Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › What are the real unemployment numbers?
- This topic has 200 replies, 22 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 3 months ago by
Werewolf.
-
AuthorPosts
-
December 5, 2008 at 3:41 PM #312501December 5, 2008 at 3:51 PM #312033
DWCAP
Participantesmith brings up some good points. Both of my parents fall into the “under 65 and employable” catagory, yet neither works anymore. They left today to go run a marathon, so they arnt in the unemployable catagory yet they inflate your stats as they dont have jobs. They saved and invested and worked hard and now are enjoying a long retiremnet for it. They should not be counted as “unemployed”.
It seems you are looking to get a handel on the true employment issues our economy is facing. Use the “underemployment” catagory, I think it rose to the middle teens today. It includes all the people who want a job, have a part time job but want a full time one, and stopped activly looking out of discouragment. It is the highest it has ever been since they started tracking it in 1994.
December 5, 2008 at 3:51 PM #312390Participantesmith brings up some good points. Both of my parents fall into the “under 65 and employable” catagory, yet neither works anymore. They left today to go run a marathon, so they arnt in the unemployable catagory yet they inflate your stats as they dont have jobs. They saved and invested and worked hard and now are enjoying a long retiremnet for it. They should not be counted as “unemployed”.
It seems you are looking to get a handel on the true employment issues our economy is facing. Use the “underemployment” catagory, I think it rose to the middle teens today. It includes all the people who want a job, have a part time job but want a full time one, and stopped activly looking out of discouragment. It is the highest it has ever been since they started tracking it in 1994.
December 5, 2008 at 3:51 PM #312422Participantesmith brings up some good points. Both of my parents fall into the “under 65 and employable” catagory, yet neither works anymore. They left today to go run a marathon, so they arnt in the unemployable catagory yet they inflate your stats as they dont have jobs. They saved and invested and worked hard and now are enjoying a long retiremnet for it. They should not be counted as “unemployed”.
It seems you are looking to get a handel on the true employment issues our economy is facing. Use the “underemployment” catagory, I think it rose to the middle teens today. It includes all the people who want a job, have a part time job but want a full time one, and stopped activly looking out of discouragment. It is the highest it has ever been since they started tracking it in 1994.
December 5, 2008 at 3:51 PM #312444Participantesmith brings up some good points. Both of my parents fall into the “under 65 and employable” catagory, yet neither works anymore. They left today to go run a marathon, so they arnt in the unemployable catagory yet they inflate your stats as they dont have jobs. They saved and invested and worked hard and now are enjoying a long retiremnet for it. They should not be counted as “unemployed”.
It seems you are looking to get a handel on the true employment issues our economy is facing. Use the “underemployment” catagory, I think it rose to the middle teens today. It includes all the people who want a job, have a part time job but want a full time one, and stopped activly looking out of discouragment. It is the highest it has ever been since they started tracking it in 1994.
December 5, 2008 at 3:51 PM #312511Participantesmith brings up some good points. Both of my parents fall into the “under 65 and employable” catagory, yet neither works anymore. They left today to go run a marathon, so they arnt in the unemployable catagory yet they inflate your stats as they dont have jobs. They saved and invested and worked hard and now are enjoying a long retiremnet for it. They should not be counted as “unemployed”.
It seems you are looking to get a handel on the true employment issues our economy is facing. Use the “underemployment” catagory, I think it rose to the middle teens today. It includes all the people who want a job, have a part time job but want a full time one, and stopped activly looking out of discouragment. It is the highest it has ever been since they started tracking it in 1994.
December 5, 2008 at 4:35 PM #312068MadeInTaiwan
Participant[quote=stockstradr]…
Where’s MY handout! I need to figure out a way to get my family on the gravy train![/quote]
Are you serious? Most people on food stamp are on it temporarily, and only because they do need it. I suppose they should stop eating. Besides, you wouldn’t want the food allotment required by food stamps anyways. You do realize the welfare queen driving a Cadi was made up by Reagan…
December 5, 2008 at 4:35 PM #312425Participant[quote=stockstradr]…
Where’s MY handout! I need to figure out a way to get my family on the gravy train![/quote]
Are you serious? Most people on food stamp are on it temporarily, and only because they do need it. I suppose they should stop eating. Besides, you wouldn’t want the food allotment required by food stamps anyways. You do realize the welfare queen driving a Cadi was made up by Reagan…
December 5, 2008 at 4:35 PM #312457Participant[quote=stockstradr]…
Where’s MY handout! I need to figure out a way to get my family on the gravy train![/quote]
Are you serious? Most people on food stamp are on it temporarily, and only because they do need it. I suppose they should stop eating. Besides, you wouldn’t want the food allotment required by food stamps anyways. You do realize the welfare queen driving a Cadi was made up by Reagan…
December 5, 2008 at 4:35 PM #312479Participant[quote=stockstradr]…
Where’s MY handout! I need to figure out a way to get my family on the gravy train![/quote]
Are you serious? Most people on food stamp are on it temporarily, and only because they do need it. I suppose they should stop eating. Besides, you wouldn’t want the food allotment required by food stamps anyways. You do realize the welfare queen driving a Cadi was made up by Reagan…
December 5, 2008 at 4:35 PM #312546Participant[quote=stockstradr]…
Where’s MY handout! I need to figure out a way to get my family on the gravy train![/quote]
Are you serious? Most people on food stamp are on it temporarily, and only because they do need it. I suppose they should stop eating. Besides, you wouldn’t want the food allotment required by food stamps anyways. You do realize the welfare queen driving a Cadi was made up by Reagan…
December 5, 2008 at 5:57 PM #312088socrattt
ParticipantAm I losing my marbles or is DWCAP and Esmith only taking numbers away from the equation? Esmith you seem to be arguing in favor of what I am saying. If you want to tell me that we should drop the employable age to 14 then that would essentially add numbers to the bottom line therefore decreasing the unemployment rates I am stating. When we remove a stay at home mom or an early retiree from the employable group we have an unemployment percentage that would be even higher.
My point is simply that US numbers are completely out of whack creating a false sense of security in this country. I truly believe that unemployment is already over 11% nationally, but that this government is doing everything in their power to have us think otherwise. It is simple math. Not many think outside the box, they just watch the news.
December 5, 2008 at 5:57 PM #312445ParticipantAm I losing my marbles or is DWCAP and Esmith only taking numbers away from the equation? Esmith you seem to be arguing in favor of what I am saying. If you want to tell me that we should drop the employable age to 14 then that would essentially add numbers to the bottom line therefore decreasing the unemployment rates I am stating. When we remove a stay at home mom or an early retiree from the employable group we have an unemployment percentage that would be even higher.
My point is simply that US numbers are completely out of whack creating a false sense of security in this country. I truly believe that unemployment is already over 11% nationally, but that this government is doing everything in their power to have us think otherwise. It is simple math. Not many think outside the box, they just watch the news.
December 5, 2008 at 5:57 PM #312477ParticipantAm I losing my marbles or is DWCAP and Esmith only taking numbers away from the equation? Esmith you seem to be arguing in favor of what I am saying. If you want to tell me that we should drop the employable age to 14 then that would essentially add numbers to the bottom line therefore decreasing the unemployment rates I am stating. When we remove a stay at home mom or an early retiree from the employable group we have an unemployment percentage that would be even higher.
My point is simply that US numbers are completely out of whack creating a false sense of security in this country. I truly believe that unemployment is already over 11% nationally, but that this government is doing everything in their power to have us think otherwise. It is simple math. Not many think outside the box, they just watch the news.
December 5, 2008 at 5:57 PM #312499ParticipantAm I losing my marbles or is DWCAP and Esmith only taking numbers away from the equation? Esmith you seem to be arguing in favor of what I am saying. If you want to tell me that we should drop the employable age to 14 then that would essentially add numbers to the bottom line therefore decreasing the unemployment rates I am stating. When we remove a stay at home mom or an early retiree from the employable group we have an unemployment percentage that would be even higher.
My point is simply that US numbers are completely out of whack creating a false sense of security in this country. I truly believe that unemployment is already over 11% nationally, but that this government is doing everything in their power to have us think otherwise. It is simple math. Not many think outside the box, they just watch the news.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.