So who's really unemployed?

[Tab]

We measure unemployment by the number of people receiving benefits, but that's not really a good indicator.

If you were or are a consultant, you don't qualify, and there's a lot of consultants out there. Not in the low-wage industries, but in the higher-wage industries (computer, financial, whatever).

If you owned your own business, you don't qualify.

As a President of a corporation, you don't qualify, and a corporation doesn't have to be General Motors. Any asshole can incorporate.

If you took a lesser-paying job (meaning "underemployed") you're off unemployment, but you ain't making what you did.

Unemployment doesn't last forever. If you exhaust your benefits, you're not on the unemployment rolls, but that doesn't mean you're employed.

So take the unemployment numbers and at least double them. Maybe triple them?

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TwilightGardener]

2. Yikes. What did the OP say that was so wrong?

[Tab]

3. I wanted to think you were being sarcastic

but I'm not so sure.

[NNN0LHI]

5. Don't let it get to you

TahitiNut tanned my ass on this very subject a few years ago.

Sometimes we get the bear and other times the bear gets us.

Live and learn is what I say.

Don

[Esra Star]

4. Deep breaths, nice and easy....that's it.

I think your point is that education is required. I agree with that !00%.
Try not to abuse the people who need the learnin'.

Remember the golden rule:

"Before they care what you know, they must know that you care."

Cheers

[TahitiNut]

9. This same falsehood has been puked up dozens of times on DU and shown for the myth it is each time.

It's beyond stupid.

[Tab]

15. I'm speaking from experience

As a former consultant, a former officer of a corporation, etc... If you are unemployed but try to generate business - tough shit to you. I had a conversation with unemployment a few years ago - they asked if I was still an officer of my corporation, and I said yes. They asked if I did anything for it, and I said "well, I answer the phone if it rings, but it doesn't ring". Well, that disqualified me right there (the fact that I was trying to "drum up" business). So, officially not "unemployed" even though I wasn't making any money.

[TahitiNut]

17. Your ELIGIBILITY for unemployment benefits does NOT determine whether you're counted as unemployed.

Period. Some are. Some aren't.

They are separate and distinct. Do your homework.

[Esra Star]

22. Yes you are correct.

I find that so much of DU is beyond the pale.
The good thing is that they are communicating, or attempting to.
It might not be much, but it all we've got to work with.
Keep up the good work.

[TBF]

30. Although the op may not be correct, would you say the "official"

number we hear quoted in the msm is pretty accurate, then, or understated? Many people don't understand the nuances of this, even if they are reasonably educated.

[TahitiNut]

31. The unemployment rate ("U3") typically quoted in the media ("U3") MAY or MAY NOT match any ...

... individual's perceptions. For an unemployed older person in Michigan, it's far too low. For an employed younger person in Washington, DC, it sounds high. From my personal experience, the elimination of workers too discouraged to look for work in the prior 4 weeks, combined with the elimination of folks who did SOME work (to stay alive) in that period, is overly conservative ... but that's how they report THAT measure. That's why *I* look at the alternative measures of unemployment.

[hfojvt]

10. but, but, but It's the conventional wisdom that we do

everybody knows that

[JDPriestly]

12. The numbers are much higher because when they ask you

whether you are working, they don't consider people who are working just a few hours a week or the people who are working but not getting paid for their work. There is a lot of that going on.

A lot of people "borrowed" money on their houses to start up consultancy or other small businesses. They try to keep going but aren't getting work. There are many, many people in that category. The numbers do not add up. I personally know so many people who are out of work in California.

Do you actually know anyone who has ever been called in one of these surveys they claim they make? I don't, and I certainly have not been called myself.

[pinqy]

32. Not true

For the 16 and over population not in prison, the military or other institution:

If you worked for pay for at least one hour in the reference period, you're considered to be "Employed." If you worked for at least 15 hours unpaid for a family run business or farm you are also considered "Employed."

If you do not meet those criteria and have actively looked for work in the previous 4 weeks or are on temporary layoff expecting to return to work, you are Unemployed.

If you don't fit either of those, you are Not in the Labor Force.
Of those Not in the Labor Force, special attention is made for those who say they want to work, are available to work, and have looked in the last year but aren't looking now for whatever reason (the Marginally Attached) and the sub-set of the Marginally attached who aren't looking because they don't think they'll find any work (Discouraged Workers).

The numbers of part-time and full-time (for statistical reasons, "full-time is 35 hours or more/week) are published. The reason for part-time work is also published.

Calling anyone who actually worked for pay "unemployed" makes a mess of everything because it becomes too subjective. When I was finishing up my degree (in Economics) I worked 10 hours a week for near minimum wage. I was Employed and considered myself so, and so would pretty much anyone. The next semester, the school changed things around and I only worked 3-4 hours a week, but my hourly pay increased so that I didn't make any less money. So was I employed or not employed working only 4 hours/week? I certainly considered myself Employed. By the alternate U-6 measurement (which includes all Marginally Attached and part-time for economic reasons as unemployed), someone who normally works full-time, but for the one week surveyed worked only 34 hours would be considered Unemployed. So I would be employed at 4 hrs/week and this other person would be Unemployed at 34 hrs/week. That just doesn't work if you're trying to have any kind of coherent numbers.

Now the U-6 definition does work IF you're looking at perceptions and desires rather than the actual market situation, and that has its place, just not for an official estimation.

[JDPriestly]

19. I read the website. Here's the catch. People who have been out of work,

let's say for four years, are considered "not in the labor force." They no longer send out resumes since they have sent resumes to just about every employer who is appropriate for them. These people probably try to sell their services through some other means or are simply living on loans or savings. A lot of these people are older and take retirement earlier than they intended. They are living on very, very little but are "not in the labor force." If the job market looked good, they would go back into the labor force. That is why the employment numbers are inaccurate. And since a lot of people lost their jobs about four to five years ago (especially a lot of older people and very skilled or well-educated people), they are no longer considered to be in the labor force. That is the government's out. That skews the numbers.

[TahitiNut]

23. If a person CONTINUES to look for work they're counted.

The length of time they're unemployed is relevant ONLY to their rationale for NOT looking.

Look... there's not much question that MOST of us intuitively think of "unemployed" in many different ways. The FACT of the matter is that the statistical methods for measuring unemployment DON'T haven anything to do with unemployment benefits! THAT'S the falsehood.

There ARE alternative measures of unemployment ... INCLUDING one that includes "discouraged workers."

Again ... there's FACT and there's MYTH. The difference is essential to sane and reasoned discourse.

[Coyote_Bandit]

6. Thanks

for pointing out that lots of folks are not included in those official unemployment numbers. I'm one of them.

And, even though I'm sure it was not intentional, thanks for providing the opportunity to add another notch in my ignore list. I do not feel obligated to entertain the commentary of those who do not play well with others. Makes my DU experience a whole hell of a lot better.

[NNN0LHI]

7. I don't think I would put TahitiNut on your ignore list if I were you

He is right about most things.

I have learned that the hard way too but it was worth the lessons.

Don

[TahitiNut]

13. I appreciate the good words, Don.

This particular "urban myth" gets under my skin. It's something I equate to the "birther" crap. We have NEVER measured unemployment by those who collect benefits. Never. Ever.

[Coyote_Bandit]

14. I don't put folks on my ignore list because

they are right or wrong or because they disagree with me.

I put them there because they are either bigotted or rude.

They do not play well with others.

[NNN0LHI]

18. Thats OK but you will lose more than you will gain by doing so

I promise.

I have learned more from TahitiNut than just about anyone else here. Some of it I learned the hard way too.

Its no big deal.

Don

[EFerrari]

21. It's just like getting to know your friends, isn't it?

lol

:loveya:

[NNN0LHI]

25. It is

:toast:

[Coyote_Bandit]

26. Fortunately

knowledge is not exclusivey resident in a single individual.

[EFerrari]

28. Not after it's originated by an individual it's not.

Then it becomes part of the public fund.

[redqueen]

27. +1

It's the nastiness, not the correctness.

One can be correct without being an asshole about it.

[EFerrari]

16. Anomaly. We all likely have that issue that sets us off. Ask me about Hugo Chavez.

lol

:hi:

[JDPriestly]

8. Absolutely. Many people have lost their jobs over the past years

and then tried to set up their own businesses -- which are now faltering in this economy. So the unemployment numbers are much, much higher than the reported numbers. I know people who lost their jobs four to five years ago and, in spite of trying very hard to find new ones, have not been able to find new, stable jobs -- just maybe a little work here and there. The situation is much, much worse than admitted by our government.

[tonysam]

20. Self-Employment is Always Touted as an Alternative, But

it's no use setting up a business if nobody is going to buy what you have to offer because they are tightening their belts.

There's the rub.

[Hannah Bell]

11. How unemployment is measured:

The Bureau of Labor Statistics measures employment and unemployment (of those over 15 years of age) using two different labor force surveys<28> conducted by the United States Census Bureau (within the United States Department of Commerce) and/or the Bureau of Labor Statistics (within the United States Department of Labor) that gather employment statistics monthly.

The Current Population Survey (CPS), or "Household Survey", conducts a survey based on a sample of 60,000 households. This Survey measures the unemployment rate based on the ILO definition.<29> The data is also used to calculate 5 alternate measures of unemployment as a percentage of the labor force based on different definitions noted as U1 through U6:<30>

U1: Percentage of labor force unemployed 15 weeks or longer.

U2: Percentage of labor force who lost jobs or completed temporary work.

U3: Official unemployment rate per ILO definition.

U4: U3 + "discouraged workers", or those who have stopped looking for work because current economic conditions make them believe that no work is available for them.

U5: U4 + other "marginally attached workers", or those who "would like" and are able to work, but have not looked for work recently.

U6: U5 + Part time workers who want to work full time, but can not due to economic reasons.
Note: "Marginally attached workers" are added to the total labor force for unemployment rate calculation for U4, U5, and U6. The BLS revised the CPS in 1994 and among the changes the measure representing the official unemployment rate was renamed U3 instead of U5.

The Current Employment Statistics survey (CES), or "Payroll Survey", conducts a survey based on a sample of 160,000 businesses and government agencies that represent 400,000 individual employers.

This survey measures only nonagricultural, nonsupervisory employment; thus, it does not calculate an unemployment rate, and it differs from the ILO unemployment rate definition. These two sources have different classification criteria, and usually produce differing results.

Additional data are also available from the government, such as the unemployment insurance weekly claims report available from the Office of Workforce Security, within the U.S. Department of Labor Employment & Training Administration.<32>


wikipedia.


U-3 is the "official" unemployment measure most often used in news reports.

[redqueen]

24. I thought there were more than that. Wasn't U-11 or U-12 the actual number?

It's been so long since I looked it up. Maybe they've changed the tables around since then.

[pinqy]

33. There's never been a U-11 or 12, but...

..the old alternative measures (1976-1993)were:

• U-1 Persons unemployed 15 weeks or longer, as a percent of the civilian labor force
  
• U-2 Job losers, as a percent of the civilian labor force
  
• U-3 Unemployed persons aged 25 and older, as a percent of the civilian labor force aged 25 and older
  
• U-4 Unemployed persons seeking full time jobs as a percent of the full time labor force
  
• U-5 Total unemployed persons, as a percent of the civilian labor force (the official unemployment rate
  
• U-6 Total persons seeking full time jobs, plus one-half of persons seeking part-time jobs, plus one-half of persons employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force less one-half of the part time labor force
  
• U-7 Total persons seeking full-time jobs, plus one-half of persons seeking part-time jobs, plus one-half of persons employed part time for economic reasons, plus discouraged workers, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus discourage workers less one-half of the part time labor force

Source: BLS introduces new range of alternative unemployment measures

[NC_Nurse]

29. Don't forget people who left a job for other reasons and then couldn't find

work again. We moved for family reasons and my husband is still out of work.