Skip to comments.What's the truth about the unemployment numbers?
Posted on 03/04/2012 9:25:54 PM PST by Bobbys1963
The recent sudden drops in both initial unemployment insurance claims and unemployment rates have generated a slew of positive news stories and lifted White House spirits. Fox News contributor and former Clinton pollster Doug Schoen even writes about the high-fiving in the White House.
But other numbers show a much weaker job market and economy; the average unemployment duration remains near its all-time high, hiring is stuck near record lows, and there are almost 3 million workers in part-time rather than full-time jobs. Further, GDP grew just 1.7% last year and few new companies are being started.
So which scenario is right?
First, let us set one thing straight. The apparent contradiction between a falling unemployment rate and other indicators isnt because the Obama administration manipulates numbers to get [the] unemployment headline under 9% as Rush Limbaugh claims. The current "recovery" is so unusual that the normal rules for relating the unemployment rate to other labor market indicators dont hold; indeed those rules can be quite misleading.
Take initial unemployment insurance claims. . . .
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Hello Newbie! Welcome to FreeRepublic!
“The recent sudden drops in both initial unemployment insurance claims and unemployment rates have generated a slew of positive news stories and lifted White House spirits. Fox News contributor and former Clinton pollster Doug Schoen even writes about the high-fiving in the White House.
Look at the Leading Economic Index.Leading indicators are indicators that usually change before the economy as a whole changes.They are able to predict the economy six to nine months.
Welcome to FreeRepublic newbie
“Look at the Leading Economic Index.Leading indicators are indicators that usually change before the economy as a whole changes.They are able to predict the economy six to nine months.”
I could hit you in the head but then mulder would have me killed.
Here is a beginners guide to Economic Indicators
So, like the Global Warming scam, B(l)S doesn't cook the books; but "adjusts" the numbers by a secret amount; using a secret formula; and in such a way that 'recovery' is favored (and at the other end, drops are 'smoothed' & hidden), using cherry picked picked data + "secret sauce".
Got it: Rush is wrong, even though he's really right.
“Saint Michael the Archangel, defend us in battle; Be our protection against the wickedness and snares of the devil.
May God rebuke him, we humbly pray: and do thou, O Prince of the heavenly host,
by the power of God, thrust into hell Satan and all the evil spirits who prowl
about the world seeking the ruin of souls. Amen”
As I remember my history correctly, the patron saint of the Knights Templar was Saint Michael.If I am also correct, during the end times St Michael will be leading God’s warriors into battle and defeat Satan.Saint Michael is an archangel and his name means He who is like God.
Pope John Paul II who encouraged the Catholic faithful to continue to pray to Saint Michael, saying: “I ask everyone not to forget it and to recite it to obtain help in the battle against forces of darkness
Truth, honesty, all those deadly important skills..
Hmmmm. Or could it be that they Baraqs just removed 1.2 million voters, I mean workers?
Pope John Paul II who encouraged the Catholic faithful to continue to pray to Saint Michael, saying: I ask everyone not to forget it and to recite it to obtain help in the battle against forces of darkness
I know you are correct. I also believe with you.
His response was that if the best IPO the American economy can produce is essentially an "internet time waster" then we're in trouble.
The methods have been in place for a long while. The discouraged worker was added in the early 90’s and accounts for most of the disparity between the reported unemployment rate and the actual rate.
The actual rated is published btw but its not the most reported and much lower headline rate.
Whether the data inputted is accurate is another question but the formulas have been around.
I do not know why Limbaugh says that.
I do know that the BLS household survey (Current Population Survey) is used to develop the unemployment rate.
The article goes on to say
The very weak recovery means the official unemployment rate is an unreliable barometer of the labor market. People are only counted as unemployed if they have been actively looking for work in the past four weeks. It is good news when the number of unemployed falls due to more hires. It is not so good if the number falls due to people giving up looking for work.
That's true because actual hires come from the establishment survey of 400,000 businesses.
I say that there are no questions on the household survey that ask "Are you a marginally attached worker?" Instead the computer determines that by the answers to the survey of 60,000 households -- and I believe that.. how the computer interprets can be adjusted. THUS I believe that the numbers can be and in fact are manipulated by all administrations since this "feature" was added, I think in the first Clinton term.
BTW, some argue that the establishment survey does not catch some workers such as "start up" businesses but the household does catch those workers. OK -- that was a huge debate during the Bush recovery -- but I believe that the household counts someone as working even though there is no income such as someone claiming to be a contractor but who does not have a contract or someone working in a family-owned business but not being paid.
That's more shenanigans.. possibly. The Current Population Survey determined somehow that there were far more people in the over-55 category than heretofore thought. So an adjustment was made for the beginning of 2012. Some one-million-plus were moved to the over-55 category and since the over-55 category has a larger "not in the labor force" rate many of those one-million-plus were dropped from the "looking for work" category thus lowering the unemployment rate.
BTW, that 2012 adjustment was the largest ever.. the second largest was in election year 2000 also a time when the incumbent administration was Democrat and the economy was in sharp decline.
During the Clinton administration, the survey excluded inner cities populations, thereby lowering the unemployment counts. At the end of his term, Clinton then had inner city populations thrown back in, which made Bush look bad.
It wouldn’t surprise me if Obama were doing the same thing.
God bless you,