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.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,938 posts, read 36,788,991 times
Reputation: 40634
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rambler123
Valid point:
All I was getting at is that there is no agency that tracks EVERY person who's out of work once their benefits expire. Yes, if you get a call as part of the household survey and you're out of work, have exhausted your benefits, but have looked for work in the past 4 weeks, you still count as "unemployed" even for the purposes of the headline unemployment number.
Well of course not. Sampling is used. Which in many ways is more precise than attempts at an census, which there is no possible way to do it.
The number may be questioned, but since the methodology doesn't change, and the structure of the compiling of the Federal unemployment rate is so rigidly divided and firewalled to make it impossible to be tampered with by politicians (think about it, if there was way for politicians to tamper with it, would the party in power ever raise it?), it proves very useful as a relative (not absolute) number.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rambler123
Let's make this a forum question - has ANYONE here ever been called in the household survey regarding employment? Just curious.
I don't think that any numbers having to do with phone surveys are correct. Let me explain. You take a survey wanting to know who is working and who is not working. Unless you call my work you will not reach me. I don't answer the phone if I don't know who is calling. For me, I would never be one of the survey participants because of not answering the phone.
My thought is that you would have a larger number of unemployed that could answer the question. The reason is that they may be home more often than those that are working. Now That is a sad statement because the unemployed should be out looking for work. The problem that I am hearing about is that the unemployed may have become discouraged with the situation out in the work force and decide to forgo looking for work.
I base my thoughts on nothing of importance and I may be way off base as I only see my own situation, which is and has always been employed.
Location: RI, MA, VT, WI, IL, CA, IN (that one sucked), KY
41,938 posts, read 36,788,991 times
Reputation: 40634
Quote:
Originally Posted by SOON2BNSURPRISE
My thought is that you would have a larger number of unemployed that could answer the question. The reason is that they may be home more often than those that are working. Now That is a sad statement because the unemployed should be out looking for work. The problem that I am hearing about is that the unemployed may have become discouraged with the situation out in the work force and decide to forgo looking for work.
My understanding is that this differential is factored in their modeling. Just as with political polling, there are adjustments made to account for people that refuse to answer, can't be reached by traditional means, adjust for people that will likely vote vs who were polled, people that lie, etc. It isn't a straight number, it is a model. These are very sophisticated and very well honed models.
My understanding is that this differential is factored in their modeling. Just as with political polling, there are adjustments made to account for people that refuse to answer, can't be reached by traditional means, adjust for people that will likely vote vs who were polled, people that lie, etc. It isn't a straight number, it is a model. These are very sophisticated and very well honed models.
Agreed - the models are pretty good, for what they model. I was just curious if anyone here had actually be surveyed. I didn't mean to imply that if the answer was "no," than the model was flawed - my bad.
Agreed - the models are pretty good, for what they model. I was just curious if anyone here had actually be surveyed. I didn't mean to imply that if the answer was "no," than the model was flawed - my bad.
No problems - that's the problem with textual communications.
I don't think that any numbers having to do with phone surveys are correct. Let me explain. You take a survey wanting to know who is working and who is not working. Unless you call my work you will not reach me. I don't answer the phone if I don't know who is calling. For me, I would never be one of the survey participants because of not answering the phone.
My thought is that you would have a larger number of unemployed that could answer the question. The reason is that they may be home more often than those that are working. Now That is a sad statement because the unemployed should be out looking for work. The problem that I am hearing about is that the unemployed may have become discouraged with the situation out in the work force and decide to forgo looking for work.
I base my thoughts on nothing of importance and I may be way off base as I only see my own situation, which is and has always been employed.
Exactly, you can have unintended biases based on who you call. By a random sample, you can have the same people pop up that are either continually employed or unemployed. That is not if you go into exclusion sampling bias, they talk to more historically employed vs. historically unemployed like the healthy user bias or specific real area were you may not interview those in rural areas. Not saying hat this doesn't happen, just that it could.
Stats can be swayed or dismissed based on different biases. It's not as cut and dry as we have a 6.9 U-3 unemployment rate. It could be higher or lower for the entire population. It's a SAMPLE. It should never be taken as gospel at all which many people whether it is this or political ratings or Obamacare ratings.
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.
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.
