Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: 7.8% unemployment statistics are a meaningless conjob

Posted 1 year ago on Oct. 5, 2012, 10:38 a.m. EST by Underdog (2971) from Clermont, FL
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Given the choice of two evils, I will take Obama over Romney any day of the week. The latest 7.8% unemployment figure released today should help bolster the President's campaign for re-election. But politics aside, the MSM does not report the more realistic U6 data, but instead only reports the official U3 data as released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).

Just take a look at this link and study it for a moment. Note that U6, currently at 14.7%, includes the following definition: "U-6 Total unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force"

And did you see the NOTE at the bottom? Persons marginally attached to the labor force are those who currently are neither working nor looking for work but indicate they want and are available for a job and have looked for work sometime in the past 12 months. Discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached. have given a job-market related reason for not currently looking for work. Persons employed part time for economic reasons are those who want and are available for full-time work but have had to settle for a part-time schedule.

The U6 data is the truer indication of unemployment in the US today and it is the data that should be reported in the media. Yet, it hardly ever gets any mention whatsoever. Why? (rhetorical question). It is obvious that the state of unemployment in the US today is very, very dire. Neither candidate would want to have that information widely known to the public. So the official U3 unemployment data is a conjob.

This cartoon sums up the situation in a nutshell.

Government and politicians need to come clean on the true state of unemployment in America. Anybody want to put a bet down on when that will happen?

30 Comments

30 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 2 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 1 year ago

Our whole establishment media is a conjob. The so-called journalism schools should close up shop or turn out bloggers. The paid liars of the corpoRAT press don't want the sheep to know the truth. They might wake up.

The true unemployment stats were defined out of existence in 1994 under Clinton. Perception management is the name of the game.

The true number is 22-23%, which means we are in a depression. Ack, the "d" word!

http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/unemployment-charts

Paul Craig Roberts on other shadowstat data: http://www.lewrockwell.com/roberts/roberts366.html .

[-] 2 points by Renneye (3313) 1 year ago

Thanks ND! Important post!

[-] 2 points by Underdog (2971) from Clermont, FL 1 year ago

Holy Shit!!! That's as shameful as it is incredible. I had no idea that data was phased out. Do you have any idea why it was gotten rid of (besides the obvious governmental embarrasment)? If that data is used then, absolutely and positively, we are in GD2.

Would you mind if I updated this post with that graph? It really is shocking. I had no idea.

[-] 3 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 1 year ago

Do what you want of course.

The criminal elite that rule us think we're stupid sheep. I don't believe the casualty numbers from their wars (committed in our names) either. I think Clinton and the Powers-That-Be decided that they didn't want to scare the sheep -- you know, we might stop eating grass (consuming). We're like farm animals to them.

[-] 1 points by hazencage (58) 1 year ago

Actually the government still uses all six measures, and they are released on a routine basis by the BLS, and various private agencies whom also conduct the surveys. Official Figures used during the 1930s were arranged differently compared to today, but it was during this period that our government started to take tracking unemployment figures more seriously. When the Great Depression hit, these unemployment figures indicated that the unemployment rate peaked at 25 percent in 1933. In comparison to this the economic crisis of the late 2000's experienced a peak unemployment rate of 10.1% in the year 2009. Finally not only do both figures express a large difference in the amount unemployed, but anyone who cares about economic history will look back to see how they are collected, and will eventually find that today's U3 data series is very similar to the Great Depression. Thus, if the Great Depression were to occur in a world confined to the current labor statistics, we would find that the U3 unemployment rate would be around 25%, and that the U6 unemployment series may be as high as 50%.

[-] 1 points by Underdog (2971) from Clermont, FL 1 year ago

"...today's U3 data series is very similar to the Great Depression."

Just so I understand you clearly, you are saying that, in your opinion, we are in another Great Depression, yes?

If so, I wonder why this hasn't made it's way somehow to the MSM. They care about market share and headlines, and being able to blast a headline like "United States proven to be in another Great Depression" would seem too tantalizing to pass up. Maybe this whole Great Recession label is just a euphemism to hide the truth of the actual GD2.

[-] 1 points by hazencage (58) 1 year ago

I meant to say that the U3 unemployment series is collected in a way that is comparable to the manner in which we used to collect unemployment figures in the 1930's. Henceforth the U3 unemployment rate of the GReat Depression would have been 25%, and the U6 figure may have been as high as 50%( some have even put it at 80%).

[-] 1 points by Underdog (2971) from Clermont, FL 1 year ago

Oh. So then you are saying, in your opinion, that we have never even been close to the Great Depression? Others on this forum seem to think differently and believe that we are in GD2.

When Obama came into office in 2008 he walked into a full-blown fire passed to him by Bush2. Obama has been severely criticized by the Rs for spending trillions and running up the debt, but they conveniently forget that had he not done that (QE1 and QE2 by the Fed) we would have likely been plunged into an economic dark age (and hence the rest of the world along with us).

I would really like to know the actual truth about unemployment and whether or not we are really in another Great Depression or not. If we are, the truth needs to be told to the people and not supressed.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

Ack, the "d" word!

I couldn't get out of bed

[-] 1 points by nomdeguerre (1775) from Brooklyn, NY 1 year ago

Do you ever make sense? I guess you are paid by the quantity, not the quality.

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 1 year ago

"q"s are 10 points

[-] 0 points by hazencage (58) 1 year ago

The current U3 statistical figure we use is very similar to what was used in the 1930's, and therefore our unemployment rate is not even close to what it was during the great depression. Some economists even estimate that the U6 unemployment rate during the great depression may have been as high as 50%. Finally Lewrockwell.com is not a credible source, because often times they allow individuals such as Ron Paul and Thomas Dilrenzo to publish articles that do nothing more then try to rewrite the truth(. I.e Congressional Medals, The Real Lincoln, and so forth.).

[-] 1 points by UntilUKnow (35) 1 year ago

Agreed! Bottom line is, if 7.8% is bogus, so isn't 8.3% or 8.5% or 9.0%, or whatever. Point being, you either have to believe it or not. You can't defend it for the Republicans and not the Democrats. Unless of course you're jsut a meer ideolog.

[-] 1 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 1 year ago

I wouldn't be surprized to see the unemployment rate crawl up to about 25-30% and stay there indefinitely.

[-] 1 points by Underdog (2971) from Clermont, FL 1 year ago

FYI, even though Florida is at 8.8% officially, where I live in Florida the official unemployment rate is 10.2%, and the job growth stat is -1.43% (negative 1.43, not positive). I think it is important to remember that the official statistic is a nationwide average. There are certain areas of the country, like Nevada (12.1%), California (10.7%), and Rhode Island (10.6%) where it is very high above average. In total, there were 23 states above the official 7.8% average. This fact doesn't get much MSM attention either.

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

It won't happen. It needs to be pushed. Homelessness needs to be pushed. The lack of affordable housing needs to be pushed. All of that needs to be pushed. Poverty pimps need to shown for what they are. Non profits and corps that antognize the situation or benefit-need to be exposed. We make it an issue and then they have no choice but to make it an issue.

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (34909) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Say it LOUD - Say it PROUD - Everyone TAKE UP THE CALL TO ACTION. Thx GF Thx UD

tweeted this post.

[-] 2 points by Ache4Change (3280) 1 year ago

"TAKE UP THE CALL TO ACTION" and after you have seen 'Inside Job' - http://vimeo.com/24981578 - there will be NO confusion or uncertainty why we need to!

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (34909) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

A very good documentary - should go viral - tweet it.

http://vimeo.com/24981578

[-] 1 points by Ache4Change (3280) 1 year ago

I'm sorry but I don't speak that language but I'm e-mailing the link everywhere that I can!

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (34909) from Coon Rapids, MN 1 year ago

Not to worry I have tweeted it before - as I just now did again - BTW like the subtitle version.

[-] 2 points by Ache4Change (3280) 1 year ago

I found the 'Inside Job' link here on this forum and now my Spanish is better too! I wrote a bigger post about it earlier. It is a less than two hour education that you won't get at any school or college and very important for all Occupy people everywhere I think. Thank-you for spreading the word and all that you and others do here. It is appreciated.

[-] 2 points by Underdog (2971) from Clermont, FL 1 year ago

GF, if I haven't said so, let me say how happy I am to see you back on this forum. I always appreciated your input here and thought it was very insightful. Welcome back!!

[-] 1 points by GirlFriday (17435) 1 year ago

Thank you, Underdog. I missed you guys a lot.

[-] 0 points by yobstreet (-575) 1 year ago

All persons marginally attached would include dependents, no? So I'd flush the whole survey. Because we know that's a bogus number.

[-] 1 points by Underdog (2971) from Clermont, FL 1 year ago

If you're talking about grown dependents (like kids) living with their parents I would assume they would be included in U6. Regardless of whether they are living on their own or are living at home, I would think this statistic means they have looked for work in the last 12 months at least once (applied for a job). I really don't know how the BLS is able to determine their statistics exactly, and there is a good possibility, imho, that there is a fair amount of swag (some wild ass guess) in it.

[-] 0 points by yobstreet (-575) 1 year ago

I don't interpret the words "marginally attached to the labor force" in that way; the definition is completely bogus.

[-] 0 points by hazencage (58) 1 year ago

U3 data is important because it helps economists estimate such things as consumer spending, and economic growth. Perhaps the most useful economic indicator is the U1 unemployment series which is a weekly report. This weekly report is important because weekly changes are often indicative of a broader trend.

As for the U6 unemployment rate I normally refer to it when their are changes in inflation and so forth.

Thus, every unemployment figure is important, and can be used for different things.

[-] 1 points by Underdog (2971) from Clermont, FL 1 year ago

You speak as if you were an economist. Is that the case? Have I misprepresented something in this post in your opinion?

[-] 1 points by hazencage (58) 1 year ago
  1. The government never phased out the U6 number, but instead they simply rely on U3 because it is a number that is more indicative of future economic developments. Many economists actually rely on the U1 unemployment series when it comes to making predictions about a possible recession occurring. On the other hand the U3 unemployment rate is a medium number that combines both U2, and U1, but does one more important thing, and this being that it includes the amount of unemployed seeking employment. Hence, the U3 unemployment figure could be used to estimate how many more individuals are likely to be employed in the future because the figure excludes those whom are not actively seeking employment. This is important if the economy is growing, because then it is more likely these individuals will get employed and henceforth it would also become safer to assume that consumer spending will pick up as well as the U3 figure begins to drop.

  2. We were never even close to the great depression. Today our monetary system is different, and almost everything about economics is different.