What's the real unemployment rate?

[takncarabizniz]

<a href="https://www.youtube.com/v/Hn6JWzoKv14" target="_blank">https://www.youtube.com/v/Hn6JWzoKv14</a> 



Because surveying 60,000 homes out of 3 billion people is an accurate measurement...right?

And with 6 different rate scenarios, this nation is totally screwy...

[D2D]

Sadly, Obama has ruined America and her work ethic!

[captain_kook]

"Because surveying 60,000 homes out of 3 billion people is an accurate measurement"

compared to the usual one or two thousand-person sample used by most pollsters.

Yes it is more accurate when combined with the other factors the BLS uses.

NOBODY can cite the exact number of Americans able to work and available to work who need a job.

[D2D]

Kook is happy more than a third of working age Americans have dropped out of the workforce!

That leaves fewer workers to support the dependent class!

[jst-the-fax]

3 billion cpt. kooky...where did you get that number?

But to the point...all during dictator obama's reign...media reported on the U3 number and never mentioned the U6 number. Now if President Trump doesn't bring that number down...it will be the number the MSM now uses?

[D2D]

Good point Jst!

I didn't know America had "3 billion" working age Americans!

[takncarabizniz]

Actually, I provided the 3 billion number in my original post.  There are 3 billion people in the US, just for perspective...of that, certainly, I don't know the number of working age folks, but I do know that 60,000 seems a drop in the bucket.

[D2D]

According to the BLS the number of working age Americans is 159,640,000 with only 100,094,280 currently employed!

That leaves 59,545,720 out of the workforce!

Those are tragic numbers!

[D2D]

[wvit1001]

all you old retired tea party goofs need to get back to work.

[Jw2]

not every individual 16 years and older wants to work.

my kids started working at age 16.  part-time.  because they worked < 30 hours, they are considered under employed.

there's really no upper end age limit. 

I know 62 year olds who:  work full-time, work part-time because they have to, work part-time because that fits their needs ($$$) or lifestyle and those who are retired.

There are hundreds of thousands who physically can not work - they're disabled, on SSI.

My stay-at-home spouse, who raised our children the old fashioned way (and these spouses still make up 15-20% of households) didn't count.



I appreciate that tcb is so concerned.  Please come back here next year and we can do some comparisons.

[gwboolean]

I always find it interesting the numbers that our TrEA$on party colleagues use when they fraudulently discuss unemployment.  As we all know there are several (6 that I know of) different unemployment rates. 

What I have found is that when they refer to the unemployment rate, while discussing Obama, they use the U6 rate and when they discuss unemployment under, say Bush as an example, they use the U4 rate.  Now if the U4 rate is used then Obama would be responsible for a rate of about 4% while his predecessor Bush would have been responsible for a nearly 12% rate (both at the end of their respective terms).  Using the U6 rate we find that Obama is responsible for a rate of over 7% while his predecessor Bush had a corresponding rate of nearly 20%. 

So whenever we hear any of our TrEA$on party colleagues fraudulently whining about unemployment under Obama we can easily recognize their source of Maskorovska. Almost clever of them.