Wow, 5.1 Unemployment

Mottleydude said:
That's the problem with you partisans like you, little dick and Desh, your completely incapable of objectivity.

It's well known that the Bush administrations DOL stubornly refuses to count those who have dropped out of the labor force completely due to lack of opportunity and frustration. The actual unemployment figure is significantly higher than what DOL is admiting. More like 8%.....so who needs an economic course?
Click to expand...

Apparently you do. You do not count those that are not looking for work. Anyone that has taken Econ 101 knows that. It is far more accurate a picture of the economy to look at the number of those looking for work that cannot find it.
 
Thare are those still looking for work that have not found it that are not included as unemployed in the stats.
 
uscitizen said:
Thare are those still looking for work that have not found it that are not included as unemployed in the stats.
Click to expand...

Do you even understand how the unemployment rate is done?

It is a survey. They randomly call people up and ask if they (and others in the household) are employed. If they are not employed, they ask them if they are looking. If they say yes, they are looking.... they are counted. If they say no, they are not looking... they are not counted.

There is no situation in which a person who is looking for work and cannot find it is not counted if they are a part of the survey.

This does not mean that the 5.1% is without statistical margins of error. So in that sense you could be correct in that it could be 5.2% in reality vs. the 5.1%.... but that is only if one of the two extremes is coincidentally occurring right now.
 
US.... not sure if this is where you are confused on the issue, but it is common for some to believe that the unemployment numbers are tied to unemployment checks from the government or somehow tied to how often a person contacts an employment/unemployment agency.... both are wrong. It is simply a survey.
 
so the unemployment rate is just a poll ? and we know how accurate those are.


I wonder who selects what areas are called for the survey ?

I have never been called in all my life for it, have you ?
 
uscitizen said:
so the unemployment rate is just a poll ? and we know how accurate those are.


I wonder who selects what areas are called for the survey ?

I have never been called in all my life for it, have you ?
Click to expand...

No. And I have never been called for the spinsters poll either! And being that I am an unemployed spinster, we can safely assume that both statistics are incorrect!
 
uscitizen said:
so the unemployment rate is just a poll ? and we know how accurate those are.


I wonder who selects what areas are called for the survey ?

I have never been called in all my life for it, have you ?
Click to expand...

Yes, it is just a survey. Always has been. Like I said, because it is a survey it does have a margin of error. It is used as a guage of the economy. It has never been used to predict an exact result.

The selection is purely random. As it has always been.

The vast majority of people will never be selected for the survey. When you figure that there are about 830 surveys done in the average persons life, it stands to reason that the odds are against you being selected.

(and no, I have never been selected)
 
these tools will say how great the same number is once Obama is in control.
it's still fun to embarrass them along the way though.
 
yeah like the random jury selection in Hillsboro county FL. I got called 3 years in a row in the same month. What are the odds of that ? And by law it is a random selection.
And I had gotten to noticing some of the same people there with me as last year.
I brought it up to them and was never called again.
 
Onceler said:
"Ah but the catcher is it's all Bush's fault, even though the economy was fine until the Dims took over the Congress."

Can you describe for us, in as much detail as you can, exactly what Bush's economic policy has been?
Click to expand...

It's just been so awful!!! He took from the poor and gave to the rich. Then he went back to the White House and dined on brown skinned babies with Dick Cheney and Condoleza Rice. Then the three of them had an orgy in the oval office and Dick got stains on Condi's dress and George's collar.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top