Population interests me because you have about a 2% annual population growth rate, which must influence employment metrics in terms of adding more people to a shrinking job market.

I take it that these additional new humans, many of which are working age, are not just members of the birth/death rate adjustments, but perhaps people related to immigration.

As an example, in the housing boom era, there were a lot of jobs available and many people south and north of “our” border were added to positive employment reports — reports that helped push the bubble of The Owner-Ship Society. Construction jobs fueled the economy as report after report praised the housing market for helping hold the economy together (with multiple layers of fraud, collusion and corruption).

Let’s just say that during The Bush Coup, there was a potential increase in population of 16%, e.g, Total US Population in 2000 was 281,421,906, but that increase of 45,027,504 that would have brought us to about 326,449410, didn’t officially occur, because we now have an estimated 306,384,321 people (accounted for). U.S. Population mid-2008 was 305 million.

So, my question is, how does population distortion influence employment and GDP. I know some people used to think in terms of GDP per capita, because population can overestimate or underestimate output.

I guess the bottom line, is that we have fewer jobs in a weak economy, an increased supply of people and apparently a labor market that connects TARP funding to a black market of underground labor …. or something like that, I don’t know, you figure it out!

More on conspiracy theory:

The Government’s Macroeconomic Series: X-Files, Dilbert, or Resource Constraints?

The quote, “the “seasonal adjustment”, which is a black box that can tweek me into looking like Dumbo the flying elephant. They’re knocking off ±65,000 workers for no clearly discernible reason.”

IS this normal for every month?? so does that mean every month so far needs to have their number revised, and an addition (about) 65,000 jobs loss need to be included in the unemployment numbers? thanks for the explanation.

good article.. I can personally vouch for 2 students, from top 10 univeristies who are having an extremely hard time finding a job. They interned at a couple of companies over their 4 year schooling period, and these 2 students thought this might give them a leg up, but that fortune 500 company is laying people off and not really hiring.
The 2 million figure might be overshot, my guess would be between 1 – 1.5, and of those at least half will not find work they trained for.

Very sad, but with Obama’s economic policy, companies are not willing to make new invesments, and hire (One of the HR people so much as told the students I know.)

Do you post on Slate also? You look familar.

How does population affect Unemployment? Not sure if I understand the question; but, I will try. If job creation does not keep up with population growth they end up in Not In Labor Force rather than the Civilian Labor Force.

What is interesting is Participation Rate jumped 3 tenths of 1% to 65.8 from March to April. I have never seen that happen before in the last decade. Obama’s extension of Unemployment Insurance may have draw those people into the Civilian Labor Force from Not in Labor Force. They are counted as looking for work rather than discouraged and not looking. That is a significant jump. It could also be the Census also.

How does population increase impact unemployment?

I feel free to add that unemployment often improves in a recession because fewer people are looking for work, and obviously fewer jobs exist to find, thus one should not read too much into these little changes in trends… other than that, I beg for forgiveness and offer myself prostrate before your will and Tender Mercies .

Background and History of the NIPAsHowever, when the components of an aggregate include large negative values, the Fisher formula may require taking the square root of a negative number.
For these aggregates, another method for calculating chained dollars must be used. The inability to calculate a particular Fisher quantity index (for example, change
in private inventories) because of negative values usually does not extend to the calculation of higher level
aggregates (for example, quantity indexes for gross private domestic investment and for GDP can be computed). The calculation of contributions to percent change is not affected by negative values, so they can be calculated for all components.

Ed, I’m sorry to place that in here, but it doesn’t fit anywhere else, and I had no other choice other than placing it here. What was I to friggn do, not post that or just bookmark it and shut the hell up ….. nah, that didn’t feel right, so there yah go, and now it’s outta my system and in your hands, and I’d like to thank you once agin for your GDP post and ask one more favor, while I have you here, but obviously anyone else can feel as free as I do and thus jump in here to reply to this Q: How has population been impacting GDP? For that matter how would population impact unemployment? That kinda works …. huh, huh?

Also see:

Series: GDPDEF, Gross Domestic Product: Implicit Price Deflator