Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-04-2014, 07:12 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,118,301 times
Reputation: 9383

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by RaymondChandlerLives View Post
They've been calculating unemployment the same way for 20 years. Only now do the Bushbots complain.
No they havent, the calculation method has been changed numerous times..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-04-2014, 07:26 AM
 
Location: San Diego
5,319 posts, read 8,986,362 times
Reputation: 3396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler View Post
Numbers are flawed either way you calculate them. The official UE number doesn't count the unemployed who have run out of benefits or those who have gone on SS early because they simply cannot find work like my BIL and a friend have done. The UE number is much higher than what is being reported but the percent not in the labor force includes people who simply retired which gives a false high. So one number gives a false low and the other a false high. The real number is something between the two.
You are wrong about this.

You are making your own assumptions about who is counted and who isn't.

Try reading the rules:

Current Population Survey Frequently Asked Questions

Quote:
Who is counted as unemployed?

Persons are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work.
Workers expecting to be recalled from layoff are counted as unemployed, whether or not they have engaged in a specific jobseeking activity. In all other cases, the individual must have been engaged in at least one active job search activity in the 4 weeks preceding the interview and be available for work (except for temporary illness).
NOWHERE in the above rules does it mention ANYTHING about Unemployment Insurance.

The only things that matter are:
(1) they do not have a job, and

(2) they actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and

(3) they are available for work.
And I will repeat again what the BLS states about Unemployment Insurance related to the Unemployment Rate (from same BLS website as above):

Current Population Survey Frequently Asked Questions

Quote:
What do the unemployment insurance (UI) figures measure?

These data are not used to measure total unemployment because they exclude several important groups. To begin with, not all workers are covered by UI programs. For example, self-employed workers, unpaid family workers, workers in certain not-for-profit organizations, and several other small (primarily seasonal) worker categories are not covered. In addition, the insured unemployed exclude the following:
  • Unemployed workers who have exhausted their benefits
  • Unemployed workers who have not yet earned benefit rights (such as new entrants or reentrants to the labor force)
  • Disqualified workers whose unemployment is considered to have resulted from their own actions rather than from economic conditions; for example, a worker discharged for misconduct on the job
  • Otherwise eligible unemployed persons who do not file for benefits
Unemployment Insurance IS NOT USED to measure total unemployment as stated above.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2014, 07:36 AM
 
Location: San Diego
5,319 posts, read 8,986,362 times
Reputation: 3396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler View Post
Numbers are flawed either way you calculate them. The official UE number doesn't count the unemployed who have run out of benefits or those who have gone on SS early because they simply cannot find work like my BIL and a friend have done. The UE number is much higher than what is being reported but the percent not in the labor force includes people who simply retired which gives a false high. So one number gives a false low and the other a false high. The real number is something between the two.
I repeat .... Unemployment Insurance IS NOT USED to measure total unemployment.

You can even see the same answer I stated above here in this month's BLS report:

Employment Situation News Release

Quote:
6. Is the count of unemployed persons limited to just those people receiving unemployment insurance benefits?
No; the estimate of unemployment is based on a monthly sample survey of households. All persons who are without jobs and are actively seeking and available to work are included among the unemployed. (People on temporary layoff are included even if they do not actively seek work.) There is no requirement or question relating to unemployment insurance benefits in the monthly survey.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2014, 07:52 AM
 
Location: Tampa Florida
22,229 posts, read 17,858,215 times
Reputation: 4585
I think we can all agree that the Repubs know what will help to spur job growth. It's just that they don't want to do it now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2014, 08:01 AM
 
69,368 posts, read 64,118,301 times
Reputation: 9383
Quote:
Originally Posted by florida.bob View Post
I think we can all agree that the Repubs know what will help to spur job growth. It's just that they don't want to do it now.
Is that why the Democratic Senate is sitting on so many bills?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2014, 08:04 AM
 
47,525 posts, read 69,707,823 times
Reputation: 22474
This is the problem -- all people have to do today is claim some medical or mental problem and the government will pick up their tab for the rest of their lazy lives. In spite of modern medicine, far more people claim to have issues that make them unable to work than ever before. Cradle to grave socialism -- free money for the lazy.

http://apps.npr.org/unfit-for-work/

In the past three decades, the number of Americans who are on disability has skyrocketed. The rise has come even as medical advances have allowed many more people to remain on the job, and new laws have banned workplace discrimination against the disabled. Every month, 14 million people now get a disability check from the government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2014, 08:11 AM
 
Location: Tampa Florida
22,229 posts, read 17,858,215 times
Reputation: 4585
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Is that why the Democratic Senate is sitting on so many bills?
I wish that the House "jobs" bills fallacy were true.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2014, 10:01 AM
 
26,498 posts, read 15,079,792 times
Reputation: 14655
Quote:
Originally Posted by florida.bob View Post
I wish that the House "jobs" bills fallacy were true.
Speaking of fallacies...look at Obamabot Talking points:

-The Democrat Senate has passed a record # of bills and the House refuses to take them...Obamabot outrage...ignoring the Senate sitting on House bills.

-The Democrat Senate can't pass bills because of a record # of filibusters...Obamabot outrage...ignoring that most of these "filibusters" were actually clotures and there was no threat or filibuster even possible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-05-2014, 04:53 AM
 
9,617 posts, read 6,065,647 times
Reputation: 3884
This long term - much more than boomers retiring - structural problem of declining workforce participation threatens the viability of all the so called entitlement programs. No work, no pay, no taxes.

It also creates a false lowering of the U-3 rate. U-6 still in the ~12% range. Much more indicative of the prog malaise that grips the country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-05-2014, 07:04 AM
 
Location: San Diego
5,319 posts, read 8,986,362 times
Reputation: 3396
Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
and the obama lovers think this was a wonderful report?

Yes, the 288k number and upward revisions of previous nonfarm payrolls numbers were good. The data from the household survey (a separate survey from which the ue rate is derived) was mainly horrific, despite the lower ue rate. According to the household survey, 73,000 fewer americans actually have jobs.

Still cheering?

employment situation news release
Some months the number goes down ....

And some months the number goes up ....

2013 Jan. 214,000
2013 Feb -188,000
2013 Mar -412
,000
2013 Apr. 260
,000
2013 May. 250
,000
2013 Jun. 213
,000
2013 Jul -129
,000
2013 Aug -258
,000
2013 Sep.. 38
,000
2013 Oct -848
,000
2013 Nov. 659
,000
2013 Dec -347
,000

2014 Jan. 523
,000
2014 Feb. 264
,000
2014 Mar. 503
,000
2014 Apr -806
,000

Why weren't you cheering back in Jan, Feb and Mar 2014?


Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:57 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top