The Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) has released the results of their most recent Job Vacancy Survey, and the hits just keep coming. In the fourth quarter 2009, there were 8.2 job seekers for each vacant job in Minnesota. This is up from 7.7 in the second quarter and 5.6 one year ago. According to DEED,

The fourth quarter 2009 labor market was the least favorable for job seekers during the history of the job vacancy series dating back to fourth quarter 2000.

Here’s what it looks like:

When DEED first started conducting this survey 10 years ago, there were actually more job vacancies than job seekers (nearly two jobs available for each unemployed person).

Other highlights of the report:

• 58% of the vacant jobs are in the seven-county Twin Cities Metro Area.
• 45% of vacant jobs are part time.
• 17% are temporary or seasonal.
• 56% require no education beyond a high school diploma or GED.
• The occupations with the most vacancies are sales, office and administrative support, and healthcare support.
• The median wage (half pay more, half pay less) is $10.86/hour. (Note: A full-time job at $10.86/hour would give you an annual income of $22,589.)

For more information, read the full report. You can also get detailed information for various regions.

The new unemployment numbers took a lot of people, including me, by surprise: Unemployment rose from 9.8% in September to 10.2% in October. It isn’t the increase that surprised me—all the economists have been saying the unemployment rate is going to continue its climb, even though the recession itself is likely over. Rather, it was the size of the increase. I had just finished my October State of the Economy the previous week, which included unemployment projections of 10% by December and a peak of 10.2% in February.

So I wonder if it’s peaking early, or if it’s going to peak a lot higher than has been forecast. Some of the more pessimistic economists (okay, one economist in this Wall Street Journal survey) are predicting 11% in June. Ten percent don’t think the unemployment rate will peak until the second half of 2010. Or later.

Unemployment has increased for virtually all demographic groups, but not all demographic groups are equally affected. Wondering who’s getting hit the hardest? Young people for sure. People of color more than whites. Men more than women. Want to know where you fit in the mix? Check out this interactive graphic developed by the New York Times—you can get unemployment rates by race, sex, age, and educational level—or any variation thereof. (I spent an embarrassing amount of time playing with the numbers: It’s grim and fascinating at the same time.)

There are also broader measures of unemployment (I’ve talked about this before). So if you include discouraged workers the unemployment rate goes up to 10.7%. And if you add in marginally attached and involuntary part-time workers, it goes up to 17.5%. That’s getting uncomfortably close to 1 in 5 workers.

Hunker down. The bumpy ride isn’t over yet….

When my brain hits capacity reading Proust and the Squid, I put it down and pick up something lighter. Most recently that lighter thing has been OBD: Obsessive Branding Disorder, by Lucas Conley.

A few tidbits you might find of interest:

• On average, people fulfill 80-85% of their needs with just 150 everyday items.
• The average American encounters between 3,000 and 5,000 ad messages each day.
• In 2006 U.S. advertisers spent nearly $300 billion—about $10,000 a second.

$10,000 a second. It makes one pause.

More:

• Fifty million American households signed up for the Do-Not Call Registry when it was launched in 2003 (10 million in the first three days). Today the list includes 145 million phone numbers.
• As much as 90% of all email is estimated to be spam. 

Today I am grateful for spam filters.

One of the functions of the Research & Planning Department is to verify and source various facts and data points.

Photo by idrewuk

One “fact” that we get asked to source on a regular basis is that third grade reading scores are used in the state of (Virginia, California, Indiana—fill in the blank) to project how many prison beds will be needed in the future. What a compelling statement! It just begs to be repeated.

Unfortunately (or perhaps fortunately), it isn’t true.

It has an impressive pedigree:  Colin Powell has cited it, as has Hillary Clinton. The Washington Post and New York Times have both published opinion columns that reference it. A quick Google search of “third grade reading” and “prison beds” came up with 36,400 matches (and fewer than 4,000 matches if you add the word “bogus”).

We have contacted officials in both California and Virginia (the two most frequently cited states) and have come up empty. We have searched the web and scoured research articles. Plenty of references to the alleged fact, but not a single one of the purported sources pans out.

So it was with no small amount of relief that not too very long ago I ran across this article in the Washington Post debunking the claim.

If the Washington Post with its myriad resources, national and international, couldn’t track down a reliable source, I’m inclined to believe it doesn’t exist. If anyone out there knows otherwise, please let me (and the Washington Post) know.