Friday, August 7, 2026

U-3 And U-6 Unemployment Rate Long-Term Charts As Of August 7, 2026

Shortly after each monthly employment report I have been posting a continual series titled “3 Critical Unemployment Charts.”

Of course, there are many other employment charts that can be displayed as well.

For reference purposes, below are the U-3 and U-6 Unemployment Rate charts from a long-term historical perspective.  Both charts are from the St. Louis Fed site.  The U-3 measure is what is commonly referred to as the official unemployment rate; whereas the U-6 rate is officially (per Bureau of Labor Statistics) defined as:

Total unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force

Of note, many economic observers use the U-6 rate as a (closer) proxy of the actual unemployment rate rather than that depicted by the U-3 measure.

Here is the U-3 chart, currently showing a 4.1% unemployment rate:


Data Source: FRED, Federal Reserve Economic Data, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis: Civilian Unemployment Rate [UNRATE] ; U.S. Department of Labor: Bureau of Labor Statistics; accessed August 7, 2026: http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/UNRATE

–

Here is the U-6 chart, currently showing a 7.9% unemployment rate:


Data Source: FRED, Federal Reserve Economic Data, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis: Total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers plus total employed part time for economic reasons  [U6RATE] ; U.S. Department of Labor: Bureau of Labor Statistics; accessed August 7, 2026:  http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/U6RATE

_____

The Special Note summarizes my overall thoughts about our economic situation

SPX at 7742.65 as this post is written

3 Critical Unemployment Charts – August 2026

As I have commented previously, as in the October 6, 2009 post (“A Note About Unemployment Statistics”), in my opinion the official methodologies used to measure the various job loss and unemployment statistics do not provide an accurate depiction; they serve to understate the severity of unemployment.

However, even if one chooses to look at the official statistics, the following charts provide an interesting (and disconcerting) long-term perspective of certain aspects of the officially-stated unemployment (and, in the third chart, employment) situation.

The three charts below are from the St. Louis Fed site.  Here is the Median Duration of Unemployment (current value = 10.5 weeks):

(click on charts to enlarge images)(charts updated as of 8-7-26)


Data Source: FRED, Federal Reserve Economic Data, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis: Median Duration of Unemployment [UEMPMED] ; U.S. Department of Labor: Bureau of Labor Statistics; accessed August 7, 2026:  http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/UEMPMED

–

Here is the chart for Unemployed 27 Weeks and Over (current value = 1.771 million):


Data Source: FRED, Federal Reserve Economic Data, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis: Civilians Unemployed for 27 Weeks and Over [UEMP27OV] ; U.S. Department of Labor: Bureau of Labor Statistics; accessed August 7, 2026: http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/UEMP27OV

–

Here is the chart for Total Nonfarm Payroll (current value = 158.858 million):


Data Source: FRED, Federal Reserve Economic Data, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis: All Employees: Total Nonfarm [PAYEMS] ; U.S. Department of Labor: Bureau of Labor Statistics; accessed August 7, 2026:  https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/PAYEMS

–

Our unemployment problem is severe.  The underlying dynamics of the current – and especially future – unemployment situation remain exceedingly worrisome.  These dynamics are numerous and complex, and greatly lack recognition and understanding.

My commentary regarding unemployment is generally found in the “Unemployment” category.  This commentary includes the page titled “U.S. Unemployment Trends,” which discusses various problematical issues concerning the present and future employment situation.

_____

The Special Note summarizes my overall thoughts about our economic situation

SPX at 7731.84 as this post is written

Sunday, August 2, 2026

U.S. Dollar Decline – August 2, 2026 Update

U.S. Dollar weakness is a foremost concern of mine.  As such, I have extensively written about it, including commentary on the “A Substantial U.S. Dollar Decline And Consequences” page.  I am very concerned that the actions being taken to “improve” our economic situation will dramatically weaken the Dollar.  Should the Dollar substantially decline from here, as I expect, the negative consequences will far outweigh any benefits.  The negative impact of a substantial Dollar decline can’t, in my opinion, be overstated.

The following three charts illustrate various technical analysis aspects of the U.S. Dollar, as depicted by the U.S. Dollar Index.

First, a look at the monthly U.S. Dollar from 1983.  This clearly shows a long-term weakness, with the blue line showing technical support until 2007, and the red line representing a (past) trendline:

(charts courtesy of StockCharts.com; annotations by the author)

(click on charts to enlarge images)


–

Next, another chart, this one focused on the daily U.S. Dollar since 2000 on a LOG scale.  The red line represents a (past) trendline.  The gray dotted line is the 200-day M.A. (moving average):


–

Lastly, a chart of the Dollar on a daily LOG scale.  There is possible technical support depicted by the dashed light blue line:


–

I will continue providing updates on this U.S. Dollar situation regularly as it deserves very close monitoring…

_____

The Special Note summarizes my overall thoughts about our economic situation

SPX at 7489.72 as this post is written

Problems Within The U.S. Economic Situation – August 2, 2026

Various surveys, economic growth projections, and market risk indicators indicate sustained economic growth and financial stability for the foreseeable future.

However, there are various indications – many of which have been discussed on this site – that this very widely-held consensus is in many ways incorrect.  There are many exceedingly problematical financial conditions that have existed prior to 2020, and continue to exist.  As well, numerous economic dynamics continue to be exceedingly worrisome and many economic indicators have portrayed facets of weak growth or outright decline currently as well as prior to 2020.

Of paramount importance is the resulting level of risk and the future economic implications.

From an “all things considered” standpoint, I continue to believe the overall level of risk remains at a fantastic level – one that is far greater than that experienced at any time in the history of the United States.

Cumulatively, these highly problematical conditions will lead to future upheaval.  The extent of the resolution of these problematical conditions will determine the ongoing viability of the financial system and economy as well as the resultant quality of living.

As I have previously written in “The U.S. Economic Situation” updates:

My analyses continues to indicate that the growing level of financial danger will lead to the next stock market crash that will also involve (as seen in 2008) various other markets as well.  Key attributes of this next crash is its outsized magnitude (when viewed from an ultra-long term historical perspective) and the resulting economic impact.  This next financial crash is of tremendous concern, as my analyses indicate it will lead to a Super Depression – i.e. an economy characterized by deeply embedded, highly complex, and difficult-to-solve problems.

_____

The Special Note summarizes my overall thoughts about our economic situation

SPX at 7489.72 as this post is written

Friday, July 31, 2026

Another Recession Probability Indicator – Through Q1 2026

Each month I have been highlighting various estimates of U.S. recession probabilities.  The latest update was that of July 9, 2026, titled “Recession Probability Models – July 2026.”

While I don’t agree with the methodologies employed or the probabilities of impending economic weakness as depicted by these and other estimates, I do believe that the results of these models and estimates should be monitored.

Another probability of recession is provided by James Hamilton, and it is titled “GDP-Based Recession Indicator Index.”  A description of this index, as seen in FRED:

This index measures the probability that the U.S. economy was in a recession during the indicated quarter. It is based on a mathematical description of the way that recessions differ from expansions. The index corresponds to the probability (measured in percent) that the underlying true economic regime is one of recession based on the available data. Whereas the NBER business cycle dates are based on a subjective assessment of a variety of indicators that may not be released until several years after the event , this index is entirely mechanical, is based solely on currently available GDP data and is reported every quarter. Due to the possibility of data revisions and the challenges in accurately identifying the business cycle phase, the index is calculated for the quarter just preceding the most recently available GDP numbers. Once the index is calculated for that quarter, it is never subsequently revised. The value at every date was inferred using only data that were available one quarter after that date and as those data were reported at the time.

If the value of the index rises above 67% that is a historically reliable indicator that the economy has entered a recession. Once this threshold has been passed, if it falls below 33% that is a reliable indicator that the recession is over.

Additional reference sources for this index and its construction can be seen in the Econbrowser post of February 14, 2016 titled “Recession probabilities” as well as on the “The Econbrowser Recession Indicator Index” page.

Below is a chart depicting the most recent value of 7.00000% for the first quarter of 2026, last updated on July 30 (after the July 30, 2026 Gross Domestic Product, Second Quarter 2026 (Advance Estimate)):

source:  Hamilton, James, GDP-Based Recession Indicator Index [JHGDPBRINDX], retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; accessed July 31, 2026: 
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/JHGDPBRINDX#

_________

I post various indicators and indices because I believe they should be carefully monitored.  However, as those familiar with this site are aware, I do not necessarily agree with what they depict or imply.

_____

The Special Note summarizes my overall thoughts about our economic situation

SPX at 7484.21 as this post is written


Employment Cost Index (ECI) – June 2026

While the concept of Americans’ incomes can be defined in a number of ways, many prominent measures continue to show disconcerting trends.

One prominent measure is the Employment Cost Index (ECI).

Here is a description from the BLS document titled “The Employment Cost Index:  what is it?“:

The Employment Cost Index (ECI) is a quarterly measure of the change in the price of labor, defined as compensation per employee hour worked. Closely watched by many economists, the ECI is an indicator of cost pressures within companies that could lead to price inflation for finished goods and services. The index measures changes in the cost of compensation not only for wages and salaries, but also for an extensive list of benefits. As a fixed-weight, or Laspeyres, index, the ECI controls for changes occurring over time in the industrial-occupational composition of employment.

On July 31, 2026, the latest ECI report was released.  Here are two excerpts from the BLS release titled “Employment Cost Index – June 2026“:

Compensation costs for civilian workers increased 0.9 percent, seasonally adjusted, for the 3-month period ending in June 2026, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. Wages and salaries increased 0.9 percent and benefit costs increased 1.0 percent from March 2026. (See tables A, 1, 2, and 3.)

Compensation costs for civilian workers increased 3.4 percent, not seasonally adjusted, for the 12-month period ending in June 2026. Wages and salaries increased 3.2 percent and benefit costs increased 3.8 percent over the year. (See tables A, 4, 8, and 12.)   

Below are three charts, updated on July 31, 2026 that depict various aspects of the ECI, which is seasonally adjusted (SA):

The first depicts the ECI, with a value of 177.178:


source: US. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Employment Cost Index: Total compensation: All Civilian [ECIALLCIV], retrieved from FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, accessed July 31, 2026:  https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/ECIALLCIV/#

The second chart depicts the ECI on a “Percent Change from Year Ago” basis, with a value of 3.4%:


The third chart depicts the ECI on a “Percent Change” (from last quarter) basis, with a value of .9%:


_________

I post various indicators and indices because I believe they should be carefully monitored.  However, as those familiar with this site are aware, I do not necessarily agree with what they depict or imply.

_____

The Special Note summarizes my overall thoughts about our economic situation

SPX at 7487.81 as this post is written

Velocity Of Money – Charts Updated As Of July 30, 2026

Here are two charts from the St. Louis Fed depicting the velocity of money in terms of the M1 and M2 money supply measures.

All charts reflect quarterly data through the 2nd quarter of 2026, and were last updated as of July 30, 2026.

Velocity of M1 Money Stock, current value = 1.648:


Data Source: FRED, Federal Reserve Economic Data, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; accessed July 31, 2026:
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/M1V

–

Velocity of M2 Money Stock, current value = 1.412:


Data Source: FRED, Federal Reserve Economic Data, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis; accessed July 31, 2026: 
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/M2V

_________

I post various indicators and indices because I believe they should be carefully monitored.  However, as those familiar with this site are aware, I do not necessarily agree with what they depict or imply.

_____

The Special Note summarizes my overall thoughts about our economic situation

SPX at 7476.00 as this post is written

Thursday, July 30, 2026

Kevin Warsh’s July 29, 2026 Press Conference – Notable Aspects

On Wednesday, July 29, 2026 FOMC Chair Kevin Warsh gave the scheduled July 2026 FOMC Press Conference. (link of video and related materials)

Below are Kevin Warsh’s comments I found most notable – although I don’t necessarily agree with them – in the order they appear in the transcript.  These comments are excerpted from the “Transcript of Chair Warsh’s Press Conference“ (preliminary)(pdf) of July 29, 2026, with the accompanying “FOMC Statement” dated July 29, 2026.

Excerpts from Chair Warsh’s opening comments:

Today, as you know, our Committee decided to vote by a 9 to 3 vote to maintain the target range for the federal funds rate at 3-1/2 to 3-3/4 percent.  The Committee is continuing its policy of making ample reserves in the banking system.  The economy is showing impressive resilience.  Even with recent shocks, the trends are positive and reveal solid growth.  Job gains have kept pace with the workforce, and the unemployment rate has changed little.  Inflation remains elevated relative to the Committee’s 2 percent goal.  The Committee remains resolute.  You’ve heard this before, but we will deliver price stability.  

Excerpts of Kevin Warsh’s responses as indicated to various questions:

NEIL IRWIN. Hi, Chairman Warsh, thanks. Neil Irwin with Axios, thank you for taking our questions. So the Fed funds rate is now about 75 basis points below the two-year yield, suggests markets think you’ll have to tighten eventually, about 100 basis points below most Taylor Rule estimates. You’re hitting your employment mandate, inflation stays high. Why should rates not be higher today?

CHAIRMAN WARSH. There’s a lot in there, Neil. So, rates are higher today than they were 42 days ago. Markets have made decisions because we stepped back in part from trying to influence those. Market judgments have moved up on what nominal rates are, across the Treasury curve. That doesn’t mean we take them as — by dictation, but we’re observing them. So I think it’s a mischaracterization to say that markets haven’t reacted because we didn’t move today. Markets are reacting in real time. In the period ahead, we’ve got important decisions to make about the policy rate. Markets in the intervening period, I think, have quite a bit of decisions to make. I’ll see if I can put it this way, monetary policy matters not just by what we say, or even what we do, monetary policy matters by how it affects the real economy. And these prices that we see in financial markets is one of the many ways in which it affects the real economy. We’ll be continuing to watch that market information, see how it responds to incoming events, and that can help inform our decision making when we meet in seven or eight weeks.

NEIL IRWIN. How would you characterize, in the family fight the last couple days, of you and the other eight members who wanted to hold, was that a strong conviction, or was that a hair trigger close call on holding versus tightening?

CHAIRMAN WARSH. Well, I think, you know, the vote was 9-3. The broader discussion to my ear over the course of the last days showed a lot of agreement on the hard questions. The four questions I raised at the outset about what’s really happening in the economy with the shocks and absent the shocks. What are our tools and our capabilities? What’s the effect on prices on output? I heard a lot of commonality on the questions. Were there different leans on the answers? You bet there was. So, could people come to different conclusions? Absolutely. But my own judgment is this is a period of watchful thinking, not watchful waiting. And I think the score on that vote was unanimous. 

also:

MICHAEL MCKEE. Michael McKee from Bloomberg Radio and Television. I’m struggling a little bit with some of what you’ve said today, and maybe you can help clarify this. You’ve said over and over again that your job is to bring down prices, to get prices stable, to hit your target, and that you will hit your target. The market says you’re not there yet, because they’ve raised rates. But all you’ve talked about today is talking about it, and it’s not like members of the Committee weren’t there before you talking about it. So I guess what the American people might be asking is, what are you waiting for?

CHAIRMAN WARSH. Yeah. So, believe it or not, this press conference is not all I’ve done today. We have spent an inordinate amount of time in the last two — two days, two weeks, looking at our monetary policy strategy. Evaluating our tools. Thinking hard about the sources of data that we have at our disposal, and we wish we had. We’ve also thought hard about the period ahead. What among these questions will be answered with more clarity, certainly not certainty. So, the decision we made today, the discussion we had in that room, was the farthest thing from inertia I can imagine. As a point estimate at this very moment, in a choice between two alternatives, you heard the results of it, but I would tell you that this discussion was far more robust and our thinking about how best to achieve that target is advanced, and over the coming months I expect it to be advanced much more significantly. If you were to sort of — if I were to steal a follow-up question, I won’t let you — you won’t be giving it up — if I were to steal a follow-up question, well what’s — what’s — what’s the world think about what you’ve done? I would again reiterate, what we do isn’t just about what we say, it’s not just about what we do, we’re in the performance business. And so — so, if I look at the Treasury curve, if I look at the dollar, if I look at a lot of things that are internals inside of financial markets, I think what they’re broadly saying is that this Committee does own it, has the credibility to deliver it, and they believe, like I do, that we will. But I don’t want to leave you with a misimpression, we’ve got no magic wand. This isn’t something that we’re going to be able to carry out in days or weeks. But we’re going to deliver on the responsibility that Congress gave us, and today’s meeting, and the preparation for today’s meeting, was an important step towards that destination.

MICHAEL MCKEE. I’d like to follow-up on the task forces as well, and ask, what vetting did you do of the people that you appointed to the task forces. In particular, given Marc Andreessen’s substantial political spending, $25 million in just the past year to back candidates who oppose stricter AI regulation, how can the public be confident that a committee he co-chairs will provide an independent assessment of AI’s economic effects, rather than one aligned with the interests of the AI industry?

CHAIRMAN WARSH. Yeah, so I selected 15 incredible subject market — subject matter experts to tackle five of the most important questions that if we get the answers right, we’re going to do a far better job in delivering. And if we get the answers wrong, we have a problem. The comfort that I can give you and your listeners is, we’re the decision makers. The Chairman of the Board of the Federal Reserve and the members of the Board and the FOMC, we will be the consumers of the outputs from five different committees. The judgments we’re making will be informed by, but not at all determined by these outside groups. My theory of the case in establishing the task forces were to pick people with extraordinary talent, depth of expertise and a divergence of views inside every committee. So they too can have a family fight. This is not outsourcing to people that aren’t known and haven’t been vetted. This is seeing whether new ideas can catalyze a broader, better, more informed discussion inside the room. And I’m very confident that we’re going to be able to do that. I am impressed by the credentials of these 15 people. And full disclosure, I’ve known almost all of them for a very long time, and I think they’re going to give their best views on the subject, but ultimately, these are decisions we’re going to make and we’re accountable to our oversight committees and to the remit Congress gave us to deliver. 

_____

_____

The Special Note summarizes my overall thoughts about our economic situation

SPX at 7422.14 as this post is written