The growth of unemployment since January 2007

Interactive map- watch the change from 2007 to 2009!  Link

Latoya Egwuekwe

Watch the growth of unemployment by county/geographic region from Jan 2007 through Sept 2009.   This isn’t U6 so it could have been even worse.   Do our “rulers” even have a notion of what this means, let alone a plan?

Here’s the world according to ShadowStatistics.Com:

U3, U6 and the economists own calculations of unemployment.  The general page has other measures, CPI, GDP based on current and former calculations.  The sad thing is that we’ve been in trouble for a long time.

5 responses to “The growth of unemployment since January 2007

  1. I’m delighted you found a way to post this map and I urge everyone to visit the site and view the interactive version.

    The changes since 2007 are ominous and should motivate us all to let the Corporate Congress know ‘business as usual’ will no longer work.

    • Glad you found it useful. It’s a remarkable visual history of the the last two plus years. Do you think anyone was watching other than the people? What are they doing in Washington, DC? Not much, that’s for sure. It’s time to motivate them with early retirements.

      The data, as the creator noted, is the “official” unemployment number (“U3”). The better number is “U5” which counts all people unemployed period, regardless if they’ve looked for a job or not. Check out the link for the second graph, ShadowGovernmentStats.Com. That’s the way to compare what is going in with the Great Depression. For example, the “U6” unemployment figure no is 18%. The same formula, or close to it, was used in 1940 to calculate unemployment, at that time 15%. We’re in a depression. Don’t let anyone kid you that we’re not.

      • I think we’re in a depression too, well deserved with so many resources squandered on things that blow up. And it will get worse.

  2. hey, cool, Michael! I took my link down. Yeah, I thought her numbers were smaller than what I’ve read elsewhere.

    still, it shows a pattern

  3. She’s clear in the narrative on the multimedia page that 31 mil is the correct figure (U6) by the BLS. But the official numbers do show the same pattern. See my reply to ‘laudyms’ above.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s