Nevada ranks highest in U.S. in percentage of underemployed

Although Nevada’s official unemployment percentage continues to gradually decline, when you add in those working part-times for economic reasons and those who would like to work but have given up actively looking, Nevada’s underemployed ranks the highest in the nation, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Nevada’s so-called U-6 figure was 13.9 percent in 2015 compared to a national figure of 10.4 percent, but both have sharply declined over the past five years.

Here are state-by-state figures:

statebystatejobless

 

Here is a Nevada comparison to U.S.:

NV-US

 

Advertisements

30 comments on “Nevada ranks highest in U.S. in percentage of underemployed

  1. Steve says:

    Jobless claims up 11,000 to 276,000 as of March reporting.

    Obamacares!

  2. nyp says:

    Nevada unemployment rate when President Obama took office: 10.1%

    Nevada unemployment rate today: 5.9%

  3. Rincon says:

    When unemployment is 5.9%, there’s no excuse for “… those who would like to work but have given up actively looking, ” You’re starting to sound like a Liberal, Thomas.

  4. nyp says:

    Today’s Washington Post:
    “The nation’s hiring boom continued its momentum in March, with government data released Friday morning showing the economy added 215,000 jobs last month.
    Employers have been bringing on workers at a rapid clip for the past two years, and the strengthening job market is encouraging many people who had been on the sidelines to start looking for work.” http://tinyurl.com/zcnvao7

    I blame that job-killing ObamCare for this disasterous news.

    Oh yeah, and the job-choking regulations.

  5. Rincon says:

    It’s like global warming. Each side finds a snippet of information that sheds next to no light on the long term trends, but claims it’s REAL important.

  6. nyp says:

    Huh?? The “long term trend” is that U.S. businesses have now added 14.4 million jobs over 73 straight months, extending the longest streak on record.” Yes, that is real important.

  7. Steve says:

    It’s like claims by one side of the other side cherry picking the start point for the plateau in in global temperature.

    when you start at the bottom of a sinkhole of the economy, it should be no surprise that once the regulations and overbearing mandates were overcome, hiring is finally coming along…specially after you guys made all the chosen billionaires rich enough to spend money again!

  8. Nyp says:

    But I thought all these job-killing programs were going to kill the economy?

  9. Steve says:

    And I thought Florida was going to be flooded with sea water to the Georgia border by now.

  10. Steve says:

    Trump on abortion….another high profile moment in his campaign for Clinton.

    Remember this, Nyp?
    https://4thst8.wordpress.com/2015/08/26/trump-voters-will-not-listen-to-reason/#comment-59690

  11. Rincon says:

    Apples and oranges. Predictions of an Obamacare apocalypse have been shown to have been clearly wrong. With sea level and the Earth’s temperature still rising, the climate change scientists have been reasonable accurate so far. Ironic that you should pick today to deny sea level rise. It seems that our previous estimates may have been a little too conservative: http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/31/science/global-warming-antarctica-ice-sheet-sea-level-rise.html

    Conservatives say we need to study this phenomenon for a longer time before we act at all, but when the studies show that it may be worse than we previously thought, I can predict the response: Still more studies. You guys would make good government bureaucrats. That’s how they solve problems: By kicking the can down the road.

  12. Steve says:

    Yeah, Florida is really under water, Rincon!

    Those poor people drowning in all that sea level rise…..you keep living the dream.

  13. Rincon says:

    I don’t know of a single prediction that the Florida coast would be under water by now. Can you find one from a reputable source or are you just hallucinating? Thought so.

  14. Steve says:

    “reputable source”

    As defined by you, of course.

  15. Rincon says:

    You are free to present any source you wish, although I see that you have made no attempt. Every reader defines what he/she feels is a reliable source, so what’s your problem?

  16. Steve says:

    Why would I even bother to offer any source?
    All you will do is “debunk” whatever I attempt. Usually by spinning the devil out of whatever I put in front of you.

  17. Patrick says:

    “There have been lots of other studies, you might say. True: The last sea-level alarm (in what seems an endless series) came just a month ago. That analysis showed that in the 20th century, sea level rose faster than at any time in the past 2,800 years, and that our fossil-fuel emissions were very likely responsible.

    Climate has changed naturally even within human history, that study said, and sea level has changed with it—but not as fast as we’re changing it now.”

    “Comes now the study published in Nature Thursday by Robert Deconto of the University of Massachusetts and David Pollard of Penn State. It’s different from other alarms, and here’s why.

    Deconto and Pollard aren’t projecting the future based only on the experience of the past few millennia. They’re projecting it with a computer model of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet and of the Antarctic climate—that is, from the laws of physics.”

    http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/04/160401-climate-change-sea-level-antarctica-ice-melt-physics/

  18. Rincon says:

    Admit it, Steve. You have no source.

    Unfortunately Patrick, Conservatives are an antiscience bunch.

  19. Steve says:

    I have plenty of back up. You simply call everything “passive” or some other snipe.

    So, why bother?

  20. Patrick says:

    Rincon its like I always say: if it weren’t for the liberals, “conservatives” would still be living in caves cowering at every eclipse.

  21. Rincon says:

    Nice quote. I’ll have to use it some time.

  22. Steve says:

    Every Conservative is a former Liberal who became a homeowner.

  23. Rincon says:

    Homeowners aren’t really conservatives. They want their home mortgage deductions. I know, I know. “A tax deduction isn’t a subsidy”.

  24. Steve says:

    I don’t have enough debt to reach the “standard deduction” so the mortgage deduction doesn’t apply to me.
    This may change once I get all the facts together with the inheritance and investments but I believe it will not be the case either, because the inheritance is not enough to reach that level that makes it taxable.

    I was raised liberal, than I bought a house. Became pretty conservative almost overnight.

    Funnier still is the business owner who claims to be all Democrat and ultra liberal. The owner of a print shop in town (who just achieved the goal of opening a medical pot store).
    When it comes to politics she is liberal, when it comes to her business, she is as conservative as they come.
    Poor woman is as miserable as can be, because she hasn’t come out as conservative yet, she remains in the closet.

  25. Rincon says:

    Your political views changed when your self interest changed.

  26. Steve says:

    Nope, the party and liberalism itself, changed when they became the power structure and establishment.
    Both became the very things they were fighting so hard to eliminate and their words, ideals and actions all appear (on the surface) to be different but, somehow still manage to achieve the same results.

  27. Rincon says:

    Turns out that I did sort of the opposite. I used to be pretty conservative, but that was when the maximum tax rate was 70% and the middle class was strong. Unions were at the peak of their power, Nixon created the EPA and political correctness was gaining ground by leaps and bounds. It was before Rush Limbaugh and Fox News as well.

  28. Steve says:

    I’d trade today’s public employee unions for those private sector unions of the 70’s.

    Unions put themselves out of use by getting laws passed that really do protect workers. That was one of those things Liberals used to do. Really mean it when they say they are for the little guy.
    Now unions have to feed at the tax trough and make California pass bad minimum wage law even the governor (an old time liberal sucked into today’s lies) admits is economically dangerous.

  29. Rincon says:

    I don’t think unions have a lot of political power anymore. Their membership numbers are way smaller than they were in their heyday.

  30. Steve says:

    Except for a few like the Culinary 226 here. Those that hold power are the public sector unions, mainly because they can make demands on elected officials who benefit directly from those same unions money and support.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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 )

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s