The September 2009 Unemployment Rate is........

[AllieBaba]

The reason it's FALLING is the first wave of ppl w/ extended unemployment are no longer receiving it.

The numbers don't represent ppl who aren't working & don't receive UC.

Unemployment checks aren't used to determine the rate. The rate is calculated using a survey of households.

Lol. Post a link for that, genius.

 

[AllieBaba]

You can't, because it isn't true. As I learned in training. The numbers aren't representative, as they told us when they were telling us to brace for massive of numbers flooding our offices despite the misleading news that "unemployment is falling".

 

[Polk]

Early each month, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) of the U.S. Department of Labor announces the total number of employed and unemployed persons in the United States for the previous month, along with many characteristics of such persons. These figures, particularly the unemployment rate—which tells you the percent of the labor force that is unemployed—receive wide coverage in the media.

Some people think that to get these figures on unemployment, the Government uses the number of persons filing claims for unemployment insurance (UI) benefits under State or Federal Government programs. But some people are still jobless when their benefits run out, and many more are not eligible at all or delay or never apply for benefits. So, quite clearly, UI information cannot be used as a source for complete information on the number of unemployed.

Other people think that the Government counts every unemployed person each month. To do this, every home in the country would have to be contacted—just as in the population census every 10 years. This procedure would cost way too much and take far too long. Besides, people would soon grow tired of having a census taker come to their homes every month, year after year, to ask about job-related activities.

Because unemployment insurance records relate only to persons who have applied for such benefits, and since it is impractical to actually count every unemployed person each month, the Government conducts a monthly sample survey called the Current Population Survey (CPS) to measure the extent of unemployment in the country. The CPS has been conducted in the United States every month since 1940, when it began as a Work Projects Administration project. It has been expanded and modified several times since then. For instance, beginning in 1994, the CPS estimates reflect the results of a major redesign of the survey. (For more information on the CPS redesign, see Chapter 1, "Labor Force Data Derived from the Current Population Survey," in the BLS Handbook of Methods.)

There are about 60,000 households in the sample for this survey. This translates into approximately 110,000 individuals, a large sample compared to public opinion surveys which usually cover fewer than 2,000 people. The CPS sample is selected so as to be representative of the entire population of the United States. In order to select the sample, all of the counties and county-equivalent cities in the country first are grouped into 2,025 geographic areas (sampling units). The Census Bureau then designs and selects a sample consisting of 824 of these geographic areas to represent each State and the District of Columbia. The sample is a State-based design and reflects urban and rural areas, different types of industrial and farming areas, and the major geographic divisions of each State. (For a detailed explanation of CPS sampling methodology, see Chapter 1, of the BLS Handbook of Methods.)

How the Government Measures Unemployment

So yeah.

 

[AllieBaba]

And that information came straight from the unemployment department.

 

[AllieBaba]

"Persons are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work."

If they don't have a job, they aren't actively looking, they don't count them as among the labor force. Ppl whose unemployment has run out, who are on welfare and at home with the kids, and don't qualify for UC don't count.

It's the exact same way the unemployment department determines who is eligible for UC or not.

They aren't counting a whole population of people.

How the Government Measures Unemployment

 

[Polk]

You can't, because it isn't true. As I learned in training. The numbers aren't representative, as they told us when they were telling us to brace for massive of numbers flooding our offices despite the misleading news that "unemployment is falling".

The rate is falling as the raw number goes up because the commonly reported rate (U3) measures the number of people actively looking for work. If people are no longer looking for work, they're not counted in the rate even if they'd prefer to be working.

 

[Polk]

"Persons are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work."

If they don't have a job, they aren't actively looking, they don't count them as among the labor force. Ppl whose unemployment has run out, who are on welfare and at home with the kids, and don't qualify for UC don't count.

It's the exact same way the unemployment department determines who is eligible for UC or not.

They aren't counting a whole population of people.

How the Government Measures Unemployment

They are not counting them using the figures for unemployment insurance, which was your original claim.

 

[Dr Grump]

"Persons are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work."

If they don't have a job, they aren't actively looking, they don't count them as among the labor force. Ppl whose unemployment has run out, who are on welfare and at home with the kids, and don't qualify for UC don't count.

It's the exact same way the unemployment department determines who is eligible for UC or not.

They aren't counting a whole population of people.

How the Government Measures Unemployment

They are not counting them using the figures for unemployment insurance, which was your original claim.

Allie suffers from a permanent case of "Foot In Mouth" disease. You could tell her the sky is blue and she'd argue the toss if she disagreed...

 

[Maple]

I'm going to predict it will FALL again. I'm going to say 9.2 or under. I do not think we will break Ronald Reagan's record of 10% unemployment in this recession.

What planet do you live on??? Last week 560,000 people lost thier jobs, this week 570,000 people lost their jobs, that's an additional 10,000 people who lost thier jobs, you call that a decrease???? Maybe you need to go back to grammer school and re-visit your 1st grade math class.

 

[Andrew2382]

I'm going to predict it will FALL again. I'm going to say 9.2 or under. I do not think we will break Ronald Reagan's record of 10% unemployment in this recession.

My guess is 9.3721%.

you're way off

I say

9.4543

 

[Maple]

I'm going to predict it will FALL again. I'm going to say 9.2 or under. I do not think we will break Ronald Reagan's record of 10% unemployment in this recession.

Wishful thinking David S, but it's just a sign that many have given up looking or been dropped off the unemployment count. The real unemployment number in some communities is well over 10%, 14% in the state of Michigan.

Why Did the Unemployment Rate Drop? - Real Time Economics - WSJ

 

[Polk]

My educated guess is the rate is going to peak at around 10%. As the job picture looks better in the last few months of the year, discouraged workers will reenter the labor market, increasing the rate temporarily.

 

[Maple]

My educated guess is the rate is going to peak at around 10%. As the job picture looks better in the last few months of the year, discouraged workers will reenter the labor market, increasing the rate temporarily.

Maybe. I do know that stimulus bill is doing little to nothing to create new jobs, but when you read it and look at what they are spending it on, it's no wonder. Here is Colorado they are spending app 5 million to repave a bike trail. They were excited to state that they will have to hire another 4 men to help with the repaving. of course those jobs will end once the re-paving is done.

They are spending enormous amounts of money putting up billboards to let everyone know what thier spending your tax dollars on.That's another wasteful and huge expense. It's just a dog and pony show.
Read the bill, it's down right disgusting.

The funniest was the removal of fish barriers. All a fish barrier is, is a beaver damn, a couple of guys go out and break up the damns of the beavers.

Poor beavers, now they will be homeless, maybe Obama will realize his unfairness to the beavers and have Chris Dodd get Country Wide to give them a GREAT DEAL on a mortgage interest loan and have Barney Frank get Freddie and Fanny to back it. Nancy Pelosi can write up the paper work. Of course they will be forced to join a Union( The National organization of Critters) and contribute fish to Acorn, but I am sure he will help them, the poor creatures that they are.

 

[hjmick]

While claiming he was a conservative. What a laugh.

That is one good thing about the Obama Borg.

 

[eagleseven]

I bet it'll be below 9%. How?

Because more people will have unwillingly moved "out of the workforce" than will have freshly lost their jobs.

 

[KittenKoder]

While claiming he was a conservative. What a laugh.

That is one good thing about the Obama Borg.

Suweet! I am going to copy that link! Thanks HJ.

 

[Mad Scientist]

I'm going to predict it will FALL again. I'm going to say 9.2 or under. I do not think we will break Ronald Reagan's record of 10% unemployment in this recession.

From the "evil" Bloomberg news:
U.S. Payroll Losses Slow, Unemployment Rises to 9.7% (Update2) - Bloomberg.com

U.S. Payroll Losses Slow, Unemployment Rises to 9.7%

Wow. Imagine if McCain had won the election:
"Wall Street got it's bailout but the American worker is getting screwed! Impeach McCain NOW!"

 

[eagleseven]

I'm going to predict it will FALL again. I'm going to say 9.2 or under. I do not think we will break Ronald Reagan's record of 10% unemployment in this recession.

From the "evil" Bloomberg news:
U.S. Payroll Losses Slow, Unemployment Rises to 9.7% (Update2) - Bloomberg.com

U.S. Payroll Losses Slow, Unemployment Rises to 9.7%

Wow. Imagine if McCain had won the election:
"Wall Street got it's bailout but the American worker is getting screwed! Impeach McCain NOW!"

Think they'll change how unemployment is calculated again to keep the official number forever under 10%?

 

[DiveCon]

I'm going to predict it will FALL again. I'm going to say 9.2 or under. I do not think we will break Ronald Reagan's record of 10% unemployment in this recession.

From the "evil" Bloomberg news:
U.S. Payroll Losses Slow, Unemployment Rises to 9.7% (Update2) - Bloomberg.com

U.S. Payroll Losses Slow, Unemployment Rises to 9.7%

Wow. Imagine if McCain had won the election:
"Wall Street got it's bailout but the American worker is getting screwed! Impeach McCain NOW!"

yup, another EPIC FAIL for davids

 

[Vast LWC]

I'm going to predict it will FALL again. I'm going to say 9.2 or under. I do not think we will break Ronald Reagan's record of 10% unemployment in this recession.

We have not had a month go buy without massive loss of jobs yet you retards are claiming the unemployment rate is dropping. What is dropping is the poor fools with no jobs and now no unemployment benefits.

Or maybe YOU can explain how with over 200000 lost jobs in a month the unemployment rate goes down? Ohh and by the way, didn't Obama promise it would not go over 8 percent if we JUST rushed through his stimulus plan without actually reading it?

The unemployment rate has not dropped.

The rate of unemployment GROWTH has dropped.

See the difference?