U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [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 01-09-2009, 09:07 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,068 posts, read 74,832,001 times
Reputation: 27602

Advertisements

Finally the MSM is waking up and posting some "real" numbers as calculated before the government added their "modifications".

Great Depression jobs parallel may not be far flung | U.S. | Reuters

snippet:
"Figures collected for Reuters by John Williams, from the electronic newsletter Shadowstats.com, suggest that, while we are not there yet, the comparison is not as outlandish as it might initially seem.

By his count, if unemployment were still tallied the way it was in the 1930s, today's jobless rate would be closer to 16.5 percent -- more than double the stated rate."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-09-2009, 10:43 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles Area
3,306 posts, read 3,561,515 times
Reputation: 592
I wouldn't call this "waking up", I would call typical media BS.

They way report is so shallow its pointless to read it...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-09-2009, 10:54 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,068 posts, read 74,832,001 times
Reputation: 27602
I think it's good in that many people believe the government figures and dismiss shadowstats.
This article gives shadowstats some credibility.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2009, 12:20 AM
 
Location: Los Angeles Area
3,306 posts, read 3,561,515 times
Reputation: 592
Yes the article gives shadowstats some credibility which is precisely the problem, in much the same way they gave used house sales men credibility. Both don't deserve it.

Regarding the government figures, what is there not to believe? They tell you precisely how they collect the data. There is no deception, unless of course you think the government doesn't collect data in the way they suggest they do.

On the other hand is shadowstats forth coming with their methodology? No, because its idiotic. They use the government data and simply pad it percentage wise to come up with the "alternative". You'll notice now ironically the "alternative data" follows the official data, modulo a certain percentage.
But, hey good conspiracies apparently sell subscriptions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2009, 01:14 AM
 
Location: where you sip the tea of the breasts of the spinsters of Utica
8,299 posts, read 12,559,141 times
Reputation: 8057
Thanks for the article, HappyTexan. I agree that it's important to show that the govt has been dicking around with the figures, and to bring out the fact that Great Depression stats were calculated differently so that we might be closer to those numbers than many believe.

The way I understand it, the "official" stats are called U3. The way stats were calculated before Clinton is pretty much the same as U6, which is an official number that isn't often quoted by the media.

I suppose the way they calculated it during the GD was still another way, and I don't know what exactly the SGS Alternate is.



It looks like U6 (which includes the discouraged etc but I think not the disabled) is between 13 and 14 at this time.

Oh, here's what they say, I think I screwed up:
Quote:
The SGS Alternate Unemployment Rate reflects current unemployment reporting methodology adjusted for SGS-estimated "discouraged workers" defined away during the Clinton Administration added to the existing BLS estimates of level U-6 unemployment.

Last edited by Waterlily; 01-11-2009 at 01:30 AM.. Reason: cut out link
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2009, 07:26 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,068 posts, read 74,832,001 times
Reputation: 27602
How the government tweeked the figures is called "Pollyanna creep". Here's a good article that describes how the government changed their calculations starting back in the 70's.

Tinkering with Inflation Calculations: The “Pollyanna Creep” Phenomenon - Seeking Alpha

snippet:
"Since the 1960s, Washington has been forced to gull its citizens and creditors by debasing official statistics…. The effect…has been to create a false sense of economic achievement and rectitude, allowing us to maintain artificially low interest rates, massive government borrowing, and a dangerous reliance on mortgage and financial debt even as real economic growth has been slower than claimed."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2009, 10:32 AM
 
4,247 posts, read 9,547,577 times
Reputation: 1463
Omg...

Quote:
"i expect that unemployment in the current downturn, which will be particularly deep and protracted, eventually will rival, if not top, the 25 percent seen in the great depression," williams said.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2009, 11:10 AM
 
Location: WA
5,474 posts, read 21,931,694 times
Reputation: 6157
Yes, the statistics are very misleading.

My job was eliminated in 2005 and I was on unemployment as I looked for a new job so I guess I was counted. In 2006 I did some contract work and considered myself employed but don't know how I was counted. In 2007 all contract work dried up and with no prospects I wound up calling myself retired. Now that the market has crashed I need employment more than ever but am in a position where I am a poor candidate for any employment.

I don't even know how to count my own unemployment, or the under-employed and sometimes employed people I know.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2009, 11:27 AM
 
Location: Los Angeles Area
3,306 posts, read 3,561,515 times
Reputation: 592
Yes, the government changed their calculations. That is clearly stated, its not some big conspiracy.


shadowstats is completely useless on the other hand.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-10-2009, 11:30 AM
 
Location: Beautiful Lakes & Mountains of East TN
3,454 posts, read 6,727,344 times
Reputation: 874
Quote:
Originally Posted by Humanoid View Post
Yes, the government changed their calculations. That is clearly stated, its not some big conspiracy.


shadowstats is completely useless on the other hand.
The govt stats would be honest IF they compared today's rate (7.2) with the rate calculated in the SAME MANNER from the past.

i.e. When they compare unemployment rates during the Depression as 25%, then say we're nowhere near that at 7.2%.

That's apples to oranges. Hence, misleading.

Not a conspiracy. Just dishonest, whether intentional or not.

Last edited by bbkaren; 01-10-2009 at 11:39 AM..
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 > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:58 AM.

© 2005-2020, 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