The 'Real' Jobless Rate: 17.5% Of Workers Are Unemployed

[American]

Link

Published: Thursday, 19 Nov 2009 | 4:55 PM ET Text Size By: Jeff Cox
CNBC.com

As experts debate the potential speed of the US recovery, one figure looms large but is often overlooked: nearly 1 in 5 Americans is either out of work or under-employed.
According to the government's broadest measure of unemployment, some 17.5 percent are either without a job entirely or underemployed. The so-called U-6 number is at the highest rate since becoming an official labor statistic in 1994.
The number dwarfs the statistic most people pay attention to—the U-3 rate—which most recently showed unemployment at 10.2 percent for October, the highest it has been since June 1983.
The difference is that what is traditionally referred to as the "unemployment rate" only measures those out of work who are still looking for jobs. Discouraged workers who have quit trying to find a job, as well as those working part-time but looking for full-time work or who are otherwise underemployed, count in the U-6 rate.
With such a large portion of Americans experiencing employment struggles, economists worry that an extended period of slow or flat growth lies ahead.
"To me there's no easy solution here," says Michael Pento, chief economist at Delta Global Advisors. "Unless you create another bubble in which the economy can create jobs, then you're not going to have growth. That's the sad truth."

Looky here, it worse then the MSM and govt have been reporting.

 

[Lightdemon]

Link


Looky here, it worse then the MSM and govt have been reporting.

So you think "unemployed" should be defined as "Discouraged workers who have quit trying to find a job, as well as those working part-time but looking for full-time work or who are otherwise underemployed."

Obviously you can tell why there is such a big discrepancy in the reporting of "unemployment."

Is it safe to say that this was your attempt to expose the liberal media? :2wave:

 

[Redress]

Link


Looky here, it worse then the MSM and govt have been reporting.

This has been the case for many years. The unemployment rate as it is figured is always lower than it really is. I cannot find a source for it, but I was once told it was because they want to keep the numbers figured the same for consistency.

 

[EpicDude86]

lol, once again the definition of a word is not really the definition of a word.


wtf does unemployed even mean?!


Well, one might think it means without employment, but no that's too large a number. We've got trim the fat on this thing, guys!

 

[Lightdemon]

wtf does unemployed even mean?!

Apparently if you hold a part-time job, you're unemployed.

 

[EpicDude86]

Apparently if you hold a part-time job, you're unemployed.

and if you don't have a job, and you're not seeking employment, you're not unemployed :lol:

 

[MKULTRABOY]

I thought people who didnt want jerbs were useless fodder that needed to be euthanized cause they didn't work hard for what they got like the rest of us werkin folks. Why would we count them?

 

[Redress]

lol, once again the definition of a word is not really the definition of a word.


wtf does unemployed even mean?!


Well, one might think it means without employment, but no that's too large a number. We've got trim the fat on this thing, guys!

In this case, it's a technical term with a technical definition. The unemployment rate that is normally used is figured from people out of work who are seeking work. The number American gives is those people plus underemployed and unemployed no longer seeking a job.

There are pushes to change the "official" figure to be the one that American uses, but from what I have seen, when it's hard times and democrats in office, it republicans who want to change it, and when republicans are in office for the rough times, it's democrats who want to change it. it probably will never change because both parties know that it would end up hurting them.

 

[phattonez]

As far as I know, if you're unemployed and have given up on looking for work, then you're not counted as being unemployed. But aren't you still unemployed then?

 

[EpicDude86]

In this case, it's a technical term with a technical definition. The unemployment rate that is normally used is figured from people out of work who are seeking work. The number American gives is those people plus underemployed and unemployed no longer seeking a job.

There are pushes to change the "official" figure to be the one that American uses, but from what I have seen, when it's hard times and democrats in office, it republicans who want to change it, and when republicans are in office for the rough times, it's democrats who want to change it. it probably will never change because both parties know that it would end up hurting them.

Big surprise. :lol:

 

[EpicDude86]

I thought people who didnt want jerbs were useless fodder that needed to be euthanized cause they didn't work hard for what they got like the rest of us werkin folks. Why would we count them?

You can't just cull the herd, it's not PC.

 

[American]

lol, once again the definition of a word is not really the definition of a word.


wtf does unemployed even mean?!


Well, one might think it means without employment, but no that's too large a number. We've got trim the fat on this thing, guys!

Aren't part-timers also taxed for social security? But yet they are considered unemployed (i.e., not working)? Something just doesn't seem right about that.

 

[Hatuey]

Link


Looky here, it worse then the MSM and govt have been reporting.

Not to burst your bubble but isn't CNBC part of the MSM?

 

[Lightdemon]

In this case, it's a technical term with a technical definition. The unemployment rate that is normally used is figured from people out of work who are seeking work. The number American gives is those people plus underemployed and unemployed no longer seeking a job.

There are pushes to change the "official" figure to be the one that American uses, but from what I have seen, when it's hard times and democrats in office, it republicans who want to change it, and when republicans are in office for the rough times, it's democrats who want to change it. it probably will never change because both parties know that it would end up hurting them.

Would you know the different advantages of using either definition in statistical analysis? I assume there are certain situations where one definition should be used over the other when doing specific calculations.

 

[phattonez]

Would you know the different advantages of using either definition in statistical analysis? I assume there are certain situations where one definition should be used over the other when doing specific calculations.

You look at underemployment when you want to know how hard government programs to create jobs are failing.

 

[Redress]

Would you know the different advantages of using either definition in statistical analysis? I assume there are certain situations where one definition should be used over the other when doing specific calculations.

No clue. That would be way over my head. Supposedly, including underemployed and those not looking for work is a more accurate figure, but no one really wants to change it since people would see, for example now, unemployment jump from 10 % to 17 %. The two figures are very closely related, so when one rises, the other does, and vice versa, so either works for comparisons as long as you are consistent, and the number American gave is available and I assume economists do work with it.

 

[American]

Not to burst your bubble but isn't CNBC part of the MSM?

I said "have been".

 

[Redress]

I said "have been".

And you are wrong, since I have seen both figures on MSNBC. It's not like the figure you quoted is some hush hush figure, it's well known.

 

[RyrineaHaruno]

I guess holding a part time job means your unemployed. I have a part time job, but I tend have it, because I go to college. I like my part time job because I am it goes with the flow of my college classes. I can work some hours during the week, and then go to classes as well.

 

[Redress]

I guess holding a part time job means your unemployed. I have a part time job, but I tend have it, because I go to college.

As I understand it, underemployed refers to people working part time who want to work full time. For example, since I am laid off again(though not for terribly long this time, just till first of the year), and I took a part time job to supplement my unemployment benefits(not that there are part time jobs open around here), I would still be counted as unemployed using the figure American posted, but not the figure that is more generally referred to as "the unemployment rate".

 

[MSgt]

Unemployment is a poor excuse for the lazy.

 

[Redress]

Unemployment is a poor excuse for the lazy.

Sometimes, not always. Oversimplification is a sign of a weak mind sometimes too.

 

[apdst]

Unemployment is a poor excuse for the lazy.

When the unemployment rate is at 4%, yeah.

 

[Kushinator]

Oh how cute... The U-6 has surfaced on a day when leading economic indicators have been quite solid. I highly doubt we'll see anything about the natural rate of unemployment.

 

[Kushinator]

Unemployment is a poor excuse for the lazy.

Unless of course scarcity exists