacturing (SIC) in Sep 2023 at 40.3 percent below long-term trend since 1919 and at 25.9 percent below trend measured from 1999 to 2006. Output of manufacturing (NAICS) at 44.2 percent below trend measured from 1986 to 2006 and 26.5 percent below trend measured from 1999 to 2006 (https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/11/the-federal-open-market-committee-fomc.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/09/us-gdp-grew-at-seasonally-adjusted_29.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/09/us-gdp-grew-at-seasonally-adjusted.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/07/us-gdp-grew-at-seasonally-adjusted.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/07/us-gdp-grew-at-seasonally-adjusted.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/05/us-gdp-grew-at-seasonally-adjusted.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/04/us-gdp-grew-at-seasonally-adjusted_29.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/04/us-gdp-grew-at-seasonally-adjusted.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/02/us-gdp-grew-at-seasonally-adjusted.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/01/us-gdp-grew-at-seasonally-adjusted.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/12/us-gdp-grew-at-seasonally-adjusted_31.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/12/us-gdp-grew-at-seasonally-adjusted.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/10/us-gdp-grew-at-seasonally-adjusted.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/10/us-gdp-contracted-at-seasonally.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/09/us-gdp-contracted-at-seasonally.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/08/cumulative-growth-of-us-manufacturing.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/07/cumulative-growth-of-us-manufacturing.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/05/cumulative-growth-of-us-manufacturing.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/04/inflation-accelerating-worldwide.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/03/the-fomc-decided-to-raise-target-range.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/02/united-states-producer-prices-of.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/01/united-states-producer-prices-of.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/12/cumulative-growth-of-us-manufacturing.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/11/total-nonfarm-hires-move-from-4986.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/10/cumulative-growth-of-us-manufacturing.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/09/cumulative-growth-of-us-manufacturing.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/08/cumulative-growth-of-us-manufacturing.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/07/cumulative-growth-of-us-manufacturing.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/06/unchanged-fomc-target-fed-funds-rate.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/05/cumulative-growth-of-us-manufacturing.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/04/cumulative-growth-of-us-manufacturing.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/03/unchanged-fomc-target-fed-funds-rate.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/02/cumulative-growth-of-us-manufacturing.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2021/01/cumulative-growth-of-us-manufacturing.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/12/cumulative-growth-of-us-manufacturing.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/11/cumulative-growth-of-us-manufacturing.html and earlier (https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/10/cumulative-growth-of-us-manufacturing.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/09/federal-open-market-committee-leaves.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/08/us-industrial-production-increased-3.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/07/growth-of-industrial-production-of-54.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/06/recovery-in-jun-2020-of-manufacturing.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/05/recovery-without-hiring-twenty-million.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/04/contraction-of-united-states.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/03/sharp-contraction-of-valuations-of-risk.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/02/declining-valuations-of-risk-financial.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2020/01/declining-valuations-of-risk-financial.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/12/diverging-economic-conditions-and.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/11/oscillating-risk-financial-assets-world.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/10/increasing-valuations-of-risk-financial_26.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/09/uncertain-fomc-outlook-of-monetary.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/08/global-decline-of-yields-of-government.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/07/global-manufacturing-stress-world.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/07/global-manufacturing-stress-world.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/06/fomc-outlook-uncertainty-central-bank.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/05/decreasing-valuations-of-risk-financial.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/04/increasing-valuations-of-risk-financial.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/03/inverted-yield-curve-of-treasury.html and earlier (https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/02/revaluation-of-yuanus-dollar-exchange.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2019/01/delays-in-updating-united-states.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/12/increase-of-interest-rates-by-monetary.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/11/weaker-world-economic-growth-with.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/10/oscillation-of-valuations-of-risk.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/09/world-inflation-waves-united-states.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/08/world-inflation-waves-lost-economic.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/07/continuing-gradual-increases-in-fed.html and earlier (https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/06/world-inflation-waves-united-states.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/05/dollar-revaluation-united-states_24.html and earlier (https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/04/rising-yields-world-inflation-waves.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/03/united-states-inflation-united-states.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/02/world-inflation-waves-united-states.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2018/01/dollar-devaluation-and-increasing.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/12/mediocre-cyclical-united-states_23.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/11/the-lost-economic-cycle-of-global_25.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/10/world-inflation-waves-long-term-and.html and earlier) (https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/09/monetary-policy-of-reducing-central.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/08/fluctuating-valuations-of-risk.html and earlier (https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/07/rising-valuations-of-risk-financial.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/06/fomc-interest-rate-increase-planned.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/05/dollar-devaluation-world-inflation.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/04/united-states-commercial-banks-assets.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/03/fomc-increases-interest-rates-world.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/02/world-inflation-waves-united-states.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2017/01/world-inflation-waves-united-states.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/12/of-course-economic-outlook-is-highly.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/11/interest-rate-increase-could-well.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/10/dollar-revaluation-world-inflation.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/09/interest-rates-and-volatility-of-risk.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/08/interest-rate-policy-uncertainty-and.html and earlier (http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/07/unresolved-us-balance-of-payments.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/06/fomc-projections-world-inflation-waves.html and earlier (http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/05/most-fomc-participants-judged-that-if.html and earlier (http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/04/contracting-united-states-industrial.html and earlier (http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/03/monetary-policy-and-competitive.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/02/squeeze-of-economic-activity-by-carry.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2016/01/unconventional-monetary-policy-and.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/12/liftoff-of-interest-rates-with-monetary.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/11/interest-rate-liftoff-followed-by.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/10/interest-rate-policy-quagmire-world.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/09/interest-rate-increase-on-hold-because.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2015/08/exchange-rate-and-financial-asset.html

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) of the US Department of Labor provides both seasonally adjusted (SA) and not-seasonally adjusted (NSA) or unadjusted data with important uses (Bureau of Labor Statistics 2012Feb3; 2011Feb11):

“Most series published by the Current Employment Statistics program reflect a regularly recurring seasonal movement that can be measured from past experience. By eliminating that part of the change attributable to the normal seasonal variation, it is possible to observe the cyclical and other nonseasonal movements in these series. Seasonally adjusted series are published monthly for selected employment, hours, and earnings estimates.”

Requirements of using best available information and updating seasonality factors affect the comparability over time of United States employment data. In the first month of the year, the BLS revises data for several years by adjusting benchmarks and seasonal factors (page 4 at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf release of Jan 2015 at http://www.bls.gov/schedule/archives/empsit_nr.htm#2015), which is the case of the data for Jan 2015 released on Feb 6, 2015:

“In accordance with annual practice, the establishment survey data released today have been benchmarked to reflect comprehensive counts of payroll jobs for March 2014. These counts are derived principally from the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW), which enumerates jobs covered by the unemployment insurance tax system. The benchmark process results in revisions to not seasonally adjusted data from April 2013 forward.

Seasonally adjusted data from January 2010 forward are subject to revision. In addition, data for some series prior to 2010, both seasonally adjusted and unadjusted, incorporate revisions. The total nonfarm employment level for March 2014 was revised upward by 91,000 (+67,000 on a not seasonally adjusted basis, or less than 0.05 percent). The average benchmark revision over the past 10 years was plus or minus 0.3 percent. Table A presents revised total nonfarm employment data on a seasonally adjusted basis for January through

December 2014.

An article that discusses the benchmark and post-benchmark revisions and other technical issues can be accessed through the BLS website at www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cesbmart.pdf.

Information on the data released today also may be obtained by calling (202) 691-6555.”

There are also adjustments of population that affect comparability of labor statistics over time (page 5 at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf release of Jan 2015 at http://www.bls.gov/schedule/archives/empsit_nr.htm#2015):

“Effective with data for January 2015, updated population estimates have been used in the household survey. Population estimates for the household survey are developed by the U.S. Census Bureau. Each year, the Census Bureau updates the estimates to reflect new information and assumptions about the growth of the population since the previous decennial census. The change in population reflected in the new estimates results from adjustments for net international migration, updated vital statistics and other information, and some methodological changes in the estimation process. In accordance with usual practice, BLS will not revise the official household survey estimates for December 2014 and earlier months. To show the impact of the population adjustments, however, differences in selected December 2014 labor force series based on the old and new population estimates are shown in table B.”

There are also adjustments of benchmarks and seasonality factors for establishment data that affect comparability over time (page 4 at http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf release of Jan 2015 at http://www.bls.gov/schedule/archives/empsit_nr.htm#2015):

“In accordance with annual practice, the establishment survey data released today [Feb 6, 2015] have been benchmarked to reflect comprehensive counts of payroll jobs for March 2014. These counts are derived principally from the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW), which enumerates jobs covered by the unemployment insurance tax system. The benchmark process results in revisions to not seasonally adjusted data from April 2013 forward. Seasonally adjusted data from January 2010 forward are subject to revision. In addition, data for some series prior to 2010, both seasonally adjusted and unadjusted, incorporate revisions.”

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) revised household data for seasonal factors in the release for Dec 2015 (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf):

“Seasonally adjusted household survey data have been revised using updated seasonal adjustment factors, a procedure done at the end of each calendar year. Seasonally adjusted estimates back to January 2011 were subject to revision. The unemployment rates for January 2015 through November 2015 (as originally published and as revised) appear in table A on page 5, along with additional information about the revisions.”

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) revised household data for seasonal factors in the release for Dec 2016 (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf):

“Seasonally adjusted household survey data have been revised using updated seasonal adjustment factors, a procedure done at the end of each calendar year. Seasonally adjusted estimates back to January 2012 were subject to revision. The unemployment rates for January 2016 through November 2016 (as originally published and as revised) appear in table A on page 5, along with additional information about the revisions.”

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) revised establishment data for seasonal and benchmarks in the release for Jan 2016 (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf): “Establishment survey data have been revised as a result of the annual benchmarking process and the updating of seasonal adjustment factors. Also, household survey data for January 2016 reflect updated population estimates. See the notes beginning on page 4 for more information about these changes.”

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) revised establishment data for seasonal and benchmarks in the release for Jan 2017 (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf): “Establishment survey data have been revised as a result of the annual benchmarking process and the updating of seasonal adjustment factors using an improved methodology to select models. Also, household survey data for January 2017 reflect updated population estimates. See the notes beginning on page 4 for more information about these changes.”

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) revised household data for seasonal adjustment in the release for Dec 2017 (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf): “Seasonally adjusted household survey data have been revised using updated seasonal adjustment factors, a procedure done at the end of each calendar year. Seasonally adjusted estimates back to January 2013 were subject to revision. The unemployment rates for January 2017 through November 2017 (as originally published and as revised) appear in table A on page 6, along with additional information about the revisions.”

All comparisons over time are affected by yearly adjustments of benchmarks and seasonality factors. All data in this blog comment use revised data released by the BLS (http://www.bls.gov/).

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) revised household data for seasonal adjustment in the release for Dec 2018 (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf): “Revision of Seasonally Adjusted Household Survey Data. Seasonally adjusted household survey data have been revised using updated seasonal adjustment factors, a procedure done at the end of each calendar year. Seasonally adjusted estimates back to January 2014 were subject to revision. The unemployment rates for January 2018 through November 2018 (as originally published and as revised) appear in table A on page 5, along with additional information about the revisions.”

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) revised payroll establishment data with the release of the estimates for Jan 2019 (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_02012019.htm): “ Establishment survey data have been revised as a result of the annual benchmarking process and the updating of seasonal adjustment factors. Also, household survey data for January 2019 reflect updated population estimates. See the notes beginning at the end of this news release for more information about these changes.”

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) revised the Establishment Survey Data with the release of estimates for Jan 2018 on Feb 20, 2018 (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf): “In accordance with annual practice, the establishment survey data released today have been benchmarked to reflect comprehensive counts of payroll jobs for March 2017. These counts are derived principally from the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW), which counts jobs covered by the Unemployment Insurance (UI) tax system. In addition, the data were updated to the 2017 North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) from the 2012 NAICS. This update resulted in minor changes to several detailed industries. The normal benchmark process revises not seasonally adjusted data from April 2016 forward and seasonally adjusted data from January 2013 forward. However, some data were also revised further back in their history than normal due to the implementation of 2017 NAICS and other minor technical changes related to rounding and re-aggregation of some series. The total nonfarm employment level for March 2017 was revised upward by 146,000 (+138,000 on a not seasonally adjusted basis, or +0.1 percent). On a not seasonally adjusted basis, the average absolute benchmark revision over the past 10 years is 0.2 percent. The effect of these revisions on the underlying trend in nonfarm payroll employment was minor. For example, the over-the-year change in total nonfarm employment for 2017 was revised from +2,055,000 to +2,173,000 (seasonally adjusted). Table A presents revised total nonfarm employment data on a seasonally adjusted basis from January to December 2017. All revised historical establishment survey data are available on the BLS website at www.bls.gov/ces/data.htm. In addition, an article that discusses the benchmark and post-benchmark revisions and other technical issues is available at www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cesbmart.htm.”

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) informs that “Establishment survey data have been revised as a result of the annual benchmarking process and the updating of seasonal adjustment factors. Also, household survey data for January 2019 reflect updated population estimates. See the notes beginning on page 6 for more information about these changes” (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf).

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) informs that “Revision of Seasonally Adjusted Household Survey Data. Seasonally adjusted household survey data have been revised using updated seasonal adjustment factors, a procedure done at the end of each calendar year. Seasonally adjusted estimates back to January 2015 were subject to revision. The unemployment rates for January 2019 through November 2019 (as originally published and as revised) appear in table A on page 5, along with additional information about the revisions” (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf).

The Bureau of Labor Statistics informs that “Establishment survey data have been revised as a result of the annual benchmarking process and the updating of seasonal adjustment factors. In addition, several changes have been made to household survey data, including the annual update of population estimates. See the notes beginning on page 4 for more information” (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf).

The Bureau of Labor Statistics informs that “Revision of Seasonally Adjusted Household Survey Data Seasonally adjusted household survey data have been revised using updated seasonal adjustment factors, a procedure done at the end of each calendar year. Seasonally adjusted estimates back to January 2016 were subject to revision. The unemployment rates for January 2020 through November 2020 (as originally published and as revised) appear in table A on page 7, along with additional information about the revisions” (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf).

The Bureau of Labor Statistics informs that “Establishment survey data have been revised as a result of the annual benchmarking process and the updating of seasonal adjustment factors. Also, household survey data for January 2021 reflect updated population estimates. See the notes at the end of this news release for more information about the revisions” (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf).

The Bureau of Labor Statistics informs that “Seasonally adjusted household survey data have been revised using updated seasonal | adjustment factors, a procedure done at the end of each calendar year. Seasonally adjusted estimates back to January 2017 were subject to revision. The unemployment rates for January 2021 through November 2021 (as originally published and as revised) |appear in table A at the end of this news release, along with additional information about the revisions.” (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf).

The Bureau of Labor Statistics informs that “Changes to The Employment Situation Data Establishment survey data have been revised as a result of the annual benchmarking process and the updating of seasonal adjustment factors. Also, household survey data for January 2022 reflect updated population estimates. See the notes beginning on page 5 for more information.” (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf).

The Bureau of Labor Statistics informs that “Revision of Seasonally Adjusted Household Survey Data Seasonally adjusted household survey data have been revised using updated seasonal adjustment factors, a procedure done at the end of each calendar year. Seasonally adjusted estimates back to January 2018 were subject to revision. The unemployment rates for January 2022 through November 2022 (as originally published and as revised) appear in table A on page 6, along with additional information about the revisions.” (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf).

The Bureau of Labor Statistics informs of revisions of establishment survey data:” Establishment survey data have been revised as a result of the annual benchmarking

process, the NAICS 2022 conversion, and the updating of seasonal adjustment factors.

Also, household survey data for January 2023 reflect updated population estimates. (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf).

“See the notes at the end of this news release for more information.”. The Bureau of Labor Statistics also revised population estimates: “Effective with data for January 2023, updated population estimates were incorporated into the household survey. Population estimates for the household survey are developed by the U.S. Census Bureau. Each year, the Census Bureau updates the estimates to

reflect new information and assumptions about the growth of the population since the

previous decennial census. The change in population reflected in the new estimates

results from adjustments for net international migration, updated vital statistics, and

improvements in estimation methodology.” (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf).

IA2 Number of People in Job Stress. There are two approaches to calculating the number of people in job stress. The first approach consists of calculating the number of people in job stress unemployed or underemployed with the raw data of the employment situation report as in Table I-2. The data are seasonally adjusted (SA). The first three rows provide the labor force and unemployed in millions and the unemployment rate of unemployed as percent of the labor force. There is increase in the number unemployed from 6.355 million in Aug 2023 to 6.360 million in Sep 2023. The number unemployed increased to 6.506 million in Oct 20223. The rate of unemployment did not change from 3.8 percent in Aug 2023 to 3.8 percent in Sep 2023, increasing to 3.9 percent in Oct 2023. An important aspect of unemployment is its persistence for more than 27 weeks with 1.282 million in Oct 2023 corresponding to 19.7 percent of the unemployed. The longer the period of unemployment the lower are the chances of finding another job with many long-term unemployed ceasing to search for a job. Another key characteristic of the current labor market is the high number of people trying to subsist with part-time jobs because they cannot find full-time employment or part-time for economic reasons. The BLS explains as follows: “these individuals, who would have preferred full-time employment, were working part time because their hours had been reduced or because they were unable to find full-time jobs” (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf 2). The number of part-time for economic reasons decreased from 4.221 million in Aug 2023 to 4.065 million in Sep 2023, increasing to 4.283 million in Oct 2023. Another important fact is the marginally attached to the labor force. The BLS explains as follows: “these individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey” (http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf 2). The number in job stress unemployed or underemployed of 12.180 million in Oct 2023 consists of:

6.506 million unemployed (of whom 1.282 million, or 19.7 percent, unemployed for 27 weeks or more) compared with 6.360 million unemployed in Sep 2023 (of whom 1.216 million, or 19.1 percent, unemployed for 27 weeks or more).

· 4.283 million employed part-time for economic reasons in Oct 2023 (who suffered reductions in their work hours or could not find full-time employment) compared with 4.065 million in Sep 2023.

· 1.391 million who were marginally attached to the labor force in Oct 2023 (who were not in the labor force but wanted and were available for work) compared with 1.492 million in Sep 2023.

Table I-2, US, People in Job Stress, Millions and % SA

	Oct 2023	Sep 2023	Aug 2023
Labor Force Millions	167.728	167.929	167.839
Unemployed Millions	6.506	6.360	6.355
Unemployment Rate (unemployed as % labor force)	3.9	3.8	3.8
Unemployed ≥27 weeks Millions	1.282	1.216	1.296
Unemployed ≥27 weeks %	19.7	19.1	20.4
Part Time for Economic Reasons Millions	4.283	4.065	4.221
Marginally Attached to Labor Force Millions	1.391	1.492	1.500
Job Stress Millions	12.180	11.917	12.076
In Job Stress as % Labor Force	7.3	7.1	7.2

Job Stress = Unemployed + Part Time Economic Reasons + Marginally Attached Labor Force

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics

Table I-3 repeats the data in Table I-2 but including Feb and additional data. What really matters is the number of people with jobs or the total employed, representing the opportunity for exit from unemployment. The final row of Table I-3 provides people employed as percent of the population or employment to population ratio. The number has remained relatively constant around 59 percent, reaching 60.1 in Nov 2017, 60.1 in Dec 2017, 60.6 in Jul 2018, 60.3 in Aug 2018, 60.4 for Sep 2018, 60.5 in Oct 2018, 60.6 in Nov 2018, 60.6 in Dec 2018, 60.6 in Jan 2019, 60.7 in Feb 2019, 60.6 in Mar 2019, 60.6 in Apr 2019, 60.6 in May 2019, 60.7 in Jun 2019, 60.8 in Jul 2019 and 60.8 in Aug 2019. The employment to population ratio fell from an annual level of 63.1 percent in 2006 to 58.6 percent in 2012, 58.6 percent in 2013 and 59.0 in 2014 with the lowest level at 58.4 percent in 2011. The employment population ratio NSA reached 59.4 in Dec 2015, 59.6 in Dec 2016, 60.0 in Dec 2017, 60.4 in Dec 2018, 60.9 in Dec 2019, 57.3 in Dec 2020, 59.4 in Dec 2021 and 60.0 in Dec 2022. The SA level in Table I-3 is 60.2 in Oct 2023.

Table I-3, US, Unemployment and Underemployment, SA, Millions and Percent

	Oct 2023	Sep 2023	Aug 2023	July 2023
Labor Force	167.728	167.929	167.839	167.103
Participation Rate	62.7	62.8	62.8	62.6
Unemployed	6.506	6.360	6.355	5.841
UNE Rate %	3.9	3.8	3.8	3.5
Part Time Economic Reasons	4.283	4.065	4.221	4.000
Marginally Attached to Labor Force	1.391	1.492	1.500	1.467
In Job Stress	12.180	11.917	12.076	11.308
In Job Stress % Labor Force	7.3	7.1	7.2	6.8
Employed		161.570	161.484	161.262
Employment % Population	60.2	60.4	60.4	60.4

Job Stress = Unemployed + Part Time Economic Reasons + Marginally Attached Labor Force

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics

for considering another approach to calculating job stress in the US. Chart I-1 of the Bureau of Labor Statistics provides the level of employment in the US from 2001 to 2023. There was a big drop of the number of people employed from 147.315 million at the peak in Jul 2007 (NSA) to 136.809 million at the trough in Jan 2010 (NSA) with 10.506 million fewer people employed. Recovery has been anemic compared with the shallow recession of 2001 that was followed by nearly vertical growth in jobs. The number employed in Oct 2023 was 161.676 million (NSA) or 14.361 million more people with jobs relative to the peak of 147.315 million in Jul 2007 while the civilian noninstitutional population of ages 16 years and over increased from 231.958 million in Jul 2007 to 267.642 million in Oct 2023 or by 35.684 million. The number employed increased 9.7 percent from Jul 2007 to Oct 2023 while the noninstitutional civilian population of ages of 16 years and over, or those available for work, increased 15.4 percent. The ratio of employment to population in Jul 2007 was 63.5 percent (147.315 million employed as percent of population of 231.958 million). The same ratio in Oct 2023 would result in 169.953 million jobs (0.635 multiplied by noninstitutional civilian population of 267.642 million). There are effectively 8.277 million fewer jobs in Oct 2023 than in Oct 2007, or 169.953 million minus 161.676 million. There is actually not sufficient job creation in merely absorbing new entrants in the labor force because of those dropping from job searches, worsening the stock of unemployed or underemployed in involuntary part-time jobs.

Chart I-1, US, Employed, Thousands, SA, 2001-2023

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

Chart I-2 of the Bureau of Labor Statistics provides 12-month percentage changes of the number of people employed in the US from 2001 to 2023. There was recovery since 2010 but not sufficient to recover lost jobs. Many people in the US who had jobs before the global recession are not working now and many who entered the labor force cannot find employment. There is sharp contraction of employment in Mar and Apr 2020 with recovery in May 2020-Oct 2023 in the global recession, with output in the US reaching a high in Feb 2020 (https://www.nber.org/research/data/us-business-cycle-expansions-and-contractions), in the lockdown of economic activity in the COVID-19 event and the through in Apr 2020 (https://www.nber.org/news/business-cycle-dating-committee-announcement-july-19-2021).

Chart I-2, US, Employed, 12-Month Percentage Change NSA, 2001-2023

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

The foundation of the second approach derives from Chart I-3 of the Bureau of Labor Statistics providing the level of the civilian labor force in the US. The civilian labor force consists of people who are available and willing to work and who have searched for employment recently. The labor force of the US NSA grew 9.4 percent from 142.828 million in Jan 2001 to 156.255 million in Jul 2009. The civilian labor force is 7.4 percent higher at 167.774 million in Oct 2023 than in Jul 2009, all numbers not seasonally adjusted. Chart I-3 shows the flattening of the curve of expansion of the labor force and its decline in 2010 and 2011. The ratio of the labor force of 154.871 million in Jul 2007 to the noninstitutional population of 231.958 million in Jul 2007 was 66.8 percent while the ratio of the labor force of 167.774 million in Oct 2023 to the noninstitutional population of 267.642 million in Oct 2023 was 62.7 percent. The labor force of the US in Oct 2023 corresponding to 66.8 percent of participation in the population would be 178.785 million (0.668 x 267.642) The difference between the measured labor force in Oct 2023 of 167.774 million and the labor force in Oct 2023 with participation rate of 66.8 percent (as in Jul 2007) of 178.785 million is 11.011 million. The level of the labor force in the US has stagnated and is 11.011 million lower than what it would have been had the same participation rate been maintained. Millions of people have abandoned their search for employment because they believe there are no jobs available for them. Millions lost their employment in the lockdown of economic activity of the COVID-19 event. The key issue is whether the decline in participation of the population in the labor force is the result of people giving up on finding another job in addition to job contraction in the global recession, with output in the US reaching a high in Feb 2020 (https://www.nber.org/research/data/us-business-cycle-expansions-and-contractions), in the lockdown of economic activity in the COVID-19 event and the through in Apr 2020 (https://www.nber.org/news/business-cycle-dating-committee-announcement-july-19-2021).

Chart I-3, US, Civilian Labor Force, Thousands, SA, 2001-2023

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics https://www.bls.gov/data/

Chart I-4 of the Bureau of Labor Statistics provides 12-month percentage changes of the level of the labor force in the US. The rate of growth fell almost instantaneously with the global recession and became negative from 2009 to 2011. The labor force of the US collapsed and did not recover cyclically. Growth in the beginning of the summer originates in younger people looking for jobs in the summer after graduation or during school recess.

Chart I-4, US, Civilian Labor Force, Thousands, NSA, 12-month Percentage Change, 2001-2023

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics https://www.bls.gov/data/

Chart I-5 of the Bureau of Labor Statistics provides the labor force participation rate in the US or labor force as percent of the population. The labor force participation rate of the US fell from 66.8 percent in Jan 2001 to 62.7 percent NSA in Oct 2023, all numbers not seasonally adjusted. The annual labor force participation rate for 1979 was 63.7 percent and also 63.7 percent in Nov 1980 during sharp economic contraction. This comparison is further elaborated below. Chart I-5 shows an evident downward trend beginning with the global recession that has continued throughout the recovery beginning in IIIQ2009. The critical issue is whether people left the workforce of the US because they believe there is no longer a job for them and if that number will increase in the global recession, with output in the US reaching a high in Feb 2020 (https://www.nber.org/research/data/us-business-cycle-expansions-and-contractions), in the lockdown of economic activity in the COVID-19 event and the through in Apr 2020 (https://www.nber.org/news/business-cycle-dating-committee-announcement-july-19-2021).

Chart I-5, Civilian Labor Force Participation Rate, Percent of Population in Labor Force SA, 2001-2023

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics https://www.bls.gov/data435

Chart I-6 of the Bureau of Labor Statistics provides the level of unemployed in the US. The number unemployed rose from the trough of 6.272 million NSA in Oct 2006 to the peak of 16.147 million in Jan 2010, declining to 13.400 million in Jul 2012, 12.696 million in Aug 2012 and 11.741 million in Sep 2012. The level unemployed fell to 11.741 million in Oct 2012, 11.404 million in Nov 2012, 11.844 million in Dec 2012, 13.181 million in Jan 2013, 12.500 million in Feb 2013 and 9.984 million in Dec 2013. The level of unemployment reached 6.098 million in Oct 2023, all numbers not seasonally adjusted, in the global recession, with output in the US reaching a high in Feb 2020 (https://www.nber.org/research/data/us-business-cycle-expansions-and-contractions), in the lockdown of economic activity in the COVID-19 event and the through in Apr 2020 (https://www.nber.org/news/business-cycle-dating-committee-announcement-july-19-2021).

Chart I-6, US, Unemployed, Thousands, SA, 2001-2023

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics https://www.bls.gov/data/

Chart I-7 of the Bureau of Labor Statistics provides the rate of unemployment in the US or unemployed as percent of the labor force. The rate of unemployment of the US rose from 4.7 percent in Jan 2001 to 6.5 percent in Jun 2003, declining to 4.1 percent in Oct 2006. The rate of unemployment jumped to 10.6 percent in Jan 2010 and declined to 7.6 percent in Dec 2012 but increased to 8.5 percent in Jan 2013 and 8.1 percent in Feb 2013, falling back to 7.3 percent in May 2013 and 7.8 percent in Jun 2013, all numbers not seasonally adjusted. The rate of unemployment not seasonally adjusted stabilized at 7.7 percent in Jul 2013 and fell to 6.5 percent in Dec 2013 and 5.4 percent in Dec 2014. The rate of unemployment NSA decreased to 4.8 percent in Dec 2015 and 4.5 percent in Dec 2016, reaching 3.9 percent in Dec 2017. The NSA rate of unemployment was at 3.7 percent in Dec 2018, 3.4 percent in Dec 2019 and 6.5 percent in Dec 2020. The NSA unemployment rate was 3.7 percent in Dec 2021, 3.3 percent in Dec 2022 and 3.6 percent in Oct 2023 in the global recession, with output in the US reaching a high in Feb 2020 (https://www.nber.org/research/data/us-business-cycle-expansions-and-contractions), in the lockdown of economic activity in the COVID-19 event and the through in Apr 2020 (https://www.nber.org/news/business-cycle-dating-committee-announcement-july-19-2021).

Chart I-7, US, Unemployment Rate, SA, 2001-2023

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

Chart I-8 of the Bureau of Labor Statistics provides 12-month percentage changes of the level of unemployed. There was a jump of 81.8 percent in Apr 2009 with subsequent decline and negative rates since 2010. On an annual basis, the level of unemployed rose 59.8 percent in 2009 and 26.1 percent in 2008 with increase of 3.9 percent in 2010, decline of 7.3 percent in 2011 and decrease of 9.0 percent in 2012. The annual level of unemployment decreased 8.4 percent in 2013 and fell 16.1 percent in 2014. The annual level of unemployment fell 13.7 percent in 2015 and fell 6.6 percent in 2016, decreasing 9.9 percent in 2017. The level of unemployment decreased 12.4 percent in Dec 2017 relative to a year earlier and decreased 4.0 percent in Dec 2018 relative to a year earlier. The level of unemployment decreased 8.7 percent in Dec 2019 relative to a year earlier. The level of unemployment increased 317.7 percent in Apr 2020 and increased 34.4 percent in Mar 2021 relative to a year earlier in the global recession, with output in the US reaching a high in Feb 2020 (https://www.nber.org/research/data/us-business-cycle-expansions-and-contractions), in the lockdown of economic activity in the COVID-19 event and the through in Apr 2020 (https://www.nber.org/news/business-cycle-dating-committee-announcement-july-19-2021). The level of unemployment decreased 59.0 percent in Apr 2021 relative to a year earlier and decreased 57.0 percent in May 2021 relative to a year earlier. The level of unemployment decreased 45.3 percent in Jun 2021 relative to a year earlier and decreased 45.4 percent in Jul 2021 relative to a year earlier. The level of unemployed decreased 40.0 percent in Sep 2021 relative to a year earlier and decreased 35.1 percent in Oct 2021 relative to a year earlier. The level of unemployment decreased 38.6 percent in Nov 2021 relative to a year earlier and decreased 42.7 percent in Dec 2021 relative to a year earlier. The level of unemployment decreased 10.3 percent in Dec 2022 relative to a year earlier. The level of unemployment increased 8.7 percent in Oct 2023 relative to a year earlier.

Chart I-8, US, Unemployed, 12-month Percentage Change, NSA, 2001-2023

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics https://www.bls.gov/data/

Chart I-9 of the Bureau of Labor Statistics provides the number of people in part-time occupations because of economic reasons, that is, because they cannot find full-time employment. The number underemployed in part-time occupations not seasonally adjusted rose from 3.732 million in Jan 2001 to 5.270 million in Jan 2004, falling to 3.787 million in Apr 2006. The number underemployed seasonally adjusted jumped to 9.114 million in Nov 2009, falling to 8.171 million in Dec 2011 but increasing to 8.305 million in Jan 2012 and 8.238 million in Feb 2012 but then falling to 7.943 million in Dec 2012 and increasing to 8.099 million in Jul 2013. The number employed part-time for economic reasons seasonally adjusted reached 4.627 million in Dec 2018 and 4.665 million in Nov 2018. Without seasonal adjustment, the number employed part-time for economic reasons reached 9.354 million in Dec 2009, declining to 8.918 million in Jan 2012 and 8.166 million in Dec 2012 but increasing to 8.324 million in Jul 2013. The number employed part-time for economic reasons NSA stood at 7.990 million in Dec 2013, 6.970 million in Dec 2014 and 6.179 million in Dec 2015. The number employed part-time for economic reasons NSA stood at 5.707 million in Dec 2016. The number employed part-time for economic reasons reached 5.060 million in Dec 2017. The level of employed part-time for economic reasons stood at 4.740 million in Dec 2018 and 4.247 million in Dec 2019. The longer the period in part-time jobs the lower are the chances of finding another full-time job. The number of part-time for economic reasons NSA jumped to 10.684 million in Apr 2020 and 6.245 million in Dec 2020 in the global recession, with output in the US reaching a high in Feb 2020 (https://www.nber.org/research/data/us-business-cycle-expansions-and-contractions), in the lockdown of economic activity in the COVID-19 event and the through in Apr 2020 (https://www.nber.org/news/business-cycle-dating-committee-announcement-july-19-2021). The level of part-time for economic reasons reached 4.049 million in Dec 2021, 3.991 million in Dec 2022 and 3.973 million in Oct 2023.

Chart I-9, US, Part-Time for Economic Reasons, Thousands, SA, 2001-2023

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics https://www.bls.gov/data/

Chart I-10 of the Bureau of Labor Statistics repeats the behavior of unemployment. The 12-month percentage change of the level of people at work part-time for economic reasons jumped 84.7 percent in Mar 2009 and declined subsequently. The declines have been insufficient to reduce significantly the number of people who cannot shift from part-time to full-time employment. On an annual basis, the number of part-time for economic reasons increased 33.5 percent in 2008 and 51.7 percent in 2009, declining 0.4 percent in 2010, 3.5 percent in 2011 and 5.1 percent in 2012. The annual number of part-time for economic reasons decreased 2.3 percent in 2013 and fell 9.1 percent in 2014. The annual number of part-time for economic reasons fell 11.7 percent in 2015 and fell 6.7 percent in 2016. The number of part-time for economic reasons decreased 7.6 percent in Dec 2016 relative to a year earlier. The level of part-time for economic reason fell 11.3 percent in Dec 2017 relative to a year earlier. The level of part-time for economic reasons fell 6.3 percent in Dec 2018 relative to a year earlier and decreased 10.4 percent in Dec 2019 relative to a year earlier. The level of part-time for economic reasons jumped 138.3 percent in Apr 2020 relative to a year earlier and 37.2 percent in Feb 2021 relative to a year earlier in the global recession, with output in the US reaching a high in Feb 2020 (https://www.nber.org/research/data/us-business-cycle-expansions-and-contractions), in the lockdown of economic activity in the COVID-19 event and the through in Apr 2020 (https://www.nber.org/news/business-cycle-dating-committee-announcement-july-19-2021). The level of part-time for economic reasons increased 0.6 percent in Mar 2021 relative to a year earlier and decreased 52.9 percent in Apr 2021 relative to a year earlier, decreasing 51.6 percent in May 2021 relative to a year earlier. The level of part-time for economic reasons decreased 48.0 percent in Jun 2021 relative to a year earlier and decreased 46.3 percent in Jul 2021 relative to a year earlier. The level of part-time for economic reasons decreased 41.4 percent in Aug 2021 relative to a year earlier, decreasing 30.6 percent in Sep 2021 relative to a year earlier, decreasing 35.4 percent in Oct 2021 relative to a year earlier and decreasing 35.9 percent in Nov 2021 relative to a year earlier. The level of part-time for economic reasons decreased 35.2 percent in Dec 2021 and decreased 32.0 percent in 2021 relative to 2020. The level of part-time for economic reasons decreased 1.4 percent in Dec 2022 relative to a year earlier and decreased 20.0 percent relative to 2021. The level of part-time for economic reasons increased 18.4 percent in Oct 2023 relative to a year earlier.

Chart I-10, US, Part-Time for Economic Reasons NSA 12-Month Percentage Change, 2001-2023

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics https://www.bls.gov/data/

Chart I-11 of the Bureau of Labor Statistics provides the same pattern of the number marginally attached to the labor force jumping to significantly higher levels during the global recession and remaining at historically high levels. The number marginally attached to the labor force not seasonally adjusted increased from 1.295 million in Jan 2001 to 1.691 million in Feb 2004. The number of marginally attached to the labor force fell to 1.299 million in Sep 2006 and increased to 2.609 million in Dec 2010 and 2.800 million in Jan 2011. The number marginally attached to the labor force was 2.540 million in Dec 2011, increasing to 2.809 million in Jan 2012, falling to 2.608 million in Feb 2012. The number marginally attached to the labor force fell to 2.352 million in Mar 2012, 2.363 million in Apr 2012, 2.423 million in May 2012, 2.483 million in Jun 2012, 2.529 million in Jul 2012 and 2.561 million in Aug 2012. The number marginally attached to the labor force fell to 2.517 million in Sep 2012, 2.433 million in Oct 2012, 2.505 million in Nov 2012 and 2.427 million in Dec 2013. The number marginally attached to the labor force reached 2.260 million in Dec 2014 and 1.833 million in Dec 2015. The number marginally attached to the labor force stood at 1.684 million in Dec 2016. The level marginally attached to the labor force reached 1.623 million in Dec 2017. The level of marginally attached to the labor force stood at 1.556 million in Dec 2018 and 1.246 million in Dec 2019. The level of marginally attached to the labor force reached 2.197 million in Dec 2020. The level of marginally attached to the labor force reached 1.671 million in Dec 2021. The level of marginally attached to the labor force reached 1.260 million in Dec 2022. The level of marginally attached to the labor force reached 1.391 million in Oct 2023.

Chart I-11, US, Marginally Attached to the Labor Force, Thousands, NSA, 2001-2023

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics https://www.bls.gov/data/

Chart I-12 provides 12-month percentage changes of the marginally attached to the labor force from 2001 to 2023. There was a jump of 56.1 percent in May 2009 during the global recession followed by declines in percentage changes but insufficient negative changes. On an annual basis, the number of marginally attached to the labor force increased in four consecutive years: 15.7 percent in 2008, 37.9 percent in 2009, 11.7 percent in 2010 and 3.5 percent in 2011. The number marginally attached to the labor force fell 2.2 percent on annual basis in 2012 but increased 2.9 percent in the 12 months ending in Dec 2012, fell 13.0 percent in the 12 months ending in Jan 2013, falling 10.7 percent in the 12 months ending in May 2013. The number marginally attached to the labor force increased 4.0 percent in the 12 months ending in Jun 2013 and fell 4.5 percent in the 12 months ending in Jul 2013 and 8.6 percent in the 12 months ending in Aug 2013. The annual number of marginally attached to the labor force fell 6.2 percent in 2013 and fell 6.5 percent in 2014. The annual number of marginally attached to the labor force fell 11.4 percent in 2015. The number marginally attached to the labor force fell 7.2 percent in the 12 months ending in Dec 2013 and fell 6.9 percent in the 12 months ending in Dec 2014. The number marginally attached to the labor force fell 18.9 percent in the 12 months ending in Dec 2015 and decreased 8.1 percent in the 12 months ending in Dec 2016. The level of marginally attached to the labor force decreased 3.6 percent in the 12 months ending in Dec 2017. The level of marginally attached to the labor force decreased 4.1 percent in the 12 months ending in Dec 2018 and decreased 19.9 percent in the 12 months ending in Dec 2019. The level of marginally attached to the labor force increased 64.3 percent in the 12 months ending in May 2020 and increased 29.2 percent in the 12 months ending in Mar 2021 in the global recession, with output in the US reaching a high in Feb 2020 (https://www.nber.org/research/data/us-business-cycle-expansions-and-contractions), in the lockdown of economic activity in the COVID-19 event and the through in Apr 2020 (https://www.nber.org/news/business-cycle-dating-committee-announcement-july-19-2021). The level of marginally attached to the labor force decreased 23.9 percent in the 12 months ending in Dec 2021 and decreased 24.6 percent in the 12 months ending in Dec 2022. The level of marginally attached to the labor force decreased 5.3 percent in the 12 months ending in Oct 2023.

Chart I-12, US, Marginally Attached to the Labor Force 12-Month Percentage Change, NSA, 2001-2023

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics https://www.bls.gov/data/

Table I-4 consists of data and additional calculations using the BLS household survey, illustrating the possibility that the actual rate of unemployment could be 8.8 percent and the number of people in job stress could be around 20.9 million, which is 11.8 percent of the effective labor force. Unemployment increased sharply while employment declined rapidly in the global recession, with output in the US reaching a high in Feb 2020 (https://www.nber.org/cycles.html), in the lockdown of economic activity in the COVID-19 event (https://www.bls.gov/cps/employment-situation-covid19-faq-june-2020.pdf https://www.bls.gov/covid19/employment-situation-covid19-faq-july-2020.htm https://www.bls.gov/covid19/employment-situation-covid19-faq-august-2020.htm https://www.bls.gov/covid19/employment-situation-covid19-faq-september-2020.htm https://www.bls.gov/covid19/employment-situation-covid19-faq-october-2020.htm https://www.bls.gov/covid19/employment-situation-covid19-faq-november-2020.htm https://www.bls.gov/covid19/employment-situation-covid19-faq-december-2020.htm https://www.bls.gov/covid19/employment-situation-covid19-faq-january-2021.htm https://www.bls.gov/covid19/employment-situation-covid19-faq-february-2021.htm https://www.bls.gov/covid19/employment-situation-covid19-faq-march-2021.htm https://www.bls.gov/covid19/employment-situation-covid19-faq-april-2021.htm https://www.bls.gov/covid19/employment-situation-covid19-faq-may-2021.htm https://www.bls.gov/covid19/employment-situation-covid19-faq-june-2021.htm https://www.bls.gov/covid19/employment-situation-covid19-faq-july-2021.htm https://www.bls.gov/covid19/employment-situation-covid19-faq-august-2021.htm https://www.bls.gov/covid19/employment-situation-covid19-faq-september-2021.htm https://www.bls.gov/covid19/employment-situation-covid19-faq-october-2021.htm https://www.bls.gov/covid19/employment-situation-covid19-faq-november-2021.htm https://www.bls.gov/covid19/employment-situation-covid19-faq-december-2021.htm https://www.bls.gov/covid19/effects-of-covid-19-pandemic-and-response-on-the-employment-situation-news-release.htm). There is increasing employment and reduction of unemployment in the gradual return of economic activity in May 2020-Oct 2023. The first column provides for 2006 the yearly average population (POP), labor force (LF), participation rate or labor force as percent of population (PART %), employment (EMP), employment population ratio (EMP/POP %), unemployment (UEM), the unemployment rate as percent of labor force (UEM/LF Rate %) and the number of people not in the labor force (NLF). All data are unadjusted or not-seasonally-adjusted (NSA). The numbers in column 2006 are averages in millions while the monthly numbers for Oct 2022, Sep 2023 and Oct 2023 are in thousands, not seasonally adjusted. The average yearly participation rate of the population in the labor force was in the range of 66.0 percent minimum to 67.1 percent maximum between 2000 and 2006 with the average of 66.4 percent (https://www.bls.gov/data/). Table I-4b provides the yearly labor force participation rate from 1979 to 2023. The objective of Table I-4 is to assess how many people could have left the labor force because they do not think they can find another job. Abraham, Hatiwanger, Sandusky and Spletzer (2016) find that “unemployment duration has a strongly negative effect on the likelihood of subsequent employment.” Row “LF PART 66.2 %” applies the participation rate of 2006, almost equal to the rates for 2000 to 2006, to the noninstitutional civilian population in Oct 2022, Sep 2023 and Oct 2023 to obtain what would be the labor force of the US if the participation rate had not changed. In fact, the participation rate fell to 62.3 percent by Oct 2022 and was 62.7 percent in Sep 2023 and 62.7 percent in Oct 2023, suggesting that many people simply gave up on finding another job. There is also abrupt decrease in employment and increase in unemployment in the global recession, with output in the US reaching a high in Feb 2020 (https://www.nber.org/cycles.html), in the lockdown of economic activity in the COVID-19 event. Row “∆ NLF UEM” calculates the number of people not counted in the labor force because they could have given up on finding another job by subtracting from the labor force with participation rate of 66.2 percent (row “LF PART 66.2%”) the labor force estimated in the household survey (row “LF”). Total unemployed (row “Total UEM”) is obtained by adding unemployed in row “∆NLF UEM” to the unemployed of the household survey in row “UEM.” The row “Total UEM%” is the effective total unemployed “Total UEM” as percent of the effective labor force in row “LF PART 66.2%.” The results are that:

there are an estimated 9.405 million unemployed in Oct 2023 who are not counted because they left the labor force on their belief they could not find another job (∆NLF UEM), that is, they dropped out of their job searches
the total number of unemployed is effectively 15.503 million (Total UEM) and not 6.098 million (UEM) of whom many have been unemployed long term
the rate of unemployment is 8.8 percent (Total UEM%) and not 3.6 percent, not seasonally adjusted, or 3.9 percent seasonally adjusted
the number of people in job stress is close to 20.867 million by adding the 9.405 million leaving the labor force because they believe they could not find another job, corresponding to 11.8 percent of the effective labor force.

The row “In Job Stress” in Table I-4 provides the number of people in job stress not seasonally adjusted at 20.867 million in Oct 2023, adding the total number of unemployed (“Total UEM”), plus those involuntarily in part-time jobs because they cannot find anything else (“Part Time Economic Reasons”) and the marginally attached to the labor force (“Marginally attached to LF”). The final row of Table I-4 shows that the number of people in job stress is equivalent to 11.8 percent of the labor force in Oct 2023.

The argument that anemic population growth causes “secular stagnation” in the US (Hansen 1938, 1939, 1941) is as misplaced currently as in the late 1930s (for early dissent see Simons 1942). There is currently population growth in the ages of 16 to 24 years but not enough job creation and discouragement of job searches for all ages (https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/03/us-consumer-price-index-increased-79.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/02/us-consumer-price-index-increased-75.html). This is merely another case of theory without reality with dubious policy proposals. The number of hiring relative to the number unemployed measures the chances of becoming employed. The number of hiring in the US economy has declined by 10 million and does not show signs of increasing in an unusual recovery without hiring Long-term economic performance in the United States consisted of trend growth of GDP at 3 percent per year and of per capita GDP at 2 percent per year as measured for 1870 to 2010 by Robert E Lucas (2011May). The economy returned to trend growth after adverse events such as wars and recessions. The key characteristic of adversities such as recessions was much higher rates of growth in expansion periods that permitted the economy to recover output, income and employment losses that occurred during the contractions. Over the business cycle, the economy compensated the losses of contractions with higher growth in expansions to maintain trend growth of GDP of 3 percent and of GDP per capita of 2 percent. US economic growth has been at only 2.3 percent on average in the cyclical expansion in the 57 quarters from IIIQ2009 to IIIQ2023 and in the global recession, with output in the US reaching a high in Feb 2020 (https://www.nber.org/research/data/us-business-cycle-expansions-and-contractions), in the lockdown of economic activity in the COVID-19 event and the through in Apr 2020 (https://www.nber.org/news/business-cycle-dating-committee-announcement-july-19-2021). Boskin (2010Sep) measures that the US economy grew at 6.2 percent in the first four quarters and 4.5 percent in the first 12 quarters after the trough in the second quarter of 1975; and at 7.7 percent in the first four quarters and 5.8 percent in the first 12 quarters after the trough in the first quarter of 1983 (Professor Michael J. Boskin, Summer of Discontent, Wall Street Journal, Sep 2, 2010 http://professional.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703882304575465462926649950.html). There are new calculations using the revision of US GDP and personal income data since 1929 by the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) (https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/index_nipa.cfm) and the first estimate of GDP for IIIQ2023 (https://www.bea.gov/sites/default/files/2023-10/gdp3q23_adv.pdf). The average of 7.7 percent in the first four quarters of major cyclical expansions is in contrast with the rate of growth in the first four quarters of the expansion from IIIQ2009 to IIQ2010 of only 2.9 percent obtained by dividing GDP of $16,743.2 billion in IIQ2010 by GDP of $16,269.1 billion in IIQ2009 {[($16,743.2/$16,269.2) -1]100 = 2.9%] or accumulating the quarter-on-quarter growth rates (https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/11/us-gdp-grew-at-49-percent-saar-in.html earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/10/us-gdp-grew-at-21-percent-saar-in.html). The expansion from IQ1983 to IQ1986 was at the average annual growth rate of 5.7 percent, 5.3 percent from IQ1983 to IIIQ1986, 5.1 percent from IQ1983 to IVQ1986, 5.0 percent from IQ1983 to IQ1987, 5.0 percent from IQ1983 to IIQ1987, 4.9 percent from IQ1983 to IIIQ1987, 5.0 percent from IQ1983 to IVQ1987, 4.9 percent from IQ1983 to IQ1988, 4.9 percent from IQ1983 to IIQ1988, 4.8 percent from IQ1983 to IIIQ1988, 4.8 percent from IQ1983 to IVQ1988, 4.8 percent from IQ1983 to IQ1989, 4.7 percent from IQ1983 to IIQ1989, 4.6 percent from IQ1983 to IIIQ1989, 4.5 percent from IQ1983 to IVQ1989, 4.5 percent from IQ1983 to IQ1990, 4.4 percent from IQ1983 to IIQ1990, 4.3 percent from IQ1983 to IIIQ1990, 4.0 percent from IQ1983 to IVQ1990, 3.8 percent from IQ1983 to IQ1991, 3.8 percent from IQ1983 to IIQ1991, 3.8 percent from IQ1983 to IIIQ1991, 3.7 percent from IQ1983 to IVQ1991, 3.7 percent from IQ1983 to IQ1992, 3.7 percent from IQ1983 to IIQ1992, 3.7 percent from IQ1983 to IIIQ1992, 3.8 percent from IQ1983 to IVQ1992, 3.7 percent from IQ1983 to IQ1993, 3.7 percent from IQ1983 to IIQ1993, 3.6 percent from IQ1983 to IIIQ1993, 3.7 percent from IQ1983 to IVQ1993, 3.7 percent from IQ1983 to IQ1994, 3.7 percent from IQ1983 to IIQ1994, 3.7 percent from IQ1983 to IIIQ1994, 3.7 percent from IQ1983 to IVQ1994, 3.6 percent from IQ1983 to IQ1995, 3.6 percent from IQ1983 to IIQ1995, 3.6 percent from IQ1983 to IIIQ1995, 3.6 percent from IQ1982 to IVQ1995, 3.6 percent from IQ1982 to IQ1996, 3.6 percent from IQ1982 to IIQ1996, 3.6 percent from IQ1982 to IIIQ1996, 3.6 percent from IQ1982 to IVQ1996, 3.6 percent from IQ1982 to IQ1997 and at 7.9 percent from IQ1983 to IVQ1983 (https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/11/us-gdp-grew-at-49-percent-saar-in.html earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/10/us-gdp-grew-at-21-percent-saar-in.html). The National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) dates a contraction of the US from IQ1990 (Jul) to IQ1991 (Mar) (https://www.nber.org/cycles.html). The expansion lasted until another contraction beginning in IQ2001 (Mar). US GDP contracted 1.4 percent from the pre-recession peak of $10,090.6 billion of chained 2017 dollars in IIIQ1990 to the trough of $9951.9 billion in IQ1991 (https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/index_nipa.cfm). The US maintained growth at 3.0 percent on average over entire cycles with expansions at higher rates compensating for contractions. Growth at trend in the entire cycle from IVQ2007 to IIIQ2023 and in the global recession, with output in the US reaching a high in Feb 2020 (https://www.nber.org/research/data/us-business-cycle-expansions-and-contractions), in the lockdown of economic activity in the COVID-19 event and the through in Apr 2020 (https://www.nber.org/news/business-cycle-dating-committee-announcement-july-19-2021) would have accumulated to 59.3 percent. GDP in IIIQ2023 would be $26,944.1 billion (in constant dollars of 2017) if the US had grown at trend, which is higher by $4452.5 billion than actual $22,491.6 billion. There are more than four trillion dollars of GDP less than at trend, explaining the 20.9 million unemployed or underemployed equivalent to actual unemployment/underemployment of 11.8 percent of the effective labor force with the largest part originating in the global recession, with output in the US reaching a high in Feb 2020 (https://www.nber.org/research/data/us-business-cycle-expansions-and-contractions), in the lockdown of economic activity in the COVID-19 event (Section I and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/10/increase-in-sep-2023-of-nonfarm-payroll.html). Unemployment is decreasing while employment is increasing in initial adjustmenhttps://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/10/increase-in-sep-2023-of-nonfarm-payroll.htmlt of the lockdown of economic activity in the global recession resulting from the COVID-19 event (https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/10/increase-in-sep-2023-of-nonfarm-payroll.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/09/the-federal-open-market-committee-fomc.html). US GDP in IIIQ2023 is 16.5 percent lower than at trend. US GDP grew from $16,915.2 billion in IVQ2007 in constant dollars to $22,225.4 billion in IIQ2023 or 31.4 percent at the average annual equivalent rate of 1.8 percent. Professor John H. Cochrane (2014Jul2) estimates US GDP at more than 10 percent below trend. Cochrane (2016May02) measures GDP growth in the US at average 3.5 percent per year from 1950 to 2000 and only at 1.76 percent per year from 2000 to 2015 with only at 2.0 percent annual equivalent in the current expansion. Cochrane (2016May02) proposes drastic changes in regulation and legal obstacles to private economic activity. The US missed the opportunity to grow at higher rates during the expansion and it is difficult to catch up because growth rates in the final periods of expansions tend to decline. The US missed the opportunity for recovery of output and employment always afforded in the first four quarters of expansion from recessions. Zero interest rates and quantitative easing were not required or present in successful cyclical expansions and in secular economic growth at 3.0 percent per year and 2.0 percent per capita as measured by Lucas (2011May). There is cyclical uncommonly slow growth in the US instead of allegations of secular stagnation. There is similar behavior in manufacturing. There is classic research on analyzing deviations of output from trend (see for example Schumpeter 1939, Hicks 1950, Lucas 1975, Sargent and Sims 1977). The long-term trend is growth of manufacturing at average 2.9 percent per year from Oct 1919 to Oct 2023. Growth at 2.9 percent per year would raise the NSA index of manufacturing output (SIC, Standard Industrial Classification) from 106.7154 in Dec 2007 to 167.8044 in Oct 2023. The actual index NSA in Oct 2023 is 99.8939 which is 40.5 percent below trend. The underperformance of manufacturing in Mar-Nov 2020 originates partly in the earlier global recession augmented by the global recession, with output in the US reaching a high in Feb 2020 (https://www.nber.org/research/data/us-business-cycle-expansions-and-contractions), in the lockdown of economic activity in the COVID-19 event and the through in Apr 2020 (https://www.nber.org/news/business-cycle-dating-committee-announcement-july-19-2021). Manufacturing output grew at average 1.5 percent between Dec 1999 and Dec 2006. Using trend growth of 1.5 percent per year, the index would increase to 135.0846 in Oct 2023. The output of manufacturing at 99.8939 in Oct 2023 is 26.1 percent below trend under this alternative calculation. Using the NAICS (North American Industry Classification System), manufacturing output fell from the high of 108.3508 in Jun 2007 to the low of 84.6376 in Jun 2009 or 21.9 percent. The NAICS manufacturing index increased from 84.6376 in Apr 2009 to 100.3482 in Oct 2023 or 18.6 percent. The NAICS manufacturing index increased at the annual equivalent rate of 3.5 percent from Dec 1986 to Dec 2006. Growth at 3.5 percent would increase the NAICS manufacturing output index from 104.6156 in Dec 2007 to 180.3647 in Oct 2023. The NAICS index at 100.3482 in Oct 2023 is 44.4 percent below trend. The NAICS manufacturing output index grew at 1.7 percent annual equivalent from Dec 1999 to Dec 2006. Growth at 1.7 percent would raise the NAICS manufacturing output index from 104.6156 in Dec 2007 to 136.6191 in Oct 2023. The NAICS index at 100.3482 in Oct 2023 is 26.5 percent below trend under this alternative calculation.

Table I-4, US, Population, Labor Force and Unemployment, NSA

	2006	Oct 2022	Sep 2023	Oct 2023
POP	229	264.535	267.428	267.642
LF	151	164.753	167.718	167.774
PART%	66.2	62.3	62.7	62.7
EMP	144	159.144	161.669	161.676
EMP/POP%	62.9	60.2	60.5	60.4
UEM	7	5.609	6.049	6.098
UEM/LF Rate%	4.6	3.4	3.6	3.6
NLF	77	99.782	99.710	99.868
LF PART 66.2%		175.122	177.037	177.179
∆NLF UEM		10.369	9.319	9.405
Total UEM		15.978	15.368	15.503
Total UEM%		9.1	8.7	8.8
Part Time Economic Reasons		3.356	3.742	3.973
Marginally Attached to LF		1.469	1.492	1.391
In Job Stress		20.803	20.602	20.867
People in Job Stress as % Labor Force		11.9	11.6	11.8

Pop: population; LF: labor force; PART: participation; EMP: employed; UEM: unemployed; NLF: not in labor force; ∆NLF UEM: additional unemployed; Total UEM is UEM + ∆NLF UEM; Total UEM% is Total UEM as percent of LF PART 66.2%; In Job Stress = Total UEM + Part Time Economic Reasons + Marginally Attached to LF

Note: the first column for 2006 is in average millions; the remaining columns are in thousands; NSA: not seasonally adjusted

The labor force participation rate of 66.2% in 2006 is applied to current population to obtain LF PART 66.2%; ∆NLF UEM is obtained by subtracting the labor force with participation of 66.2 percent from the household survey labor force LF; Total UEM is household data unemployment plus ∆NLF UEM; and total UEM% is total UEM divided by LF PART 66.2%

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics

In the analysis of Hansen (1939, 3) of secular stagnation, economic progress consists of growth of real income per person driven by growth of productivity. The “constituent elements” of economic progress are “(a) inventions, (b) the discovery and development of new territory and new resources, and (c) the growth of population” (Hansen 1939, 3). Secular stagnation originates in decline of population growth and discouragement of inventions. According to Hansen (1939, 2), US population grew by 16 million in the 1920s but grew by one half or about 8 million in the 1930s with forecasts at the time of Hansen’s writing in 1938 of growth of around 5.3 million in the 1940s. Hansen (1939, 2) characterized demography in the US as “a drastic decline in the rate of population growth. Hansen’s plea was to adapt economic policy to stagnation of population in ensuring full employment. In the analysis of Hansen (1939, 8), population caused half of the growth of US GDP per year. Growth of output per person in the US and Europe was caused by “changes in techniques and to the exploitation of new natural resources.” In this analysis, population caused 60 percent of the growth of capital formation in the US. Declining population growth would reduce growth of capital formation. Residential construction provided an important share of growth of capital formation. Hansen (1939, 12) argues that market power of imperfect competition discourages innovation with prolonged use of obsolete capital equipment. Trade unions would oppose labor-savings innovations. The combination of stagnating and aging population with reduced innovation caused secular stagnation. Hansen (1939, 12) concludes that there is role for public investments to compensate for lack of dynamism of private investment but with tough tax/debt issues.

The current application of Hansen’s (1938, 1939, 1941) proposition argues that secular stagnation occurs because full employment equilibrium can be attained only with negative real interest rates between minus 2 and minus 3 percent. Professor Lawrence H. Summers (2013Nov8) finds that “a set of older ideas that went under the phrase secular stagnation are not profoundly important in understanding Japan’s experience in the 1990s and may not be without relevance to America’s experience today” (emphasis added). Summers (2013Nov8) argues there could be an explanation in “that the short-term real interest rate that was consistent with full employment had fallen to -2% or -3% sometime in the middle of the last decade. Then, even with artificial stimulus to demand coming from all this financial imprudence, you wouldn’t see any excess demand. And even with a relative resumption of normal credit conditions, you’d have a lot of difficulty getting back to full employment.” The US economy could be in a situation where negative real rates of interest with fed funds rates close to zero as determined by the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) do not move the economy to full employment or full utilization of productive resources. Summers (2013Oct8) finds need of new thinking on “how we manage an economy in which the zero nominal interest rates is a chronic and systemic inhibitor of economy activity holding our economies back to their potential.”

Former US Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin (2014Jan8) finds three major risks in prolonged unconventional monetary policy of zero interest rates and quantitative easing: (1) incentive of delaying action by political leaders; (2) “financial moral hazard” in inducing excessive exposures pursuing higher yields of risker credit classes; and (3) major risks in exiting unconventional policy. Rubin (2014Jan8) proposes reduction of deficits by structural reforms that could promote recovery by improving confidence of business attained with sound fiscal discipline.

Professor John B. Taylor (2014Jan01, 2014Jan3) provides clear thought on the lack of relevance of Hansen’s contention of secular stagnation to current economic conditions. The application of secular stagnation argues that the economy of the US has attained full-employment equilibrium since around 2000 only with negative real rates of interest of minus 2 to minus 3 percent. At low levels of inflation, the so-called full-employment equilibrium of negative interest rates of minus 2 to minus 3 percent cannot be attained and the economy stagnates. Taylor (2014Jan01) analyzes multiple contradictions with current reality in this application of the theory of secular stagnation:

Secular stagnation would predict idle capacity, in particular in residential investment when fed fund rates were fixed at 1 percent from Jun 2003 to Jun 2004. Taylor (2014Jan01) finds unemployment at 4.4 percent with house prices jumping 7 percent from 2002 to 2003 and 14 percent from 2004 to 2005 before dropping from 2006 to 2007. GDP prices doubled from 1.7 percent to 3.4 percent when interest rates were low from 2003 to 2005.
Taylor (2014Jan01, 2014Jan3) finds another contradiction in the application of secular stagnation based on low interest rates because of savings glut and lack of investment opportunities. Taylor (2009) shows that there was no savings glut. The savings rate of the US in the past decade is significantly lower than in the 1980s.
Taylor (2014Jan01, 2014Jan3) finds another contradiction in the low ratio of investment to GDP currently and reduced investment and hiring by US business firms.
Taylor (2014Jan01, 2014Jan3) argues that the financial crisis and global recession were caused by weak implementation of existing regulation and departure from rules-based policies.
Taylor (2014Jan01, 2014Jan3) argues that the recovery from the global recession was constrained by a change in the regime of regulation and fiscal/monetary policies.

In revealing research, Edward P. Lazear and James R. Spletzer (2012JHJul22) use the wealth of data in the valuable database and resources of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (https://www.bls.gov/data/) in providing clear thought on the nature of the current labor market of the United States. The critical issue of analysis and policy currently is whether unemployment is structural or cyclical. Structural unemployment could occur because of (1) industrial and demographic shifts and (2) mismatches of skills and job vacancies in industries and locations. Consider the aggregate unemployment rate, Y, expressed in terms of share s_i of a demographic group in an industry i and unemployment rate y_i of that demographic group (Lazear and Spletzer 2012JHJul22, 5-6):

Y = ∑_is_iy_i (1)

This equation can be decomposed for analysis as (Lazear and Spletzer 2012JHJul22, 6):

∆Y = ∑_i∆s_iy*_i+ ∑_i∆y_is*_i (2)

The first term in (2) captures changes in the demographic and industrial composition of the economy ∆s_i multiplied by the average rate of unemployment y*_i, or structural factors. The second term in (2) captures changes in the unemployment rate specific to a group, or ∆y_i, multiplied by the average share of the group s*_i,or cyclical factors. There are also mismatches in skills and locations relative to available job vacancies. A simple observation by Lazear and Spletzer (2012JHJul22) casts intuitive doubt on structural factors: the rate of unemployment jumped from 4.4 percent in the spring of 2007 to 10 percent in October 2009. By nature, structural factors should be permanent or occur over relative long periods. The revealing result of the exhaustive research of Lazear and Spletzer (2012JHJul22) is:

“The analysis in this paper and in others that we review do not provide any compelling evidence that there have been changes in the structure of the labor market that are capable of explaining the pattern of persistently high unemployment rates. The evidence points to primarily cyclic factors.”

Table I-4b and Chart I-12-b provide the US labor force participation rate or percentage of the labor force in population. It is not likely that simple demographic trends caused the sharp decline during the global recession and failure to recover earlier levels. The civilian labor force participation rate dropped from the peak of 66.9 percent in Jul 2006 to 62.6 percent in Dec 2013, 62.5 percent in Dec 2014, 62.4 percent in Dec 2015 and 62.4 in Dec 2016. The civilian labor force participation rate reached 62.4 in Dec 2017, and 63.1 percent in 2019. The civilian labor force participation rate was at 62.9 percent in Nov 2018 and 62.8 percent in Dec 2018. The civilian labor force participation was 63.0 in Dec 2019. The civilian labor force participation rate was 61.3 in Dec 2020. The civilian labor force participation rate was 61.7 percent in Dec 2021. The civilian labor force participation rate was 62.0 in Dec 2022. The civilian labor force participation rate was 62.7 in Oct 2023. The civilian labor force participation rate was 63.7 percent on an annual basis in 1979 and 63.4 percent in Dec 1980 and Dec 1981, reaching even 62.9 percent in both Apr and May 1979. The civilian labor force participation rate jumped with the recovery to 64.8 percent on an annual basis in 1985 and 65.9 percent in Jul 1985. Structural factors cannot explain these sudden changes vividly shown visually in the final segment of Chart I-12b. Seniors would likely delay their retiring especially because of the adversities of financial repression on their savings. Labor force statistics are capturing the disillusion of potential workers with their chances in finding a job in what Lazear and Spletzer (2012JHJul22) characterize as accentuated cyclical factors. The argument that anemic population growth causes “secular stagnation” in the US (Hansen 1938, 1939, 1941) is as misplaced currently as in the late 1930s (for early dissent see Simons 1942). There is currently population growth in the ages of 16 to 24 years but not enough job creation and discouragement of job searches for all ages (https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/03/us-consumer-price-index-increased-79.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2022/02/us-consumer-price-index-increased-75.html). “Secular stagnation” would be a process over many years and not from one year to another. This is merely another case of theory without reality with dubious policy proposals.

Table I-4b, US, Labor Force Participation Rate, Percent of Labor Force in Population, NSA, 1979-2023

Year	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Dec	Annual
1979	64.5	64.9	64.5	63.8	64.0	63.8	63.7
1980	64.6	65.1	64.5	63.6	63.9	63.4	63.8
1981	64.6	65.0	64.6	63.5	64.0	63.4	63.9
1982	64.8	65.3	64.9	64.0	64.1	63.8	64.0
1983	65.1	65.4	65.1	64.3	64.1	63.8	64.0
1984	65.5	65.9	65.2	64.4	64.6	64.3	64.4
1985	65.5	65.9	65.4	64.9	65.1	64.6	64.8
1986	66.3	66.6	66.1	65.3	65.5	65.0	65.3
1987	66.3	66.8	66.5	65.5	65.9	65.5	65.6
1988	66.7	67.1	66.8	65.9	66.1	65.9	65.9
1989	67.4	67.7	67.2	66.3	66.6	66.3	66.5
1990	67.4	67.7	67.1	66.4	66.5	66.1	66.5
1991	67.2	67.3	66.6	66.1	66.1	65.8	66.2
1992	67.6	67.9	67.2	66.3	66.2	66.1	66.4
1993	67.3	67.5	67.0	66.1	66.4	66.2	66.3
1994	67.2	67.5	67.2	66.5	66.8	66.5	66.6
1995	67.2	67.7	67.1	66.5	66.7	66.2	66.6
1996	67.4	67.9	67.2	66.8	67.1	66.7	66.8
1997	67.8	68.1	67.6	67.0	67.1	67.0	67.1
1998	67.7	67.9	67.3	67.0	67.1	67.0	67.1
1999	67.7	67.9	67.3	66.8	67.0	67.0	67.1
2000	67.7	67.6	67.2	66.7	66.9	67.0	67.1
2001	67.2	67.4	66.8	66.6	66.7	66.6	66.8
2002	67.1	67.2	66.8	66.6	66.6	66.2	66.6
2003	67.0	66.8	66.3	65.9	66.1	65.8	66.2
2004	66.5	66.8	66.2	65.7	66.0	65.8	66.0
2005	66.5	66.8	66.5	66.1	66.2	65.9	66.0
2006	66.7	66.9	66.5	66.1	66.4	66.3	66.2
2007	66.6	66.8	66.1	66.0	66.0	65.9	66.0
2008	66.6	66.8	66.4	65.9	66.1	65.7	66.0
2009	66.2	66.2	65.6	65.0	64.9	64.4	65.4
2010	65.1	65.3	65.0	64.6	64.4	64.1	64.7
2011	64.5	64.6	64.3	64.2	64.1	63.8	64.1
2012	64.3	64.3	63.7	63.6	63.8	63.4	63.7
2013	64.0	64.0	63.4	63.2	62.9	62.6	63.2
2014	63.4	63.5	63.0	62.8	63.0	62.5	62.9
2015	63.1	63.2	62.7	62.3	62.5	62.4	62.7
2016	63.2	63.4	62.9	62.8	62.8	62.4	62.8
2017	63.3	63.5	63.0	63.0	62.7	62.4	62.9
2018	63.4	63.5	62.7	62.7	62.9	62.8	62.9
2019	63.4	63.6	63.2	63.1	63.3	63.0	63.1
2020	61.8	62.0	61.8	61.4	61.7	61.3	61.7
2021	62.1	62.3	61.8	61.7	61.8	61.7	61.7
2022	62.5	62.6	62.4	62.2	62.3	62.0	62.2
2023	62.9	63.1	62.9	62.7	62.7

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics

Chart I-12b, US, Labor Force Participation Rate, Percent of Labor Force in Population, NSA, 1979-2023

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

Broader perspective is in Chart I-12c of the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. The United States civilian noninstitutional population has increased along a consistent trend since 1948 that continued through earlier recessions and the global recession from IVQ2007 to IIQ2009 and the cyclical expansion after IIIQ2009.

Chart I-12c, US, Civilian Noninstitutional Population, Thousands, NSA, 1948-2023

Sources: US Bureau of Labor Statistics

The labor force of the United States in Chart I-12d has increased along a trend similar to that of the civilian noninstitutional population in Chart I-12c. There is an evident stagnation of the civilian labor force in the final segment of Chart I-12d during the current economic cycle, with growth below historical trend. This stagnation is explained by cyclical factors similar to those analyzed by Lazear and Spletzer (2012JHJul22) that motivated an increasing population to drop out of the labor force instead of structural factors. Large segments of the potential labor force are not observed, constituting unobserved unemployment and of more permanent nature because those afflicted have been seriously discouraged from working by the lack of opportunities.

Chart I-12d, US, Labor Force, Thousands, NSA, 1948-2023

Sources: US Bureau of Labor Statistics

The rate of labor force participation in the US is in Chart I-12E from 1948 to 2023. There is sudden decline during the global recession after 2007 without recovery explained by cyclical factors (Lazear and Spletzer2012JHJul22) as many potential workers stopped their searches disillusioned that there could be an opportunity for them in sharply contracted markets.

Chart I-12E, US, Labor Force Participation Rate, Percent of Labor Force in Population, NSA, 1948-2023

Sources: US Bureau of Labor Statistics

IA4 Job Creation. What is striking about the data in Table I-8 is that the numbers of monthly increases in jobs in 1983 and 1985 are higher than in 2010 to 2019. The civilian noninstitutional population grew by 48.8 percent from 174.215 million in 1983 to 259.175 million in 2019 and labor force higher by 46.6 percent, growing from 111.550 million in 1983 to 163.539 million in 2019. The civilian noninstitutional population increased from 259.175 million in 2019 to 261.445 million in 2021 and the labor force decreased from 163.539 million in 2019 to 161.204 million in 2021. The civilian noninstitutional population increased from 261.445 million in 2021 to 263.973 million in 2022 and the labor force increased from 161.204 million in 2019 to 164.287 million in 2022. Total nonfarm payroll employment seasonally adjusted (SA) increased 150 thousand in Oct 2023 and private payroll employment increased 99 thousand. The Bureau of Labor Statistics states (https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm): “Our analysis suggests that the net effect of these hurricanes [Harvey and Irma] was to reduce the estimate of total nonfarm payroll employment for September. There was no discernible effect on the national unemployment rate. No changes were made to either the establishment or household survey estimation procedures for the September figures.” A hurdle in analyzing the labor market is the global recession, with output in the US reaching a high in Feb 2020 (https://www.nber.org/research/data/us-business-cycle-expansions-and-contractions), in the lockdown of economic activity in the COVID-19 event and the through in Apr 2020 (https://www.nber.org/news/business-cycle-dating-committee-announcement-july-19-2021) (https://www.bls.gov/covid19/effects-of-covid-19-pandemic-and-response-on-the-employment-situation-news-release.htm). Nonfarm jobs seasonally adjusted increased from 148,559 thousand in Oct 2021 to 154,006 thousand in Oct 2022 and increased to 156,923 thousand in Oct 2023. Private jobs seasonally adjusted increased from 126,522 thousand in Oct 2021 to 131,744 thousand in Oct 2022, increasing to 134,031 thousand in Oct 2023. This situation will continue to challenge measurement (https://www.bls.gov/covid19/effects-of-covid-19-pandemic-and-response-on-the-employment-situation-news-release.htm) and the return to fuller employment is unpredictable.

Table I-8, US, Monthly Change in Jobs, Number SA

Month	1981	1982	1983	2008	2009	2010	Private
Jan	90	-330	219	1	-780	-10	-19
Feb	72	-2	-73	-76	-758	-98	-83
Mar	105	-129	173	-68	-818	164	122
Apr	73	-284	274	-217	-668	251	200
May	13	-43	280	-191	-355	530	103
Jun	194	-242	377	-158	-468	-144	112
Jul	111	-344	416	-197	-341	-81	90
Aug	-36	-158	-308	-283	-181	4	153
Sep	-88	-180	1118	-451	-240	-85	88
Oct	-97	-276	273	-464	-178	281	231
Nov	-209	-121	355	-748	-3	134	144
Dec	-276	-15	355	-697	-251	81	102
			1984			2011	Private
Jan			443			7	15
Feb			484			210	253
Mar			272			225	248
Apr			363			327	335
May			306			100	155
Jun			381			232	197
Jul			310			55	170
Aug			243			133	165
Sep			312			221	255
Oct			285			212	197
Nov			353			144	171
Dec			125			200	217
			1985			2012	Private
Jan			265			345	353
Feb			131			272	271
Mar			339			226	230
Apr			196			83	95
May			274			108	128
Jun			147			72	53
Jul			189			146	163
Aug			192			177	174
Sep			205			182	173
Oct			188			159	181
Nov			210			163	183
Dec			166			241	237
			1986			2013	Private
Jan			123			190	208
Feb			115			279	267
Mar			87			145	156
Apr			187			187	188
May			127			215	220
Jun			-93			178	202
Jul			318			122	147
Aug			115			244	228
Sep			346			184	180
Oct			187			220	225
Nov			187			275	262
Dec			201			54	77
			1987			2014	Private
Jan			169			184	190
Feb			241			155	144
Mar			245			279	271
Apr			335			312	292
May			229			203	224
Jun			172			332	269
Jul			347			243	237
Aug			173			182	228
Sep			227			305	263
Oct			491			242	222
Nov			234			284	269
Dec			289			277	262
			1988			2015	Private
Jan			92			196	183
Feb			461			267	249
Mar			275			95	103
Apr			243			278	243
May			230			338	331
Jun			364			155	152
Jul			224			294	259
Aug			124			141	131
Sep			339			135	155
Oct			263			320	304
Nov			341			225	200
Dec			281			273	257
			1989			2016	Private
Jan			263			115	98
Feb			266			212	188
Mar			194			256	216
Apr			170			190	184
May			122			45	30
Jun			114			251	270
Jul			42			363	254
Aug			51			149	154
Sep			249			297	258
Oct			107			108	136
Nov			276			120	138
Dec			84			219	192
			1990			2017	Private
Jan			352			231	219
Feb			244			206	196
Mar			204			130	127
Apr			34			197	191
May			163			217	205
Jun			24			199	186
Jul			-34			184	170
Aug			-214			135	199
Sep			-88			92	69
Oct			-148			148	120
Nov			-153			230	212
Dec			-48			144	139
			1991			2018	Private
Jan			-122			149	159
Feb			-319			388	343
Mar			-163			223	215
Apr			-217			145	128
May			-102			329	324
Jun			88			211	178
Jul			-47			56	102
Aug			11			250	218
Sep			33			89	83
Oct			27			165	160
Nov			-60			96	102
Dec			32			183	145
			1992			2019	Private
Jan			34			309	296
Feb			-54			-22	-34
Mar			47			228	191
Apr			155			243	206
May			133			67	108
Jun			69			167	159
Jul			82			82	117
Aug			123			232	160
Sep			33			207	176
Oct			180			129	99
Nov			144			215	176
Dec			223			102	93
			1993			2020
Jan			292			334	274
Feb			250			273	185
Mar			-52			-1427	-1397
Apr			303			-20514	-19600
May			275			2625	3156
Jun			181			4565	4554
Jul			309			1444	1342
Aug			149			1735	1233
Sep			246			961	1053
Oct			278			719	871
Nov			256			264	350
Dec			334			-268	-258
			1994			2021
Jan			275			494	384
Feb			181			575	563
Mar			461			784	701
Apr			347			286	233
May			336			482	481
Jun			314			693	624
Jul			370			769	731
Aug			292			663	600
Sep			355			557	583
Oct			203			781	818
Nov			415			614	613
Dec			302			569	551
			1995			2022
Jan			330			364	345
Feb			188			904	897
Mar			215			414	423
Apr			158			254	226
May			-15			364	343
Jun			235			370	382
Jul			92			568	493
Aug			262			352	306
Sep			241			350	344
Oct			149			324	299
Nov			139			290	228
Dec			157			239	232
			1996			2023
Jan			-7			472	353
Feb			416			248	193
Mar			256			217	157
Apr			166			217	179
May			333			281	255
Jun			281			105	86
Jul			245			236	145
Aug			186			165	114
Sep			201			297	246
Oct			261			150	99
Nov			286
Dec			196

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics

Charts numbered from I-38 to I-41 from the database of the Bureau of Labor Statistics provide a comparison of payroll survey data for the contractions and expansions in the 1980s and after 2007. Chart I-38 provides total nonfarm payroll jobs from 2001 to 2023. The sharp decline in total nonfarm jobs during the contraction after 2007 has been followed by initial stagnation and then inadequate growth in 2012 and 2013-2020 while population growth continued. There is sharp contraction in the final segment in Apr 2020 in the global recession, with output in the US reaching a high in Feb 2020 (https://www.nber.org/research/data/us-business-cycle-expansions-and-contractions), in the lockdown of economic activity in the COVID-19 event and the through in Apr 2020 (https://www.nber.org/news/business-cycle-dating-committee-announcement-july-19-2021).

Chart I-38, US, Total Nonfarm Payroll Jobs SA 2001-2023

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics

Chart I-39 provides total nonfarm jobs SA from 1979 to 1996. Recovery is strong throughout the decade with the economy growing at trend over the entire economic cycle. The National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) dates a contraction of the US from IQ1990 (Jul) to IQ1991 (Mar) (https://www.nber.org/cycles.html). The expansion lasted until another contraction beginning in IQ2001 (Mar). US GDP contracted 1.4 percent from the pre-recession peak of $9404.5 billion of chained 2012 dollars in IIIQ1990 to the trough of $9275.3 billion in IQ1991 (https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/index_nipa.cfm). The third recession explains the decline of the curve in 1990 followed by incipient recovery.

Chart I-39, US, Total Nonfarm Payroll Jobs SA 1979-1996

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics

Most job creation in the US is by the private sector. Chart I-40 shows the sharp destruction of private payroll jobs during the contraction after 2007. There has been growth after 2010 but insufficient to recover higher levels of employment, adjusting for population growth, prevailing before the contraction. At current rates, recovery of employment may spread over several years in contrast with past expansions of the business cycle in the US. There is sharp contraction in Apr 2020 in the global recession, with output in the US reaching a high in Feb 2020 (https://www.nber.org/research/data/us-business-cycle-expansions-and-contractions), in the lockdown of economic activity in the COVID-19 event and the through in Apr 2020 (https://www.nber.org/news/business-cycle-dating-committee-announcement-july-19-2021).

Chart I-40, US, Total Private Payroll Jobs SA 2001-2023

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics

In contrast, growth of private payroll jobs in the US recovered vigorously during the expansion in 1983 through 1985, as shown in Chart I-41. Rapid growth of creation of private jobs continued throughout the 1980s. The National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) dates a contraction of the US from IQ1990 (Jul) to IQ1991 (Mar) (https://www.nber.org/cycles.html). The expansion lasted until another contraction beginning in IQ2001 (Mar). US GDP contracted 1.4 percent from the pre-recession peak of $9404.5 billion of chained 2012 dollars in IIIQ1990 to the trough of $9275.3 billion in IQ1991 (https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/index_nipa.cfm). The third recession explains the decline of the curve in 1990 followed by recovery.

Chart I-41, US, Total Private Payroll Jobs SA 1979-1996

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics

http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2014/02/mediocre-cyclical-united-states.html and earlier http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2013/12/collapse-of-united-states-dynamism-of.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2013/11/global-financial-risk-mediocre-united.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2013/09/mediocre-and-decelerating-united-states.html

The NBER dates recessions in the US from peaks to troughs as: IQ80 to IIIQ80, IIIQ81 to IV82 and IVQ07 to IIQ09 (https://www.nber.org/cycles.html). Table I-12 provides total annual level nonfarm employment in the US for the 1980s and the 2000s, which is different from 12-month comparisons. Nonfarm jobs rose by 4.859 million from 1982 to 1984, or 5.4 percent, and continued rapid growth in the rest of the decade. In contrast, nonfarm jobs are down by 7.636 million in 2010 relative to 2007 and fell by 951,000 in 2010 relative to 2009 even after six quarters of GDP growth. Monetary and fiscal stimuli have failed in increasing growth to rates required for mitigating job stress. The initial growth impulse reflects a flatter growth curve in the current expansion. Nonfarm jobs declined from 137.981 million in 2007 to 136.363 million in 2013, by 1.618 million or 1.2 percent. Nonfarm jobs increased from 137.981 million in 2007 to 150.904 million in 2019, by 12.923 million or 9.4 percent. The US noninstitutional population or in condition to work increased from 231.867 million in 2007 to 259.175 million in 2019, by 27.308 million or 11.8 percent. The ratio of nonfarm jobs of 137.981 million in 2007 to the noninstitutional population of 231.867 was 59.5. Nonfarm jobs in 2019 corresponding to the ratio of 59.5 of nonfarm jobs/noninstitutional population would be 154.209 million (0.595x259.175). The difference between actual nonfarm jobs of 150.904 million in 2019 and nonfarm jobs of 154.209 million that are equivalent to 59.5 percent of the noninstitutional population as in 2007 is 3.305 million fewer jobs. The proper explanation for this loss of work opportunities is not in secular stagnation but in cyclically slow growth. The NBER dates recessions in the US from peaks to troughs as: IQ80 to IIIQ80, IIIQ81 to IV82 and IVQ07 to IIQ09 (https://www.nber.org/cycles.html). The US maintained growth at 3.0 percent on average over entire cycles with expansions at higher rates compensating for contractions. The US maintained growth at 3.0 percent on average over entire cycles with expansions at higher rates compensating for contractions. US economic growth has been at only 2.3 percent on average in the cyclical expansion in the 56 quarters from IIIQ2009 to IIQ2023 and in the global recession, with output in the US reaching a high in Feb 2020 (https://www.nber.org/research/data/us-business-cycle-expansions-and-contractions), in the lockdown of economic activity in the COVID-19 event and the through in Apr 2020 (https://www.nber.org/news/business-cycle-dating-committee-announcement-july-19-2021). Boskin (2010Sep) measures that the US economy grew at 6.2 percent in the first four quarters and 4.5 percent in the first 12 quarters after the trough in the second quarter of 1975; and at 7.7 percent in the first four quarters and 5.8 percent in the first 12 quarters after the trough in the first quarter of 1983 (Professor Michael J. Boskin, Summer of Discontent, Wall Street Journal, Sep 2, 2010 http://professional.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703882304575465462926649950.html). There are new calculations using the revision of US GDP and personal income data since 1929 by the Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) (https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/index_nipa.cfm) and the third estimate of GDP for IIQ2023 (https://www.bea.gov/sites/default/files/2023-09/gdp2q23_3rd.pdf). The average of 7.7 percent in the first four quarters of major cyclical expansions is in contrast with the rate of growth in the first four quarters of the expansion from IIIQ2009 to IIQ2010 of only 2.9 percent obtained by dividing GDP of $16,743.2 billion in IIQ2010 by GDP of $16,269.1 billion in IIQ2009 {[($16,743.2/$16,269.2) -1]100 = 2.9%] or accumulating the quarter-on-quarter growth rates (https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/10/us-gdp-grew-at-21-percent-saar-in.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/09/us-gdp-grew-at-21-percent-saar-in.html). The expansion from IQ1983 to IQ1986 was at the average annual growth rate of 5.7 percent, 5.3 percent from IQ1983 to IIIQ1986, 5.1 percent from IQ1983 to IVQ1986, 5.0 percent from IQ1983 to IQ1987, 5.0 percent from IQ1983 to IIQ1987, 4.9 percent from IQ1983 to IIIQ1987, 5.0 percent from IQ1983 to IVQ1987, 4.9 percent from IQ1983 to IQ1988, 4.9 percent from IQ1983 to IIQ1988, 4.8 percent from IQ1983 to IIIQ1988, 4.8 percent from IQ1983 to IVQ1988, 4.8 percent from IQ1983 to IQ1989, 4.7 percent from IQ1983 to IIQ1989, 4.6 percent from IQ1983 to IIIQ1989, 4.5 percent from IQ1983 to IVQ1989, 4.5 percent from IQ1983 to IQ1990, 4.4 percent from IQ1983 to IIQ1990, 4.3 percent from IQ1983 to IIIQ1990, 4.0 percent from IQ1983 to IVQ1990, 3.8 percent from IQ1983 to IQ1991, 3.8 percent from IQ1983 to IIQ1991, 3.8 percent from IQ1983 to IIIQ1991, 3.7 percent from IQ1983 to IVQ1991, 3.7 percent from IQ1983 to IQ1992, 3.7 percent from IQ1983 to IIQ1992, 3.7 percent from IQ1983 to IIIQ1992, 3.8 percent from IQ1983 to IVQ1992, 3.7 percent from IQ1983 to IQ1993, 3.7 percent from IQ1983 to IIQ1993, 3.6 percent from IQ1983 to IIIQ1993, 3.7 percent from IQ1983 to IVQ1993, 3.7 percent from IQ1983 to IQ1994, 3.7 percent from IQ1983 to IIQ1994, 3.7 percent from IQ1983 to IIIQ1994, 3.7 percent from IQ1983 to IVQ1994, 3.6 percent from IQ1983 to IQ1995, 3.6 percent from IQ1983 to IIQ1995, 3.6 percent from IQ1983 to IIIQ1995, 3.6 percent from IQ1982 to IVQ1995, 3.6 percent from IQ1982 to IQ1996, 3.6 percent from IQ1982 to IIQ1996, 3.6 percent from IQ1982 to IIIQ1996, 3.6 percent from IQ1982 to IVQ1996 and at 7.9 percent from IQ1983 to IVQ1983 (https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/10/us-gdp-grew-at-21-percent-saar-in.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/09/us-gdp-grew-at-21-percent-saar-in.html). The National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) dates a contraction of the US from IQ1990 (Jul) to IQ1991 (Mar) (https://www.nber.org/cycles.html). The expansion lasted until another contraction beginning in IQ2001 (Mar). US GDP contracted 1.4 percent from the pre-recession peak of $10,090.6 billion of chained 2017 dollars in IIIQ1990 to the trough of $9951.9 billion in IQ1991 (https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/index_nipa.cfm). The US maintained growth at 3.0 percent on average over entire cycles with expansions at higher rates compensating for contractions. Growth at trend in the entire cycle from IVQ2007 to IIQ2023 and in the global recession, with output in the US reaching a high in Feb 2020 (https://www.nber.org/research/data/us-business-cycle-expansions-and-contractions), in the lockdown of economic activity in the COVID-19 event and the through in Apr 2020 (https://www.nber.org/news/business-cycle-dating-committee-announcement-july-19-2021) would have accumulated to 58.1 percent. GDP in IIQ2023 would be $26,745.7 billion (in constant dollars of 2017) if the US had grown at trend, which is higher by $4520.3 billion than actual $22,225.4 billion. There are more than four trillion dollars of GDP less than at trend, explaining the 20.6 million unemployed or underemployed equivalent to actual unemployment/underemployment of 11.6 percent of the effective labor force with the largest part originating in the global recession, with output in the US reaching a high in Feb 2020 (https://www.nber.org/research/data/us-business-cycle-expansions-and-contractions), in the lockdown of economic activity in the COVID-19 event (Section I and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/09/the-federal-open-market-committee-fomc.html). Unemployment is decreasing while employment is increasing in initial adjustment of the lockdown of economic activity in the global recession resulting from the COVID-19 event (https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/07/us-gdp-grew-at-20-percent-saar-in.html and earlier https://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2023/06/us-gdp-grew-at-13-percent-saar-in.html). US GDP in IIQ2023 is 16.9 percent lower than at trend. US GDP grew from $16,915.2 billion in IVQ2007 in constant dollars to $22,225.4 billion in IIQ2023 or 31.4 percent at the average annual equivalent rate of 1.8 percent. Professor John H. Cochrane (2014Jul2) estimates US GDP at more than 10 percent below trend. Cochrane (2016May02) measures GDP growth in the US at average 3.5 percent per year from 1950 to 2000 and only at 1.76 percent per year from 2000 to 2015 with only at 2.0 percent annual equivalent in the current expansion. Cochrane (2016May02) proposes drastic changes in regulation and legal obstacles to private economic activity. The US missed the opportunity to grow at higher rates during the expansion and it is difficult to catch up because growth rates in the final periods of expansions tend to decline. The US missed the opportunity for recovery of output and employment always afforded in the first four quarters of expansion from recessions. Zero interest rates and quantitative easing were not required or present in successful cyclical expansions and in secular economic growth at 3.0 percent per year and 2.0 percent per capita as measured by Lucas (2011May). There is cyclical uncommonly slow growth in the US instead of allegations of secular stagnation. There is similar behavior in manufacturing. There is classic research on analyzing deviations of output from trend (see for example Schumpeter 1939, Hicks 1950, Lucas 1975, Sargent and Sims 1977). The long-term trend is growth of manufacturing at average 2.9 percent per year from Sep 1919 to Sep 2023. Growth at 2.9 percent per year would raise the NSA index of manufacturing output (SIC, Standard Industrial Classification) from 106.7154 in Dec 2007 to 167.4053 in Sep 2023. The actual index NSA in Sep 2023 is 99.9794 which is 40.3 percent below trend. The underperformance of manufacturing in Mar-Nov 2020 originates partly in the earlier global recession augmented by the global recession, with output in the US reaching a high in Feb 2020 (https://www.nber.org/research/data/us-business-cycle-expansions-and-contractions), in the lockdown of economic activity in the COVID-19 event and the through in Apr 2020 (https://www.nber.org/news/business-cycle-dating-committee-announcement-july-19-2021). Manufacturing output grew at average 1.5 percent between Dec 1999 and Dec 2006. Using trend growth of 1.5 percent per year, the index would increase to 134.9172 in Sep 2023. The output of manufacturing at 99.9794 in Sep 2023 is 25.9 percent below trend under this alternative calculation. Using the NAICS (North American Industry Classification System), manufacturing output fell from the high of 108.3508 in Jun 2007 to the low of 84.6376 in Jun 2009 or 21.9 percent. The NAICS manufacturing index increased from 84.6376 in Apr 2009 to 100.3412 in Sep 2023 or 18.6 percent. The NAICS manufacturing index increased at the annual equivalent rate of 3.5 percent from Dec 1986 to Dec 2006. Growth at 3.5 percent would increase the NAICS manufacturing output index from 104.6156 in Dec 2007 to 179.8486 in Sep 2023. The NAICS index at 100.3412 in Sep 2023 is 44.2 percent below trend. The NAICS manufacturing output index grew at 1.7 percent annual equivalent from Dec 1999 to Dec 2006. Growth at 1.7 percent would raise the NAICS manufacturing output index from 104.6156 in Dec 2007 to 136.4274 in Sep 2023. The NAICS index at 100.3412 in Sep 2023 is 26.5 percent below trend under this alternative calculation.

Table I-12, US, Total Nonfarm Employment in Thousands

Year	Total Nonfarm	Year	Total Nonfarm
1980	90,533	2000	132,011
1981	91,297	2001	132,073
1982	89,689	2002	130,634
1983	90,295	2003	130,330
1984	94,548	2004	131,769
1985	97,532	2005	134,033
1986	99,500	2006	136,435
1987	102,116	2007	137,981
1988	105,378	2008	137,224
1989	108,051	2009	131,296
1990	109,527	2010	130,345
1991	108,425	2011	131,914
1992	108,799	2012	134,157
1993	110,931	2013	136,363
1994	114,393	2014	138,939
1995	117,401	2015	141,824
1996	119,828	2016	144,335
1997	122,941	2017	146,607
1998	126,146	2018	148,908
1999	129,228	2019	150,904
		2020	142,186
		2021	146,285
		2022	152,575

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics https://www.bls.gov/data

Chart I-43 provides annual nonfarm jobs from 2000 to 2019. Cyclically slow growth in the expansion since IIIQ2009 has not been sufficient to recover nonfarm jobs. Because of population growth, there are 3.304 million fewer nonfarm jobs in the US in 2019 than in 2007.

Chart I-43, US, Annual Nonfarm Jobs, NSA, Thousands, 2000-2019

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics https://www.bls.gov/data

Chart I-44 provides annual nonfarm jobs in the US from 1980 to 1999. Much more rapid cyclical growth as in other expansions historically allowed steady and rapid growth of nonfarm job opportunities even with similarly dynamic population growth.

Chart I-44, US, Annual Nonfarm Jobs, NSA, Thousands, 1980-1999

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics https://www.bls.gov/data

The highest average yearly percentage of unemployed to the labor force since 1940 was 14.6 percent in 1940 followed by 9.9 percent in 1941, 8.5 percent in 1975, 9.7 percent in 1982 and 9.6 percent in 1983 (ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/special.requests/lf/aa2006/pdf/cpsaat1.pdf). The rate of unemployment remained at high levels in the 1930s, rising from 3.2 percent in 1929 to 22.9 percent in 1932 in one estimate and 23.6 percent in another with real wages increasing by 16.4 percent (Margo 1993, 43; see Pelaez and Pelaez, Regulation of Banks and Finance (2009b), 214-5). There are alternative estimates of 17.2 percent or 9.5 percent for 1940 with real wages increasing by 44 percent. Employment declined sharply during the 1930s. The number of hours worked remained in 1939 at 29 percent below the level of 1929 (Cole and Ohanian 1999). Private hours worked fell in 1939 to 25 percent of the level in 1929. The policy of encouraging collusion through the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA), to maintain high prices, together with the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA), to maintain high wages, prevented the US economy from recovering employment levels until Roosevelt abandoned these policies toward the end of the 1930s (for review of the literature analyzing the Great Depression see Pelaez and Pelaez, Regulation of Banks and Finance (2009b), 198-217).

Table I-13, US, Total Nonfarm and Total Private Jobs Destroyed and Subsequently Created in Two Recessions IIIQ1981-IVQ1982 and IVQ2007-IIQ2009, Thousands and Percent

	Total Nonfarm Jobs	Total Private Jobs
06/1981 #	92,288	75,969
11/1982 #	89,482	73,260
Change #	-2,806	-2,709
Change ∆%	-3.0	-3.6
12/1982 #	89,383	73,185
05/1984 #	94,471	78,049
Change #	5,088	4,864
Change ∆%	5.7	6.6
11/2007 #	139,090	116,291
05/2009 #	131,626	108,601
Change %	-7,464	-7,690
Change ∆%	-5.4	-6.6
12/2009 #	130,178	107,338
05/2011 #	131,753	108,494
Change #	1,575	1,156
Change ∆%	1.2	1.1
05/1983 #	90,005	73,667
05/1984 #	94,471	78,049
Change #	4,466	4,382
Change ∆%	4.9	5.9
05/2010 #	130,801	107,405
05/2011 #	131,753	109,203
Change #	952	1,798
Change ∆%	0.7	1.7
Change # by ∆% as in 05/1984 to 05/1985	6,409*	6,337**
Difference in Jobs that Would Have Been Created	5,457 = 6,409-952	4,539 = 6,337-1,798

*[(130,801x1.049)-130,801] = 6,409 thousand

**[(107,405)x1.059 – 107,405] = 6,337 thousand

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics http://www.bls.gov/data/

http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2013/09/increasing-interest-rate-risk.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2013/08/risks-of-steepening-yield-curve-and.html http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/tapering-quantitative-easing-policy-and.html

http://cmpassocregulationblog.blogspot.com/2013/06/mediocre-united-states-economic-growth.html

Table IB-1, US, Earnings per Hour and Average Weekly Hours SA

Earnings per Hour	Oct 2022	Aug 2023	Sep 2023	Oct 2023
Total Private	$32.66	$33.82	$33.93	$34.00
Goods Producing	$32.86	$34.31	$34.43	$34.51
Service Providing	$32.62	$33.71	$33.81	$33.88
Average Weekly Earnings
Total Private	$1,130.04	$1,163.41	$1,167.19	$1,166.20
Goods Producing	$1,314.40	$1,368.97	$1,373.76	$1,373.50
Service Providing	$1,092.77	$1,122.54	$1,125.87	$1,124.82
Average Weekly Hours
Total Private	34.6	34.4	34.4	34.3
Goods Producing	40.0	39.9	39.9	39.8
Service Providing	33.5	33.3	33.3	33.2

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics

https://www.bls.gov/

Average weekly hours in Table IB-2 fell from 34.8 in Dec 2007 at the beginning of the contraction to 33.7 in Jun 2009, which was the last month of the contraction. Average weekly hours rose to 34.4 in Dec 2011 and oscillated to 34.8 in Dec 2012 and 34.7 in Dec 2013. Average weekly hours of all employees decreased to 34.6 in Dec 2014 and 34.5 in Dec 2015. Average weekly hours stood at 34.3 in Dec 2016. Average weekly hours reached 34.5 in Dec 2017, increasing to 34.9 in Dec 2018. Average weekly hours moved to 34.7 in Dec 2019, 34.8 in Dec 2020, 34.8 in Dec 2021 and 34.3 in Dec 2022. Average weekly hours moved to 34.7 in Oct 2023. The BLS is revising the data from 2006 to 2009 (https://www.bls.gov/ces/#notices) now available in the release for Jan 2016 and subsequent months.

Table IB-2, US, Average Weekly Hours of All Employees, NSA 2006-2023

Year	Jun	Jul	Aug	Sep	Oct	Dec	Annual
2006	34.4	34.7	34.5	34.3	34.7	34.4
2007	34.5	34.8	34.5	34.8	34.3	34.8	34.4
2008	34.8	34.3	34.5	34.2	34.2	33.9	34.3
2009	33.7	33.8	34.3	33.7	33.8	33.8	33.8
2010	34.1	34.2	34.7	34.1	34.3	34.2	34.1
2011	34.3	34.4	34.4	34.3	34.8	34.4	34.3
2012	34.4	34.7	34.5	34.8	34.3	34.8	34.5
2013	34.9	34.4	34.5	34.9	34.4	34.7	34.4
2014	34.9	34.5	34.6	34.5	34.5	34.6	34.5
2015	34.5	34.5	35.1	34.3	34.5	34.5	34.5
2016	34.4	34.4	34.4	34.4	34.8	34.3	34.4
2017	34.4	34.8	34.4	34.3	34.8	34.5	34.4
2018	34.6	34.9	34.6	34.8	34.4	34.9	34.5
2019	34.9	34.3	34.5	34.8	34.3	34.7	34.4
2020	34.6	34.5	35.1	34.5	34.8	34.8	34.6
2021	34.8	34.7	35.1	34.5	34.7	34.8	34.7
2022	34.6	34.5	34.5	34.5	34.9	34.3	34.5
2023	34.4	34.7	34.4	34.3	34.7

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics

https://www.bls.gov/

Chart IB-1 provides average weekly hours of all employees seasonally adjusted. There was sharp contraction during the global recession. Hours returned to levels before and above the contraction. There is recent decrease.

Chart IB-1, US, Average Weekly Hours of All Employees, SA 2006-2023

Source: US Bureau of Labor Statistics