Looked at in detail, today’s unemployment numbers give even more reason to ask Peter Brimelow’s question: “Where are the calls for an immigration moratorium?”)

Rumors that the recession is dead are exaggerated. Payrolls dropped by a seasonally adjusted 190,000 in October, bringing to total number of jobs lost in the recession to 7.3 million. It was the 22nd straight month of employment decline.

The “other” employment survey - of households rather than business establishments - registered a gut wrenching job loss of 589,000. The household survey is used to calculate the national unemployment rate - which hit 10.2 percent in October.

Both surveys show a growing disconnect between GDP, which grew at a 3.2% annual rate in the third quarter, and the job market. Not to worry, economists say: employment is a lagging indicator.

The great unanswered question: is it different this time? Is the lag longer? Or, put differently, are the job/GDP linkages of past recessions irrelevant in our increasingly globalized, open-border economy? From our perspective, the displacement of native-born workers by low-wage immigrants could easily disrupt the historical nexus between GDP and jobs.

American worker displacement stalled at near record levels in October, as Hispanics and non-Hispanics lost jobs at identical rates:

• Total employment: -589,000 (-0.43 percent)
• Non-Hispanic employment: -519,000 (-0.43 percent)
• Hispanic employment: -70,000 (-0.43 percent)

The October draw comes on the heels of a month in which Hispanic employment rose by 192,000 and non-Hispanics lost nearly 1 million jobs.

Non-Hispanic employment has declined every month since April 2008.

Over the longer run, of course, national employment trends are overwhelmingly tipped in favor of Hispanics. From January 2001 through October 2009:

• Hispanic employment increased by 3,437,000 positions (+ 21.3 percent)
• Non-Hispanic employment fell by 2,938,000 positions (-2.4 percent)

For years we have illustrated these divergent trends in VDARE.com’s American Worker Displacement Index (VDAWDI):

The black line tracks Hispanic job growth; the pink non-Hispanic job growth; and the yellow line VDAWDI - the ratio of Hispanic to non-Hispanic job growth. All lines start at 100.0 in January 2001.

In October VDAWDI rose to 124.3, up slightly from September’s 124.2. The October index is calculated like this:

• For every 100.0 Hispanics employed in January 2001 there are now 121.3
• For every 100.0 non-Hispanics employed in January 2001 there are now 97.5
• VDAWDI equals 124.3 (=100 X 121.3/97.5)

VDAWDI peaked in September 2008, just before the bottom dropped out of the labor market. The onset of the Great Recession saw a sharp reduction in Hispanic job growth, both in absolute terms and relative to non-Hispanic growth.

But in recent months GDP and VDAWDI have both rebounded. Could a resurgent VDAWDI derail the much anticipated job recovery? Stay tuned.

U.S. payrolls declined by 247,000 in July, the 19th consecutive month of job losses. The “good” news: it was the smallest monthly job loss in nearly a year, prompting pundits to spin it as a clear signal that the economy is emerging from the recession.

End of the recession? For whom?

The alternative employment survey, of households rather than business establishments, shows a decidedly bifurcated picture. While total employment declined modestly in July, non-Hispanics bore the entire decline. For Hispanic workers, July was one big job fair:

• Total employment decline in July: -155,000 (0.11 percent)
• Non-Hispanic employment: -277,000 (-0.23 percent)
• Hispanic employment: +122,000 (+0.62 percent)

Hispanic employment rose by 0.63 percent in July - the largest percentage gain since April; non-Hispanic employment declined by 0.23 percent.

Non-Hispanic employment has declined every month since April 2008.

July marked the second month running in which Hispanic and non-Hispanic employment moved in opposite directions - advantage Hispanics.

People on our side of the immigration debate saw it coming. They warned that the Obama stimulus would benefit occupations disproportionately manned by immigrants. The pattern of the past two months–with Hispanics gaining 150,000 positions and non-Hispanics losing 679,000 - seems to justify their “paranoia.”

Over the long run, of course, the notion that immigrants displace native born workers is amply documented by the data. From January 2001 through July 2009:

• Hispanic employment increased by 3,627,000 positions, or by 22.5 percent
• Non-Hispanic employment fell by 1,362,000 positions, or by 1.12 percent,

The V-Dare.com American Worker Displacement Index (VDAWDI) rose by 0.85 percent in July, on top of a 0.5 percent gain in June. VDAWDI is the ratio of Hispanic to non-Hispanic job growth, expressed as an index number, since January 2001.

VDAWDI is calculated like this:

• For every 100.0 Hispanics employed in January 2001 there are now 122.5
• For every 100.0 non-Hispanics employed in January 2001 there are now 98.9
• VDAWDI equals 123.9 (=100 X 122.5/98.9)

VDAWDI peaked in September 2008, just before the bottom dropped out of the labor market. The onset of the Great Recession saw a sharp reduction in Hispanic job growth, both in absolute terms and relative to non-Hispanic growth. As a result, VDAWDI fell from 124.5 in September to 122.3 in May.

The last two months have seen a sharp break in the pattern. American worker displacement is back–as is evident in the right tail of the graphic:

The blue line tracks Hispanic job growth; pink non-Hispanic job growth; and yellow VDAWDI–the ratio of Hispanic to non-Hispanic job growth indices.

All lines start at 100.0 in January 2001.

The economy lost 457,000 jobs last month, and the unemployment rate edged up to 9.5 percent–the highest in 26 years. More depressing still: the upbeat trend of last month, when job losses moderated, is decisively over. June’s decline killed off 120,000 more positions than May’s.

The V-shaped recovery that some economists thought was likely a month ago now looks more like a W–or even, heaven forbid, an L. With the stock market and consumer confidence down, and the stimulus thus far failing to stimulate, June may be remembered as the month that the Obama Administration was forced to take “ownership” of the Great Recession.

But the political implications of the “other” employment survey–of households rather than businesses–are somewhat less ominous for the Administration. Household employment declined by 374,000 positions, or nearly 100,000 less than the business survey figure. More importantly, the fastest growing ethnic group enjoyed a gain:

• - Total employment in June: -374,000 (-0.27 percent)
• - Non-Hispanic employment: -402,000 (-0.33 percent)
• - Hispanic employment: +28,000 (+0.14 percent)

White workers bore the brunt of June’s decline, as seen by disparity among unemployment rate changes:

• - White unemployment: 8.7 percent (+0.1 point in June)
• - Black unemployment: 14.7 percent (-0.2 point)
• - Hispanic unemployment: 12.2 percent (-0.5 point)

People on our side of the immigration debate warned that the Obama stimulus would benefit occupations disproportionately manned by immigrants. June’s figures do nothing to discredit their “paranoia.”

Over the long run, of course, the notion that immigrants displace native born workers is amply supported by hard evidence. From January 2001 to June 2009 Hispanic employment increased by 3,505,000 positions, or by 22.0 percent. Non-Hispanic employment fell by 1,085,000 positions, or by 0.9 percent, over the same period.

The ratio of Hispanic to non-Hispanic job growth since the January 2001, expressed as an index that we call VDAWDI (the VDARE.com American Worker Displacement Index), rose by 0.5 percent in June. Since peaking in September 2008, VDAWDI has declined by 1.4 percent:

So far the Great Recession has cut Hispanic job growth, both in absolute terms and relative to non-Hispanic job growth. This is clearly seen in the graphic:

The black line tracks Hispanic job growth; pink non-Hispanic job growth; and yellow the ratio of Hispanic to non-Hispanic job growth indices,–i.e., American Worker Displacement. (All lines start at 100.0 in January 2001.)

Every American wants the black and pink lines to line to turn up. One worries whether the yellow line–measuring the displacement of American workers by immigrants–will roar back also.

The economy lost 345,000 jobs in May, the government reported on Friday, a sharp slowing in the pace of job losses that fueled hopes that the economy was on its way toward stabilizing. (See the report:[PDF] )

The “other” employment survey, of households rather businesses, revealed a significantly larger job loss: 437,000. Total employment as measured by this survey is also significantly larger. In May, for example, the business survey found 132.2 million individuals were employed while the household survey put total employment at 140.6 million.

The 8 million worker difference reflects, in large measure, illegal aliens who are counted in the household survey but missed when the government queries businesses. When times were good, and illegals crossed the border in even larger numbers than today, household survey employment rose faster than employment as reported by businesses. Over the past eighteen months that has changed: Employment as measured by the household survey has declined more rapidly than the employment per the more widely cited business survey.

Are illegal workers heading home? The BLS report is mute on the subject, stating that “Neither the establishment nor household survey is designed to identify the legal status of workers. Thus, while it is likely that both surveys include at least some undocumented immigrants, it is not possible to determine how many are counted in either survey.”

The May employment figures are, in fact, consistent with the “Homeward Bound” scenario:

• Total employment: -437,000 (-0.31 percent)
• Non-Hispanic employment: -178,000 (-0.15 percent)
• Hispanic employment: -259,000 (-1.30 percent)

Hispanic employment fell by 1.3 percent in May, nine-times the percentage decline in non-Hispanic jobs. Not surprisingly, the  Hispanic unemployment rate also deteriorated more than that of other groups:

• U.S. unemployment rate: 9.4 percent (+0.5 point from April)
• White unemployment: 8.6 percent (+0.6 point)
• Black unemployment: 14.9 percent (-0.1 point)
• Hispanic unemployment: 12.7 percent (+ 1.4 points)

Blacks, arguably the group competing most directly with illegal alien workers, were the only group to enjoy a lower unemployment rate last month. This may reflect the withdrawal of illegals from the labor force.

The ratio of Hispanic to non-Hispanic job growth since the January 2001, expressed as an index that we call VDAWDI (the VDare.com American Worker Displacement Index), declined 1.2 percent in May. Since peaking in September 2008, VDAWDI has declined by 1.7 percent.

The recession has cut Hispanic job growth, both in absolute terms and relative to non-Hispanic job growth. This is evident in the VDAWDI graphic:

The black line tracks Hispanic job growth; pink non-Hispanic job growth; and yellow the ratio of Hispanic to non-Hispanic job growth indices,–i.e., American Worker Displacement.

All lines start at 100.0 in January 2001.

U.S. workers were hammered again in March with large payroll losses, pushing the total number of jobs lost since the recession began to 5.1 million, according to the Labor Department. (See the report: PDF)
Payroll employment fell by 663,000 in March.

The other employment survey–of Households rather than businesses–revealed an even steeper decline–861,000.

Non-Hispanics bore the brunt of the month’s bloodbath:

• Total employment: -861,000 (-0.61 percent)
• Non-Hispanic employment: -817,000 (-0.67 percent)
• Hispanic employment: -44,000 (-0.22 percent)

Because so many Hispanics are immigrants or the children of immigrants, Hispanic employment is the best proxy we have for the impact of immigration on employment. The ratio of Hispanic to non-Hispanic job growth is a strong indication of how immigrants have fared relative to native-born workers.

Hispanics lost jobs at only one-third the rate of non-Hispanics in March. VDARE.com’s Index of American Worker Displacement (VDAWDI)–reflecting the ratio of Hispanic to non-Hispanic job loss since January 2001–rose to 122.3–its highest reading since December 2008.

March’s job losses finally wiped out more than eight years of non-Hispanic employment gains. Here are the employment shifts from January 2001 to March 2009:

• Total employment: +3,109,000 (+2.26 percent)
• Non-Hispanic employment: -411,000 (-0.34 percent)
• Hispanic employment: +3,522,000 (+21.85 percent)

The graphic demonstrates the situation starkly. The blue line is the index of Hispanic job growth; pink is the non-Hispanic index; yellow the ratio of Hispanic to non-Hispanic job growth indices.

All lines start at 100.0 in January 2001.

The blue (Hispanic) line skyrocketed to a high of 128.0 in November 2007, stumbled during the recession, but is still well above its January 2001 level. (In March it was at 121.9.)

The pink (non-Hispanic) line fell during the malaise of early Bush II years, recovered weakly to 103.6 in November 2007. Pushed down during the recession, it managed to stay above 100.0–until March’s coup de grace.

For non-Hispanic workers the Keynesian long-run has arrived.

The weakness in U.S. labor markets has gathered extraordinary momentum, wiping away millions of jobs over the past four months alone, the Labor Department reported Friday. (Read the full BLS report: PDF)

The survey of U.S. business payrolls found a job loss of 651,000 j in February, the fourth month in a row where job losses were near or above 600,000. Unemployment rose to 8.1%, up from 7.6% in January and from what now seems an unattainably low 4.8% in February of 2008.

The other employment survey - of households rather than business establishments - shows a February job decline of 351,000 - or nearly half the payroll figure. Over the last twelve months, however, the two survey are remarkably close - with the payroll survey indicating 4.141 million jobs lost and the household variant reporting a loss of 4.245 million.

February saw a continuation of the reverse-displacement trend, with Hispanic jobs shrinking at a far faster clip than non- Hispanic jobs:

• - Total employment: -351,000 (-0.25 percent)
• - Non-Hispanic employment: -235,000 (-0.19 percent)
• - Hispanic employment: -116,000 (-0.59 percent)

Over the past 12 months Hispanic employment declined by 717,000, or 3.5%, while the number of non-Hispanics working in the U.S. shrank by 4.2 million, or 2.9%.

Hispanic unemployment skyrocketed to 10.9% in February, up from 9.7% the prior month. White unemployment all rose, albeit by a more modest 0.4 percentage points, reaching 7.3% in February.

While poring over the details one small glimmer of hope sprang out to us: Labor force participation rates reversed a three-month long decline, rising (slightly) for both Hispanics and non-Hispanics. In normal times this would signal increased confidence among job seekers. In today’s funk it may be seen as a sign of desperation - jobless workers looking for jobs they know aren’t there. We are eternal optimists.

The ratio of Hispanic to non-Hispanic job growth since the January 2001, expressed as an index that we call VDAWDI (the V-Dare.com American Worker Displacement Index), fell by 0.4% percent in February. Since the job market fell out of bed in September, the Hispanic job growth index is down by 4.2%; the non-Hispanic index is down by 2.0%; and VDAWDI (the ratio of Hispanic to non-Hispanic job growth) is off by 2.2%.

The recent collapse is alarmingly apparent in the graphic:

From January 2001 through February 2009 Hispanic employment increased by 3.97 million, or 22.1 percent, while non-Hispanic employment nudged up by 1.31 million, or 0.99 percent.

Bottom line: The worst job collapse since the Great Depression hasn’t erased eight-years of American worker displacement. Not yet, anyway.

U.S. payrolls fell by 524,000 jobs in December, closing out the worst year for job losses since World War II, the Labor Department said Friday. [PDF]

That’s the good news.

The bad news: the Household survey revealed a stunning 806,000 decline in jobs - the largest drop since August 2001. As has been the case throughout most of the Bush years, non-Hispanics bore the brunt of December’s carnage:

• Total Job loss: -806,000 (-0.56 percent)
• Hispanic job loss: -92,000 (-0.46 percent)
• Non-Hispanic job loss: -714,000 (-0.58 percent)

VDARE.com’s American Worker Displacement Index (VDAWDI), calculated as the ratio of Hispanic to non-Hispanic employment indexes since the start of the Bush years (January 2001), rose to 123.1 in December from 122.9 the prior month.

But last year also saw a subtle but significant change in ethnic employment trends: Over the course of 2008 the percentage drop in Hispanic employment exceeded - admittedly, by the slightest of margins - that of non-Hispanics. Here are the job losses, December 2007 to December 2008:

• Total Job decline: -2,956,000 (-2.02 percent)
• Hispanic job loss: -408,000 (-1.99 percent)
• Non-Hispanic job loss: -2,548,000 (-2.03 percent)

Since the start of the Bush Administration (January 2001) through December 2008, Hispanic employment has increased 4.0 million, or 24.7 percent, while non-Hispanic employment is up a mere 1.6 million, or 1.3 percent. That means that Hispanics, who make up only 14% of the workforce, got three-quarters of American job growth during Dubya’s two terms.

So calendar year 2008 represents a comeuppance of sorts, as Hispanics saw their jobs disappear at about the same rate as non-Hispanics. (Misery loves company!)

The Hispanic unemployment rate, a seasonally adjusted 9.2 percent in December, was a full 3 percentage points above the comparable year-ago figure (6.2 percent.) Hispanic unemployment would have grown even faster were if not for the withdrawal of Hispanic immigrants from the U.S. labor force.

In the third quarter of 2008, 71.3% of Latino immigrant workers were either employed or actively seeking work, compared with 72.4% in the same quarter a year earlier, according to a study released in December by the Pew Hispanic Center.  The drop in labor market activity was about twice as high among immigrants from Mexico.

The 1.1-percentage-point drop “marks a substantial decrease in the labor-market participation of Latino immigrants”, according to Rakesh Kochhar, the Pew economist who prepared the report.

Since 2003 the labor force participation rate–the employed or job-seeking share of the population–among foreign-born Hispanics had been consistently on the rise, according to the Pew report.

Among Hispanic immigrants who entered the U.S. between 1990 and 1999, the survey found that 217,000 quit the labor force between the third quarter of 2007 and the third quarter of 2008. “These trends suggest that at least some foreign-born Latinos are not only leaving the labor force but, perhaps, also returning to their countries of origin,” the report said.

Although the Pew study studiously avoids mentions “illegal aliens”, it confirms what we have reported  before: self-deportation is not merely a possibility, but is actually happening.

U.S. unemployment bolted to a 14-year high in October, as another 240,000 payroll jobs were cut–stark evidence that the economy is in a recession. The “other” employment survey, of households rather than business establishments,[PDF] confirmed this with an even steeper decline of 297,000 positions.

The employment market is much weaker than economists expected. They were forecasting the unemployment rate to climb to 6.3 percent in October and for payrolls to fall by around 200,000.

But October was one of those rare months in which Hispanic job growth (which we use as a proxy for immigrant job growth) lagged that of non-Hispanics. Here is the job action by ethnic group:

• Total: -297,000 (-0.20 percent)
• Hispanic: -243,000 (-1.18 percent)
• Non-Hispanic -54,000 (-0.04 percent)

The unemployment rate for Hispanics rose a full percentage point, to 8.8 percent in October. By comparison, white unemployment rose by half a percentage point, to 5.9 percent, and Blacks enjoyed a 0.3 percentage point reduction, to 11.1 percent.

The ratio of Hispanic to non-Hispanic job growth since the start of the George W. Bush era, expressed as an index that we call VDAWDI (the VDARE.COM American Worker Displacement Index), fell by 1.14 percent in October. There have been only two months since Mr. Bush took office in which non-Hispanics managed to displace Hispanics as vigorously. Unfortunately, October’s reversal occurred because a sinking economy was displacing both groups – albeit non-Hispanics at a lower rate.

Hispanic job losses are undoubtedly concentrated in the illegal alien labor force, reflecting both the shrinking of opportunities and the expansion of federal enforcement efforts. The long-run displacement of American workers is still quite intact, as seen in the following graphic (click to enlarge):

From January 2001 through this October Hispanic employment increased by 4,170,000, or 25.9 percent, while non-Hispanic employment grew by 3,012,000, or 2.5 percent.

Bottom line: Hispanic (=immigrant) employment has grown more than 10-times as rapidly as non-Hispanic employment during the Bush years. Immigrants took almost half of all new jobs created under Bush.

The August jobs report, released on Friday, delivered startling bad news about economic conditions. Non-farm payrolls declined by 84,000 positions, pushing the unemployment rate up to 6.1%–the highest in nearly five years.

In the blink of an eye, the prospect of an end-of-year rebound collapsed, and the policy chatter changed from interest rates possibly moving higher to the necessity for further easing in rates.

As usual, little attention was given to the “other” set of employment figures, those generated by household survey. Good thing, since that would have ruined the weekend entirely.

Household employment fell by a whopping 342,000 jobs, or more than four times the drop in payroll employment.

More important from our perspective, the Hispanic workforce, comprised disproportionately of legal and illegal immigrants, enjoyed an increase in jobs despite the general bloodbath.  Here are employment figures for August:

• Total employment: -342,000  (-0.235 percent)
• Non-Hispanic: -359,000 (-0.286 percent)
• Hispanic: +17,000 (+0.083 percent)

For some months, we have noted what seemed to be a reversal in American worker displacement. For 3 of the past 8 months, Hispanics have lost ground relative to non-Hispanics - a phenomenon we’ve attributed to stricter workplace enforcement of immigration laws and a weaker job market.

But after eight straight months of national job loss, the displacement of American workers is still evident. Here are year-to-date (January through August) employment figures:

• Total employment: -771,000  (-0.53 percent)
• Non-Hispanic: -903,000 (-0.72 percent)
• Hispanic: +132,000 (+0.65 percent)

In other words, nearly one million (903,000) non-Hispanics have lost jobs this year -and many of them were supplanted by the 132,000 Hispanic (= immigrant) workers who found gainful employment over this period.

The trends in Hispanic and non-Hispanic employment since the start of the Bush Administration are tracked the following graphic:

Since January 2001 Hispanic employment has increased by 4,343,000, or 26.9 percent, while non-Hispanic employment grew by 3,367,000, or 2.8 percent.

The ratio of Hispanic to non-Hispanic job indexes, which we call VDAWDI (the V-Dare.com American Worker Displacement Index), rose to 123.5 in August from 123.0 in July.

The record high for VDAWDI, 124.1, was recorded in August 2007 - the month that U.S. economic growth started to decelerate.

The border fence is 700 miles long–and counting. Border Patrol apprehensions have been dropping for three years. Remittance outflows to Mexico were down nearly 3% in the first three months of this year from the same period last year. A poll of migrants by the Inter American Development Bank in April confirms that fewer are sending money back regularly.

“Evidence” for a decline in the illegal immigrant population has been limited to these anecdotal items–until now. A new report by Steve Camarota finds that the illegal population fell by some 1.3 million, or 11%, through May 2008 after peaking in August 2007 The study is based on the Current Population Survey, widely regarded as the most accurate gauge of U.S. population available between Census years.

We feel justified in crying out “We told you so!” For years we have tracked monthly trends in Hispanic and non-Hispanic employment, highlighting the disproportionately large advance in Hispanic labor since the start of the Bush Administration.

Since last summer, however, we’ve noted what can be reasonable called a sea change: Hispanic employment growth rates started lagging non-Hispanic employment growth rates.

Our last employment update, published in early July, contained the following prescient observation:

“VDARE.com’s American Worker Displacement Index (VDAWDI), calculated as the ratio of Hispanic to non-Hispanic job growth indexes during the Bush years, fell to 122.8 in June– its the largest decline since January. Since peaking in August, VDAWDI has encountered upside resistance:”

“Our general economic funk undoubtedly plays a role, dissuading legals as well as illegals from coming to these parts. But there are plenty of reasons to suspect that a diminished influx of illegal workers is playing the larger role.”

The post-August 2007 reversal, now confirmed by Camarota, was quite evident in our last VDAWDI graphic:

Is it just the economy? No, stupid. Camarota finds that employment of less-educated Hispanic immigrants began to fall well before their unemployment rate started to rise, noting:

“This suggests that the fall in the size of the likely illegal population was caused by enforcement rather than deterioration in the economy. However, the rise in unemployment now may be acting in concert with increased enforcement efforts, making it increasingly difficult to determine the relative importance of the economy or enforcement if the current decline continues.”

To be sure, Camarota’s illegal alien population figures are estimates. His data source–the Current Population Survey - does not ask immigrants their legal status. This egregious flaw forces researchers to estimate the illegal alien population using various markers–citizenship status, age, country of birth, level of education, household size, etc.

Some have abandoned CPS for other data sources. They report the illegal alien population may be as high as 30 million.