- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Lowest unemployment rate in 10 years
Posted on 5/5/17 at 3:29 pm
Posted on 5/5/17 at 3:29 pm
Ok, we all know the 4.4% u3 number is complete bullshite and the books have been cooked. Maybe now liberals will admit it.
I just want to see it stop being touted by the same people who knew it was bullshite 3 years ago.
I just want to see it stop being touted by the same people who knew it was bullshite 3 years ago.
8
Posted on 5/5/17 at 3:34 pm to SoulGlo
Because people are dropping out of the workforce!!!
Participation rate is down!!!
Wanted to try it once.
Participation rate is down!!!
Wanted to try it once.
Posted on 5/5/17 at 3:36 pm to SoulGlo
But the PARTICIPATION RATE!!!!
borrowed from the last 8 years of "the economy is improving" threads
Also: Germans
borrowed from the last 8 years of "the economy is improving" threads
Also: Germans
This post was edited on 5/5/17 at 3:37 pm
Posted on 5/5/17 at 3:36 pm to a want
quote:
But the PARTICIPATION RATE!!!! borrowed from the last 8 years.
You know how I can tell you didn't take the time to look up the participation rate...........
Posted on 5/5/17 at 3:39 pm to SoulGlo
quote:Meh. The problem is having an "official" rate when they have multiple rates, each with strengths and weaknesses. The books aren't cooked, but elevating a single flawed statistic and making it official, can paint a flawed picture.
Ok, we all know the 4.4% u3 number is complete bull shite and the books have been cooked. Maybe now liberals will admit it.
I just want to see it stop being touted by the same people who knew it was bull shite 3 years ago.
Posted on 5/5/17 at 3:39 pm to ShortyRob
Why does economic data have to be partisan? If it does well under an administration that I'm not a fan of I'll still give them credit for a good economy and vice versa.
Posted on 5/5/17 at 3:41 pm to a want
Forbes
quote:
The much-discussed U-6 figure -- often referred to as the "real" unemployment rate because it measures the percent of total unemployed plus people who are marginally attached to the labor force or working part time for economic reasons -- dipped to 8.6%, down from 8.9% in March and 9.3% in April 2016.
The labor force participation rate, meanwhile, remained virtually unchanged at 62.9%. Steve Rick, chief economist at CUNA Mutual Group, said that the stagnation in this number isn't too concerning because a demographic shift (retiring Baby Boomers) is offsetting the economic growth, and higher participation in prior years was a largely demographic-driven event.
Posted on 5/5/17 at 3:43 pm to SoulGlo
The unemployment rate is simply the number of people drawing benefits.
Literally tens of millions have exhausted benefits and are no longer counted.
That is why liberals HATE participation rate numbers. Those numbers tell the true story.
Literally tens of millions have exhausted benefits and are no longer counted.
That is why liberals HATE participation rate numbers. Those numbers tell the true story.
Posted on 5/5/17 at 3:44 pm to Paul Allen
quote:Not sure why you responded to me.
Why does economic data have to be partisan? If it does well under an administration that I'm not a fan of I'll still give them credit for a good economy and vice versa.
I was simply taking humor in the first two responses.
Posted on 5/5/17 at 3:44 pm to a want
quote:
But the PARTICIPATION RATE!!!!
The factual number of Americans not working.
I can see where you liberals would hate those numbers.
Posted on 5/5/17 at 3:44 pm to ShortyRob
Excuse me?
Posted on 5/5/17 at 3:45 pm to SoulGlo
Dumb as when the democrats said it.
Posted on 5/5/17 at 3:45 pm to ShortyRob
quote:It ticked down a tenth of a percent in April. So better than expected job gains but fewer looking for jobs, the rate dropped more significantly.
You know how I can tell you didn't take the time to look up the participation rate
Conversely, for the last couple of years, the participation rate has seemed to tick up with better than expected job totals so the U3 has either stayed constant or increased.
Even then, I think people vastly overrate the participation rate since a lower participation could be indicative of both bad (people giving up) and good (wages high enough to support single incomes in a family) Personally, my wife and I both which I made enough that she could stay at home with our son. In that case, we would go from a family participation rate of 100% to 50%, but that would be a decrease reflects something positive.
Posted on 5/5/17 at 3:48 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:
buckeye_vol
Hey. I get that it requires more complicated analysis any time the numbers come out.
But hey. Given that A Want couldn't even be bothered to figure out what income is taxable in a discussion about.......wait for it...TAXABLE income........it's probably too much to expect him to actually know what the frick he's talking about on this one.
Posted on 5/5/17 at 3:51 pm to SavageOrangeJug
quote:Not exactly. A person counted as participating in the labor force may not have a job, but actively seeking one. Technically, you would have to multiply the employment rate from the U3 statistic (1-U3) and multiply that by the participation rate to get this figure.
The factual number of Americans not working.
Posted on 5/5/17 at 3:58 pm to ShortyRob
quote:Fair enough, but unfortunately the ignorance is too prevelant on both sides.
But hey. Given that A Want couldn't even be bothered to figure out what income is taxable in a discussion about.......wait for it...TAXABLE income........it's probably too much to expect him to actually know what the frick he's talking about on this one.
So overall I think the recent unemployment numbers are a net positive month over month, but they aren't as positive as the official rate would indicate since the improvement is somewhat offset by less participation. Yet, one side will use one figure and the other ide will use another figure and greatly overrate their respective argument.
Posted on 5/5/17 at 4:21 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:absolutely. I posted on here about that before. Very few people actually try to learn for themselves what information means. They think research is when you read the interpretations of a subject you don't understand from a source that meets your biases. So you don't actually understand the information even your favorite Source gave you. You just know you like the source. Then you cite its opinion as if you understand it
enough, but unfortunately the ignorance is too prevelant on both sides
Posted on 5/5/17 at 4:23 pm to ShortyRob
I always laugh when I see people say that they read a lot of sources and then decide for themselves. That's fricking retarded. That isn't research. Reading 10 different people's opinions of a subject you haven't taken the time to learn yourself isn't research no matter how many times your college professor told you it was.
Posted on 5/5/17 at 4:44 pm to SoulGlo
Trump will tout this as his accomplishment. And the Trumpkins will fall in line dismissing their previous claims that low unemployment numbers were fake during Obama's presidency
This post was edited on 5/5/17 at 4:47 pm
Posted on 5/5/17 at 4:57 pm to ShortyRob
Q
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News