Reply With Quote
Although the w ay they measure actual not government new jobs are sketchy. that would be the number(s)
I would focus on, Not so much unemployment.
what's that number?
Although the w ay they measure actual not government new jobs are sketchy. that would be the number(s)
I would focus on, Not so much unemployment.
what number?
point of clarification, times two
Ever heard of "seasonally adjusted"?
The Ranks of the Underemployed Continue to Grow
In September, the number of underemployed workers rose for the third consecutive month
Almost 9.3 million Americans are considered underemployed, defined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics as working part-time for economic reasons, such as unfavorable business conditions or seasonal declines in demand. That's up from just over 8 million in July, but down from a peak of about 9.5 million in September 2010. In addition, about 2.5 million individuals are considered "marginally attached to the labor force," meaning they were not in the labor force, wanted and were available for work, and looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. (They are not counted as unemployed because they had not looked for a job in the past four weeks prior to the survey.)
http://money.usnews.com/money/career...ntinue-to-grow
U.S. Underemployment at 18.6% in August
Underemployment, as measured by Gallup, was 18.6% in August, up from 18.4% at the end of July. Underemployment peaked at 20.4% in April and has yet to break below 18.3% this year
http://www.gallup.com/poll/142835/un...nt-august.aspx
Youth Underemployment: An Overlooked Epidemic
a continuously weak economy youth unemployment has now reached 18.1% on a record low 59.5% participation rate. Even these numbers can be considered conservative as many recent graduates have kicked the can of the job market through either graduate school or do not apply for unemployment because they do not have a previous job to make them eligible for benefits. This issue has flown under the radar, but long-term high youth unemployment has significant negative consequences for the macroeconomy
http://seekingalpha.com/article/2991...ooked-epidemic
oh noes younger peeps need to better qualify themselves in preparation for the real world. this is doomed to lead towards ty work output and inhibited macro growth.
doomed. youre all doomed!
Last edited by The Reckoning; 12-05-2011 at 09:03 AM.
Ever heard of manipulation? Take it all with a grain of salt..
@boutons: thanks for posting the underemployment figures others said were notable, but did not note
gfy
good morning, sir
wet and cold. the weather's wonderful!
(in central and south central Texas)
been here long?
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...s-economy.htmlA decline in unemployment and pickup in manufacturing point to accelerating U.S. growth. Some economists say the numbers may not be as good as they look.
One reason: the severity of the economy’s plunge in late 2008 and early 2009 after Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. collapsed threw a wrench into models used to smooth the data for seasonal changes, according to analysts at Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Nomura Securities International Inc.
The main reason that the unemployment number dropped was that they are counting fewer people as "looking for work". It's all smoke and mirrors.
yep. I thought the recession throwing off seasonal smoothing models was an interesting footnote.
I was reading the other day that if they used the same number of people looking for work as they did in 2009 then the unemployment number would be 11%.
I'll look for the link.
Didn't find the link yet but here is a good article with some interesting graphs...
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/...or-jobs/69046/
The third chart of discouraged workers seems to bear out that 11% claim...
I think there's a shadow stats chart somewhere to the same effect upstream.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
