Posted on 03/04/2011 9:52:04 AM PST by FromLori
Why don’t they simply report how many are employed?
Because it would show how many people are actually getting welfare and not working as opposed to unempoyed and recieving unemployment benefits?
Does he not understand its 8.9%? the goverment says so, so it must be true, Right????
Sarc Alert!!!!
I have become so tired of the Feds falsifying reports to suit a political agenda. I wonder if Congress would find it in their black hearts to pass a Law making lying to the American Public regarding national statistics a Federal offense.
It seems whether it is the Dummie Mayor of Phoenix scamming taxpayer money to Labor Dept, lying has become a national epidemic. And frankly I am tired of it.
"The truth is a beautiful and terrible thing, and should therefore be treated with great caution." ~ Albus Dumbledore
Frankly I’m sick of Top Quarks personal attacks and I believe it is against the rules of Free Republic. Please address this poster enough is enough.
Polly want a cracker?
| Measure | Not seasonally adjusted | Seasonally adjusted | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb. 2010 |
Jan. 2011 |
Feb. 2011 |
Feb. 2010 |
Oct. 2010 |
Nov. 2010 |
Dec. 2010 |
Jan. 2011 |
Feb. 2011 |
|
|
U-1 Persons unemployed 15 weeks or longer, as a percent of the civilian labor force |
6.0 | 5.6 | 5.6 | 5.8 | 5.7 | 5.7 | 5.6 | 5.5 | 5.3 |
|
U-2 Job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs, as a percent of the civilian labor force |
7.0 | 6.2 | 6.0 | 6.2 | 5.9 | 6.2 | 5.8 | 5.6 | 5.4 |
|
U-3 Total unemployed, as a percent of the civilian labor force (official unemployment rate) |
10.4 | 9.8 | 9.5 | 9.7 | 9.7 | 9.8 | 9.4 | 9.0 | 8.9 |
|
U-4 Total unemployed plus discouraged workers, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus discouraged workers |
11.1 | 10.4 | 10.1 | 10.4 | 10.4 | 10.5 | 10.2 | 9.6 | 9.5 |
|
U-5 Total unemployed, plus discouraged workers, plus all other persons marginally attached to the labor force, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force |
11.9 | 11.4 | 11.1 | 11.1 | 11.2 | 11.2 | 10.9 | 10.7 | 10.5 |
|
U-6 Total unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force |
17.9 | 17.3 | 16.7 | 16.8 | 17.0 | 17.0 | 16.7 | 16.1 | 15.9 |
|
NOTE: Persons marginally attached to the labor force are those who currently are neither working nor looking for work but indicate that they want and are available for a job and have looked for work sometime in the past 12 months. Discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached, have given a job-market related reason for not currently looking for work. Persons employed part time for economic reasons are those who want and are available for full-time work but have had to settle for a part-time schedule. Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data. |
|||||||||
bttt
Can you tell me what indicates that these reports are a lie?
I can envision Bennie Bernake standing on the deck of the Titanic with his ankles deep in sea water saying, “the economy is improving, there is no inflation. The economy is improving, there is no inflation”.
Here is what you coud've fond even in Wikipedia:
"alternate measures of unemployment, U1 through U6, that measure different aspects of unemployment:[72]
U1: Percentage of labour force unemployed 15 weeks or longer.
U2: Percentage of labour force who lost jobs or completed temporary work.
U3: Official unemployment rate per the ILO definition occurs when people are without jobs and they have actively looked for work within the past four weeks.[2]
U4: U3 + "discouraged workers", or those who have stopped looking for work because current economic conditions make them believe that no work is available for them.
U5: U4 + other "marginally attached workers", or "loosely attached workers", or those who "would like" and are able to work, but have not looked for work recently.
U6: U5 + Part time workers who want to work full time, but cannot due to economic reasons (underemployment)."
You can continue now with your sarcasm.
You’ve founded these statistics. So have they or have they not been published?
The fed is using the exact same standard for calculating unemployment now as it did then. During Bush’s recession it was the libs claiming that true unemployment was higher and that his administration was deceiving the public. Everyone likes the agreed upon measure while it is saying the things that they want it to say. They start complaining when it doesn’t support their message.
As posters above said, we could measure workforce participation instead of claimed unemployment, but that isn’t all that useful. Average age in this country is rising steadily, so it should be no surprise to anyone that lower percentages are working even if there wasn’t a recession. The trick is figuring out which is which. Simply asking if people want to work is not the answer either. Ask someone on welfare or extended unemployment if they are looking for work. Of course they will say yes; saying no might jeopardize their government handout!
I said fed by mistake. Not the fed, it is the bureau of labor statistics.
If you have evidence that he misrepresents the data, let's hear it (and please do report that to the FBI).
Would be nice if arm-chair generals would show at least understanding what Bernanke's job is and what he says.
But don't get distracted from Fed-bashing. Defamation has become a norm, even among "conservatives." Enjoy; you have strength in numbers.
They are published by the BLS every time they publish the unemployment rate. It just ruins all the conspiracy theories if you say that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.