4.7%

[dcbl]

Although much of the major media are reporting the national unemployment rate for October as4.9%, the "real unemployment rate," as determined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) and which includes part-time workers and those marginally attached to the work force, is 9.5%.

oops - should have read a little before I replied; as I am sure you know, Trump plans to use U6 numbers

I am confident that the media will not make the distinction - they will tout Obama's U3 numbers and compare them to Trump's U6 numbers - they consistently lie like that...

 

[pinqy]

The U6 is the actual unemployment and its double that 4.7

Why do you consider those who are not trying to work and those who have jobs, including full time jobs, but who aren't working as many hours as they want "actual unemployment?


Nobody, in the history of ever, has used anything remotely like the U-6 as a "real" measure of unemployment.


The U-3 and the U-6 (and the U-1, U-2, U-4, and U-5) all measure different things and answer different questions. Which one is preferred depends on what you want to know.


And you seem to think that because the U-6 is higher (and it can never be lower) means it shows things as worse. But that would only be true if they were measuring the same thing...and they're not.

 

[Faun]

Hopefully the new Administration will get rid of The Cooked Books approach used to lie to The Public about how many people are unemployed.
There are 95 Million people out of work who had jobs and are looking for work again and cannot find work, and have exhausted their unemployment benefits.

That represents a 29% unemployment rate beyond the 4.7% promoted by the current administration.

Adding the two figures together to give you a rough percentage shows that we have a 34% Unemployment rate, of which only 4.7% are receiving unemployment benefits.

What complete and utter conservative bullshit.

There are not 95 million people who lost their jobs and cannot find new ones. Where do you idiots come up with this nonsense??

Many of the 95 million folks who are not in the labor force never had a job to begin with, so who knows how you think they lost one? The vast majority of that 95 million don't even want a job and none of that 95 million are even looking for a job.

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

 

[dcbl]

Good Lord you can't be this stupid.

as much as I hate to call you out for being wrong, you might wanna re-think that...

 

[dcbl]

There are not 95 million people who lost their jobs and cannot find new ones. Where do you idiots come up with this nonsense??

that is not what he said - he said that there are 95 million that are either unemployed or under-employed

which is true

 

[Muhammed]

4.7%. Remember that number folks. That is the unemployment rate on Obama's last day in office.

Bullshit. If you are gullible enough t believe that lie, I have a bridge to sell you.

 

[Winston]

I believe Noninstitutional refers to people who are not Students in a University as the DOL list Full Time Student as an Occupation, so that person is considered employed.
You are playing with Semantics.

No matter which way you play this game, 34% of our population who are capable of working are not working.

They may be receiving other entitlements like food stamps or welfare.

So if you have 34% of your eligible workforce not working, perhaps this will explain why Obama racked up 11 Trillion Dollars in debt while he was in office.
That 34% figure is not good not matter which way you try to explain it away, and it is undeniable that this administration has presided over the highest Non Participation Rate in our history.

That claim is just sheer out and out stupidity. That percentage includes the disabled, it includes the retired, it includes the 102 year old man in the nursing home.

I mean when the hell did the labor participation rate make a happy damn? It has never been an indication of economic health, either way. Last I checked, our motto was "In God We Trust", not "Arbeit Macht Frei".

But the worst claim of your ignorance is not the capable of working, it is the not working part. Not only does your 35% include the retired and disabled, it includes the stay at home moms and the thousands of individuals devoting their time to taking care of an elderly parent. It is out and out disgusting and the truth is, the number never made a happy damn to anyone until the right started using it to counter Obama's success in cutting unemployment.

 

[Faun]

The Senate and House were under Republican control until 2007 and once Bush replaced Clinton they never got the same numbers, so it obviously was Clinton and not the GOP congress.

You never get anything right.

Congress Profiles | US House of Representatives: History, Art & Archives
105th Congress (1997–1999)
Congressional Profile
Total Membership:

• 435 Representatives
• 4 Delegates
• 1 Resident Commissioner

Party Divisions:*

• 207 Democrats
• 226 Republicans
• 2 Independent

How does that refute the fact that the GOP held control of both houses of congress for the most part until 2007????

WikiLeaks thinks you're full of shit there buddy.

The Democratic Party controlled a majority in both chambers for the first time since the end of the 103rd Congress in 1995. Although the Democrats held fewer than 50 Senate seats, they had an operational majority because the two independent senators caucused with the Democrats for organizational purposes. No Democratic-held seats had fallen to the Republican Party in the 2006 elections.[2] Democrat Nancy Pelosi became the first woman Speaker of the House.[3] The House also received the first Muslim (Keith Ellison)[4][5] and Buddhist (Hank Johnson and Mazie Hirono)[6] members of Congress.

You prove my point, the GOP lost the 2006 elections and control went to the Dems in 2007 for the first time since 1995.

The Right are so stupid they can't even read a calendar, no wonder Tramp loves lying to them.

The left is full of idiots just like you.

2006 is when the Dems took over. Not 2007.

4.7%. Remember that number folks. That is the unemployment rate on Obama's last day in office.

It's awesome, especially when you don't count the millions of workers who are no longer in the workforce because they stopped looking for jobs that don't exist.

The 1st Black President leaves behind an Unemployment rate for Blacks of 7.8%, btw.
- Table A-2. Employment status of the civilian population by race, sex, and age

Anyone who believes that 4.7% is the real number than the box of rocks is gaining on them.

What number do you prefer we measure Trump against ?

Will have to wait till he's in office for a while.

This is half day one.

Good Lord you can't be this stupid.

You're a ******* nut. Elections were held in 2006. But Democrats didn't take over until January, 2007. That's when the 110th Congress began.

 

[Faun]

4.7%. Remember that number folks. That is the unemployment rate on Obama's last day in office.

Anybody think it will be that low on Trump's last day?

Want to bet?

With all the billionaire business criminals and Nazi dingbats he appointed to his cabinet, I'm sure the economy is going to be a shambles by the time he's through.

These corporate leaders all say regulations are "job killers." How come after 8 years of Obama's regulations the unemployment rate is only 4.7%? I don't think it has ever been that low in my lifetime.

The real reason they oppose regulations is because protecting workers, consumers, and the environment takes money out of their greedy hands.

Ironically, the working class white chumps who most strongly supported Trump will be the ones hurting the most in a few years.

that number is highly misleading

Trump plans to use U6 numbers (which currently have unemployment at over 9% and are a more realistic snapshot of where we really are)

Obama has been using U3 numbers (which misrepresent the actual rates)

what are the odds that the media will make that distinction???

The U-3 unemployment rate has always been the official unemployment rate. Still is.

 

[dcbl]

The U-3 unemployment rate has always been the official unemployment rate. Still is.

I hear you; but that does not make it any less misleading - especially today

the number of "under-employed" is higher than it typically is; especially in a strong & vibrant economy

we both know that both sides do it, manipulate the numbers and use the data that supports their agenda

labor participation is not strong & people are hurting; especially in middle America & in the "flyover" states

that's one of the main reasons that Trump got elected

 

[edthecynic]

Trump plans to use U6 numbers (which currently have unemployment at over 9% and are a more realistic snapshot of where we really are)

No, pathological liar Tramp plans to use the 96 million number. And so will I.

JAN. 11, 2017
TRUMP: There will be a major border tax on these companies that are leaving and getting away with murder. And if our politicians had what it takes, they would have done this years ago. And you’d have millions more workers right now in the United States that are — 96 million really wanting a job and they can’t get. You know that story. The real number — that’s the real number. So, that’s the way it is. OK.

 

[edthecynic]

There are not 95 million people who lost their jobs and cannot find new ones. Where do you idiots come up with this nonsense??

From pathological liar Tramp and their MessiahRushie.
So we will use it as well for Tramp.

JAN. 11, 2017
TRUMP: There will be a major border tax on these companies that are leaving and getting away with murder. And if our politicians had what it takes, they would have done this years ago. And you’d have millions more workers right now in the United States that are — 96 million really wanting a job and they can’t get. You know that story. The real number — that’s the real number. So, that’s the way it is. OK.

 

[edthecynic]

There are not 95 million people who lost their jobs and cannot find new ones. Where do you idiots come up with this nonsense??

that is not what he said - he said that there are 95 million that are either unemployed or under-employed

which is true

No here is exactly what he said:
JAN. 11, 2017
TRUMP: There will be a major border tax on these companies that are leaving and getting away with murder. And if our politicians had what it takes, they would have done this years ago. And you’d have millions more workers right now in the United States that are — 96 million really wanting a job and they can’t get. You know that story. The real number — that’s the real number. So, that’s the way it is. OK.

 

[pinqy]

I believe Noninstitutional refers to people who are not Students in a University as the DOL list Full Time Student as an Occupation, so that person is considered employed.

What you believe is irrelevant. Noninstitutional refers to people who are not in a nursing home or mental health facility or other long-term care:
Civilian noninstitutional population (Current Population Survey)
Included are persons 16 years of age and older residing in the 50 states and the District of Columbia who do not live in institutions (for example, correctional facilities, long-term care hospitals, and nursing homes) and who are not on active duty in the Armed Forces.
And nowhere does BLS list Full Time Student as an occupation. What main DOL does has nothing to do with BLS definitions.

No matter which way you play this game, 34% of our population who are capable of working are not working.

How do you determine "capable of working? And you are just making that number up.
the real numbers (not seasonally adjusted)
The Civilian Noninstitutional population is 254,742,000 Again...age 16+, not in prison, military or institution such as nursing home or mental institute.
Employed 151,798,000
Unemployed (not working, available for work, looking for work, regardless of unemployment benefits) 7,170,000
That gives us a labor force of 158,968,000 and a labor force participation rate of 62.6% and an employment-population ratio of 59.6% and an unemployment rate of 4.5%

We are left with 95,089,000 people who are neither working nor looking for work.
90,325,000 do not want a job (16.1 million age 16-24, 21.1 million age 25-54, and 53.1 million age 55 and older)
So we do have 5,449,000 who are Not in the Labor Force (neither employed nor unemployed) who say the Do want a job, but are not currently doing anything about it.
3.2 million of them did nothing at all to find work..not one application or resume or interview or asking a friend...in all of 2016.
A-38. Persons not in the labor force by desire and availability for work, age, and sex

So show me how you're getting 34% of "eligible workforce" (after you define the term).



They may be receiving other entitlements like food stamps or welfare.

it is undeniable that this administration has presided over the highest Non Participation Rate in our history.

It's very deniable:

It's currently higher than anytime before 1978, and it's been declining since 1999.

 

[Faun]

There are not 95 million people who lost their jobs and cannot find new ones. Where do you idiots come up with this nonsense??

that is not what he said - he said that there are 95 million that are either unemployed or under-employed

Bullshit, that's exactly what he said....

"There are 95 Million people out of work who had jobs and are looking for work again and cannot find work, and have exhausted their unemployment benefits."​

which is true

Most of whom don't want to work.

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

 

[pinqy]

that number is highly misleading

Trump plans to use U6 numbers (which currently have unemployment at over 9% and are a more realistic snapshot of where we really are)

Obama has been using U3 numbers (which misrepresent the actual rates)

Please explain what you mean by "actual rate" when U-3 (unemployed as a percent of the labor force) has been the standard since forever, and is the type of rate used by almost every country in the world. No one ever has used a U-6 type as a real measure. BLS doesn't even call it an unemployment rate.

And how, exactly, does the U-6 give a better picture of where we are? From the chart, both show about the same thing:

 

[Faun]

I believe Noninstitutional refers to people who are not Students in a University as the DOL list Full Time Student as an Occupation, so that person is considered employed.
You are playing with Semantics.

No matter which way you play this game, 34% of our population who are capable of working are not working.

They may be receiving other entitlements like food stamps or welfare.

So if you have 34% of your eligible workforce not working, perhaps this will explain why Obama racked up 11 Trillion Dollars in debt while he was in office.
That 34% figure is not good not matter which way you try to explain it away, and it is undeniable that this administration has presided over the highest Non Participation Rate in our history.

That claim is just sheer out and out stupidity. That percentage includes the disabled, it includes the retired, it includes the 102 year old man in the nursing home.

I mean when the hell did the labor participation rate make a happy damn? It has never been an indication of economic health, either way. Last I checked, our motto was "In God We Trust", not "Arbeit Macht Frei".

But the worst claim of your ignorance is not the capable of working, it is the not working part. Not only does your 35% include the retired and disabled, it includes the stay at home moms and the thousands of individuals devoting their time to taking care of an elderly parent. It is out and out disgusting and the truth is, the number never made a happy damn to anyone until the right started using it to counter Obama's success in cutting unemployment.

The labor force participation rate has never been considered a measurement of the health of the job markets until Obama became president and the unemployment rate began falling.

 

[pinqy]

Although much of the major media are reporting the national unemployment rate for October as4.9%, the "real unemployment rate," as determined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) and which includes part-time workers and those marginally attached to the work force, is 9.5%.

oops - should have read a little before I replied; as I am sure you know, Trump plans to use U6 numbers

I am confident that the media will not make the distinction - they will tout Obama's U3 numbers and compare them to Trump's U6 numbers - they consistently lie like that...

The official release from BLS will continue to use the U-3 as the official number. Trump cannot change that.

 

[Faun]

The U-3 unemployment rate has always been the official unemployment rate. Still is.

I hear you; but that does not make it any less misleading - especially today

the number of "under-employed" is higher than it typically is; especially in a strong & vibrant economy

we both know that both sides do it, manipulate the numbers and use the data that supports their agenda

labor participation is not strong & people are hurting; especially in middle America & in the "flyover" states

that's one of the main reasons that Trump got elected

The U-3 rate has 39.7% under Obama, from 7.8% to 4.7%. The U-6 rate has fallen 35.2%, from 14.2% to 9.2%. So by either measure, the unemployment is significantly lower under Obama.

 

[dcbl]

And how, exactly, does the U-6 give a better picture of where we are? From the chart, both show about the same thing:

U6 includes people that are unable to get the type of work they want and or need - people who are part time (many are in this position because of ACA rules)

it also brings in those that are discouraged from looking

perhaps you can explain to me how that is not more realistic?

Trump is promising to address the situation; to work on creating more jobs so that everyone has as much work & as many hours as they need & are capable of

that's a good thing...