The chart shows progress, but when you dig into the text above from the BLS website, there are some glaring metrics staring at you in the face.
"Dig into" a two-paragraph blurb? Instead of looking at raw BLS statistics? Uh-oh...
Why are there so many people out there who can’t find jobs for a long period of time? [...]The simple answer is: Those who want a job, don’t have the tech skills that companies want.
Wat? No. This is head-spinning interpolation backed by zero real data.
People are unemployed because we're experiencing a significant structural economic shift, not because these people have "generic business" skills (wow, what a hand-wavey statement). Domestic manufacturing has been hit hardest, so those with double-digit years of manufacturing experience have had their responsibilities outsourced to other countries unless they're (a) building aircraft, or (b) working on specialized, highly-precise, machine-produced parts.
This is a great example of the tech-obsessed writing produced by the startup craze. Does anyone really believe people are unemployed because they can't code, given that software makes up less than 5% of our GDP? [0]
I can't believe this type of self-congratulatory pseudo-economic article hits the front page of HN. What a load of crap.
[0] See Table 3 of the latest BEA GDP release. Look for "information processing equipment & software" on Table 3, compare to the level of GDP in 2012q1:
The article also hits one of my pet peeves about BLS stats: referring to "the unemployment rate" without qualification. U3 and U6 unemployment are distinctly different things - the main difference is that the average person's idea of "unemployed" includes a lot of able-bodied willing-to-work individuals who are counted in U6 and ignored by U3. Unfortunately, when someone talks about "the unemployment rate," they're almost always talking about the U3 measure of unemployment, because that's the one that presidents, senators, and congresscritters trumpet (on account of their incentive to understate unemployment).
"Dig into" a two-paragraph blurb? Instead of looking at raw BLS statistics? Uh-oh...
Why are there so many people out there who can’t find jobs for a long period of time? [...]The simple answer is: Those who want a job, don’t have the tech skills that companies want.
Wat? No. This is head-spinning interpolation backed by zero real data.
People are unemployed because we're experiencing a significant structural economic shift, not because these people have "generic business" skills (wow, what a hand-wavey statement). Domestic manufacturing has been hit hardest, so those with double-digit years of manufacturing experience have had their responsibilities outsourced to other countries unless they're (a) building aircraft, or (b) working on specialized, highly-precise, machine-produced parts.
This is a great example of the tech-obsessed writing produced by the startup craze. Does anyone really believe people are unemployed because they can't code, given that software makes up less than 5% of our GDP? [0]
I can't believe this type of self-congratulatory pseudo-economic article hits the front page of HN. What a load of crap.
[0] See Table 3 of the latest BEA GDP release. Look for "information processing equipment & software" on Table 3, compare to the level of GDP in 2012q1:
http://bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/2012/pdf/gdp1q12_2n...