UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (20) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Author: AjaxofTelamon Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: of 1961368  
Subject: Real Unemployment Rate is 7.3 Percent Date: 3/9/2004 12:54 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 35
Since March 2001 the percentage of the population that is officially in the workforce has plunged from 67.1 percent to 65.9 percent. According to Jared Bernstein, an economist with the Economic Policy Institute, that means the real Bush unemployment rate is 7.3 percent. [SNIP]

The Bush tax cuts, which have most benefited the high earners, the top one percent, have done little to stimulate job growth, and at an enormous cost to the Treasury.

"You would think that after spending almost $3 trillion, you'd get more than 21,000 jobs," Rep. Rahm Emmanuel (D-Ill.) told The New York Times. "The president has not only a fiscal deficit, but a jobs deficit and a credibility deficit," Emmanuel adds.


More from: http://www.niagarafallsreporter.com/gallagher155.html



-=Ajax=-
Print the post Back To Top
Author: MSHH Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 458032 of 1961368
Subject: Re: Real Unemployment Rate is 7.3 Percent Date: 3/9/2004 5:21 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Are you including the Mexican unemploymed in that calculation?

Because Bush wants to include Mexican labor in the American workforce. Instead of standing up to Vincente Fox and telling him to take some tough decisions to improve the lot of his own people instead of exporting his unemployment problem to the US.

So the unemployment rate is almost surely higher than 7.3% if one includes the Mexican unemployed.

George Bush II--spineless flip-flopper of the first order.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: tgrmn Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 458078 of 1961368
Subject: Re: Real Unemployment Rate is 7.3 Percent Date: 3/9/2004 9:46 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 6
The choices are clear, Socialistic responses favored by the co-dependent leftists and their echoing minions, or free enterprise styled economies.

Leftist(EU) unemployment rates and their way: 10%+

American free enterprise and freedoms: 5.7%

It clearly would be absurd to go backwards following the leftist chants and handwringing...

Print the post Back To Top
Author: MasonMcDan Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 458245 of 1961368
Subject: Re: Real Unemployment Rate is 7.3 Percent Date: 3/9/2004 1:18 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
The choices are clear, Socialistic responses favored by the co-dependent leftists and their echoing minions, or free enterprise styled economies.

Leftist(EU) unemployment rates and their way: 10%+

American free enterprise and freedoms: 5.7%

It clearly would be absurd to go backwards following the leftist chants and handwringing...


Actually, if you include discouraged workers and other marginally attached workers, and workers who took part-time jobs while looking for full-time work, the rate is about 9.3%.

http://fireboards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=20452529

Print the post Back To Top
Author: MrCynic Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 458282 of 1961368
Subject: Re: Real Unemployment Rate is 7.3 Percent Date: 3/9/2004 2:30 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Here we go again with attempts to redefine the term "unemployment."

Trends are based on the standard definition, and attempts to change the definition are bogus and deeply dishonest.

The biggest lie of all, of course, is the idea that the President is responsible for or has any real control over the employment rate.

That lie has become so common that no one notices it anymore.





Print the post Back To Top
Author: ghdude Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 458284 of 1961368
Subject: Re: Real Unemployment Rate is 7.3 Percent Date: 3/9/2004 2:39 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Since March 2001 the percentage of the population that is officially in the workforce has plunged from 67.1 percent to 65.9 percent. According to Jared Bernstein, an economist with the Economic Policy Institute, that means the real Bush unemployment rate is 7.3 percent.

I couldn't find this information in the article but does his calculation take into account the self-employed? The reason I bring this up is that baby boomers, which make up an enormous percentage of the work force, have been shifting more and more into consulting and may or may not be actually documented on the payroll of the companies they work for. I believe the question is asked in the surveys but in the "payroll" numbers, the self-employed don't show up.

Derek

Print the post Back To Top
Author: MasonMcDan Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 458300 of 1961368
Subject: Re: Real Unemployment Rate is 7.3 Percent Date: 3/9/2004 3:02 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 3
Here we go again with attempts to redefine the term "unemployment."

Trends are based on the standard definition, and attempts to change the definition are bogus and deeply dishonest.


What would you call people who have gotten so discouraged that they quit looking for work after a year, or those still looking, but have fallen off of the unemployment rolls? Irrelevant? Fully employed? Consultants?

I would say that *not* counting them is deeply dishonest. Otherwise, even if you have 1% of the population employed, but wait a certain number of weeks when unemployment benefits run out and *ta da!* 0% unemployment!

Print the post Back To Top
Author: EricTaller Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 458302 of 1961368
Subject: Re: Real Unemployment Rate is 7.3 Percent Date: 3/9/2004 3:03 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"What would you call people who have gotten so discouraged that they quit looking for work after a year..."

You would have to call some of them self-employed, which is a fact that you and Mishedlo do not want to hear.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: warrl Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 458331 of 1961368
Subject: Re: Real Unemployment Rate is 7.3 Percent Date: 3/9/2004 3:34 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
Since March 2001 the percentage of the population that is officially in the workforce has plunged from 67.1 percent to 65.9 percent.

And, oddly, the percentage of the population who are officially working has increased.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: Dopeman1 Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 458349 of 1961368
Subject: Re: Real Unemployment Rate is 7.3 Percent Date: 3/9/2004 4:08 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
What would you call people who have gotten so discouraged that they quit looking for work after a year, or those still looking, but have fallen off of the unemployment rolls?

If they're smart, I'd call them "students".



Print the post Back To Top
Author: TheNajdorfDefens Big funky green star, 20000 posts Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 458372 of 1961368
Subject: Re: Real Unemployment Rate is 7.3 Percent Date: 3/9/2004 4:48 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 10
No, it's still 5.6%.

Unemployment doesn't get to be revised upwards because more people retire, go back to school, or choose to stay home and have kids. You don't get to make up the numbers as you go along.

Secondly, between November 2001 through Jan 2004, Payrolls were up over 2.2 million jobs, according to the Fed's Household survey, available on their website.

2.2 million MORE jobs.

The Bush tax cuts, which have most benefited the high earners

Aha, jealously, and class warfare again raise their ugly head.

Factually speaking, the LOW-income tax payers got the biggest reduction in taxes, hundreds of thousands of them had their income taxes reduced 100%! To make an apples-to-apples comparison, you have to use percentages. Obviously someone who pays $1mm in taxes and gets a 5% cut saves more than someone who pays $100 in taxes.

best,

Naj

Print the post Back To Top
Author: MasonMcDan Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 458431 of 1961368
Subject: Re: Real Unemployment Rate is 7.3 Percent Date: 3/9/2004 7:24 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
No, it's still 5.6%.

Unemployment doesn't get to be revised upwards because more people retire, go back to school, or choose to stay home and have kids. You don't get to make up the numbers as you go along.


For comparative purposes, I might see your point. But the numbers aren't so far from each other because of "retirement" "going back to school" or "staying home and having kids"; there are actual checkboxes for my categories on the BLS site. How 'bout for yours? For the particular phenomenon of so many people falling off the rolls, which statistic is the more honest measure? If the "official" number doesn't reflect reality, why cling to it? The comparative value is almost meaningless without a broader understanding of what's actually happening.

Secondly, between November 2001 through Jan 2004, Payrolls were up over 2.2 million jobs, according to the Fed's Household survey, available on their website.

2.2 million MORE jobs.


And the labor pool increased by 2.6 million in that same period. So 400,000 eligible people *didn't* get a job. You say I can't "re-define" unemployment. I say you can't pluck numbers out of context.

The repubs are just playing with statistics. Look at the *real* numbers.

http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/surveymost?ln

Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: tgrmn Big funky green star, 20000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 458448 of 1961368
Subject: Re: Real Unemployment Rate is 7.3 Percent Date: 3/9/2004 8:39 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
I'd like to help these 'discouraged' job seekers.

If anyone knows of any in the DFW area, I can help them find continual day labor that may well lead to permanent employment.

If ANYONE in the DFW area is desparate for a job, I'll hook 'em up within 24 hours...

Print the post Back To Top
Author: MasonMcDan Big gold star, 5000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 458460 of 1961368
Subject: Re: Real Unemployment Rate is 7.3 Percent Date: 3/9/2004 9:19 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
If anyone knows of any in the DFW area, I can help them find continual day labor that may well lead to permanent employment.

Dang. Texas always gets the good jobs.

Print the post Back To Top
Author: MSHH Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 458509 of 1961368
Subject: Re: Real Unemployment Rate is 7.3 Percent Date: 3/10/2004 1:03 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
>Secondly, between November 2001 through Jan 2004, Payrolls were up over 
2.2 million jobs, according to the Fed's Household survey, available on their website.
2.2 million MORE jobs.

Naj,

Come on. Everybody knows the unemployment number is a joke. Straight from the 
BLS blurb on what counts as an "employed" person in the household survey.

But what about the two following cases? George Lewis is 16 years old, and he has 
no job from which he receives any pay or profit. However, George does help with the 
regular chores around his father's farm about 20 hours each week. 

Lisa Fox spends most of her time taking care of her home and children, but, 
all day Friday and Saturday, she helps in her husband's computer software store. 

Under the Government's definition of employment, 
both George and Lisa are considered employed. They fall into a group called 
"unpaid family workers," which includes any person who worked 
15 hours or more in a week without pay in a family-operated enterprise. 
Such persons contribute significantly to our productive effort and are an important 
part of our labor supply, particularly in 
agriculture and retail trade. However, unpaid family workers 
who work fewer than 15 hours per week are counted as "not in the labor force." 
http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm

So you can work part-time--and not even get paid--and 
the Bushies count you as "employed" in the household survey. It's a joke.

But hey--this is the Bush government that mused whether making 
burgers at McDonalds makes you a manufacturing employee. McManufacturing.

And 6% has not always been considered full employment. 
Take a look at the numbers back the 1950s and 1960s--
the unemployment was almost always between 3-5%.

Only in the last 20 wonderful supply-sider years that apologists 
claim 6% is full employment. The Bushite supply-siders are a joke. A bad joke.


US national unemployment rate:

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Annual 
1950 6.5 6.4 6.3 5.8 5.5 5.4 5.0 4.5 4.4 4.2 4.2 4.3   
1951 3.7 3.4 3.4 3.1 3.0 3.2 3.1 3.1 3.3 3.5 3.5 3.1   
1952 3.2 3.1 2.9 2.9 3.0 3.0 3.2 3.4 3.1 3.0 2.8 2.7   
1953 2.9 2.6 2.6 2.7 2.5 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.9 3.1 3.5 4.5   
1954 4.9 5.2 5.7 5.9 5.9 5.6 5.8 6.0 6.1 5.7 5.3 5.0   
1955 4.9 4.7 4.6 4.7 4.3 4.2 4.0 4.2 4.1 4.3 4.2 4.2   
1956 4.0 3.9 4.2 4.0 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.1 3.9 3.9 4.3 4.2   
1957 4.2 3.9 3.7 3.9 4.1 4.3 4.2 4.1 4.4 4.5 5.1 5.2   
1958 5.8 6.4 6.7 7.4 7.4 7.3 7.5 7.4 7.1 6.7 6.2 6.2   
1959 6.0 5.9 5.6 5.2 5.1 5.0 5.1 5.2 5.5 5.7 5.8 5.3   
1960 5.2 4.8 5.4 5.2 5.1 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.5 6.1 6.1 6.6   
1961 6.6 6.9 6.9 7.0 7.1 6.9 7.0 6.6 6.7 6.5 6.1 6.0   
1962 5.8 5.5 5.6 5.6 5.5 5.5 5.4 5.7 5.6 5.4 5.7 5.5   
1963 5.7 5.9 5.7 5.7 5.9 5.6 5.6 5.4 5.5 5.5 5.7 5.5   
1964 5.6 5.4 5.4 5.3 5.1 5.2 4.9 5.0 5.1 5.1 4.8 5.0   
1965 4.9 5.1 4.7 4.8 4.6 4.6 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.2 4.1 4.0   
1966 4.0 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.9 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.7 3.7 3.6 3.8   
1967 3.9 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.9 3.8 3.8 3.8 4.0 3.9 3.8   
1968 3.7 3.8 3.7 3.5 3.5 3.7 3.7 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4   
1969 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.7 3.7 3.5 3.5   




Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: TheNajdorfDefens Big funky green star, 20000 posts Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 458597 of 1961368
Subject: Re: Real Unemployment Rate is 7.3 Percent Date: 3/10/2004 9:36 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
Take a look at the numbers back the 1950s and 1960s

If you can't figure out that the rate dropped due to the Korean and Vietnam War, you're even much worse at evaluating economic data than I previously thought.

Drink coffee, then post. Thanks.

Naj

Print the post Back To Top
Author: TheNajdorfDefens Big funky green star, 20000 posts Feste Award Nominee! Old School Fool CAPS All Star Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 458600 of 1961368
Subject: Re: Real Unemployment Rate is 7.3 Percent Date: 3/10/2004 9:40 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 2
But the numbers aren't so far from each other because of "retirement" "going back to school" or "staying home and having kids";

Yes, they are.

there are actual checkboxes for my categories on the BLS site. How 'bout for yours?

Yep, I'll let Gene Epstein handle this:

'Speaking of the unemployment rate, it ran 5.6% in both January and February, ...

Now some naysayers argue:

1. The recent decline in the unemployment is bogus because it was accompanied by a decline in employment. And when those laid-off folks come back in search of a job, the unemployment rate will jump.

... That argument sounds plausible, but it doesn't work that way. The employment estimate is subject to short-time swings that mean nothing; it's merely "data noise," as statisticians would say.

By contrast, the estimate of the unemployed is far more stable. So 97 times out of 100, the employment figure swings back again, and the unemployment rate is unaffected.

And anyway, the decline from 6.2% to 5.6% cited above was accompanied by an increase in employment.

2. The civilian labor force as a share of the population -- the "labor force participation rate" -- is unusually low at this point in the business cycle....

True. The overall rate of labor force participation (LFPR) is low. But the problem is all concentrated in the 16-to-24 age group -- school-age folks who are least committed to the labor force. The LFPR for those 25-and-up is doing quite nicely.'
barrons.com

Nice try, though. Better luck next month coming up with spurious excuses and explanations.

Unlike yours, all of my/the Fed's data is in context. Fewer schoolkids are looking for work, more are staying in or going back to school. I fail to see this as the disaster you do.

Naj



Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
Author: Umm Big gold star, 5000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 458665 of 1961368
Subject: Re: Real Unemployment Rate is 7.3 Percent Date: 3/10/2004 11:22 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
"Unemployment doesn't get to be revised upwards because more people retire, go back to school, or choose to stay home and have kids."

You forgot to add "or stop looking because they cannot find a job".

Print the post Back To Top
Author: MSHH Big funky green star, 20000 posts Top Recommended Fools Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 458774 of 1961368
Subject: Re: Real Unemployment Rate is 7.3 Percent Date: 3/10/2004 2:09 PM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 0
If you can't figure out that the rate dropped due to the Korean and Vietnam War, you're even much worse at evaluating economic data than I previously thought</io>

So says Naj. Let's see:

<-----Korean War ends right about here
1954 4.9 5.2 5.7 5.9 5.9 5.6 5.8 6.0 6.1 5.7 5.3 5.0   
1955 4.9 4.7 4.6 4.7 4.3 4.2 4.0 4.2 4.1 4.3 4.2 4.2   
1956 4.0 3.9 4.2 4.0 4.3 4.3 4.4 4.1 3.9 3.9 4.3 4.2   
1957 4.2 3.9 3.7 3.9 4.1 4.3 4.2 4.1 4.4 4.5 5.1 5.2 



<-----Vietnam War starts right about here.  

What would we do without Naj's analysis and Bushite supply-sider psuedo-economists?


Print the post Back To Top
Author: PK227 Big red star, 1000 posts Old School Fool Add to my Favorite Fools Ignore this person (you won't see their posts anymore) Number: 459104 of 1961368
Subject: Re: Real Unemployment Rate is 7.3 Percent Date: 3/11/2004 1:02 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Recommendations: 1
It clearly would be absurd to go backwards following the leftist chants and handwringing...

----------------


Don't forget featherbedding...and the minimum wage chant. Why not $50 an hour? Why not $100?

Unemployment must be at least 20% if we count every unskilled person who refuses to take a job for $8.00 an hour and perfers to live off mom and dad. Heaven forbid they might learn something from that entry level job and climb the ladder. They want it NOW. College graduates expect $50,000 salaries. What in the world they think they can contribute to any organization that is worth $50,000 is not relevant. They want it NOW. I want your lifestyle, mom and dad, NOW and I don't want to pay any dues. If you won't give it to me, I'll stay unemployed, pout and live off you or somebody else.

We shared apartments in NYC. Nobody could afford them even in the glorious 60's. You started at the bottom and you learned and you worked hard and you were promoted. (and it was fun) Not good enough for this bunch. And the liberals feed into this attitude. These corporate executives are EVIL. They never worked for their obscene salaries. They were lucky!! You, too, could have it all if they would just open their wallets. No work involved. Stay home and take care of your children, your parents and your friends, neighbors, pets, whatever. If you get a few free minutes, show up for work and NEVER deviate from your job description. Managers are horrible people. They didn't start from the bottom and do a lot of saving and scraping and hard work. They are all idiots and you deserve their salaries and their perks. And the liberals who seem to live in influential jobs like the Universities (guaranteed job security...no accountability...generous salaries, benefits and retirement...TA's to do their teaching), or government jobs at the federal, state or local levels (guaranteed job security, no accountability, generous salaries, benefits and retirement)...just keep, apparently successfully picking away at the core strength of this nation. If you are honest, work hard, get a decent education, and play by the rules, you will be successful. The democrats, unfortunately, have a personal stake in not allowing that to happen. You need to be dependent, angry, resentful, and demanding of anybody who is more successful than you are. It's just not fair. This really needs to stop.


Post New | Post Reply | Reply Later | Create Poll . Report this Post | Recommend it!
Print the post Back To Top
UnThreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (20) | Ignore Thread Prev Thread | Next Thread
Advertisement