San Diego Unemployment goes up for March.

[UCGal]

http://www.sddt.com/News/article.cfm?SourceCode=20100416cza

County unemployment rises to 11%
By Daily Transcript staff report
Friday, April 16, 2010

The unemployment rate in San Diego County rose to 11 percent in March, from a revised 10.7 percent in February.

Total nonfarm employment increased by 5,000 jobs to reach 1,210,300 jobs. Seven sectors posted month-to-month gains. The government sector reported the largest gain, adding 1,700 jobs, primarily in local government education. The sector was followed by educational and health services and then leisure and hospitality.

Information and construction were the only two industries to record small month-to-month declines.

Agricultural employment gained 500 jobs.

Unemployment remains down from a year before, down 35,100 jobs. The most significant losses have been in manufacturing and construction. Educational and health services reported the only year-over gain, with 85 percent of the 2,200 jobs gained in health care and social assistance.

State seasonally adjusted unemployment rose to 12.6 percent from 12.5 percent in March. Nationally, unemployment remained unchanged at 9.7 percent.

The county unemployment rate is not seasonally adjusted.

I know it’s a lagging indicator – but it sucks for the unemployed people.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

The most interesting part of this report to me is that the unemployment rate went up in a period where there were a positive number of net jobs created.

This implies that the number of people in the workforce is increasing. I believe that in ealry stages of recoveries the unemployment RATE actually increases, while new jobs are being created because of people (optimistically ?) returning to the workforce.

Seems like the internals to the unemployment numbers are consistent with economic recovery thus far.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

The most interesting part of this report to me is that the unemployment rate went up in a period where there were a positive number of net jobs created.

This implies that the number of people in the workforce is increasing. I believe that in ealry stages of recoveries the unemployment RATE actually increases, while new jobs are being created because of people (optimistically ?) returning to the workforce.

Seems like the internals to the unemployment numbers are consistent with economic recovery thus far.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

The most interesting part of this report to me is that the unemployment rate went up in a period where there were a positive number of net jobs created.

This implies that the number of people in the workforce is increasing. I believe that in ealry stages of recoveries the unemployment RATE actually increases, while new jobs are being created because of people (optimistically ?) returning to the workforce.

Seems like the internals to the unemployment numbers are consistent with economic recovery thus far.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

The most interesting part of this report to me is that the unemployment rate went up in a period where there were a positive number of net jobs created.

This implies that the number of people in the workforce is increasing. I believe that in ealry stages of recoveries the unemployment RATE actually increases, while new jobs are being created because of people (optimistically ?) returning to the workforce.

Seems like the internals to the unemployment numbers are consistent with economic recovery thus far.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

The most interesting part of this report to me is that the unemployment rate went up in a period where there were a positive number of net jobs created.

This implies that the number of people in the workforce is increasing. I believe that in ealry stages of recoveries the unemployment RATE actually increases, while new jobs are being created because of people (optimistically ?) returning to the workforce.

Seems like the internals to the unemployment numbers are consistent with economic recovery thus far.

[Huckleberry]

The numbers seem very strange to me…

I know two SD county K-6 school teachers at different schools and both have informed me of massive SD county school lay-offs.

From this article it looks like somewhere in the neighborhood of 500 just three weeks ago.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/mar/21/hundreds-of-teachers-get-layoff-notices/

So, how can the education sector show any growth at all?

I just hate gov’t economic indicator numbers! It’s like they use some kind of “special” math the rest of us can’t understand, but they think we’ll just buy into it blindly…

[Huckleberry]

The numbers seem very strange to me…

I know two SD county K-6 school teachers at different schools and both have informed me of massive SD county school lay-offs.

From this article it looks like somewhere in the neighborhood of 500 just three weeks ago.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/mar/21/hundreds-of-teachers-get-layoff-notices/

So, how can the education sector show any growth at all?

I just hate gov’t economic indicator numbers! It’s like they use some kind of “special” math the rest of us can’t understand, but they think we’ll just buy into it blindly…

[Huckleberry]

The numbers seem very strange to me…

I know two SD county K-6 school teachers at different schools and both have informed me of massive SD county school lay-offs.

From this article it looks like somewhere in the neighborhood of 500 just three weeks ago.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/mar/21/hundreds-of-teachers-get-layoff-notices/

So, how can the education sector show any growth at all?

I just hate gov’t economic indicator numbers! It’s like they use some kind of “special” math the rest of us can’t understand, but they think we’ll just buy into it blindly…

[Huckleberry]

The numbers seem very strange to me…

I know two SD county K-6 school teachers at different schools and both have informed me of massive SD county school lay-offs.

From this article it looks like somewhere in the neighborhood of 500 just three weeks ago.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/mar/21/hundreds-of-teachers-get-layoff-notices/

So, how can the education sector show any growth at all?

I just hate gov’t economic indicator numbers! It’s like they use some kind of “special” math the rest of us can’t understand, but they think we’ll just buy into it blindly…

[Huckleberry]

The numbers seem very strange to me…

I know two SD county K-6 school teachers at different schools and both have informed me of massive SD county school lay-offs.

From this article it looks like somewhere in the neighborhood of 500 just three weeks ago.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/mar/21/hundreds-of-teachers-get-layoff-notices/

So, how can the education sector show any growth at all?

I just hate gov’t economic indicator numbers! It’s like they use some kind of “special” math the rest of us can’t understand, but they think we’ll just buy into it blindly…

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

Huckleberry – The notices cited in the article are for potential future layoffs.
The first paragraph cites a person who has received such a notice 5 of the past 6 years (without being laid off). So, until these people are actually laid off this summer they will not show up as job losses.

But, yes it does seem strange that there were local gov’t educaiotn jobs created in the current environment.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

Huckleberry – The notices cited in the article are for potential future layoffs.
The first paragraph cites a person who has received such a notice 5 of the past 6 years (without being laid off). So, until these people are actually laid off this summer they will not show up as job losses.

But, yes it does seem strange that there were local gov’t educaiotn jobs created in the current environment.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

Huckleberry – The notices cited in the article are for potential future layoffs.
The first paragraph cites a person who has received such a notice 5 of the past 6 years (without being laid off). So, until these people are actually laid off this summer they will not show up as job losses.

But, yes it does seem strange that there were local gov’t educaiotn jobs created in the current environment.

[(former)FormerSanDiegan]

Huckleberry – The notices cited in the article are for potential future layoffs.
The first paragraph cites a person who has received such a notice 5 of the past 6 years (without being laid off). So, until these people are actually laid off this summer they will not show up as job losses.

But, yes it does seem strange that there were local gov’t educaiotn jobs created in the current environment.

[Author]

Posts