What are the real unemployment numbers?

[socrattt]

Am 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.

[EconProf]

Here are some basic facts about how the unemployment rate is calculated.
The labor force consists of all people working (including self-employed), plus unemployed.
“Unemployed” means out of work AND actively seeking work.
Each month canvasers spread out and knock on 50,000 American doors and ask a bunch of questions. They chose a cross-section of cities and neighborhoods, and return a few times if no one answers.
Among the many questions are buried the following:
How many in this houshold?
Who is working? (defined as working as little as one day per week, last I checked)
Who is not working but wants to?
Is that person actively seeking work…i.e. making applications, asking friends about leads, checking want ads & following through, etc., etc. If so, bingo, they are classified as unemployed.
The current work force is about 153 million, of which about ten and one-quarter million are unemployed. 6.7%
Given these definitions, many people are not working by choice–stay-at-home Moms (& Dads), full time students, institutionalized, retired, etc.
A couple more definitions:
Underemployed generally means those working way under their potential, such as part-timers who would rather work full time. Also includes those working way below what their education and experience would suggest, such as Political Science majors flipping hamburgers (though I would
suggest they have maxed out).
Discouraged Workers is a category of people who have supposedly given up looking for work, but would take it if offered. Given the series of questions posed above, one can imagine a lot of people in this category, but that is a subjective call.
Journalists and hand-wringers like to point to an army of underemployed and discouraged workers as the government’s way to understate our problems. The government does put out estimates of these categories, but rightly sticks to objective questions when doing these surveys so the statistics have meaning over time. They tweak their survey methods to try to keep them relevant and meaningful. They are constantly challenged by suspicious critics so have to prove their validity constantly. Overall, a pretty good system.

[EconProf]

Here are some basic facts about how the unemployment rate is calculated.
The labor force consists of all people working (including self-employed), plus unemployed.
“Unemployed” means out of work AND actively seeking work.
Each month canvasers spread out and knock on 50,000 American doors and ask a bunch of questions. They chose a cross-section of cities and neighborhoods, and return a few times if no one answers.
Among the many questions are buried the following:
How many in this houshold?
Who is working? (defined as working as little as one day per week, last I checked)
Who is not working but wants to?
Is that person actively seeking work…i.e. making applications, asking friends about leads, checking want ads & following through, etc., etc. If so, bingo, they are classified as unemployed.
The current work force is about 153 million, of which about ten and one-quarter million are unemployed. 6.7%
Given these definitions, many people are not working by choice–stay-at-home Moms (& Dads), full time students, institutionalized, retired, etc.
A couple more definitions:
Underemployed generally means those working way under their potential, such as part-timers who would rather work full time. Also includes those working way below what their education and experience would suggest, such as Political Science majors flipping hamburgers (though I would
suggest they have maxed out).
Discouraged Workers is a category of people who have supposedly given up looking for work, but would take it if offered. Given the series of questions posed above, one can imagine a lot of people in this category, but that is a subjective call.
Journalists and hand-wringers like to point to an army of underemployed and discouraged workers as the government’s way to understate our problems. The government does put out estimates of these categories, but rightly sticks to objective questions when doing these surveys so the statistics have meaning over time. They tweak their survey methods to try to keep them relevant and meaningful. They are constantly challenged by suspicious critics so have to prove their validity constantly. Overall, a pretty good system.

[EconProf]

Here are some basic facts about how the unemployment rate is calculated.
The labor force consists of all people working (including self-employed), plus unemployed.
“Unemployed” means out of work AND actively seeking work.
Each month canvasers spread out and knock on 50,000 American doors and ask a bunch of questions. They chose a cross-section of cities and neighborhoods, and return a few times if no one answers.
Among the many questions are buried the following:
How many in this houshold?
Who is working? (defined as working as little as one day per week, last I checked)
Who is not working but wants to?
Is that person actively seeking work…i.e. making applications, asking friends about leads, checking want ads & following through, etc., etc. If so, bingo, they are classified as unemployed.
The current work force is about 153 million, of which about ten and one-quarter million are unemployed. 6.7%
Given these definitions, many people are not working by choice–stay-at-home Moms (& Dads), full time students, institutionalized, retired, etc.
A couple more definitions:
Underemployed generally means those working way under their potential, such as part-timers who would rather work full time. Also includes those working way below what their education and experience would suggest, such as Political Science majors flipping hamburgers (though I would
suggest they have maxed out).
Discouraged Workers is a category of people who have supposedly given up looking for work, but would take it if offered. Given the series of questions posed above, one can imagine a lot of people in this category, but that is a subjective call.
Journalists and hand-wringers like to point to an army of underemployed and discouraged workers as the government’s way to understate our problems. The government does put out estimates of these categories, but rightly sticks to objective questions when doing these surveys so the statistics have meaning over time. They tweak their survey methods to try to keep them relevant and meaningful. They are constantly challenged by suspicious critics so have to prove their validity constantly. Overall, a pretty good system.

[EconProf]

Here are some basic facts about how the unemployment rate is calculated.
The labor force consists of all people working (including self-employed), plus unemployed.
“Unemployed” means out of work AND actively seeking work.
Each month canvasers spread out and knock on 50,000 American doors and ask a bunch of questions. They chose a cross-section of cities and neighborhoods, and return a few times if no one answers.
Among the many questions are buried the following:
How many in this houshold?
Who is working? (defined as working as little as one day per week, last I checked)
Who is not working but wants to?
Is that person actively seeking work…i.e. making applications, asking friends about leads, checking want ads & following through, etc., etc. If so, bingo, they are classified as unemployed.
The current work force is about 153 million, of which about ten and one-quarter million are unemployed. 6.7%
Given these definitions, many people are not working by choice–stay-at-home Moms (& Dads), full time students, institutionalized, retired, etc.
A couple more definitions:
Underemployed generally means those working way under their potential, such as part-timers who would rather work full time. Also includes those working way below what their education and experience would suggest, such as Political Science majors flipping hamburgers (though I would
suggest they have maxed out).
Discouraged Workers is a category of people who have supposedly given up looking for work, but would take it if offered. Given the series of questions posed above, one can imagine a lot of people in this category, but that is a subjective call.
Journalists and hand-wringers like to point to an army of underemployed and discouraged workers as the government’s way to understate our problems. The government does put out estimates of these categories, but rightly sticks to objective questions when doing these surveys so the statistics have meaning over time. They tweak their survey methods to try to keep them relevant and meaningful. They are constantly challenged by suspicious critics so have to prove their validity constantly. Overall, a pretty good system.

[EconProf]

Here are some basic facts about how the unemployment rate is calculated.
The labor force consists of all people working (including self-employed), plus unemployed.
“Unemployed” means out of work AND actively seeking work.
Each month canvasers spread out and knock on 50,000 American doors and ask a bunch of questions. They chose a cross-section of cities and neighborhoods, and return a few times if no one answers.
Among the many questions are buried the following:
How many in this houshold?
Who is working? (defined as working as little as one day per week, last I checked)
Who is not working but wants to?
Is that person actively seeking work…i.e. making applications, asking friends about leads, checking want ads & following through, etc., etc. If so, bingo, they are classified as unemployed.
The current work force is about 153 million, of which about ten and one-quarter million are unemployed. 6.7%
Given these definitions, many people are not working by choice–stay-at-home Moms (& Dads), full time students, institutionalized, retired, etc.
A couple more definitions:
Underemployed generally means those working way under their potential, such as part-timers who would rather work full time. Also includes those working way below what their education and experience would suggest, such as Political Science majors flipping hamburgers (though I would
suggest they have maxed out).
Discouraged Workers is a category of people who have supposedly given up looking for work, but would take it if offered. Given the series of questions posed above, one can imagine a lot of people in this category, but that is a subjective call.
Journalists and hand-wringers like to point to an army of underemployed and discouraged workers as the government’s way to understate our problems. The government does put out estimates of these categories, but rightly sticks to objective questions when doing these surveys so the statistics have meaning over time. They tweak their survey methods to try to keep them relevant and meaningful. They are constantly challenged by suspicious critics so have to prove their validity constantly. Overall, a pretty good system.

[socrattt]

[quote=EconProf]
The current work force is about 153 million, of which about ten and one-quarter million are unemployed. 6.7%
[/quote]

EconProf, thanks for all the info, much appreciated. Now lets talk numbers real quick. November’s report just came with 533,000 jobs lost and pushed the unemployment rate up two tenths of a percentage point. By your facts above that should have pushed the rate over one half of a percentage point. This leads me to believe that there is a fundamental flaw in this system.

I had no clue that door knocking was the how the unemployment was determined. Maybe the bus got stuck in Rancho Santa Fe this past year. All in all I just don’t buy it! There are millions more that are unemployed that the government fails to acknowledge. I think the numbers are clearly left lower to control any sort of panic that may have happened in the Great Depression.

[socrattt]

[quote=EconProf]
The current work force is about 153 million, of which about ten and one-quarter million are unemployed. 6.7%
[/quote]

EconProf, thanks for all the info, much appreciated. Now lets talk numbers real quick. November’s report just came with 533,000 jobs lost and pushed the unemployment rate up two tenths of a percentage point. By your facts above that should have pushed the rate over one half of a percentage point. This leads me to believe that there is a fundamental flaw in this system.

I had no clue that door knocking was the how the unemployment was determined. Maybe the bus got stuck in Rancho Santa Fe this past year. All in all I just don’t buy it! There are millions more that are unemployed that the government fails to acknowledge. I think the numbers are clearly left lower to control any sort of panic that may have happened in the Great Depression.

[socrattt]

[quote=EconProf]
The current work force is about 153 million, of which about ten and one-quarter million are unemployed. 6.7%
[/quote]

EconProf, thanks for all the info, much appreciated. Now lets talk numbers real quick. November’s report just came with 533,000 jobs lost and pushed the unemployment rate up two tenths of a percentage point. By your facts above that should have pushed the rate over one half of a percentage point. This leads me to believe that there is a fundamental flaw in this system.

I had no clue that door knocking was the how the unemployment was determined. Maybe the bus got stuck in Rancho Santa Fe this past year. All in all I just don’t buy it! There are millions more that are unemployed that the government fails to acknowledge. I think the numbers are clearly left lower to control any sort of panic that may have happened in the Great Depression.

[socrattt]

[quote=EconProf]
The current work force is about 153 million, of which about ten and one-quarter million are unemployed. 6.7%
[/quote]

EconProf, thanks for all the info, much appreciated. Now lets talk numbers real quick. November’s report just came with 533,000 jobs lost and pushed the unemployment rate up two tenths of a percentage point. By your facts above that should have pushed the rate over one half of a percentage point. This leads me to believe that there is a fundamental flaw in this system.

I had no clue that door knocking was the how the unemployment was determined. Maybe the bus got stuck in Rancho Santa Fe this past year. All in all I just don’t buy it! There are millions more that are unemployed that the government fails to acknowledge. I think the numbers are clearly left lower to control any sort of panic that may have happened in the Great Depression.

[socrattt]

[quote=EconProf]
The current work force is about 153 million, of which about ten and one-quarter million are unemployed. 6.7%
[/quote]

EconProf, thanks for all the info, much appreciated. Now lets talk numbers real quick. November’s report just came with 533,000 jobs lost and pushed the unemployment rate up two tenths of a percentage point. By your facts above that should have pushed the rate over one half of a percentage point. This leads me to believe that there is a fundamental flaw in this system.

I had no clue that door knocking was the how the unemployment was determined. Maybe the bus got stuck in Rancho Santa Fe this past year. All in all I just don’t buy it! There are millions more that are unemployed that the government fails to acknowledge. I think the numbers are clearly left lower to control any sort of panic that may have happened in the Great Depression.

[Arraya]

http://www.chrismartenson.com/blog/fuzzy-numbers-jobs-report-bad-minus-533000-made-look-better/9760

But it would have been worse had it not been for the mysterious positive addition of 30,000 jobs by the so-called birth-death model. From here on out we’ll just refer to it as the birth-birth model because no matter how bad the underlying economic data this model somehow always adds jobs in every month except typically January and July when the model backs out a few of its more irrationally exuberant additions.

However, keeping regular track of the amount of fudging in the Birth-Death model is one of my favorite activities because I think it provides insight into just how unreliable government statistical models really are. For a nation that drives economic policy “by the numbers” it’s important that the numbers are good. The Birth-Death model provides a valuable caution flag for anyone with a tendency to “believe the numbers” that are being offered up for consumption.

[Arraya]

http://www.chrismartenson.com/blog/fuzzy-numbers-jobs-report-bad-minus-533000-made-look-better/9760

But it would have been worse had it not been for the mysterious positive addition of 30,000 jobs by the so-called birth-death model. From here on out we’ll just refer to it as the birth-birth model because no matter how bad the underlying economic data this model somehow always adds jobs in every month except typically January and July when the model backs out a few of its more irrationally exuberant additions.

However, keeping regular track of the amount of fudging in the Birth-Death model is one of my favorite activities because I think it provides insight into just how unreliable government statistical models really are. For a nation that drives economic policy “by the numbers” it’s important that the numbers are good. The Birth-Death model provides a valuable caution flag for anyone with a tendency to “believe the numbers” that are being offered up for consumption.

[Arraya]

http://www.chrismartenson.com/blog/fuzzy-numbers-jobs-report-bad-minus-533000-made-look-better/9760

But it would have been worse had it not been for the mysterious positive addition of 30,000 jobs by the so-called birth-death model. From here on out we’ll just refer to it as the birth-birth model because no matter how bad the underlying economic data this model somehow always adds jobs in every month except typically January and July when the model backs out a few of its more irrationally exuberant additions.

However, keeping regular track of the amount of fudging in the Birth-Death model is one of my favorite activities because I think it provides insight into just how unreliable government statistical models really are. For a nation that drives economic policy “by the numbers” it’s important that the numbers are good. The Birth-Death model provides a valuable caution flag for anyone with a tendency to “believe the numbers” that are being offered up for consumption.

[Arraya]

http://www.chrismartenson.com/blog/fuzzy-numbers-jobs-report-bad-minus-533000-made-look-better/9760

But it would have been worse had it not been for the mysterious positive addition of 30,000 jobs by the so-called birth-death model. From here on out we’ll just refer to it as the birth-birth model because no matter how bad the underlying economic data this model somehow always adds jobs in every month except typically January and July when the model backs out a few of its more irrationally exuberant additions.

However, keeping regular track of the amount of fudging in the Birth-Death model is one of my favorite activities because I think it provides insight into just how unreliable government statistical models really are. For a nation that drives economic policy “by the numbers” it’s important that the numbers are good. The Birth-Death model provides a valuable caution flag for anyone with a tendency to “believe the numbers” that are being offered up for consumption.

[Author]

Posts