America needs to stop lying to it's own citizens about the number of unemployed people. The Obama administration shares a measure of blame for this, but this has been going on for a very long time in one form or other. It's time for a more honest assesment of the real employment picture.
Originally posted by bill718 America needs to stop lying to it's own citizens about the number of unemployed people. The Obama administration shares a measure of blame for this, but this has been going on for a very long time in one form or other. It's time for a more honest assesment of the real employment picture.
Originally posted by bill718 America needs to stop lying to it's own citizens about the number of unemployed people. The Obama administration shares a measure of blame for this, but this has been going on for a very long time in one form or other. It's time for a more honest assesment of the real employment picture.
That is no "lying" involved. The BLS is upfront how it defines someone as unemployed i.e. those with no job but actively seeking one. It has always done so. If someone wants to now add discouraged workers or those holding part-time employment but preferring full-time as "unemployed" they should make an argument to do so. Obviously, all prior unemployment rates would have to be readjusted so meaningful comparisons could be maintained.
Originally posted by bill718 America needs to stop lying to it's own citizens about the number of unemployed people. The Obama administration shares a measure of blame for this, but this has been going on for a very long time in one form or other. It's time for a more honest assesment of the real employment picture.
Some economists say (or "recognize" ) that a certain percentage of unemployment is optimal or at least, inevitable, in a capitalistic economy like the US has.
Presumably this optimal percentage is calculated taking into account the way that the unemployed are counted. All that need to be done is to stop excluding those not looking for work (aside from the retired and children and students and those in jail etc.) from both figures -- the actual unemployment rate and the optimal unemployment rate. We will get used to higher numbers for both.
This will rectify the macroeconomic disjunction. The micro issue, that John Doe is without a job, remains in any case, no matter whether lying is going on.
U-3 unemployment really is 6.7 percent. U-6 unemployment is higher. U-1 unemployment is lower. No one is forcing you to consider the U-3 figure the most important one.
11 Jan '14 03:22
Juggling the figures
Back to Top