To: RaceBannon
Just like the Global Warming data, unemployment figures are filtered through algorithms. There are mathematical formulas which seem to currently indicate that unemployment is getting a bit better. But are those formulas accurate? Are the seasonal adjustment figures being overdone?
I would say that an overwhelming number of calls at state agencies is concrete proof that things are not as rosy as the government figures indicate.
Once again, the government is just lying to us.
13 posted on
12/23/2009 5:44:26 AM PST by
ClearCase_guy
(Macbeth is ripe for shaking, and the powers above put on their instruments.)
To: ClearCase_guy
A wise man once said, “Reality can only be avoided for so long.”
To: ClearCase_guy; All
We should use U6 as the real unemployment number. This is the only number which could be used for apples to apples comarison for say, comparisons with the Great Depression, as that was the number used then.
(U6 is currently over 17%)
16 posted on
12/23/2009 5:48:08 AM PST by
Red in Blue PA
(If guns cause crime, then all of mine are defective!)
To: ClearCase_guy
I wonder if the people who ran out of regular benefits and are now on Extended and High Extended Benefits are counted?
19 posted on
12/23/2009 5:57:37 AM PST by
homegroan
(ZQczar...happily addicted to the Refresh Button.....)
To: ClearCase_guy
32 posted on
12/23/2009 8:05:32 AM PST by
algernonpj
(He who pays the piper . . .)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson