Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Just adding in the marginally attached is the U-5, currently at 7.1%. The U-6 adds in part time for economic reasons, and is currently 11.5%.The U-6 cannot help you understand why, or even if, there are more or fewer part time jobs,
too stupid and nliberal of course!! U6 is 12% because it includes those who are marginally attached.
no, because he's counted as employed in both. None of the alternative measures changes the definition of anything.Get it now?? If someone works 1 hour a week (part time) he is counted as employed in the u3 numbers but not in the u6 numbers!! Get it now??
Just adding in the marginally attached is the U-5, currently at 7.1%. The U-6 adds in part time for economic reasons, and is currently 11.5%.The U-6 cannot help you understand why, or even if, there are more or fewer part time jobs,
too stupid and nliberal of course!! U6 is 12% because it includes those who are marginally attached.
But what does that have to do with your claims about measuring full time work and income using the U6?
no, because he's counted as employed in both. None of the alternative measures changes the definition of anything.Get it now?? If someone works 1 hour a week (part time) he is counted as employed in the u3 numbers but not in the u6 numbers!! Get it now??
Perhaps you were thinking of whether or not someone appears in the numerator? For your example of a person working one hour a week, he's definitely employed.
But as for whether or not he's in the numerator of the U-6? No idea: not enough information.
If he wants and is available to work 35+ hrs/wk, AND his reason for working fewer hours is either slow business or can't find full time work, then he's part time for economic reasons
Too stupid!blah blah blah
Too stupid!blah blah blah
Pinqy just explained how EdwardBaiamonte completely misunderstood what he was talking about with employment measures, so EdwardBaiamonte is forced to pretend he wasn't caught yet again talking out of his ass in a clueless manner.
Do you see why we say EdwardBaiamonte is so slow, so very slow and has failed at everything in life? Do you understand now?
dear, I didn't say that but since you bring it up NO it is 11.5%.dear, are you saying u6 is not 12%???
dear, I didn't say that but since you bring it up NO it is 11.5%.dear, are you saying u6 is not 12%???
Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization
Do you see why we say EdwardBaiamonte lacks the IQ to understand? That is why we say EdwardBaiamonte is so slow, so very very slow.
dear, I am saying it is 11.5% and I provided the link that proves it. Do you understand now? Do you see why we see EdwardBaiamonte is a compulsive liar who is too stupid to not get caught?dear, are you saying u6 is not 12%
Barry's recession that started in 2008, before he took office?about 50% higher than before Barry's recession??
dear, I am saying it is 11.5% and I provided the link that proves it. Do you understand now? Do you see why we see EdwardBaiamonte is a compulsive liar who is too stupid to not get caught?dear, are you saying u6 is not 12%
In fact only one week ago I pointed out to you it was 11.5%, at that time your lie was that is was 14%, and you said oops it is lower than you thought. That is here:
Part-time and an apartment -the new Norm Page 3 US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum
Yet somehow you have conveniently forgotten and are again caught lying. That is why we say EdwardBaiamonte lacks the IQ to even tell a good lie. Too 100% stupid!
Barry's recession that started in 2008, before he took office?about 50% higher than before Barry's recession??
Do you understand now?
Do you see why we say EdwardBaiamonte lacks the IQ? It was shown to be 11.5%, question answered, yet he's stuck with his shallow little brain repeating himself in desperation.dear, are you saying u6 is not 12%, about 50% higher than before the recession??
Do you see why we say EdwardBaiamonte lacks the IQ? It was shown to be 11.5%, question answered, yet he's stuck with his shallow little brain repeating himself in desperation.dear, are you saying u6 is not 12%, about 50% higher than before the recession??
Now you see why we say EdwardBaiamonte is so slow, so very very slow.
So you see why we say EdwardBaiamonte is a compulsive liar. He lacks the IQ to understand how easily his lies are caught.dear, are you saying u6 is not 12%, about 50% higher than before the recession??
So you see why we say EdwardBaiamonte is a compulsive liar. He lacks the IQ to understand how easily his lies are caught.dear, are you saying u6 is not 12%, about 50% higher than before the recession??
So slow, so very very slow.
Under Obama's idiotic liberal policies, like Obamacare, U6( real unemployment) has leveled off at 14% almost double the pre-recession norm.
dear, are you saying U6 is not about 12%, about 50% higher than before the recession and this is a good thing??
dear, are you saying u6 is not 12%
dear, are you saying U6 is not about 12%
Is there anyone besides you saying the U6 is 12% or 50% higher than shortly before the recession?So you see why we say EdwardBaiamonte is a compulsive liar. He lacks the IQ to understand how easily his lies are caught.dear, are you saying u6 is not 12%, about 50% higher than before the recession??
So slow, so very very slow.
dear, are you saying U6 is not about 12%, about 50% higher than before the recession and this is a good thing??
No, it's 11.5%Just adding in the marginally attached is the U-5, currently at 7.1%. The U-6 adds in part time for economic reasons, and is currently 11.5%.The U-6 cannot help you understand why, or even if, there are more or fewer part time jobs,
too stupid and nliberal of course!! U6 is 12% because it includes those who are marginally attached.
But what does that have to do with your claims about measuring full time work and income using the U6?
no, because he's counted as employed in both. None of the alternative measures changes the definition of anything.Get it now?? If someone works 1 hour a week (part time) he is counted as employed in the u3 numbers but not in the u6 numbers!! Get it now??
Perhaps you were thinking of whether or not someone appears in the numerator? For your example of a person working one hour a week, he's definitely employed.
But as for whether or not he's in the numerator of the U-6? No idea: not enough information.
If he wants and is available to work 35+ hrs/wk, AND his reason for working fewer hours is either slow business or can't find full time work, then he's part time for economic reasons
Obama's u6 is 12%,
Full time workersThats why income is down and we have fewer full time jobs than when Barry too over. And why most Americans think we are on the wrong track.
From 2008 at Toplines - Right Direction Wrong Track - February 4-5 2008 - Rasmussen Reports tradeAnd why most Americans think we are on the wrong track.
Lacks the IQ to understand the right direction wrong track is useless unless given historical context. So slow, so very very slow.