U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Work and Employment
 [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 05-05-2019, 12:33 PM
 
1,673 posts, read 548,866 times
Reputation: 3560

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
No, it doesn't, and that the discussion is not confined to the intricate statisticulation of the government numbers continues to escape you.
I understand the point you're trying to make.

You're also starting the conversation by quoting an incorrect statistic. Don't start a conversation with misleading information.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-05-2019, 12:36 PM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
8,586 posts, read 3,010,942 times
Reputation: 12789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lekrii View Post
You're also starting the conversation by quoting an incorrect statistic. Don't start a conversation with misleading information.
Show me the specific government stat that specifically includes the population you think is erroneously listed.

Hint: U6 ain't it.

I'll concede that that specific paragraph could be phrased a little more tightly, but it's a long article and it goes on to make its case. Which, I find amusingly, is much the case I've been making for the last year - about the disconnect between the stats and a changed reality.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-05-2019, 12:58 PM
 
1,673 posts, read 548,866 times
Reputation: 3560
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
Show me the specific government stat that specifically includes the population you think is erroneously listed.

Hint: U6 ain't it.

I'll concede that that specific paragraph could be phrased a little more tightly, but it's a long article and it goes on to make its case. Which, I find amusingly, is much the case I've been making for the last year - about the disconnect between the stats and a changed reality.
So that we're on the same page, you believe when the author of the article said "It counts only people actively looking for work", that it was not referring to U3?

Because other measures of unemployment include things like discouraged workers, which is where students/stay at home moms who couldn't find a job would fall. With respect, a "disconnect between stats and reality" doesn't exist. What you're seeing is a disconnect between reality (statistics) and your opinion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-05-2019, 01:00 PM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
8,586 posts, read 3,010,942 times
Reputation: 12789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lekrii View Post
Because other measures of unemployment include things like discouraged workers, which is where students/stay at home moms who couldn't find a job would fall.
The article does not say 'discouraged workers.' It says those not actively seeking or thinking of seeking employment. Not the same thing at all.

RFC.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-05-2019, 01:06 PM
 
1,673 posts, read 548,866 times
Reputation: 3560
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
The article does not say 'discouraged workers.' It says those not actively seeking or thinking of seeking employment. Not the same thing at all.

RFC.
From the article "which means it leaves out many students, stay-at-home parents or others who might like jobs if they were available"

That is discouraged workers (U4) and students (U6). U6 actually goes farther than the article, as it includes underemployed people too. U6 is at a multi-decade low right now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-05-2019, 01:08 PM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
8,586 posts, read 3,010,942 times
Reputation: 12789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lekrii View Post
From the article "which means it leaves out many students, stay-at-home parents or others who might like jobs if they were available"
We'll just have to remain mutually anti-semantic on the point. If you think the whole article is invalid because you don't like the way this one definition is phrased, power to you. The overall point is better stated by the article as a whole, and I find the basic question entirely valid and validating.

Econ types who thump the scriptures and thunder about infallibility always give me a laugh, though. Have you met Mircea?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-05-2019, 01:15 PM
 
1,673 posts, read 548,866 times
Reputation: 3560
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quietude View Post
We'll just have to remain mutually anti-semantic on the point. If you think the whole article is invalid because you don't like the way this one definition is phrased, power to you. The overall point is better stated by the article as a whole, and I find the basic question entirely valid and validating.

Econ types who thump the scriptures and thunder about infallibility always give me a laugh, though. Have you met Mircea?
You started a thread with a quote that had incorrect and misleading information. It's difficult to have a serious conversation if that is the starting point.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'infallibility', so you'll have to clarify that point. I never said anything along those lines.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-05-2019, 01:17 PM
 
Location: Aurora Denveralis
8,586 posts, read 3,010,942 times
Reputation: 12789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lekrii View Post
You started a thread with a quote that had incorrect and misleading information. It's difficult to have a serious conversation if that is the starting point.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'infallibility', so you'll have to clarify that point. I never said anything along those lines.
Okay. You win. Here's your gold star.

/done
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-05-2019, 11:40 PM
 
6,610 posts, read 3,738,816 times
Reputation: 13655
It's well known that the U.S. is on a path of becoming an oligarchy. The divide between the middle and working classes, on the one hand, and the ultra-wealthy and corporations, on the other, has been enlarging for decades, as wages (after inflation) have continued not to rise much over decades, while income for the upper class has skyrocketed. Public education is being underfunded, with funds being diverted to private schools, and certain students plucked out of public schools for charter schools. The rest of the private school students are from the wealthier classes.

Without a good education or good health care, the American Dream is not attainable any longer for many, in any real sense.

As long as all the dark money is in politics, and as long as it takes a ton of money to be in politics, the politicians will be beholden to the big donors, and legislate in their favor. High drug prices, lack of health care, divert funds for educating the middle class to private schools, lower taxes mainly for the super wealthy, allow huge corporations to pay no income taxes, and so on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-06-2019, 03:21 AM
 
6,610 posts, read 3,738,816 times
Reputation: 13655
Quote:
Originally Posted by charlygal View Post
Folks, the unemployment numbers have been run the same way for decades. It's published on the BLS site. No manipulation.
The OP is not really about the way the numbers are run.

It's about the pool of people being hired are different. They aren't counted as unemployed, because technically they're not. They "want" a job, but don't "need" a job. So don't actively look very hard for one. They're not on anyone's radar as job seekers. Not on unemployment. But they are not a member of the "long unemployed so gave up looking" group.

That's what it's saying, I think.
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 > Work and Employment
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top