Obama really does hate Small Business - HIS RECORD PROVES IT!!!!

[pinqy]

It looks better on paper because people whose benefits have run out are not being counted in the unemployment stats.

Employment Situation FAQ

Is the count of unemployed persons limited to just those people receiving unemployment insurance benefits?

No; the estimate of unemployment is based on a monthly sample survey of households.
All persons who are without jobs and are actively seeking and available to work are included among the unemployed. (People on temporary layoff are included even if they do not actively seek work.) There is no requirement or question relating to unemployment insurance benefits in the monthly survey.

And let's look at the numbers. The Current Population Survey is based on the week of the month that contains the 12th, so for June 2012, that was June 10-16.
Unadjusted Unemployment Insurance Claims all programs (Fed and State) week ending June 16: 5,857,024Unemployment Level week ending June 16 (not seasonally adjusted): 13,184,000But you're saying they should be the same.
Eligibility or receipt of benefits has never been part of the defintion of Unemployed.

 

[Skull Pilot]

It looks better on paper because people whose benefits have run out are not being counted in the unemployment stats.

Employment Situation FAQ

Is the count of unemployed persons limited to just those people receiving unemployment insurance benefits?

No; the estimate of unemployment is based on a monthly sample survey of households.
All persons who are without jobs and are actively seeking and available to work are included among the unemployed. (People on temporary layoff are included even if they do not actively seek work.) There is no requirement or question relating to unemployment insurance benefits in the monthly survey.

And let's look at the numbers. The Current Population Survey is based on the week of the month that contains the 12th, so for June 2012, that was June 10-16.
Unadjusted Unemployment Insurance Claims all programs (Fed and State) week ending June 16: 5,857,024Unemployment Level week ending June 16 (not seasonally adjusted): 13,184,000But you're saying they should be the same.
Eligibility or receipt of benefits has never been part of the defintion of Unemployed.

Keep telling yourself that.

I am not so naive as to believe everything the government publishes.

 

[pinqy]

It looks better on paper because people whose benefits have run out are not being counted in the unemployment stats.

Employment Situation FAQ

Is the count of unemployed persons limited to just those people receiving unemployment insurance benefits?

No; the estimate of unemployment is based on a monthly sample survey of households.
All persons who are without jobs and are actively seeking and available to work are included among the unemployed. (People on temporary layoff are included even if they do not actively seek work.) There is no requirement or question relating to unemployment insurance benefits in the monthly survey.

And let's look at the numbers. The Current Population Survey is based on the week of the month that contains the 12th, so for June 2012, that was June 10-16.
Unadjusted Unemployment Insurance Claims all programs (Fed and State) week ending June 16: 5,857,024Unemployment Level week ending June 16 (not seasonally adjusted): 13,184,000But you're saying they should be the same.
Eligibility or receipt of benefits has never been part of the defintion of Unemployed.

Keep telling yourself that.

I am not so naive as to believe everything the government publishes.

Then what is your source of information that only people receiving benefits are classified as unemployed? And why are the numbers of people receiving and the number of total unemployed so different?

And more importantly, why on earth would they lie about the definitions? It wouldn't make any sense to supply a count of total receiving benefits and then have another number that's really only people receiving benefits but is officially defined as everyone looking. And to keep up the deception for 70 years.

That kind of conspiracy, that has no point, makes sense to you? Really?

 

[lukelk]

LOLOLOLOL hmmmmm your quoting FAUX news, "fair and balanced" although all the people running for prez in 08 are now on their payroll, STOP POSTING TROLL shit. and YES it was the bush era that led to the collapse of our econ. YOUR watching the most bias entertainment agency in the world, its not news.......

 

[asaratis]

LOLOLOLOL hmmmmm your quoting FAUX news, "fair and balanced" although all the people running for prez in 08 are now on their payroll, STOP POSTING TROLL shit. and YES it was the bush era that led to the collapse of our econ. YOUR watching the most bias entertainment agency in the world, its not news.......

Only little pip-squeak boys that are still wet behind the ears discount information based solely on the source of it.

Guess what that makes you!