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.
“The rate of unemployment in the United States has exceeded 8 percent since February 2009, making the past three years the longest stretch of high unemployment in this country since the Great Depression. Moreover, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) projects that the unemployment rate will remain above 8 percent until 2014. The official unemployment rate excludes those individuals who would like to work but have not searched for a job in the past four weeks as well as those who are working part-time but would prefer full-time work; if those people were counted among the unemployed, the unemployment rate in January 2012 would have been about 15 percent. Compounding the problem of high unemployment, the share of unemployed people looking for work for more than six months—referred to as the long-term unemployed—topped 40 percent in December 2009 for the first time since 1948, when such data began to be collected; it has remained above that level ever since.”
Now putting out information from that highly regarded (by Democrats these days) bi-partisan group, CBO, is a dirty trick. This time there is no way for them to call those people liars so you will see a lot more deflection attempts soon like the third post in this thread.
He has been office for 3 years and has done NOTHING about UNEMPLOYMENT except to ADD to it.
I don't know what kind of sites you are going to but you need to do a serious FACT CHECK:
I'll put my money on CNN/MONEY Thank you very much!
Unemployment rate drops
Job growth rebounded in August as nation's unemployment rate dipped to 5.4 percent.
September 3, 2004: 2:43 PM EDT
The unemployment rate dipped to 5.4 from 5.5 percent in July, mainly due to a decline in the labor force, bringing the rate to its lowest since September 2001
Would also like to note that 1.7 million jobs were created since August 2003. These are NOT GOVERNMENT SHORT TERM JOBS EITHER.
"There have been very few years in my lifetime that we've had an unemployment rate as low as this," he told CNNfn.
The exact same formulas used by the last 5 Presidents are used by this one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by txgolfer130
Too bad that's the way it's been calculated for years. Unemployment has never counted "under-employed" or part-time employed as part of the official numbers.
You both get the Least Competent Postor of the Day Award.
Yes, they did, prior to 1994. For your information, they used to count the prison population and the military as "unemployed" as well.
To keep from embarrassing yourself further, you might want to go to BLS and peruse the discontinued data sets, ie data that is no longer collected or incorporated into the employment situation reports.
Quote:
Paul Solman: We've done considerable work on the unemployment statistic, Mr. Bianco. See our story, Undercounting Unemployment, which defines the different unemployment rates (called U-3, U-4, U-5 and U-6). The key points are that, compared to the way the headline unemployment rate (U-3) was officially calculated back when it hit its post-WWII high of 10.8% (1982), there have been major changes. Here they are:
1) The population is older and thus should have a LOWER unemployment rate, since older workers work more than younger ones do;
[Note: I concur with the demographics]
2) The number of Americans receiving government disability, virtually nil in 1982, is over 5 million today, and a significant percentage of them would presumably be unemployed if in the labor market;
[Note: I concur in part with their conclusion]
3) Same for America's prison population, which has risen by some 2 million since 1982. Estimates of unemployment among ex-convicts range up to 80%
[Note: I concur with the Carter Administration -- prison population should NOT be counted]
4) Finally, the point you're presumably making when you write about "a time restraint": there are far more "discouraged" workers now than in the 1980s who don't affect the unemployment rate at all. Starting in 1994, once you hadn't looked for work for more than a year, you were officially removed from the workforce. Entirely. And that, as with items (2) and (3), above, reduces the headline rate - U-3 - and all the broader measures of unemployment as well.
Oh, please, no facts; that will just confuse them terribly.
You pulled the seasonally adjusted rate. Check out the unadjusted rate: it has an LFP of 63.4% --- ooops.
Those people are not working; not paying into Social Security and Medicare; and they are way behind their Salary Curve, which means future revenues will be lesser. Big Jon, you and I and every one else will be working until we die because of that.
Too bad that's the way it's been calculated for years. Unemployment has never counted "under-employed" or part-time employed as part of the official numbers.
More whine and moan from the gallery.
The effects of the recent recession, which began in
December 2007 and ended in June 2009, have combined
to make the years since 2007the worst period of unemployment
in the United States since the 1930s.
The unemployment rate reached a very high level,
peaking at 10.0 percent in October 2009. That rate
has been topped in the post–World War II period only
once before—during the severe 1981–1982 recession
(see the upper panel of Figure 1). From the end of
2007 to October 2009, the number of unemployed
people rose by almost 8 million.
In contrast,the unemployment rate exceeded 8 percent
for 26 months and was at or above 9 percent for
19 months during the recession of the early 1980s.
In the early 80's they had a high interest rate to play with, which created a bubble.
What card are they going to pull out of their ass this time.
I have $500 for any right winger that brought up the "real unemployment level" when Bush was in office.
How come we only hear about the "real unemployment level" when right wing partisans want Obama to look bad?
If the "real unemployment level" is so much more valid...How come they never brought it up when their side was in control?
Are you suggesting that the "real" unemployment numbers aren't "real'? Is there any doubt that the left is more interested in political score keeping than real hurting flesh and blood Americans?
I don't remember hearing about "real unemployment" at all during the Bush years, from anyone. I guess it wasn't really an issue then.
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.
