Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Unemployment numbers are a wash

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
59millionmorons Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-03-04 08:06 AM
Original message
Unemployment numbers are a wash
There is nothing for Bush to brag about and not much there for Kerry to jump on. Looks to me that burger king did some hiring.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
DemNoir Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-03-04 08:08 AM
Original message
A wash indeed
As in we will all be working in car washes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bernardo de La Paz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-03-04 08:08 AM
Response to Original message
1. They are a failure for Bush. He won't keep his promises on jobs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
59millionmorons Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-03-04 08:10 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. True
But I am talking about just this month. It is sort of like kissing your sister, no sparks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whistle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-03-04 08:17 AM
Response to Original message
3. Hello, unemployment is higher by 1.6 million workers....
...according to BSL numbers
<Snip>
Unemployment (Household Survey Data)

Both the number of unemployed persons, 8.0 million, and the unemployment
rate, 5.4 percent, were little changed from July to August. The jobless rate
is down from its recent high of 6.3 percent in June 2003; most of this decline
occurred in the second half of last year. In August, the unemployment rates
for the major worker groups--adult men (5.0 percent), adult women (4.7 percent),
teenagers (17.0 percent), whites (4.7 percent), blacks (10.4 percent), and
Hispanics or Latinos (6.9 percent)--showed little change over the month. The
unemployment rate for Asians was 3.6 percent in August, not seasonally adjusted.
(See tables A-1, A-2, and A-3.)

Total Employment and the Labor Force (Household Survey Data)

Total employment held at 139.7 million in August, and the employment-pop-
ulation ratio--the proportion of the population age 16 and over with jobs--
was essentially unchanged at 62.4 percent. The civilian labor force was about
unchanged over the month at 147.7 million. After rising in July, the labor
force participation rate edged down to its June level of 66.0 percent. (See
table A-1.)

Persons Not in the Labor Force (Household Survey Data)

The number of persons who were marginally attached to the labor force was
1.6 million in August, about the same as a year earlier. (Data are not sea-
sonally adjusted.) These individuals wanted and were available to work and


had looked for a job sometime in the prior 12 months. They were not counted
as unemployed, however, because they did not actively search for work in the
4 weeks preceding the survey. There were 534,000 discouraged workers in
August, also about the same as a year earlier. Discouraged workers, a subset
of the marginally attached, were not currently looking for work specifically
because they believed no jobs were available for them. The other 1.1 million
marginally attached had not searched for work for reasons such as school or
family responsibilities. (See table A-13.)

This tells me that the unemployment rate is more like 9.6 million or really 6.4%. Then there is the issue of death/birth adjustments and the fact that the 144,000 new jobs numbers is 80% fudge factor. It is right about one thing, nothing has changed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sydnie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-03-04 09:59 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Do you have a link for that info? I'd like to read the whole thing. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
whistle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Sep-04-04 06:00 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. Sure, I sould have put that on the post....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
drumwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-03-04 09:00 AM
Response to Original message
4. agreed
The numbers won't help Bush for sure, but I was hoping they'd hurt him more than I think they will.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 09:33 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC