CA’s unemployment rate declines to 6.3 percent, still 17 percent higher than the national rate:

“For both California and the U.S., improvement in the unemployment rate continues to stem primarily from the shift in the status of the unemployed, as they have moved to the employed category or left the workforce. There has been little change in the overall labor force, and as discussed below, California’s labor force participation rate remains at 1976 levels.

“California’s seasonally adjusted unemployment rate is 17 percent higher than the national rate. California’s ranking again improved slightly to be the 11th highest unemployment rate among the states.”

Labor force participation rate remains at 62.3 percent, matching previous low in 1976:

“California’s persistently low participation rate is an indication the state still is not producing sufficient jobs at a wage rate sufficient to draw disengaged workers back into the labor force. This decline in the relative number of workers has an immediate effect on total household income, with its attendant effects on the ability of those households to afford California’s high housing, energy, and other costs of living.”

Six industries remain below 2007 pre-recession job level; construction and manufacturing remain the hardest-hit industries after the recession:

Source: California Employment Development Department, Wage & Salary Jobs (not seasonally adjusted), Average Annual Wage (Q3 2014)

Bay Area continues to dominate employment growth; Inland Empire also shows strong employment growth:

Read the full report here.

Of course. But here in California, where the incompetence of the media can scarcely be exaggerated, almost nobody is aware that the Golden State is no. 1 in economic misery.

This malpractice is nothing new. On the debate over whether California should encourage hydraulic fracturing of its massive oil reserves, the state media never note that the Obama administration considers fracking safe. On the debate over education policy, the state media never note that Gov. Brown’s prescription for education reform — local control — is the same flawed, status-quo-reinforcing policy choice that led to the two big education reform moments of the past 30 years. On AB 32, the state’s landmark 2006 climate-change law, the Los Angeles Times waited until March 2012 to note that it was a risk to California’s economic competitiveness to force its energy costs to be higher than rival states and nations. On this front, the L.A. Times trailed the New York Times by years.

So on the economy, why would the fact that California has the highest effective poverty rate in the nation be mentioned? If key details are routinely ignored on other big stories, why change the template on poverty and human misery?

The governor thinks he’s the bomb. Why won’t media push back?

Which brings me to my Sunday U-T San Diego editorial.

“… what one would never guess from his press clippings is that Brown presides over the state with by far the nation’s highest poverty rate. According to a 2012 Census report, once the cost of living is factored in, nearly one in four state residents — 23.5 percent — live below the poverty line. And according to a U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics measure that includes those who have given up looking for work, California has the second worst unemployment rate in the nation. More than one in six Californians who want to work full-time — 18.3 percent — can’t find such jobs.

“How anyone can look at this picture and conclude the Golden State has solved its economic miseries is baffling. Silicon Valley and the Bay Area are doing well. San Diego and Orange counties are much improved. But the Great Recession never ended in the Central Valley, Imperial County or the Inland Empire. Nor did it end for millions of Latino and African-American families in the minority neighborhoods that don’t reflect the tidy picture offered by the national media.

“Brown, alas, won’t acknowledge the depth of our economic woes. Such is his hubris that he’d rather enjoy the fawning than push back at the narrative of a booming, healthy California. Last month, he even gave a boastful interview to The Los Angeles Times that carried this headline: ‘Gov. Brown sees his ambitious agenda as a template for nation.'”

A normal newspaper would see a politician being this boastful and choose to point out the counter-narratives that undercut his claims. But not the L.A. Times’ reporting staff. Or its editorial page. Or its Sacramento columnist George Skelton.

What’s news vs. what’s not news: Aaauuugghh!

I have seen pack journalism my entire professional life. But I have never seen anything like the last few years out of Sacramento. I don’t think that the following four questions are only ones that would occur to a partisan individual. I think they’d occur to anyone who is reasonably well-informed.

Why isn’t it relevant that the Obama administration considers fracking safe?

Why aren’t Jerry Brown’s education policies placed in historical context?

Why did it take more than five years for a small part of the media to admit AB 32 was risky?

And on poverty, why isn’t the fact that California is worse off than Mississippi and West Virginia front-page news? Or back-page news? Or news at all?

I await sincere answers. But what do I expect, at least from Sacramento journalists? Snark.

By Wayne Lusvardi

California’s current employment rate is about at the same as in 2009, a year after the bank panic and mortgage meltdown of 2008.

While California’s unemployment rate has dropped from a high of 12.3 percent in 2010, it has steadily declined to 10.8 percent as of May 2012.

But the more important employment ratio has only recovered to the same level as 2009.

Population and Employment Change in California, 2008 to 2012 

(Source: California Employment Development Department)

According to Dr. Keith Hall, economist at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University in Arlington, Virginia, the employment-to-population ratio is the most accurate indicator of labor market health.  This is because the employment ratio takes into consideration population growth.

According to official data from the California Employment Development Department, the unemployment rate has dropped from 12.3 percent in 2010 to 10.8 percent in May 2012.  California population has grown by an average of 0.6 percent per year since 2008, but employment has grown by an average of only 0.3 percent per year over the same time period.

Job growth has not been great enough to support California’s growing population even at an anemic forecasted population growth rate of 1 percent.

California has about 12 percent of the U.S. population.  Using data from Hall, California’s working age population grows by an average of 259,600 per year.  California would need to gain 360,000 jobs per year for years to eventually catch up.  This would be like adding jobs for the entire population of Pleasant Hill in Northern California or Santa Paula in Southern California each year.