What’s the Real Unemployment Rate the Bush administration doesn't want you to know?

Forums: Unemployment Rate
Email this Topic • Print this Page

True Cost - Analyzing our economy, government policy, and society through the lens of cost-benefit

What’s the Real Unemployment Rate?
November 21, 2008 at 10:08 pm ·

The U-5 measure of unemployment stands at 7.5% in October 2008.

The officially reported unemployment rate rose to 6.5% in October 2008, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. The BLS actually collects 6 different measures of unemployment, however, and reports U-3, one of the middle-range measures, as the official unemployment rate. This rate includes those who are actively looking for work, but does not include those who have given up looking because they can’t find a job. The official unemployment rate also excludes those who are working part-time but can’t find a full time job.

So what are the numbers?

October 2008 Unemployment Measures

U-3, Officially Reported Unemployment: 6.5%
U-5, Unemployment Rate including those who have given up: 7.5%
U-6, Unemployment Rate including under-employed: 11.8%

Since most Americans count those who have are discouraged to look for work as unemployed, the U-5 measure is a more accurate measure of unemployment, even if it’s less politically palatable. One percent of the US work force equates to 1.5 million people. So next time you see the headlines, remember to add a percentage point (or two!) when looking at unemployment numbers.

http://truecost.wordpress.com/2008/11/21/whats-the-real-unemployment-rate/

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 7 • Views: 1,668 • Replies: 21

No top replies

@BumbleBeeBoogie,

Why are you making this about the Bush administration? The practice has been the same in all previous administrations, and won't change under president Obama.

2 Replies

@Thomas,

Quote:

Why are you making this about the Bush administration?

It's what she/they do.

0 Replies

I have rarely trusted any number concerning unemployment rates produced by our government, because there are too many older workers who have lost their jobs that have just been dropped from their unemployment rolls. I think my guesstimate would be closer to 25%.

0 Replies

Quote:

So next time you see the headlines, remember to add a percentage point (or two!) when looking at unemployment numbers.

Better yet, statisticians, bean counters and politicians can figure out what is really going on by listening when the people are telling them there is a problem. It shouldn't take five years of economic downturn for the numbers to finally grab the attention of these folks when it finally hurts them personally.

We've been talking about the declining middle class jobs for many many years.

0 Replies

@BumbleBeeBoogie,

bbb wrote :

Quote:

Since most Americans count those who have are discouraged to look for work as unemployed

???
i remember distinctly that some time last year there were several a2k'ers who felt it necessay to educate me .
they told me that anyone being unemployed for 6 months or more is NOT unemployed but simply no longer interested in working .
i am reasonably sure that those posters have not changed their minds in the meantime - unless they became unemployed themselves .
sorry to be so crass ! (not really)
hbg

0 Replies

@Thomas,

Your point is valid. All administrations have not been honest with the actual unemployment rate.

BBB

1 Reply

I don't think there is any question of honesty involved here at all. The implication that the government is or has been deceiving people is merely based on ignorance of the facts. The statistical methods and assumptions built into the various measures are readily available and widely known. Moreover the assumptions involved address real factors that do influence the utility of the statistics. All countries face these difficulties and all employ equivalent assumptions (though different in detail) in developing their own measures.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

OMG!! A Georgeobikanobe sighting! You just made my day, m'dear.

2 Replies

@BumbleBeeBoogie,

It's not about dishonesty either. Who is and who isn't unemployed is a matter of definition; there's a spectrum of reasonable definitions; and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, under any administration, has published data for all definitions of unemployment. The press has chosen to report only one measure from somewhere in the middle of the spectrum. They seem to be betting, correctly I guess, that reporting the whole spectrum of measures would exhaust their readers' attention.

But any reader who is interested and has a long-enough attention span can just go to the Bureau of Labor Statistic's website and get the data for the whole spectrum. Where is the dishonesty in this picture?

1 Reply

@Mame,

Who are you? Certainly not Mame -- she would have said "OMG!! A Georgeobikanobe sigthing, ey!" Your omission was a dead giveaway.

1 Reply

@Thomas,

We spell it "eh" up here, bubba.

2 Replies

i think bbb made a very valuable point :

Quote:

Since most Americans count those who have are (have become ? hbg) discouraged to look for work as unemployed, the U-5 measure is a more accurate measure of unemployment, even if it’s less politically palatable.

imo it would be asking a bit too much of the "average" person to try and decipher the various definitions of unemployment .

0 Replies

@Mame,

Izzy spells it "a".

2 Replies

@roger,

yeah, but who knows how she pronounces it? heh heh could be ah...

0 Replies

@Mame,

And you mine, babe. How'ya doing??

I kind of gave up on A2K a couple of months back (the shouting and invective finally wore me down), but do now take an occasional stroll around. Always glad to take a poke at BBB for her days as a Union organizer and her still strident views on the subject.

BTW I was up in Calgary a couple of months ago: we were trying to work a deal with SUNCOR on environmental; support for life cycle studies for the tar sands waste ponds. Now with oil below $60/barrel it may not fly - we shall see... Neat town and breathtaking country to the west. (However Calgary must have the world's largest concentration of surly, angry Hindu taxi drivers.)

What's this "Obiwankanobe" stuff?? Why does a good Irish name like O'Brien excite so many variants & nicknames? I once checked in to a fighter squadron and found two other pilots named O'Brien already there. One was known as "OB 1" an d the other as "OB 2". Because I was senior I refused to be "OB 3" so, much to my disgust, I was labelled "OB the most". I was stuck with it for two years.

I hope you are well and happy. You are one of the bright lights here.

1 Reply

@Mame,

Mame wrote:

We spell it "eh" up here, bubba.

Thats Mame !!!!

0 Replies

@roger,

its "eh" in the true , cold north !

read : an american's guide to canada - for a laugh :

http://americansguide.ca/

Quote:

Most Americans know next to nothing about their neighbo(u)r to the north, except that Canadians play a lot of hockey, drink beer, and end sentences with "eh?"

1 Reply

@hamburger,

I would rather listen to a Canadian explain hocky than an Australian explain cricket!

1 Reply

@roger,

And that would be "hockEy", toots. How're you doing, anyway? Nice to see some of my favourite people all in one place.

0 Replies

What’s the Real Unemployment Rate the Bush administration doesn't want you to know?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know