what is an optimal rate of unemployment?
95462
The US Rate of Unemployemnt just ticked down to 4.7% which is considered near full employment.
153263
If you are drawing unemployment,now would be a good time for tech school. Go for a computer class in information technology. Some schools hve grant programs which can pay you as you go!
339120
I doubt it.  There are many different ways to look at the economy.  One of them is the unemployment rate.  During the depression and the times leading up to it, our unemployment rate his 25% or so at its peak.\n\nRight now, we're actually doing better, as the unemployment rate has been steadily decreasing for the last few years.\n\nSee this chart: http://www.economagic.com/em-cgi/data.exe/feddal/ru\n\nAlso, if you go here: http://www.bea.gov/bea/dn/nipaweb/TableView.asp#Mid\n\nGDP has been growing pretty steadily for the last few years, even after taking into account increase in the CPI for inflation.  The economy is actually relatively healthy right .  There's just a lot of big stories on the media because people are paying a lot for gas, so stories about a possible depression sell really well.
258898
at or about the going rate would be best, anything else and i think you will struggle to shift them :-)
96037
If you get right back out their and find a job right away and not try to touch your unemployment it looks good to future employers,  as an employer I always check the unemployment files before I hire them and find out if they were slackers and did not try to find a job right away.  It would be more theraputic to get right back out their and not get depressed about not having a life or a job.  So get out their and keep trying until you get it right.\n\nI did I am on my 112th job within 6 years without getting on unemployment and now I am an Operations Mgr for a big company.\n\nGood Luck\n\nDon
665785
Yeah, I do think the US should do it and it will lower the unemployment rate.
684321
Free market economies tend to full employment.  There are always interruptions, but the economy is also self correcting.  Minimum wage laws that cause the wage floor to be above equilibrium will create a surplus of labor and permanent unemployment.  Official unemployment figures are generated by the number of job seekers measured at unemployment offices.  And write your own darn essay.
571549
The Bureau of Labor Statistics has data up to April 2006 and unemployment rate stands at 4.7%\n\nFrom the press release they issued:\nhttp://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm\n\n"The number of unemployed persons (7.1 million) was essentially unchanged in April, and the unemployment rate held at 4.7 percent.  The jobless rates\nfor the major worker groups--adult men (4.2 percent), adult women (4.3 percent), teenagers (14.6 percent), whites (4.1 percent), blacks (9.4 percent), and Hispanics (5.4 percent)--showed little or no change over the month.  The\nunemployment rate for Asians was 3.6 percent, not seasonally adjusted.
503810
Well, thank you for the thoughtful question. Here's what I have to offer. \n\nThose of us with a generous spirit would like to think that all people, if offered a decent job, would do their best and prosper. Sadly, there's a small minority of people who simply do not want to work, no matter how good the incentives may be. Unfortutely, those are the people who pray upon your sympathy and mine. And painful experience show that they will work the system, essentially sponging off the rest of society. \n\nAt the moment, unemployment is around 4%. According to economists, full employment is 5%. So there is a surplus of jobs at the moment, no matter where one lives. \n\nI have basic faith in the goodness of most people. I also believe we have an obligation to others up to a point. But when people do not help themselves, we do not have an obligation to them.
268840
You question is directed to a very narrow audience, considering that the unemployment rate is at 4.8%.
408235
The most obvious example I can think of, which was always discussed in my macroeconomics class, is the minimum wage:  if the minimum wage goes up too far, employers will find it too expensive to employ many workers, so they will lay people off, and the unemployment rate will rise.\n\nBasically, any labor/welfare related policy that makes it more expensive or less efficient for employers to do business will create unemployment.  \n\nThis has particularly been a problem in France (where unemployment is 10 or 11%) because of all the benefits given to workers: it is nearly impossible for a French company to fire its workers, so therefore they hire less people, and unemployment is high.\n\nBelow are some good sources on this issue:
250379
you should probably Ask the Area your wishing to employ under. Each company alway has different rates.
251875
All employers pay into state and federal unemployment with their quarterly payroll taxes.  Federal unemployment is paid into at .008 of the first $7000.00 of each emps. wage, and each state has their own rate for state unemployment on employees wages up to $28000.00 per emp.  This is strictly paid by employers, employees do not contribute.
854399
That is a difficult question, I have never seen such information on line. I would guess that the rate vary considerably, as you probably have.\nI wonder if a call to the BBC would yield a lead?\nAlso, those professors at various unis, economists, political science, entertainment departments may offer ideas. \nThe above is the best I can do. Please keep us all posted what you find.
984854
High economy? HAHAHA! Let's see. The democrats are trying to raise the minimal wage, this will cause business to 1. Fire more empolyees cause more unemployment. 2. Higher pricing for products. 3. Smaller businesses won't be able to make it because they won't be able to compete with the corporations. But of course you'll start restricting corporations cause more unemployment as well as a LOWER economy. So, good luck.
824572
A good rate is $10-15 an hour.\n\nObviously, it depends on how big your house is.\nIf you find the right person and your house is small you could expect around $30.\n\nYou could save money by finding a starving college student or illegal alien.
75143
idea 1: inflation has an "invisible hand" to control it...ie when inflation devalues the american dollar to a certain point; people spend substatially less money on luxuries, and luxury item companies react and make their product more affordable...which is reflected in a sort of ratio of cost between necessities and luxuries and whatever falls inbetween...  now idea 2: we, as a nation, expect unemployment.  we have a certain, budgeted amount of money set aside to compensate for that.  Now lets assume two things...1 - that idea 1 is true and that idea 2 is true.  2 - that in the instance that this original question is posed, neither inflation nor unemployment is so out of control that it is causing "economic anarchy"  Assuming all of this... it would make it more important to control inflation because it is not prepared for in the same way that unemployment is...plus (as a side note, and you thought i was done...) inflation causes each dollar to be worth less money...therefore, theorhetically, people are recieving smaller paychecks...and it leads some to get secondary (or even tertiary) jobs or to work additional hours, which begins to take up hours that are availible from employers...and when companies move less product, they have less hours of work to provide to those that work for them....think about it...