I'm not taking issue with the analysis -- I'm taking issue with statements like "have you ever wondered why the unemployment numbers don't match your personal experience?"
There is no way that anyone can accurately know what the unemployment rate is or even whether the economy is strong or weak based only on their own personal experience. Most people's perceptions about these things come from the official data and the various media reports about that data. No matter what the real economy is doing - if everyone in the media is saying that the economy is lousy, people will believe it - and if everyone in the media is saying that the economy is doing great, people will believe it.
Also, it seems like the media has already done a rather good job making the current economy look like the one of the worst depressions mankind has ever seen - so I'm not sure how this guy's analysis could have much additional impact.
they had to be based on SOMETHING.
i can see where the guy's coming from.
claiming unemployment has dropped when the major part of it is from striking "discouraged works" from the unemployed count is disingenuous.
similar to China: a while back noted that news reports said (something like) China's glowing GDP figures were not supported by their power consumption figures, which had dropped.
Originally posted by zeeblebotI think it would be better if people looked at employment rates instead of unemployment rates.
they had to be based on SOMETHING.
i can see where the guy's coming from.
claiming unemployment has dropped when the major part of it is from striking "discouraged works" from the unemployed count is disingenuous.
similar to China: a while back noted that news reports said (something like) China's glowing GDP figures were not supported by their power consumption figures, which had dropped.
In general, the "unemployment rate" serves mainly as an index. It allows you to compare the current unemployment levels with those in the past. While the U3, U6, and SGS provide different percentages, the overall shape of the three graphs is pretty much the same.
The important thing is that all three graphs tell pretty much the same story -- joblessness fell gradually until 2001, it then rose until 2003, then it gradually dropped back towards 2001 levels until 2007-08 - after which it has risen to uprecedented heights in 2009 and has remained pretty much unchanged so far in 2010.
Economists are fully aware of the shortcomings of the unemployment statistic -- that's why they also look at other things like job creation and new unemployment benefits claims.
Originally posted by MelanerpesI think the main benefit of using employment rates is that it also takes things like duration of education, retirement, the black market and lazy housewives into account.
In general, the "unemployment rate" serves mainly as an index. It allows you to compare the current unemployment levels with those in the past. While the U3, U6, and SGS provide different percentages, the overall shape of the three graphs is pretty much the same.
The important thing is that all three graphs tell pretty much the same story -- joblessne ...[text shortened]... 's why they also look at other things like job creation and new unemployment benefits claims.