- Thread starter
- #141
The CBO which the left profoundly respects stated clearly the UE numbers are misleading and you need to add 1.6% to the numbers.Mmm-hmm. Whatever you say choo-choo.
Link and I'll check it out.
But I can predict with a reasonable degree of certainty that 1.) By the standard employed, you always 'need to add x%' to the UE numbers, and 2.) It will not change the premise of my post. 3/4/2012 is better than 12/31/2008.
This sliding standard is constantly employed; Pointing out that discouraged workers are not being counted is the most common method. If we're 'counting' discouraged workers against today's 8.3, than it must be 'counted' against Bush's 5% or whatever timeframe you wish to analyze.
There's nothing wrong with having a consistent standard. Which standard is used is a matter of opinion.
Of course you want to take the numbers during the crash. You don't want to take the good numbers Bush had at the same time during his first term and Obama's first. That would be really revealing.