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
 

MadHound

(34,179 posts)
6. Well, actually, they aren't
Fri Feb 17, 2012, 11:29 AM
Feb 2012

And they haven't been for a long, long while.

Presidents and politicians like to put the best possible spin on the figures, so over the years they've massaged them in order to make them look better. Seasonal adjustments were one big move. Another was Reagan's move to count the military as being employed in the civilian work force. And yes, Palin is correct about a couple of things(after all, a stopped clock is right twice a day). The lowering U3 numbers(the figure that gets broadcast by the media) don't reflect the increase of discouraged workers and underemployed workers.

Again, the inaccuracy of the unemployment numbers has been pointed out under presidents ranging from Reagan to Bush II and now to Obama. It has been estimated that if we counted the unemployed like we did under FDR, our current number would be well into the double digit range.

This also applies to other big government statistics. Another favorite number for politicians and presidents to massage is the inflation rate. CPI has been massaged to keep artificially low in order to get maximum propaganda value. Things like not including "volatile" food and fuel prices. Thus, we are left wondering why our paychecks are disappearing at an ever increasing rate, while inflation remains steady.

Frankly, a lot of these numbers serve nothing more than propaganda value, and you should take them with a huge grain of salt.

Recommendations

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

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Palin Still Trying To Fig...»Reply #6