Are You Unemployed Chart
 

Pretty interesting to see how the actual number is manipulated.

http://www.joerib.com/wp-content/upl...edgameshow.jpg

http://www.joerib.com/wp-content/upl...edgameshow.jpg

Interesting....

You can't blame 'em for crunching their numbers...

I'd expect nothing less from government.

indeed :thumbsup

Yeah it's a bunch of crap how it's reported. Not a true representation.

How can't you? I am a able bodied 23 year old man with a lot of experience in a few fields and some good ass references to back me up on it and I can't even get a damn job at mcdonalds? This 10% stuff is complete bullshit as it's already been exposed... but there is no way that you "can't blame them" for "crunching numbers". The whole reason why everything is as shitty as it is for people looking for jobs is BECAUSE of the government, and they want to try to mask the reality of it all and make it seem like its not their fault.

I personally think they did this all on purpose, jsut like I think other things were done on purpose and arranged by the govt, but I won't go into detail...


Maybe I need myself a blog for this kind of shit. Then I could rant and get it all out there hahaha

Not really anything new, it's always been this way.

Statistically it's a wash.. which isn't factored into that graph. People that get benefits cut off or they end, often end up getting jobs. It may not be full time, it might be cash under the table, or it could be a real job, but all of those balances aren't added back in either - they can't be tracked.

So it's better, to use the active unemployment numbers as a gauge of how things are going and keep the unknown out of the numbers.

Silly as usual from them

:eek7 Huh?

I'm no economist - but how is NOT factoring in the underemployed or discouraged/given-up workers a better representation of how things are going?

hehe... funny stuff

I would guess looking at "U3" and "U6" numbers is equivalent, the 2 numbers are probably closely correlated, and since U3 is easier to determine accurately, that's why everyone talks about that number instead of U6...

sure, the 2 numbers are way different, but that's not the point, the whole point of looking at statistics of this type is to determine trends, and looking at U3 is better for that since it's likely to be more accurate... :2 cents: