The "Realistic" unemployment rate remains higher than the official one for two reasons:
1. 1.1m workers misclassified as employed
2. 3.7m have left labor force, more than would be expected even with the rise in unemployment.
The "Full recall" unemployment rate is a hypothetical that measures what would happen under the (wildly optimistic) scenario that all of the 5.4m added to temporary layoff went back to their jobs right away & that participation rates rose in step.
It fell to 6.6% in Aug.
If we got/administered a vaccine today the unemployment rate would likely fall towards 6.6%. But getting the rest of the way to sub-4% unemployment would likely still be a long, hard slog. Maybe a little less long and hard than I had feared a few months ago.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
And in big inflation news, the CPI-based Ecumenical Underlying Inflation measure was exactly 2.0% in May, consistent with the Fed's target. This is the first time it has been there since I started this concept during the inflationary episode.
The ecumenical measure takes the median of 21 different measures: 7 different concepts (e.g., with and without housing) over 3, 6 and 12 months--all re-meaned to match the PCE inflation that the Fed targets.
In practice it is very similar to 6-month core CPI (re-meaned).
I didn't share the basic data earlier. Here is core CPI, came in well below expectations in May.
A boring jobs report, in a good way. 139K jobs added (140K private). Unemployment rate unchanged at 4.2%. Hours unchanged. Only notable deviations from steady state were participation down and unusual wage growth up.
Note, Federal employment continued to decline. But state and local added almost as much.
Strong jobs report. 177K jobs added. Unemployment rate steady at 4.2% but participation rate up and U-6 down. Hours steady. A slowdown in hourly wage growth.
Federal employment was down a bit but state and local more than made up for it. The trend in private jobs is basically the same as total.
Unemployment rate very slowly drifted up for the last year and a half.
Wednesday's Q1 GDP # will have a lot of economic noise, a lot of measurement noise, and could generate even more political noise.
A technical🧵on one aspect: what period does it reflect?
The answer is a combo of pre- and post- 1/20 because of the weirdness of quarterly averages
When I (and most people) look at things like CPI or jobs, we look at something like a three month average. That would be growth from Dec 2024 to Mar 2025. Which is also the (geometric) average of the growth rates in Jan, Feb and Mar. It tells you what happened in those 3 months.
But GDP is not reported monthly (fortunately, would be really volatile). So the numbers are the growth from the average of Oct/Nov/Dec to Jan/Feb/Mar. If there is weak growth in Nov or Dec that lowers part of Q4 but all of Q1 so lowers overall growth.