What is the real unemployment rate?

From Investors Business Daily:

Here is the link: Jobs Crisis Far Worse Than Official Data Show, Former OfficialSays - Investors.com

 

The unemployment rate has always been much higher than the Government reports as it doesn't include those that have graduated from College in the past several years and still can't find a full-time job. Not to mention the number of graduates that had to move back home with their parents supporting them because they couldn't find a job that pays enough for them to fully support themselves. This is a huge percentage of grads and their parents, due to the age of their dependent get no tax benefits for supporting them.

Basically, marriage is one of the only ways out for these kids. It takes two salaries to pay living expenses. Sad but true.

 

Maybe if we increase taxes on businneses and their regulatory costs they will hire more. Surely if it is more expensive to do business here we will get more workers. My only other idea to get people working again is to extend unemployment benefits.

 

If I wanted to ruin the fruit industry, I would tax the people who produce fruit, increase the cost of hiring people to work in fruit businesses, and then offer to pay fruit laborers to stay home.

Oddly, all things government is doing to our economy.

One question though... I don't like how he said employment to population ratio. Population includes many people too young to work. Did he adjust his numbers for that?

 

Blah blah blah... news that the unemployment rate is much higher than official figures is always high when a democrat is president but goes unreported when a republican is.

Media bias?

 

what!!! did you you just graduate out of first grade or something..tax businesses more so they will hire more people..i know liberals are not that smart but god help us if they are really as dumb as you..

 

If all of us republicans have your sense of humor, it is no wonder we are losing the charm battle.

 

He was being sarcastic He made a good impression of a leftist though, but he was faking it.

- - - Updated - - -

No, the media is under reporting the unemployment rate. That's bias.

 

Labor force participation rate hit a 30 year low recently. The part time vs full time employment is at record levels. Anyone who says the economy is doing well and isnt one of the well repaid obama campaign contributors needs to run their head into a wall.

 

But hey, the economy is going gangbusters for investors. Who cares about those losers who can't find jobs. Oh, btw, how about those tax cuts you promised to us "job creators". I am looking at you, Republicans. I see no bills for cutting my taxes, only idiotic bills to cut spending and repeal Obamacare that will never pass the Senate. Geeze, this is worse than dealing with twelve year olds, at least they know when they are getting nowhere with something and go on to something else.

 

It depends on how you define 'unemployment'?

If people are incapable of working or simply not interested in seeking work then they cannot be consider 'unemployed'.

Only those people who are seeking employment can be considered 'unemployed'.

Further, if a person works 20 hours/week is this considered 'employed'...it should be because they are employed?

What matters to the economy is if business is satisfying it's demand on products and services? If you want more jobs then more demand must appear from domestic and/or foreign consumers. IMO people and business in the US have transferred so much manufacturing outside of the USA over the decades and today we are simply seeing the downside of these decisions on job creation...

 

Not quite true. We also have to factor in underemployment where human capital isn't fully utilised. This is a hidden form of 'demand side' unemployment

 

A person who would prefer full-time work, but is forced to settle for part-time work--in other words, one who is underemployed--is certainly considered among the unemployed by some metrics. In fact, that is the fundamental difference betwwen the so-called U3 numbers (i.e. the "official" unemployment rate) and the U6 numbers (which includes others, among whom are the underemployed): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unemployment#United_States_Bureau_of_Labor_statistics

 

Obama is in tax raising mode, republicans would have no chance with a tax cut and we all know it. Got to get rid of Reid first and Obama. Both are dead set on more of your money.

 

If a person dresses for work, transports themselves to an employer, works their shift, clocks out and goes home, they are working. You can ask or analyze 50% of workers to find they feel they are underemployed and/or not fully utilized. For the tens of millions of hourly workers who have uttered 'I could do my stupid bosses job', well...many of them are correct but we can't qualify them as underutilized?

Some people may not enjoy their jobs, or they may feel underutilized, etc. but a job is a job and a job cannot exist without a worker and if someone is working they can't be unemployed.

Now...if all of your underutilized workers are in the system actively seeking other employment, great for them if they find something, but meanwhile they remain employed...

 

No one is 'forced' to do anything?? If a person requires 40 hours of $8/hour work, then this can be solved by two separate jobs of 20 hours at $8/hour.

IMO all of the government's U? numbers are bogus at best. The government has never asked me if I'm looking for work or if I need more work hours, etc. How can government possibly present unemployment data when the data is bogus? Have they talked to you?

 

once again an attempt by the right to hold THIS PRESIDENT to a higher standard.

 

They only need to sample. Your point is rather silly!

 

But those two part-time jobs are not likely to come with benefits attached; so two 20-hour-per-week jobs are not necessarily equivalent to one 4-hour-per-week job.

 

They only need a truly random sampling of a few thousand people to get to where they can have 95% confidence that they have the numbers right.
Has anyone asked you who you were voting for? What TV shows you watched? Small samples give good results.

 

And what do YOU believe the error rate or accuracy of government 'sampling' might be? The unemployment numbers are 100% political. They serve no purpose whatsoever other than to allow the biased Dems and Reps to belittle each other over meaningless drivel and for the media to create articles.

You are correct...I think it is silly for anyone to get off on bogus data...

 

Most 40 hour jobs don't provide a litany of benefits? And why must there be benefits? Why do American workers need to demand that industry provide anything other than a wage? Add up the costs associated with 'benefits' from vacation pay, sick pay, maternity leave, jury duty, medical insurance, 401K contributions, FICA, etc. etc. etc. all of which helps explain why US business is having so much trouble competing in the global marketplace. When I was a young man we saved weekly in order to have money to go on vacation and this was no problem...today workers cry like babies if they can't hold their employer hostage for everything except a full 8 hours of hard work.

It is not the responsibility of industry or government to provide anyone with a job or income. If someone is unhappy with their job, or lack of job, or how much they earn, it is 100% that person's responsibility to take personal actions to create change...

 

The economy is effected by unemployment numbers while not much happens regarding who people vote for or what TV shows they watch. There is never a time on this forum when there are not threads about unemployment!

Where did you dream up the 95% number? Actually 100% of the time they have the wrong numbers depending on how much tolerance one is willing to give them. The media and others salivate over 7% unemployment numbers yet this could be wrong by up to 100% or more...

 

No, it is not. But it is the responsibility of every human to look after each other if everyone is to live in peace.
Or is it?
This is a question that has plagued humanity for a very long time.
It seems your choice is to live in a world where everyone is striving only for themselves, a world of strife.
There are other choices, perhaps not so profitable or lucrative in a monetary sense but is money everything?

There are entire schools of thought that suppose it is and explain all human action on the premise of monetary gain.
These run into great difficulty when faced with examples that run counter to their claims.

There are other schools that preach a mantra of sacrifice so that scarce resources may be gathered and concentrated by a few in particular endeavours that will create great things that bring benefit to all.
Enough resources have been gathered from the Earth and more than enough costly endeavours entrained that great benefit to all is easily achievable right now. The only thing preventing it is the continued concentration of the control of resources in the hands of those who trade in scarcity.

 

Do you even know how the unemployment data is measured and who does it?