[1rudeboy]

oops
If the sample is properly random, and the population clearly defined, then it is quite conceivable that a statistical study where n=60000 can be representative.

[jpsb]

60,000 in a random sample is way more then you need. 880 or something close is all you need in a random sample to get extermely accurate results.

But this from another thread

Self-Employment May Mask U.S. Job Growth

["In terms of speaking and writing and marketing and doing all that sort of stuff -- yeah, I was working."] Translation: I was working hard trying to find work.

Cool, you are now working if you are working on finding work. That should bring the unemployed numbers down to just about zero.