0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Quote from: 06wildcat on December 15, 2011, 06:10:17 PMQuote from: john "teach me how to" dougie on December 15, 2011, 05:53:42 PMQuote from: 06wildcat on December 15, 2011, 05:29:29 PMQuote from: john "teach me how to" dougie on December 15, 2011, 04:43:08 PMYes, it is obvious from the article. The actual rate includes anyone able to work that is over 18 and under 65, and that percentage is over 25%. The problem with the government numbers are many, including that as people run out of unemployment benefits, they simply drop them from the work force like they no longer exist. Right now, for many people, their three years are coming to an end at a rate of 300,000 to 400,000 per month, which will improve the government unemployment rate numbers, but not the actual.JFC you are dumb. Exhausting unemployment benefits doesn't mean you're not counted as unemployed.Perhaps this will help:QuoteWho is counted as unemployed?Persons are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work.http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm#unemployed If you aren't collecting benefits, they don't know you are looking for a job. Notice its "and" , not "or". This is an example how the government manipulates the numbers. "Golly gee, we haven't heard from Joe since his bennies ran out, so he must be working!"Are you rough ridin' Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)? At 8.6 percent with a workforce of approximately 140 million, there's 12 million people unemployed according to the BLS. There's only 6.7 million people collecting unemployment benefits right now. How the eff did the BLS find those other 5 million people. That or you believe that only 80 million people are in the workforce.I mean any responsible pollster is going to know that you can only ask people receiving unemployment benefits to answer a survey. Same for political polling. They really only ask registered voters receiving unemployment benefits to participate in those.So you admit it is a shitty way to arrive at an accurate unemployment percentage.
Quote from: john "teach me how to" dougie on December 15, 2011, 05:53:42 PMQuote from: 06wildcat on December 15, 2011, 05:29:29 PMQuote from: john "teach me how to" dougie on December 15, 2011, 04:43:08 PMYes, it is obvious from the article. The actual rate includes anyone able to work that is over 18 and under 65, and that percentage is over 25%. The problem with the government numbers are many, including that as people run out of unemployment benefits, they simply drop them from the work force like they no longer exist. Right now, for many people, their three years are coming to an end at a rate of 300,000 to 400,000 per month, which will improve the government unemployment rate numbers, but not the actual.JFC you are dumb. Exhausting unemployment benefits doesn't mean you're not counted as unemployed.Perhaps this will help:QuoteWho is counted as unemployed?Persons are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work.http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm#unemployed If you aren't collecting benefits, they don't know you are looking for a job. Notice its "and" , not "or". This is an example how the government manipulates the numbers. "Golly gee, we haven't heard from Joe since his bennies ran out, so he must be working!"Are you rough ridin' Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)? At 8.6 percent with a workforce of approximately 140 million, there's 12 million people unemployed according to the BLS. There's only 6.7 million people collecting unemployment benefits right now. How the eff did the BLS find those other 5 million people. That or you believe that only 80 million people are in the workforce.I mean any responsible pollster is going to know that you can only ask people receiving unemployment benefits to answer a survey. Same for political polling. They really only ask registered voters receiving unemployment benefits to participate in those.
Quote from: 06wildcat on December 15, 2011, 05:29:29 PMQuote from: john "teach me how to" dougie on December 15, 2011, 04:43:08 PMYes, it is obvious from the article. The actual rate includes anyone able to work that is over 18 and under 65, and that percentage is over 25%. The problem with the government numbers are many, including that as people run out of unemployment benefits, they simply drop them from the work force like they no longer exist. Right now, for many people, their three years are coming to an end at a rate of 300,000 to 400,000 per month, which will improve the government unemployment rate numbers, but not the actual.JFC you are dumb. Exhausting unemployment benefits doesn't mean you're not counted as unemployed.Perhaps this will help:QuoteWho is counted as unemployed?Persons are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work.http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm#unemployed If you aren't collecting benefits, they don't know you are looking for a job. Notice its "and" , not "or". This is an example how the government manipulates the numbers. "Golly gee, we haven't heard from Joe since his bennies ran out, so he must be working!"
Quote from: john "teach me how to" dougie on December 15, 2011, 04:43:08 PMYes, it is obvious from the article. The actual rate includes anyone able to work that is over 18 and under 65, and that percentage is over 25%. The problem with the government numbers are many, including that as people run out of unemployment benefits, they simply drop them from the work force like they no longer exist. Right now, for many people, their three years are coming to an end at a rate of 300,000 to 400,000 per month, which will improve the government unemployment rate numbers, but not the actual.JFC you are dumb. Exhausting unemployment benefits doesn't mean you're not counted as unemployed.Perhaps this will help:QuoteWho is counted as unemployed?Persons are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work.http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm#unemployed
Yes, it is obvious from the article. The actual rate includes anyone able to work that is over 18 and under 65, and that percentage is over 25%. The problem with the government numbers are many, including that as people run out of unemployment benefits, they simply drop them from the work force like they no longer exist. Right now, for many people, their three years are coming to an end at a rate of 300,000 to 400,000 per month, which will improve the government unemployment rate numbers, but not the actual.
Who is counted as unemployed?Persons are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work.
Quote from: john "teach me how to" dougie on December 15, 2011, 06:35:30 PMQuote from: 06wildcat on December 15, 2011, 06:10:17 PMQuote from: john "teach me how to" dougie on December 15, 2011, 05:53:42 PMQuote from: 06wildcat on December 15, 2011, 05:29:29 PMQuote from: john "teach me how to" dougie on December 15, 2011, 04:43:08 PMYes, it is obvious from the article. The actual rate includes anyone able to work that is over 18 and under 65, and that percentage is over 25%. The problem with the government numbers are many, including that as people run out of unemployment benefits, they simply drop them from the work force like they no longer exist. Right now, for many people, their three years are coming to an end at a rate of 300,000 to 400,000 per month, which will improve the government unemployment rate numbers, but not the actual.JFC you are dumb. Exhausting unemployment benefits doesn't mean you're not counted as unemployed.Perhaps this will help:QuoteWho is counted as unemployed?Persons are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work.http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm#unemployed If you aren't collecting benefits, they don't know you are looking for a job. Notice its "and" , not "or". This is an example how the government manipulates the numbers. "Golly gee, we haven't heard from Joe since his bennies ran out, so he must be working!"Are you rough ridin' Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)? At 8.6 percent with a workforce of approximately 140 million, there's 12 million people unemployed according to the BLS. There's only 6.7 million people collecting unemployment benefits right now. How the eff did the BLS find those other 5 million people. That or you believe that only 80 million people are in the workforce.I mean any responsible pollster is going to know that you can only ask people receiving unemployment benefits to answer a survey. Same for political polling. They really only ask registered voters receiving unemployment benefits to participate in those.So you admit it is a shitty way to arrive at an accurate unemployment percentage. It's about as accurate as you can get in a country of 300 million-plus people. Even if it's wildly inaccurate, as you suggest, it helps to know how the number is actually calculated, which you don't. But congrats on knowing nothing about the subject you're talking about and verifying your diminished mental capacity. You're quite good at that.
Please provide the exact number of jobs in the U.S. right now.
Quote from: 06wildcat on December 15, 2011, 06:55:38 PMPlease provide the exact number of jobs in the U.S. right now.I think the IRS has that data for you.
In my part of the world an 8.6% unemployment rate would be a massive improvement.
Quote from: sonofdaxjones on December 15, 2011, 11:50:36 PMIn my part of the world an 8.6% unemployment rate would be a massive improvement.It's only 6.7% in Kansas.
Quote from: Nuts Kicked on December 16, 2011, 08:05:17 AMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on December 15, 2011, 11:50:36 PMIn my part of the world an 8.6% unemployment rate would be a massive improvement.It's only 6.7% in Kansas. 4.2% in Nebraska
Quote from: steve dave on December 16, 2011, 08:19:14 AMQuote from: Nuts Kicked on December 16, 2011, 08:05:17 AMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on December 15, 2011, 11:50:36 PMIn my part of the world an 8.6% unemployment rate would be a massive improvement.It's only 6.7% in Kansas. 4.2% in Nebraska Oklahoma at 6.1%. Californians rejoice!
Quote from: Nuts Kicked on December 16, 2011, 08:23:31 AMQuote from: steve dave on December 16, 2011, 08:19:14 AMQuote from: Nuts Kicked on December 16, 2011, 08:05:17 AMQuote from: sonofdaxjones on December 15, 2011, 11:50:36 PMIn my part of the world an 8.6% unemployment rate would be a massive improvement.It's only 6.7% in Kansas. 4.2% in Nebraska Oklahoma at 6.1%. Californians rejoice!Obama's model of success only 11.7%
Quote from: LickNeckey on December 15, 2011, 01:47:13 PMQuote from: Stupid Fitz on December 15, 2011, 12:25:15 PMI find the left's Fox news obsession to be fascinating. I mean, there are so many obvious left pointing news organizations, but Fox being right just makes them crazy. Very odd. not obsessed. don't watch it. don't really care. i disagree that there are so many obvious left pointing news organizations, MSNBC obviously but most others seem pretty impartialnot sure what Fox has gotten "right" that has made people crazy?lol
Quote from: Stupid Fitz on December 15, 2011, 12:25:15 PMI find the left's Fox news obsession to be fascinating. I mean, there are so many obvious left pointing news organizations, but Fox being right just makes them crazy. Very odd. not obsessed. don't watch it. don't really care. i disagree that there are so many obvious left pointing news organizations, MSNBC obviously but most others seem pretty impartialnot sure what Fox has gotten "right" that has made people crazy?
I find the left's Fox news obsession to be fascinating. I mean, there are so many obvious left pointing news organizations, but Fox being right just makes them crazy. Very odd.
Quote from: Stupid Fitz on December 15, 2011, 12:25:15 PMI find the left's Fox news obsession to be fascinating. I mean, there are so many obvious left pointing news organizations, but Fox being right just makes them crazy. Very odd. This. Scouring a 24 hour "news" channel in search of typographical errors is really quite pathetic. They actually pay people to do this full time; Media Matters a leftist well funded "501(c)(3)".These are the same people that get their news from pseudo-journalist and untalented ass clown Jon Stewart. The irony is quite wonderful.
Quote from: Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) on December 17, 2011, 08:03:32 AMQuote from: Stupid Fitz on December 15, 2011, 12:25:15 PMI find the left's Fox news obsession to be fascinating. I mean, there are so many obvious left pointing news organizations, but Fox being right just makes them crazy. Very odd. This. Scouring a 24 hour "news" channel in search of typographical errors is really quite pathetic. They actually pay people to do this full time; Media Matters a leftist well funded "501(c)(3)".These are the same people that get their news from pseudo-journalist and untalented ass clown Jon Stewart. The irony is quite wonderful.pfffft
Quote from: Stupid Fitz on December 15, 2011, 12:25:15 PMI find the left's Fox news obsession to be fascinating. I mean, there are so many obvious left pointing news organizations, but Fox being right just makes them crazy. Very odd. right about what? being bigots who are "praying" that poor people go away?
