Employment Situation - June 2010 (Obamaconomics = FAILURE!)

Bureau of Labor Statistics ^ | July 2, 2010 | BLS

[Never on my watch]

Actually according to BLS methodology you are no longer unemployed in that situation.

I don't give a d@mn about BLS methodology, I live in the world of reality.

[Nobel_1]

Re: total spin

Absolutely! Only in the movie “love my welfare state” can you get math where fewer jobs means lower unemployment.

I like the stats at http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/unemployment-charts ... they are more “old school” in their calculations.

[An.American.Expatriate]

If someone gives up looking for work they are still unemployed. Semantically yes. BLS however says they are not in the workforce und thus do not count. Only those actively looking count.

[luvie]

Obamaconomix....there, fixed that!

This person is a JOKE!...but a bad one and no one is laughing!

[tx_eggman]

Both the number of unemployed persons, at 14.6 million, and the unemployment rate, at 9.5 percent, edged down in June ...

... In June, about 2.6 million persons were marginally attached to the labor force, an increase of 415,000 from a year earlier. (The data are not seasonally adjusted.) These individuals were not in the labor force, wanted and were available for work, and had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not counted as unemployed because they had not searched for work in the 4 weeks preceding the survey.

Throw those 2.6 million in and you're at 11.2%

The number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (some- times referred to as involuntary part-time workers), at 8.6 million, was little changed over the month

... add these on top and you're at nearly 17% un or underemployed.

Nothing to see here folks ... keep moving.

[thecabal]

Wow, Sowell is not only a genius but a very astute observer of how the enemy works.

[earlJam]

[driftdiver]

Unemployment only counts those receiving unemployment. It isn’t counting all the people who have given up.

[Oceander]

I know, which is why I included the remark about people who are polled who state that they are no longer looking for work. The bottom line is, however, that the official reported rate of unemployment is woefully inadequate and does not include a lot of people who are unemployed.

[9YearLurker]

They can’t bear the thought of the sound of “double digit unemployment”—even though that’s what we have.

[mewzilla]

I know the BLS uses the Census Dept to collect the weekly household survey data. Is the monthly report just those numbers massaged, or is the monthly data the result of another survey? And if so, is that survey done by the Census Dept as well?

[NC28203]

>>>Once again I ask, how are there less jobs and yet unemployment number goes DOWN? So confused. There are two different surveys that are used to determine the labor situation. One survey is of comapnies (payrolls) and the other surveys households (unemployment rate). Though both are trying to get a stab at the overall situation, because they two different things, the numbers can often tell a differnet story. This is often the case when the labor market is either bottoming or topping out.

The unemployment number is in not determined by the number of people filing claims for unemployment.

[doodad]

I just for the life of me can’t figure out how anybody believes any of this manure. Myself, my neighbors and many friends are all out of work and never have been in our lives. I see rental, sale and foreclosure signs all over in what is the most affluent city in this state.

Men my Dad’s age working as clerks. Women my Mom’s age in grocery stores. Guys my age making sandwiches or going door to door for yard work.

I can’t get an interview even for $10 an hour jobs. And 100 of us apply.

A pox on the house of Hussein.

[jersey117]

Leave it to CNBS to find a silver lining. Their breaking headline about the jobs lost adds this: "But the unemployment rate unexpectedly fell to 9.5% from 9.7%."

[NC28203]

>>>Once again I ask, how are there less jobs and yet unemployment number goes DOWN? So confused.

Reformatted:

There are two different surveys that are used to determine the labor situation. One survey is of comapnies (payrolls) and the other surveys households (unemployment rate). Though both are trying to get a stab at the overall situation, because they two different things, the numbers can often tell a differnet story. This is often the case when the labor market is either bottoming or topping out.

The unemployment number is in not determined by the number of people filing claims for unemployment.

[driftdiver]

‘BLS however says they are not in the workforce und thus do not count. Only those actively looking count. “

Only those registered with the local unemployment office counts. If you’re sending out resumes it doesn’t count towards this number.

[genxer]

U6 rate is 16.5 percent. that’s’ the # we should all use

[Never on my watch]

Unemployment only counts those receiving unemployment. It isn't counting all the people who have given up.

Can we please stop accepting the inside-the-beltway premise that unemployed people are not unemployed.

After all, no one reports to some agency and says "I am no longer looking for work." I will concede that some people are unwilling to work, but they are still unemployed, and if someone is willing to work, they will take a job that comes up, even if they were so discouraged that they stopped trying.

[C19fan]

The BLS will count you if you are sending out resumes, for example recent colleger grads. That is the reason the BLS uses a survey of households.

[thecabal]

Thanks much for researching that. That number is staggering. How can anyone who informs themselves of these facts not realize that the MFM is actively in collusion with the Marxists in power, working together to destroy the remnants of Capitalism in this country?