Posted on 04/06/2012 8:57:47 AM PDT by Signalman
Today's job report is bad news for Obama and the Dems. "Unexpectedly", only 120,000 jobs were created this month. Every projection I've heard in the last few days stated it was going to be well over 200,000.
Secondly, the unemployment rate did tick down 1/10th of a point to 8.2 percent. However, an economist I just heard on the radio stated that the only reason this occurred is because more people have exhausted their unemployment benefits. And as we all know, the Labor Dept. doesn't take into account those individuals when it computes the unemployment rate.
Additionally, at 8.2 percent the UE rate is,by historical standards, considered to be quite high.
So despite the MSM's best efforts to show otherwise, this report is a definite bummer for Obie and the Dems.
That is just plain wrong, i.e. not correct. Unemployment benifits have nothing to do with it. The reason the unemployment number dropped is because more and more people have dropped out of the work force and are no longer counted as being in the workforce (unemployed or employed).
The unemployment rate is a simple calculation: (unemployed) / (size of participating workforce)
I disagree.
Very few people in this math challenged country understand what you have pointed out.
The MSM trumpets the “drop” in the rate and that’s all 98% of the populace hears.
You will always lose if you overestimate the intelligence of the average American as you have just done.
They also know what $9 a gallon gas means ~ even the Democrats will be hunting down Democrat politicians in the streets with pitchforks!
Ah! But they do! When unemployment benefits run out the person is no longer counted as unemployed. So the unemployed pool shrinks by one. That's is not honest accounting but then who would expect such a thing from this administration anyway?
That sounds like a threat. We clearly need pitchfork registration and pitchfork control laws. And no concealed pitchfork carrying allowed!
I agree with you on the gas.
I still have a very low regard for the reasoning capabilities and conceptual skills of the average American.
And you can forget the notion that the average Democrat could understand the BLS numbers game. Show ‘em Shadow Stats and you’ll see glazed eyes and drool dripping from the mouth.
Sorry, nothing is bad news for obie. The smartest man in the world is skating no matter what he says or does. He’ll probably end up being lauded like the kennedy clan when it’s all over. Only a few of us will know what a real perverted scum bag he was/is. Gas prices MUST rise but we are producing more oil than ever. HUH? Maybe on private land but on OUR federal land it is dropping rapidly. After all, he got the Nobel peace prize for never having done anything. As far as the BLS numbers, we all know they are BS. My wife lost her job 2 years ago and does NOT file for benefits. So she is one of those not counted but still not working.
Thing is, it is getting so bad that personal experience is starting to trump what the MSM says. The MSM has jumped many sharks in this and more and more are noticing it.
You can’t get away with indefinitely telling a stupid man that the flooding is going down as he continues to watch the water level in his living room rise. Eventually he will believe his eyes more than what you are telling him.
And he will be pissed. At you.
No, they don't. There are various reasons the BLS does not factor unemployment compensation (who is receiving it, who is not, who is no longer, etc.) into the calculation of the unemployment rate, and there is a FAQ section on the BLS website that explains why.
The primary source of confusion appears (to me, at least) to be not understanding what constitutes "labor force participation."
Wrong. The unemployment figure is calculated from a statistical survey of households (I think the number is around 80,000) from across the country. You can be unemployed and collecting benefits, unemployed and not collecting benefits (out for too long, quit job, not yet hired out of school, not covered by unemployment insurance), not "unemployed" but collecting unemployment benefits (back in school, lying to state officials about how hard you are searching). The last is harder because those who are collecting unemployment benefits will tell everyone who calls about how hard they are looking for a job, just in case the state office is calling to check.
The qualifications to still be in the labor pool are pretty low. You just had to actively look for a job sometime in the past 4 weeks, so if you made even one call, mailed one resume or posted your resume online since March 9 you are looking for a job. Looking at the classifieds or job offers on line doesn't count.
Again, no. If she is "actively looking for work" she'd be counted. You can argue that the government is messing with what constitutes "actively," but that's entirely separate from (incorrectly) believing that her unemployment compensation, or lack thereof, has anything to do with it.
FWIW...If I recall correctly, SELF Employed people and those who worked for NON-Profits do NOT get Unemployment!
What do the unemployment insurance (UI) figures measure?
The UI figures are not produced by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Statistics on insured unemployment in the United States are collected as a by-product of UI programs. Workers who lose their jobs and are covered by these programs typically file claims ("initial claims") that serve as notice that they are beginning a period of unemployment. Claimants who qualify for benefits are counted in the insured unemployment figures (as "continued claims"). Data on UI claims are maintained by the Employment and Training Administration, an agency of the U.S. Department of Labor, and are available on the Internet at: http://workforcesecurity.doleta.gov/unemploy/claims.asp.
These data are not used to measure total unemployment because they exclude several important groups. To begin with, not all workers are covered by UI programs. For example, self-employed workers, unpaid family workers, workers in certain not-for-profit organizations, and several other small (primarily seasonal) worker categories are not covered. In addition, the insured unemployed exclude the following:
- Unemployed workers who have exhausted their benefits
- Unemployed workers who have not yet earned benefit rights (such as new entrants or reentrants to the labor force)
- Disqualified workers whose unemployment is considered to have resulted from their own actions rather than from economic conditions; for example, a worker discharged for misconduct on the job
- Otherwise eligible unemployed persons who do not file for benefits
Why can’t they just divide the number of social security contributors by the census calculated number of people of working age?
The stock market futures look ugly right now because of disappointing jobs data. Look out below on Monday.
That would apply only for “Sawed off pitchforks” ~ your full sized “Long stock pitchforks” are OK ~ no way to conceal them.
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.