normiss 622 #1 October 5, 2012 Woot. I wonder how those numbers are calculated and/or influenced Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #2 October 5, 2012 Quote Woot. I wonder how those numbers are calculated and/or influenced Same as always; incorrectly. The numbers have never been "accurate" because the metric has never been the number of people unemployed.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
beowulf 1 #3 October 5, 2012 http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-10-05/reason-todays-unemployment-rate-plunge-part-time-jobs-economic-reasons-surge-most-qe Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 622 #4 October 5, 2012 Yep. I wish more people understood that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #5 October 5, 2012 Quotehttp://www.zerohedge.com/news/2012-10-05/reason-todays-unemployment-rate-plunge-part-time-jobs-economic-reasons-surge-most-qe the part time jobs has greatly increased, I wonder if that has anything to do with Obamacare? because of the mandatory health ins requirements are employers hiring more part time workers to avoid the insurance mandate? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,622 #6 October 5, 2012 Quote Yep. I wish more people understood that. If you think we have problems figuring it out, you should take a look at China's problems.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #7 October 5, 2012 QuoteThe rate declined from 8.1 percent because the number of people who said they were employed soared by 873,000 — an encouraging sign for an economy that's been struggling to create enough jobs. The number of unemployed Americans is now 12.1 million, the fewest since January 2009. The Labor Department said employers added 114,000 jobs in September. It also said the economy created 86,000 more jobs in July and August than the department had initially estimated. Wages rose in September. And more people started looking for work. The revisions show employers added 146,000 jobs per month from July through September, up from 67,000 in the previous three months. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/us-jobless-rate-falls-7-123110106.html What the fuck? 873k - increase in people who said they are employed. 114k - jobs added in September 146k - jobs added in September, August and July My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,622 #8 October 5, 2012 Quote Quote The rate declined from 8.1 percent because the number of people who said they were employed soared by 873,000 — an encouraging sign for an economy that's been struggling to create enough jobs. The number of unemployed Americans is now 12.1 million, the fewest since January 2009. The Labor Department said employers added 114,000 jobs in September. It also said the economy created 86,000 more jobs in July and August than the department had initially estimated. Wages rose in September. And more people started looking for work. The revisions show employers added 146,000 jobs per month from July through September, up from 67,000 in the previous three months. http://finance.yahoo.com/news/us-jobless-rate-falls-7-123110106.html What the fuck? 873k - increase in people who said they are employed. 114k - jobs added in September 146k - jobs added in September, August and July The various numbers are taken from different sources which don't necessarily count the same thing. It's not a new problem; the same methodology has applied for years.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #9 October 5, 2012 I know. I know that "unemployment rate" also doesn't include those who gave up looking for work. As much as I want to see some honesty in the data provided, I'm wondering how honesty can be accomplished with such different methodology out there. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #10 October 5, 2012 QuoteI know. I know that "unemployment rate" also doesn't include those who gave up looking for work. As much as I want to see some honesty in the data provided, I'm wondering how honesty can be accomplished with such different methodology out there. Obama lost the debate and needs a boost to offset his loss. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #11 October 5, 2012 QuoteQuoteI know. I know that "unemployment rate" also doesn't include those who gave up looking for work. As much as I want to see some honesty in the data provided, I'm wondering how honesty can be accomplished with such different methodology out there. Obama lost the debate and needs a boost to offset his loss. Nope. This is the same non-sense we go through with every unemployment rate announcement. It's never done well regardless of which party is in power.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
normiss 622 #12 October 5, 2012 Yet they both throw those numbers around to knock or support a political mindset at will. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,622 #13 October 5, 2012 QuoteYet they both throw those numbers around to knock or support a political mindset at will. Would you rather they were kept secret?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #14 October 5, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteI know. I know that "unemployment rate" also doesn't include those who gave up looking for work. As much as I want to see some honesty in the data provided, I'm wondering how honesty can be accomplished with such different methodology out there. Obama lost the debate and needs a boost to offset his loss. Nope. This is the same non-sense we go through with every unemployment rate announcement. It's never done well regardless of which party is in power. Kind of like when a republican president is in power, and the GDP increases 2.6 % and we are in a recession. But when a Dem president is in power and the GDP increases 1.2%, we are in a recovery"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,622 #15 October 5, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteI know. I know that "unemployment rate" also doesn't include those who gave up looking for work. As much as I want to see some honesty in the data provided, I'm wondering how honesty can be accomplished with such different methodology out there. Obama lost the debate and needs a boost to offset his loss. Nope. This is the same non-sense we go through with every unemployment rate announcement. It's never done well regardless of which party is in power. Kind of like when a republican president is in power, and the GDP increases 2.6 % and we are in a recession. But when a Dem president is in power and the GDP increases 1.2%, we are in a recovery During the last full year of the last Republican president the GDP DECREASED by 13% That IS a recession. During the last full quarter of the last Republican president the GDP DECREASED by 8.9%... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,391 #16 October 5, 2012 >I wonder how those numbers are calculated and/or influenced Same way all the pollsters are secretly collaborating to make it look like Obama is winning, that green energy is popular with voters, that his birth certificate is real . . . . Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #17 October 5, 2012 Quote Nope. This is the same non-sense we go through with every unemployment rate announcement. It's never done well regardless of which party is in power. But if there is a substantial downward revision right after the election, there will be more grumbling than usual. Funny enough, regardless of party, these revisions always seem to be negative ones. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jimmytavino 16 #18 October 7, 2012 if a true poll was taken...of EVERY person male and female in this country, between the ages of 18 and 62..... and ONE simple question was asked... " Do you Currently have a full time job??/ 36 hrs a week minimum"?? i would bet a thousand bucks that over 50 % would be forced to answer NO..... maybe 60 or 70% that would be asking EveryOne... those who have NEVER had a job. those who may have ONCE worked... but got "down sized", those who are lucky enough to Still be working, those who have quit and never found something else and those who have been laid off.....even if it was YEARS ago,,,, and never found anything else....being a "fulltime student" MAY be work.. buy (sorry)... it's NOT a job...I pay attention as i drive here and there,, and through various parts of the city and suburbs... and believe You me........There are a TON of people NOT working.......Not volunteering. Not doing anything to contribute to the well being of the community....the unemployment "statistics" are so screwed up that whoever calculates them..... should be FIRED!!!!!!!...and that's how i see it..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon 340 #19 October 7, 2012 Quotethat would be asking EveryOne... those who have NEVER had a job. those who may have ONCE worked... but got "down sized", those who are lucky enough to Still be working, those who have quit and never found something else and those who have been laid off.....even if it was YEARS ago,,,, and never found anything else....being a "fulltime student" MAY be work.. buy (sorry)... it's NOT a job...Once again you put your anti-education bias out there for all to see. Why do you so resent those people who choose to spend time and money investing in marketable skills that could potentially result in a real career? Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #20 October 7, 2012 QuoteQuotethat would be asking EveryOne... those who have NEVER had a job. those who may have ONCE worked... but got "down sized", those who are lucky enough to Still be working, those who have quit and never found something else and those who have been laid off.....even if it was YEARS ago,,,, and never found anything else....being a "fulltime student" MAY be work.. buy (sorry)... it's NOT a job...Once again you put your anti-education bias out there for all to see. Why do you so resent those people who choose to spend time and money investing in marketable skills that could potentially result in a real career? Don So the other careers aren't "real"? MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jimmytavino 16 #21 October 7, 2012 "once again" do you have me confused with someone else?????I have NO "anti-education bias" I am NOT resentful of ANYone........ where did you come UP with THAT????? i simply point out the reality as i see it... It seems to me that while being a student IS work and requires great dedication and effort.. it is NOT like a conventional J. O. B. wherein some ELSE pays YOU...In the RARE exception some students are granted "full ride" scholarships,, but even THEY are not assured of a job and a fair number of THEM wash out.... before completing ANY degree..... I and many of my friends and all my siblings, and our kids and many of our childrens contemporaries have ALL earned College level degrees..... Sadly it must be pointed out ...That Not All have found gainful employment ANywhere... let alone in "their field of expertise"... You must be involved in teaching or academia of some sort, to be taking such a stance and blaming ME for the sad situation which many find themselves facing... This thread is about unemployment and i mostly just pointed out that far too many folks can't find ANY.... When people PAY to go to school That is the opposite of EARNING money... NO????? True enough, they may be HOPING to see some kind of return but there are NO guarantees... please don't take one phrase from my text and use it to ( incorrectly ) label me...OK??? Higher education is an asset and a noble undertaking.. but that is not the focus of this thread.... Lucky are those,,like deans and professors and PhDs.... whose somewhat "cushy" livelihood is FUNDED by such an ass-backwards system... I wonder if such folks ever feel any RESPONSIBILTY towards those students whom they kick out the door at graduation, regardless of whether or not those folks can FIND a J O B .. what matters??? so long as the next batch of innocent naive freshmen are there to take their places... peace and good luck ( sorry normiss...... for the thread drift)jmy A 3914 POPS 3935 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chutem 0 #22 October 7, 2012 QuoteQuotethat would be asking EveryOne... those who have NEVER had a job. those who may have ONCE worked... but got "down sized", those who are lucky enough to Still be working, those who have quit and never found something else and those who have been laid off.....even if it was YEARS ago,,,, and never found anything else....being a "fulltime student" MAY be work.. buy (sorry)... it's NOT a job...Once again you put your anti-education bias out there for all to see. Why do you so resent those people who choose to spend time and money investing in marketable skills that could potentially result in a real career? Don Do you think full time students should be considered employed? What if they don't have a job but would like one? I did not see this as "anti education bias", but simply as a way to get an accurate number of people who are not employed at a job. James Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
GeorgiaDon 340 #23 October 7, 2012 QuoteSo the other careers aren't "real"? I'm not aware of any careers that don't require any investment in learning specialized skills. In some cases those skills can be learned "on the job", in the form of an apprenticeship, internship, or entry level low paying position. However the great majority require some time in school beyond high school. It might be two years at a technical college, or it might be a decade or more in the case of a doctor with specialized training, an engineer, a research scientist, etc. Anyway, you nicely avoid commenting on Jimmy Tavino's assertion that "full time student" = "unemployed". If I was to pick nits, I could accuse you of similar disdain for people who pursue careers that require education beyond high school, but I doubt that was the point you were trying to make. Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chutem 0 #24 October 7, 2012 QuoteQuoteQuotethat would be asking EveryOne... those who have NEVER had a job. those who may have ONCE worked... but got "down sized", those who are lucky enough to Still be working, those who have quit and never found something else and those who have been laid off.....even if it was YEARS ago,,,, and never found anything else....being a "fulltime student" MAY be work.. buy (sorry)... it's NOT a job...Once again you put your anti-education bias out there for all to see. Why do you so resent those people who choose to spend time and money investing in marketable skills that could potentially result in a real career? Don Do you think full time students should be considered employed? What if they don't have a job but would like one? I did not see this as "anti education bias", but simply as a way to get an accurate number of people who are not employed at a job. James I guess the question would be "are full time students available for work"? This based on the defenition of unemployed that appears to be common in the US. James Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
matthewcline 0 #25 October 7, 2012 I didn't comment on Jimmy's comment because I was commenting on your comment. He is right though, they are students. Shouldn't be counted for against the numbers. IMO, you're the one with a bias issue. I now know, IYO, I have not had a career, i need to get crackin'! MattAn Instructors first concern is student safety. So, start being safe, first!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites