Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Romulox

(25,960 posts)

5. Entirely separate from this dust up, the unemployment numbers ARE obviously cooked.

Reply to pampango (Original post)

Wed Oct 10, 2012, 09:46 AM

Oct 2012

The idea that "discouraged" workers can be excluded, as well as underunemployed persons, from any TRUE count of unemployment has been logically dubious from the first.

This has been discussed in depth here at DU for years.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

6 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

NYT: To live and seethe in that world of conspiracy theories means rejecting any form of objective [View all] pampango Oct 2012 OP

It impossible to argue with any conspiracy theory nut... Javaman Oct 2012 #1

The most frustrating thing is that Counter evidence becomes evidence el_bryanto Oct 2012 #2

Also, the conspiracy theories build on themselves gollygee Oct 2012 #3

I'm amazed that was published in the NY Times. sinkingfeeling Oct 2012 #4

Of course, birthers/teabaggers are not. To them the NYT is the epitome of the dreaded LIBERAL MEDIA. pampango Oct 2012 #6

Entirely separate from this dust up, the unemployment numbers ARE obviously cooked. Romulox Oct 2012 #5