The economy is recovering, the economy is recovering, the economy is recovering.

[gipper]

You are stating the central government's figure. It is undoubtedly wrong like everything else they proclaim.

It would be practically impossible to fake or fudge these numbers. But please, present your counter evidence

Really? REALLY?

Ummm, that's not evidence. But, yes, really. It would be practically impossible. But suggest your method.

The central government lies all the time

The political parts do. Statistics? No.

...lying about the REAL unemployment rate has been going on for decades.

What are you defining as the "real" rate? And what makes it "real?"

Or maybe you would agree that 'misrepresentation' is a more appropriate word.

I think a lot of people misunderstand what the rate means, but since that information is freely and publicly available there's no misrepresentation.

This might help you.
Real Unemployment Rate Of 11.5 Means Difference To Reported Rises To Record Zero Hedge

You do realize that calling something the "real" unemployment rate doesn't make it the real unemployment rate? And since his method is an assumption of how many people should be unemployed is ludicrous, it's laughable.
His "real" rate is "if the current number of people working or looking for work was the same as the average of the last 30 years, how many people would be unemployed."

I applied his method for the year 2000 (height of the Labor Force Participation Rate) and got a negative UE rate.

The government's stated unemployment rate (U3) is much like the government's CPI rate. The CPI does not include energy, food, and taxes in its calculation.

It most certainly does include food and energy. And it includes sales tax and other taxes and use fees.

The U3 rate does not include many unemployed Americans..it is manipulated to appear better than actuality. The U6 rate is likely much more accurate.

What you mean is that the standard, decades old, internationally used definition of "unemployed" isn't big enough so you want to tweak the definition to make things look worse than they really are,

And if the government lies, why do you not think the U-6 is a lie? And if it's more true, why does the government publish it?

Do you work for the federal government?

It is well known that the CPI is manipulated as is the U3 rate.
And as I stated, the U6 rate is likely more accurate, which does not mean it is accurate.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

[/QUOTE]The government's stated unemployment rate (U3) is much like the government's CPI rate. The CPI does not include energy, food, and taxes in its calculation. It is manipulated to appear much better than it actually is. The U3 rate does not include many unemployed Americans..it is manipulated to appear better than actuality. The U6 rate is likely much more accurate.[/QUOTE] The CPI is used, when it is convient to keep the CPI looking good for the annointed one. Why else has inflation not been going up, yet when you go to the store, food is tripled., durable goods are much higher, but gasoline is $1.00 less than it was last year, but still $1.00 more than when HE assumed office? Smoke and mirrors my friends, nothing to see here, move along, move along.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

It was announced that possibly in November 2015 we are going to go into a 25 year depression. Jim Rickards The Coming 25-Year Great Depression

Jim Rickards fears he and his colleagues' warnings are being ignored by our political leaders and the Federal Reserve, and we're on the verge of entering the darkest economic period in our nation's history.
One that will ignite a 25-year Great Depression.

Here are some signs that caused the Great Depression of 1929. Great Depression - Top Five Causes of the Great Depression

1. Stock Market Crash of 1929
2. Bank Failures
3. Reduction in Purchasing Across the Board
4. American Economic Policy with Europe
5. Drought Conditions

See anything similiar with today?

 

[gipper]

The government's stated unemployment rate (U3) is much like the government's CPI rate. The CPI does not include energy, food, and taxes in its calculation. It is manipulated to appear much better than it actually is. The U3 rate does not include many unemployed Americans..it is manipulated to appear better than actuality. The U6 rate is likely much more accurate.[/QUOTE] The CPI is used, when it is convient to keep the CPI looking good for the annointed one. Why else has inflation not been going up, yet when you go to the store, food is tripled., durable goods are much higher, but gasoline is $1.00 less than it was last year, but still $1.00 more than when HE assumed office? Smoke and mirrors my friends, nothing to see here, move along, move along.[/QUOTE]


^^^

The calculation of the CPI and the U3 have nothing to do with Obama. Both factors were manipulated prior to your Messiah's arrival in DC, but the intent of the manipulation was and is to make government look more effective, no matter who occupies the WH.

 

[pinqy]

It would be practically impossible to fake or fudge these numbers. But please, present your counter evidence

Really? REALLY?

Ummm, that's not evidence. But, yes, really. It would be practically impossible. But suggest your method.

The central government lies all the time

The political parts do. Statistics? No.

...lying about the REAL unemployment rate has been going on for decades.

What are you defining as the "real" rate? And what makes it "real?"

Or maybe you would agree that 'misrepresentation' is a more appropriate word.

I think a lot of people misunderstand what the rate means, but since that information is freely and publicly available there's no misrepresentation.

This might help you.
Real Unemployment Rate Of 11.5 Means Difference To Reported Rises To Record Zero Hedge

You do realize that calling something the "real" unemployment rate doesn't make it the real unemployment rate? And since his method is an assumption of how many people should be unemployed is ludicrous, it's laughable.
His "real" rate is "if the current number of people working or looking for work was the same as the average of the last 30 years, how many people would be unemployed."

I applied his method for the year 2000 (height of the Labor Force Participation Rate) and got a negative UE rate.

The government's stated unemployment rate (U3) is much like the government's CPI rate. The CPI does not include energy, food, and taxes in its calculation.

It most certainly does include food and energy. And it includes sales tax and other taxes and use fees.

The U3 rate does not include many unemployed Americans..it is manipulated to appear better than actuality. The U6 rate is likely much more accurate.

What you mean is that the standard, decades old, internationally used definition of "unemployed" isn't big enough so you want to tweak the definition to make things look worse than they really are,

And if the government lies, why do you not think the U-6 is a lie? And if it's more true, why does the government publish it?

Do you work for the federal government?

Actually I used to work at BLS and was briefly a commodities analyst on the CPI. So I know how it works, and since I haven't worked there in years I have no reason to support any lies or misinformation if there were any.

It is well known that the CPI is manipulated as is the U3 rate.

An assertion without details. Are you standing by the false statement that food, energy, and taxes are not included? If you didn't know that they are, then how is anyone supposed to believe your word on the CPI?

And as I stated, the U6 rate is likely more accurate, which does not mean it is accurate.

The U3 and U6 do not measure the same thing. So more accurate at measuring what?

 

[gipper]

Really? REALLY?

Ummm, that's not evidence. But, yes, really. It would be practically impossible. But suggest your method.

The central government lies all the time

The political parts do. Statistics? No.

...lying about the REAL unemployment rate has been going on for decades.

What are you defining as the "real" rate? And what makes it "real?"

Or maybe you would agree that 'misrepresentation' is a more appropriate word.

I think a lot of people misunderstand what the rate means, but since that information is freely and publicly available there's no misrepresentation.

This might help you.
Real Unemployment Rate Of 11.5 Means Difference To Reported Rises To Record Zero Hedge

You do realize that calling something the "real" unemployment rate doesn't make it the real unemployment rate? And since his method is an assumption of how many people should be unemployed is ludicrous, it's laughable.
His "real" rate is "if the current number of people working or looking for work was the same as the average of the last 30 years, how many people would be unemployed."

I applied his method for the year 2000 (height of the Labor Force Participation Rate) and got a negative UE rate.

The government's stated unemployment rate (U3) is much like the government's CPI rate. The CPI does not include energy, food, and taxes in its calculation.

It most certainly does include food and energy. And it includes sales tax and other taxes and use fees.

The U3 rate does not include many unemployed Americans..it is manipulated to appear better than actuality. The U6 rate is likely much more accurate.

What you mean is that the standard, decades old, internationally used definition of "unemployed" isn't big enough so you want to tweak the definition to make things look worse than they really are,

And if the government lies, why do you not think the U-6 is a lie? And if it's more true, why does the government publish it?

Do you work for the federal government?

Actually I used to work at BLS and was briefly a commodities analyst.

It is well known that the CPI is manipulated as is the U3 rate.

An assertion without details. Are you standing by the false statement that food, energy, and taxes are not included? If you didn't know that they are, then how is anyone supposed to believe your word on the CPI?

And as I stated, the U6 rate is likely more accurate, which does not mean it is accurate.

The U3 and U6 do not measure the same thing. So more accurate at measuring what?

It is apparent you are too close to the issue, to see reality.

Spend some time on these websites to get informed.
Zero Hedge On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
Consumer Price Index
charles hugh smith-Weblog and Essays
Chapwood Index - The Real Cost of Living Increase Index Founded by Ed Butowsky of Chapwood Investments

It would seem you think a stat generated by the government is accurate, no matter how it is calculated.

 

[pinqy]

Ummm, that's not evidence. But, yes, really. It would be practically impossible. But suggest your method.

The political parts do. Statistics? No.

What are you defining as the "real" rate? And what makes it "real?"
I think a lot of people misunderstand what the rate means, but since that information is freely and publicly available there's no misrepresentation.

You do realize that calling something the "real" unemployment rate doesn't make it the real unemployment rate? And since his method is an assumption of how many people should be unemployed is ludicrous, it's laughable.
His "real" rate is "if the current number of people working or looking for work was the same as the average of the last 30 years, how many people would be unemployed."

I applied his method for the year 2000 (height of the Labor Force Participation Rate) and got a negative UE rate.

The government's stated unemployment rate (U3) is much like the government's CPI rate. The CPI does not include energy, food, and taxes in its calculation.

It most certainly does include food and energy. And it includes sales tax and other taxes and use fees.

The U3 rate does not include many unemployed Americans..it is manipulated to appear better than actuality. The U6 rate is likely much more accurate.

What you mean is that the standard, decades old, internationally used definition of "unemployed" isn't big enough so you want to tweak the definition to make things look worse than they really are,

And if the government lies, why do you not think the U-6 is a lie? And if it's more true, why does the government publish it?

Do you work for the federal government?

Actually I used to work at BLS and was briefly a commodities analyst.

It is well known that the CPI is manipulated as is the U3 rate.

An assertion without details. Are you standing by the false statement that food, energy, and taxes are not included? If you didn't know that they are, then how is anyone supposed to believe your word on the CPI?

And as I stated, the U6 rate is likely more accurate, which does not mean it is accurate.

The U3 and U6 do not measure the same thing. So more accurate at measuring what?

It is apparent you are too close to the issue, to see reality.

Spend some time on these websites to get informed.
Zero Hedge On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
Consumer Price Index
charles hugh smith-Weblog and Essays
Chapwood Index - The Real Cost of Living Increase Index Founded by Ed Butowsky of Chapwood Investments

Ok, I'm not going through all those cites to rebutt all the misinformation. Zero Hedge and shadowstats are full of crap and what they say bears no resemblence to reality.

Again, are you continuing to claim that food, energy, and taxes are not included in the CPI? You stated it...are you willing to admit you were incorrect?

It would seem you think a stat generated by the government is accurate, no matter how it is calculated.

Nope, not at all. There are many problems with all the stats based on just the nature of statistics. The Current Expenditures Survey, the base for the basket and weights used in the CPI, is being majorly overhauled based on a lot of issues with the program and its accuracy. It is also well known that income data from the Current Population Survey are not particularly accurate because the survey allows second party reporting and the interviewer cannot clarify. So if someone reports that his child makes minimum wage of $7/hour, the interviewer must record $7/hour even though it's wrong. The Unemployment numbers in October 2013 were off and known to be off and it was mentioned in the release that they were off because many government workers on furlough incorrectly identified themselves as employed.

But the claims of deliberate manipulation are asinine.

If there is any particular detail you want to discuss...please feel free. Do you need a link showing that food, energy, and sales taxes are included in the CPI?

 

[gipper]

The government's stated unemployment rate (U3) is much like the government's CPI rate. The CPI does not include energy, food, and taxes in its calculation.

It most certainly does include food and energy. And it includes sales tax and other taxes and use fees.

The U3 rate does not include many unemployed Americans..it is manipulated to appear better than actuality. The U6 rate is likely much more accurate.

What you mean is that the standard, decades old, internationally used definition of "unemployed" isn't big enough so you want to tweak the definition to make things look worse than they really are,

And if the government lies, why do you not think the U-6 is a lie? And if it's more true, why does the government publish it?

Do you work for the federal government?

Actually I used to work at BLS and was briefly a commodities analyst.

It is well known that the CPI is manipulated as is the U3 rate.

An assertion without details. Are you standing by the false statement that food, energy, and taxes are not included? If you didn't know that they are, then how is anyone supposed to believe your word on the CPI?

And as I stated, the U6 rate is likely more accurate, which does not mean it is accurate.

The U3 and U6 do not measure the same thing. So more accurate at measuring what?

It is apparent you are too close to the issue, to see reality.

Spend some time on these websites to get informed.
Zero Hedge On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
Consumer Price Index
charles hugh smith-Weblog and Essays
Chapwood Index - The Real Cost of Living Increase Index Founded by Ed Butowsky of Chapwood Investments

Ok, I'm not going through all those cites to rebutt all the misinformation. Zero Hedge and shadowstats are full of crap and what they say bears no resemblence to reality.

Again, are you continuing to claim that food, energy, and taxes are not included in the CPI? You stated it...are you willing to admit you were incorrect?

It would seem you think a stat generated by the government is accurate, no matter how it is calculated.

Nope, not at all. There are many problems with all the stats based on just the nature of statistics. The Current Expenditures Survey, the base for the basket and weights used in the CPI, is being majorly overhauled based on a lot of issues with the program and its accuracy. It is also well known that income data from the Current Population Survey are not particularly accurate because the survey allows second party reporting and the interviewer cannot clarify. So if someone reports that his child makes minimum wage of $7/hour, the interviewer must record $7/hour even though it's wrong. The Unemployment numbers in October 2013 were off and known to be off and it was mentioned in the release that they were off because many government workers on furlough incorrectly identified themselves as employed.

But the claims of deliberate manipulation are asinine.

If there is any particular detail you want to discuss...please feel free. Do you need a link showing that food, energy, and sales taxes are included in the CPI?

It most certainly is deliberate manipulation. Does that mean the government is deliberately deceptive, maybe not. You must know that government always thinks they are doing the right thing for the public good.

You are most disingenuous. You must know how the CPI plays with food and energy. Such as refusing to include the price of more expensive items, if similar items are available at a cheaper price. Such as hamburger in the place of steak. How about raising regulations on gasoline, which raises prices, but is not included in the CPI?

This from Ed Butowsky...but no doubt you are much smarter than he is.

Ongoing Modification of the CPI and the Unfortunate Consequences
In 1983, the government CPI rose roughly 12% and the government modified the CPI calculation to save money. In order to save money on salary increases and entitlement benefits, which are tied to CPI, the government changed their calculation of the CPI to reflect a much lower number.

The statistic underwent another reconfiguration in 1995/96 with the Boskin Commission. These changes made the CPI an even worse indication of the real cost of living increase.

It is estimated that between 1996 and 2006, this reconfiguration of the CPI saved the US government over $680 billion.

Since then, the government has been artificially deflating the CPI to keep figures as low as possible. The readings you see published today no longer represent the real out of pocket expenditures incurred by most Americans.

The government’s baseline CPI measure excludes items such as taxes, energy, and food; which are not only necessities, but also often a majority of our daily expenditures.
Problems with the Consumer Price Index Chapwood Index - The Real Cost of Living Increase Index Founded by Ed Butowsky of Chapwood Investments

 

[Moonglow]

One of the most frightening statistics of all: Black teens have an unemployment rate of about 50%.

But that's not the scary part. The statistic only counts the Black teens who are not in school and ARE ACTIVELY LOOKING FOR WORK! The ones who are just "chillin'" are not counted.

So what's the REAL unemployment rate for this demographic. The mind is boggled.

When is the last time you saw a black teen on a construction site trying to get a job?

 

[pinqy]

It most certainly does include food and energy. And it includes sales tax and other taxes and use fees.

What you mean is that the standard, decades old, internationally used definition of "unemployed" isn't big enough so you want to tweak the definition to make things look worse than they really are,

And if the government lies, why do you not think the U-6 is a lie? And if it's more true, why does the government publish it?

Do you work for the federal government?

Actually I used to work at BLS and was briefly a commodities analyst.

It is well known that the CPI is manipulated as is the U3 rate.

An assertion without details. Are you standing by the false statement that food, energy, and taxes are not included? If you didn't know that they are, then how is anyone supposed to believe your word on the CPI?

And as I stated, the U6 rate is likely more accurate, which does not mean it is accurate.

The U3 and U6 do not measure the same thing. So more accurate at measuring what?

It is apparent you are too close to the issue, to see reality.

Spend some time on these websites to get informed.
Zero Hedge On a long enough timeline the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
Consumer Price Index
charles hugh smith-Weblog and Essays
Chapwood Index - The Real Cost of Living Increase Index Founded by Ed Butowsky of Chapwood Investments

Ok, I'm not going through all those cites to rebutt all the misinformation. Zero Hedge and shadowstats are full of crap and what they say bears no resemblence to reality.

Again, are you continuing to claim that food, energy, and taxes are not included in the CPI? You stated it...are you willing to admit you were incorrect?

It would seem you think a stat generated by the government is accurate, no matter how it is calculated.

Nope, not at all. There are many problems with all the stats based on just the nature of statistics. The Current Expenditures Survey, the base for the basket and weights used in the CPI, is being majorly overhauled based on a lot of issues with the program and its accuracy. It is also well known that income data from the Current Population Survey are not particularly accurate because the survey allows second party reporting and the interviewer cannot clarify. So if someone reports that his child makes minimum wage of $7/hour, the interviewer must record $7/hour even though it's wrong. The Unemployment numbers in October 2013 were off and known to be off and it was mentioned in the release that they were off because many government workers on furlough incorrectly identified themselves as employed.

But the claims of deliberate manipulation are asinine.

If there is any particular detail you want to discuss...please feel free. Do you need a link showing that food, energy, and sales taxes are included in the CPI?

It most certainly is deliberate manipulation. Does that mean the government is deliberately deceptive, maybe not. You must know that government always thinks they are doing the right thing for the public good.

You are most disingenuous. You must know how the CPI plays with food and energy. Such as refusing to include the price of more expensive items, if similar items are available at a cheaper price. Such as hamburger in the place of steak.

Except that doesn't happen. Explain exactly what process you think occurs where that is done. Oh, and weren't you saying earlier that food was not in the CPI???

How about raising regulations on gasoline, which raises prices, but is not included in the CPI?

Gasoline is included in the CPI

This from Ed Butowsky...but no doubt you are much smarter than he is.

Ongoing Modification of the CPI and the Unfortunate Consequences
In 1983, the government CPI rose roughly 12% and the government modified the CPI calculation to save money. In order to save money on salary increases and entitlement benefits, which are tied to CPI, the government changed their calculation of the CPI to reflect a much lower number.

The statistic underwent another reconfiguration in 1995/96 with the Boskin Commission. These changes made the CPI an even worse indication of the real cost of living increase.

It is estimated that between 1996 and 2006, this reconfiguration of the CPI saved the US government over $680 billion.

Since then, the government has been artificially deflating the CPI to keep figures as low as possible. The readings you see published today no longer represent the real out of pocket expenditures incurred by most Americans.

Those are all assertions. He gives no specific examples. I can't correct his claims because he's just making general assertions.

The government’s baseline CPI measure excludes items such as taxes, energy, and food; which are not only necessities, but also often a majority of our daily expenditures.
Problems with the Consumer Price Index Chapwood Index - The Real Cost of Living Increase Index Founded by Ed Butowsky of Chapwood Investments

that's just false. The main CPI certainly does include food, energy, and sales and use taxes. There are hundreds of specialized variations, including ones that exclude food, housing, energy, and various combinations. BLS even provides a guide on how to do that yourself. But the main CPI-U and the CPI-W which is used for Social Sercurity COLA does include food and energy.

 

[rightwinger]

Unemployment has dropped 4.8%
8 million jobs added
Stock market up 12,000 points
GDP steady 2-3% per year
$26 trillion added to household wealth

Looks like a recovery to me

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Unemployment has dropped 4.8%
8 million jobs added
Stock market up 12,000 points
GDP steady 2-3% per year
$26 trillion added to household wealth

Looks like a recovery to me

dear, incomes are going down and Americans are get poorer so its a stretch to call that a recovery.

Do you have the IQ to understand??

 

[rightwinger]

Unemployment has dropped 4.8%
8 million jobs added
Stock market up 12,000 points
GDP steady 2-3% per year
$26 trillion added to household wealth

Looks like a recovery to me

dear, incomes are going down and Americans are get poorer so its a stretch to call that a recovery.

Do you have the IQ to understand??

That really sucks doesn't it?

It is the price we paid for a thirty year comittment to supply side economics

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

It is the price we paid for a thirty year comittment to supply side economics

100% stupid of course since govt is 4 times bigger than it was under Reagan.

See why we say liberalism is based in pure ignorance? What other conclusion is possible??

 

[rightwinger]

It is the price we paid for a thirty year comittment to supply side economics

100% stupid of course since govt is 4 times bigger than it was under Reagan.

See why we say liberalism is based in pure ignorance? What other conclusion is possible??

How true...how true

We actually had decent wage distribution under Reagan. His policies made it certain that future generations would not

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

We actually had decent wage distribution under Reagan. His policies made it certain that future generations would not

100% stupid liberal of course. Govt is 4 times bigger than under Reagan so his polices are not in effect; in fact quite the opposite.

How stupid do you have to be not to know that?? Ans: as stupid as a liberal. Sad.

 

[rightwinger]

We actually had decent wage distribution under Reagan. His policies made it certain that future generations would not

100% stupid liberal of course. Govt is 4 times bigger than under Reagan so his polices are not in effect; in fact quite the opposite.

How stupid do you have to be not to know that?? Ans: as stupid as a liberal. Sad.

The government is smaller than under Reagan

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

We actually had decent wage distribution under Reagan. His policies made it certain that future generations would not

100% stupid liberal of course. Govt is 4 times bigger than under Reagan so his polices are not in effect; in fact quite the opposite.

How stupid do you have to be not to know that?? Ans: as stupid as a liberal. Sad.

The government is smaller than under Reagan

if true the total idiot would offer evidence

 

[rightwinger]

We actually had decent wage distribution under Reagan. His policies made it certain that future generations would not

100% stupid liberal of course. Govt is 4 times bigger than under Reagan so his polices are not in effect; in fact quite the opposite.

How stupid do you have to be not to know that?? Ans: as stupid as a liberal. Sad.

The government is smaller than under Reagan

if true the total idiot would offer evidence

Ok dear,

Your turn to show how government is four times bigger than under Reagan

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

We actually had decent wage distribution under Reagan. His policies made it certain that future generations would not

100% stupid liberal of course. Govt is 4 times bigger than under Reagan so his polices are not in effect; in fact quite the opposite.

How stupid do you have to be not to know that?? Ans: as stupid as a liberal. Sad.

The government is smaller than under Reagan

if true the total idiot would offer evidence

Ok dear,

Your turn to show how government is four times bigger than under Reagan

100% stupid and liberal as always. In 1980 govt spend less than a $1trillion now they spend $4 trillion so your idea that current policies reflect 30 years of supply side eceonomics is 100% stupid and wrong and liberal.

Did you notice that liberals are always wrong? Lucky you, you're too blinded by your bigotry to think.