Bloomberg: anyone who questions the gov unemployment data is a "birther/vaxxer/flat-earther"

[randomname]

Slams the Gallup CEO as a conspiracy theorist



The Latest Economic Conspiracy Theory
12 Feb 9, 2015 10:06 AM EST
By Barry Ritholtz

Friday’s jobs numbers were big, and the revisions below the surface were huge. Yet even before the release, the birther/vaxxer/flat-earther crowd had warned us about phony numbers. As public policy, this kind conspiracy thinking can cause the deaths of infants and the elderly. At least in markets, it merely loses you money.

In December, I wrote:

Today’s column is about stupidity. Perhaps that's overstating it; to be more precise, it is about the conspiracy-theorist combination of bias, innumeracy and laziness, with a pinch of arrogance thrown in for good measure.

I am talking about the manifold ways various economic reports get misinterpreted, sometimes in a willful and ignorant manner.

That column discussed some of the sillier theories from within the darker corners of the Internet. Admittedly, these weren’t from influential people or important media outlets; it was the usual collection of oddballs in tinfoil hats.

So I am somewhat amazed that in recent days we are seeing similar idiocy from prominent people with powerful jobs who should know better. What makes these grand conspiracy theories so amusing -- whether it is the moon landing, the dangers of vaccines, or the current economic recovery -- is these people's naïve belief that they have discovered some great truth. (Actually, that it is news to anyone that the government lies to us about war or NSA invasions of privacy or so many other things is the true surprise.)

Today, I want to discuss not the unwashed masses but chief executive officers and other business leaders. (I give former General Electric CEO Jack Welch a pass because his nonsensical ramblings are so familiar as to be background noise.)

Perhaps the most-discussed recent conspiracy theory comes from Gallup CEO Jim Clifton:

Here's something that many Americans -- including some of the smartest and most educated among us -- don't know: The official unemployment rate, as reported by the U.S. Department of Labor, is extremely misleading . … Right now, we're hearing much celebrating from the media, the White House and Wall Street about how unemployment is "down" to 5.6%.

None of them will tell you this: If you, a family member or anyone is unemployed and has subsequently given up on finding a job -- if you are so hopelessly out of work that you've stopped looking over the past four weeks -- the Department of Labor doesn't count you as unemployed.

Clifton essay is subtly titled, "The Big Lie." Actually, it is something that anyone with even a passing interest in economics knows, even otherwise-ignorant financial TV anchors.

Punch into Google the phrase “how is the unemployment rate calculated,” and the very first result is the BLS explainer “How the Government Measures Unemployment.” Under the heading “basic concepts of employment and unemployment,” we get four bullet points that explain the broad concepts of measuring employment:

People with jobs are employed.
People who are jobless, looking for a job, and available for work are unemployed.
The labor force is made up of the employed and the unemployed.
People who are neither employed nor unemployed are not in the labor force.

(For a more detailed explanation, Matt O’Brien refers to this section of the same BLS page.)

The conspiracy theorists fail to understand the basics of econometric modeling and how these numbers are calculated. They also seemingly could not conceive that these measures are two-sided -- that this method can drive the unemployment rate up as well as down.

Consider the rise in unemployment in the January nonfarm payrolls report. More than a million people returned to the job market last month, raising the unemployment rate from 5.6 percent to 5.7.

Hence, we have a deep dark secret. It has been craftily hidden by the illuminati, Freemasons and Trilateral Commission, unless you know the secret handshake, or are familiar with a small, esoteric company called "Google.”

Regardless, the technical definition of unemployment is well known, and easily discoverable. The only reasons anyone who wants to understand this but does not are: a) ignorance b) laziness c) bias and d) some combination of all three.

Which brings us back to Mr. Clifton of Gallup: How is it possible for the head of a major polling organization to not understand the basics of employment data? Perhaps its time for the company to do its own internal poll: Do we want our organization to be run by someone who seems to have no economic sophistication and is easily taken in by the goofiest of conspiracy theories?

To contact the author on this story:
Barry Ritholtz at britholtz3@bloomberg.net

[dannno]

The conspiracy theorists fail to understand the basics of econometric modeling and how these numbers are calculated.

lol, bullshit, I probably got a higher grade in my econometrics class than this fool.

[Working Poor]

LOL

[AuH20]

Hence, we have a deep dark secret. It has been craftily hidden by the illuminati, Freemasons and Trilateral Commission, unless you know the secret handshake, or are familiar with a small, esoteric company called "Google.”

I was waiting for this. Too predictable.

[AuH20]

Why would the government ever alter key economic indicators? It's not like they manipulate the CPI or change the staple items of measurement when they rapidly increase in price?

[Ronin Truth]

Maybe so, but at least thankfully, I'm not a Bloomberg.:p

[AuH20]

So Ritholz is insisting that the public should be more informed about the three employment categories (employed, unemployed and no longer searching) as opposed to being concerned about an intentionally deceptive government statistic? Is that his flimsy argument?

[otherone]

Here ya' go, Barry:

http://www.unitedliberty.org/files/images/Zero-Hedge-LFP-Participation.jpg


What makes these grand conspiracy theories so amusing -- whether it is the moon landing, the dangers of vaccines, or the current economic recovery -- is these people's naïve belief that they have discovered some great truth. (Actually, that it is news to anyone that the government lies to us about war or NSA invasions of privacy or so many other things is the true surprise.)

Is he saying that it's naive to believe government lies to us?

[TheCount]

I think it's loopy to say that the data is fraudulent, but it's not crazy to disagree on which of the gov't employment numbers is the 'right' number to follow.

[DamianTV]

Monopoly on Belief

The common sentiment of public schools is that children are taught just enough to run a machine, but are not taught well enough purposefully to ask whether this is the right machine for the job. The intention is to prevent people from Thinking, and by Thinking, they start to challenge ideas. Not because the idea is wrong, but to better understand the idea itself. There are two sides to this. For people that try to Think and challenge ideas for themselves to see if they are valid or invalid, it is a demand to Blindly Accept the Idea as it is proposed without challenge, thereby fully eliminating the Thinking process. The other side of this is that there are already people who do not Think. By creating an association between challenging the Unemployment Data and other concepts that have already been well implanted into their minds, they will attack those who dare to Think. Reading between the lines, this simply means, if you do not think, attack those who do. Group Think is a very powerful psychological weapons, whereby the victim of attacks by the group internalize those attacks as if there is something wrong with the individual, and the result is that the thoughts of the individual are systematically replaced with the expressed opinion of the Group.

This is Weaponized Propoganda.

But lets dig deeper. Sure, their numbers are accurate. 22 divided by 7 is 3.14. It is special number known as PI. I wont debate that 22 / 7 = 3.14... but I will debate the source of the idea itself. Where they come up with 22 and 7 is where the fiction exists, and determination of the numbers used to do the math is as misleading as can possibly be made. So lets consider their real numbers. 5.6% means that 8.69 million people do not have jobs. In contrast, the total number of ADULTS, not the whole population, but just ADULTS, who do not have jobs is estimated at 101 million people. Now we can compare. 8.69 million people vs 101 million ADULTS. Id say that is a tremendous disconnect. By understanding how these numbers are derived, we can conclude what the Real Unemployment Rate is. Now, there are some valid exclusions. People who choose not to work. People who are over 18 that are in school and do not intend to work while going to school. People who are independently wealthy. I dont have any idea on these numbers. Another solid indicator would be Food Stamps. That is something we do have numbers for. We can compare 8.69 million people (not adults) with 45 million people on Food Stamps (rough estimate, but more accurate numbers exist. Let us assume that these 45 million people on Food Stamps definitely do not have Meaningful Employment. So lets replace 8.69 million people who qualify as Unemployed with people on Food Stams since it is pretty obvious the Food Stamps recipients do not have Meaningful Employment (IE, a non McWalMarx job). 45 million on food stamps divided by 8.69 = 5.78 and change. Thus, the Unemployment Rate is roughly 5.78 TIMES HIGHER than reported by their official statistics. 5.78 x 5.6 = 28.9988 and change. Now lets think about WHY. What sounds better, 6% Unemployment Rate, or 29% Unemployment Rate?

There is a huge disconnect between what people are TOLD the Unemployment Rate is at, and what they THINK the Unemployment Rate is:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Szu-lqRAhJg

The results of this video coincide with what most people THINK the Unemployment Rate really is. Right around 30%.

There are so many ways that this number can be crunched, but they do NOT want you to do the math yourself, and as you can see, it isnt that difficult. If Unemployment were really at 5 and a half percent, Employers would be begging people to come work for them and would experience a true Labor Shortage. Thus, there are even more disconnects in the system. Employers are not hiring because the determination of employment is subject to Algorithms, not Human Intuition, similar to your Credit Score. How many PhDs are working as Janitors? Masters Degrees working as Bartenders? Bachelors flipping Burgers? See, the problem isnt that jobs arent out there, it is that the Employment that is available is part time temporary non meaningful work that can only be filled by people that are retardedly overqualified.

Lets continue to dig deeper. Education no longer matters. We have a new class of people, the Educated Poor. Those who are unable to find meaningful employment with their education. But that isnt what matters to an Employer. Employers want the employees who are willing to eat shit, not employees who will quit once they find out how badly they will be treated. Employees have become THE DISPOSABLE PRODUCT. Many of these McWalMarx jobs burn through employees so quickly that they have to bring in employees from ever increasing distances. They will favor the "Undocumented Worker" over natural born citizens because of the mentality that these types of workers carry with them. They can be paid less because they barely complain. But they are HUMANS too. Yet, the Illegals feel that if they complain about their jobs at all, they will be DISPOSED OF and systematically replaced. And they are correct. When Immigration Services do their big crackdowns on Illegals, they go after the people who are already victims, but NEVER go after the big companies that hire them to begin with, and favor Illegals over Citizens because of who will eat the most shit. When these crackdowns occur, the burden is placed on the Illegals themselves, but not to such an extent as to interrupt the process of manufacture of the corporation. Immigration is a very large problem, but to understand it, we need to dig deeper. Farmers in their native countries can not match the production that exists in the US, and the US has already decimated their economies to the point that they are left with no other choices in their home countries that provide a meaningful path to financial success natively. The result is they follow the money, where ever they can take it. They are coming here in droves, but really our slave factories are the ones that fired the first shot. The US Govt offers Welfare as well as Open Borders, and the result is massive immigration. So who really started this problem? Govt? Govt is bought and paid for by the Corporations who get laws passed that allow them to do whatever is more profitable, regardless of ethics. Govt offers Welfare because they are bought and paid for. Govt is controlled and contrived to provide the illusion of security. Might as well call us USA Inc. as that is closer to reality. Now, the way the Illegals factor in to our unemployment is also done in such a way as to bolster the numbers.

Illegals are not counted on the Total Population the same way as a person with a Realtors License is not counted into the Unemployed number. There are many ways to pad the numbers on both sides of the mathematical equation. Excluding these numbers allows distortion of perception for those who DO NOT CHALLENGE IDEAS as they are presented to them. Hence, further demans to not challenge, as well as a call to arms to attack those who continue to challenge. DO NOT THINK CRITICALLY. That is the message. Your Obedience to the Monopoly of Belief is MANDATORY, where you are expected to BLINDLY accept the 5.6% Unemployment Rate without question because their Authority over the Numbers is legitimate. This is typically my beef with Zippy, except Zippy is in the same damn sinking boat as we are, and he is at just as much risk of drowning when this boat finally sinks. The same beef as I have with other people who choose to NOT THINK CRITICALLY. Simply challenge the ideas before accepting them. Bloomberg is a part of the Status Quo.

If you really want to be free, you MUST continue to CRITICALLY THINK. Challenge their Monopoly of Belief, as that is the greatest threat to the Status Quo.

FUCK BLOOMBERG. THINK FOR YOURSELVES.

---
Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000

http://data.bls.gov/generated_files/graphics/latest_numbers_LNS11300000_2005_2015_all_period_M0 1_data.gif

[NorthCarolinaLiberty]

I think it's loopy to say that the data is fraudulent,...

You mean like you being fraudulent on this forum? You mean like that?

It's not always what one says, but often what you one does not say. You, for instance, talked about how you can't stand to see Lindsey Graham bumper stickers in SC. What you did not say however, is the reason for that.

Your dislike of Graham is not the same as people on this forum. You dislike Graham because of his opposition to things like welfare and Obamacare, items that you support.

You were purposely ingratiating in that thread. You've conveniently done it all week.

So, it's often no different with gov stats, or any stats for that matter. I comes back to the person.

[oyarde]

I do not believe the Earth is flat .

[Weston White]

At least in markets, it merely loses you money.

Oh yes, just ask ENRON, for those murders knew all about the loss of both money and life.


So I am somewhat amazed that in recent days we are seeing similar idiocy from prominent people with powerful jobs who should know better.

...Err...It could just be that you are the one that should know better, and truth be told probably already do, but sadly opts to remain complacent due to your own fears of the system failing and thereby epically dissolving your own lifelong investment alongside it?

How about this for a measurement of rising employment rates:

30-hour workweeks now count as fulltime even though more than 40-hours is required at minimum wage just to subsist on crappy conventional food in a crappy apartment with a crappy import car—all against relentless runaway inflation.

Most employees in order to make fulltime need to seek multiple employments—which are then counted as individual jobs by the government.

A large portion of the jobs being accounted for are merely temporary and seasonal employments; and still many others are jobs pertain to government—taxpayer funded—employments.

If the case being that employment is so great and all, how then is it explainable that virtually 50% of Americans are seeking one or more forms of financial assistance from the government and that the majority of all U.S. cities are still operating in austerity mode?

People that write snarky contrived articles are not cool and are participating in real journalism. They are petty idiots.

[BV2]

If this is spontaneous it is good because it means real infighting is beginning. If not, let's not be predictable little tools. Hard to tell though, really.

[DamianTV]

If this is spontaneous it is good because it means real infighting is beginning. If not, let's not be predictable little tools. Hard to tell though, really.

We just need to make sure the Infighting is not amongst ourselves, and we can let them destroy themselves from the inside out. Just keep challenging their propoganda at every opportunity.

[GunnyFreedom]

LOL who didn't see this one coming?

[jbauer]

Labor force participation rate is a BS statistic. It counts everyone 16+ including retired folks. Any labor statistic that includes retired people is deliberately trying to deceive you. We have begun the baby boomer window of retirements. It is significantly driven by the shift in demographics.

This was a statistic that no one had heard of prior to Dumbo's re-election in 2012. The Republican's knew they had a statistic that they could hang their hat on.

If we're going to talk unemployment lets at least be educated enough to have a decent conversation.


Here ya' go, Barry:

http://www.unitedliberty.org/files/images/Zero-Hedge-LFP-Participation.jpg



Is he saying that it's naive to believe government lies to us?

[otherone]

If we're going to talk unemployment lets at least be educated enough to have a decent conversation.

You've missed the point of the graph. As an example (using hyperbole), if you have a nation of 300 million people, and only 500 people want to work, and there were 500 jobs available, and they filled all those jobs, wouldn't that be a 0 percent unemployment rate?

Look at the drop off point in the graph....how many early retirees were due to the recession? How many older people lost their jobs? How many of your "BS" 16 year olds can't find work? As far as political relevance, look at the year "dumbo" took office. You have counter data?

[Zippyjuan]

If people don't want a job, should they be counted as unemployed? (People not looking for work are assumed to not want one- otherwise they would be searching for one). Or should we only care about those who actually want one (are looking for work?) Which is a more useful/ helpful statistic?

And note the dropoff- it is not as extreme as the chart suggests. That is because the bottom of the chart is not zero. The change is actually from a high of 67% in the labor force to 63% in the labor force- four percentage points. (A six percent decline in the labor force participation rate).

[Zippyjuan]

Charts from another thread:

https://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/not-in-us-job-market-65-and-older-people-age-65-and-older-out-of-the-us-labor-market_chartbuilder.png?w=640

https://qzprod.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/people-not-in-us-labor-force-us-not-in-labor-force_chartbuilder.png?w=640
http://qz.com/286213/the-chart-obama-haters-love-most-and-the-truth-behind-it/

[otherone]

http://researchcouncil.blogs.com/.a/6a00d83540269269e20168e9e8da52970c-800wi

[jbauer]

Some of the other folks grabbed those charts for me. But, to answer your question, YES, if only 500 people want jobs and we only have 500 jobs we have 100% employment or 0% unemployment. Even if we had 100 Billion people in the country.

I agree, that the current calculation of unemployed does a terrible job of accounting for folks that have stopped looking, folks that have retired early and folks that are under-employed. I don't have the magic answer as to where to find the "real" employment numbers. But what I can tell you is labor force participation rate is a made up statistic that intentionally tries to skew the numbers negatively. LPR will continue to decline as we go more and more years into the babyboomer population.


You've missed the point of the graph. As an example (using hyperbole), if you have a nation of 300 million people, and only 500 people want to work, and there were 500 jobs available, and they filled all those jobs, wouldn't that be a 0 percent unemployment rate?

Look at the drop off point in the graph....how many early retirees were due to the recession? How many older people lost their jobs? How many of your "BS" 16 year olds can't find work? As far as political relevance, look at the year "dumbo" took office. You have counter data?

[phill4paul]

Whenever these debates come up I think to myself what the "unemployment" data would look like if there were no welfare.

[Thor]

So he admits the numbers are flawed, and every fool knows they are flawed, and it is A-OK to celebrate the flawed numbers as "improvements." A round of back slapping is in order.... And only a fool would point this out... good article... pass the Kool-aid.

[Danke]

Whenever these debates come up I think to myself what the "unemployment" data would look like if there were no welfare.

I imagine a lot of people they exclude from unemployment statics are those not looking for work, because of all the benefits they already receive. I heard even illegals can go back 3 years of tax filing and claim EIC for all those years.

[randomname]

So is this piece satire or is it real?

[Weston White]

Whenever these debates come up I think to myself what the "unemployment" data would look like if there were no welfare.

Over the years I have heard of many individuals that only take seasonal work, during the holidays, at the IRS, etc. then once their temp. job has ended float on unemployment until it runs out and then pickup another temp. job. Funny thing is these people also seem to collect huge ($5-9K) tax refunds as a cherry on the top, even though they made less than 20K throughout the year.

[otherone]

I imagine a lot of people they exclude from unemployment statics are those not looking for work, because of all the benefits they already receive. I heard even illegals can go back 3 years of tax filing and claim EIC for all those years.

The numbers are based on phone surveys, IIRC. Excluded would be self-employed, gray market and under-the-table activities. IMO, the best employment indicators would be wages per total capita vs wages per employed capita. What unemployment doesn't account for is those who have left the market and are content to be a burden on others, whether the state, family, or friends.

[acptulsa]

If people don't want a job, should they be counted as unemployed? (People not looking for work are assumed to not want one- otherwise they would be searching for one). Or should we only care about those who actually want one (are looking for work?) Which is a more useful/ helpful statistic?

And note the dropoff- it is not as extreme as the chart suggests. That is because the bottom of the chart is not zero. The change is actually from a high of 67% in the labor force to 63% in the labor force- four percentage points. (A six percent decline in the labor force participation rate).

And if people want to be retired, but are still working, should they be counted as employed?

You've been pwned again. Good job, otherone!


http://researchcouncil.blogs.com/.a/6a00d83540269269e20168e9e8da52970c-800wi


I do not believe the Earth is flat .

Burn him! Burn him at the stake!!

[jbauer]

Man, people are going to think I'm the new zippy. But you would certainly expect a rise in older people employed if a few of these things happen:

1. We have a "great recession" that wipes out savings
2. We have a society that doesn't believe in savings, which has compounded itself for the 2nd 1/2 of the babyboomers.
3. We have an increasing life expectancy. (life expectancy since 1980 has climbed 5 yrs, but it has climbed 10 years for males, the ones who seem to be working longer)
4. Some people just like working. I know several folks that are 65+ that are more than financially secure but still enjoy working.
5. Social Security "full age" is rising, this will push the 65 deal to 67 in the near term.
6. Pensions have disappeared, so people don't feel as secure in their retirements as they used to. Therefore, they work.


I'm still not trying to tell you that employment is all rainbows and bunny trails.


And if people want to be retired, but are still working, should they be counted as employed?

You've been pwned again. Good job, otherone!





Burn him! Burn him at the stake!!

[Cap]

Man, there is some serious reputational loss going on here for a certain poster. Gonna have to get a new user name, his employers aren't gonna like it.

[jonhowe]

He's right. It is common knowledge to anyone with any education in economics or public policy. WHICH IS NOT MOST PEOPLE.

Those who push these numbers don't usually feel the need to explain how misleading they are. THAT is the problem; the public at large has no idea. Obama isn't lying about what the "unemployment rate" is when "unemployment rate" has an exact definition in economics; it just happens to have a very different definition in the thinking of most people.

[Zippyjuan]

The numbers are based on phone surveys, IIRC. Excluded would be self-employed, gray market and under-the-table activities. IMO, the best employment indicators would be wages per total capita vs wages per employed capita. What unemployment doesn't account for is those who have left the market and are content to be a burden on others, whether the state, family, or friends.

Self employed are included. The important factor is "did you earn any money". You are right it is based on phone surveys. They select 20,000 households one month and each household is followed for three months. The next month, another 20,000 and the next 20,000 more for a total of 60,000 households. It does exclude military and those in institutions.

Some sample questions:


Does anyone in this household have a business or a farm?

Last week, did you do any work for (either) pay (or profit)?
If the answer to question 1 is "yes" and the answer to question 2 is "no," the next question is:

Last week, did you do any unpaid work in the family business or farm?
For those who reply "no" to both questions 2 and 3, the next key questions used to determine employment status are:

Last week, (in addition to the business) did you have a job, either full or part time? Include any job from which you were temporarily absent.

Last week, were you on layoff from a job?

What was the main reason you were absent from work last week?
For those who respond "yes" to question 5 about being on layoff, the following questions are asked:

Has your employer given you a date to return to work?
If "no," the next question is:

Have you been given any indication that you will be recalled to work within the next 6 months?
If the responses to either question 7 or 8 indicate that the person expects to be recalled from layoff, he or she is counted as unemployed. For those who were reported as having no job or business from which they were absent or on layoff, the next question is:

Have you been doing anything to find work during the last 4 weeks?
For those who say "yes," the next question is:

What are all of the things you have done to find work during the last 4 weeks?
If an active method of looking for work, such as those listed at the beginning of this section, is mentioned, the following question is asked:

Last week, could you have started a job if one had been offered?
If there is no reason, except temporary illness, that the person could not take a job, he or she is considered to be not only looking but also available for work and is counted as unemployed.


Some fictional examples of typical responses that may result in a person being classified as unemployed are:

Yvonne reported that 2 weeks ago she applied for jobs at a bank and at a mortgage lending company. She currently is waiting to hear back from both businesses. Yvonne is unemployed because she made a specific effort to find a job within the prior 4 weeks and is presently available for work.


Ms. Jenkins tells the interviewer that her teenage daughter, Katherine Marie, was thinking about looking for work in the prior 4 weeks but knows of no specific efforts she has made. Katherine Marie does not meet the activity test for unemployment and is, therefore, counted as not in the labor force.


John has been checking for openings at a local warehouse store for each of the past 3 weeks, but last week he had the flu and was unavailable for work because of it. John is counted as unemployed because he took steps to look for work and would have been available for work during the survey reference week, except for his temporary illness.


Marcus was laid off from the local plant of a major automaker when the firm began retooling to produce a new model car. Marcus knows he will be called back to work as soon as the model changeover is completed, and he also knows it is unlikely that he would be able to find a job for the period he is laid off; so, although he is available to work, he is not seeking a job. Marcus is unemployed because he is waiting to be recalled from layoff.


Julia told the interviewer that she has submitted applications with three companies for summer jobs. However, it is only April and she doesn't wish to start work until at least June 15, because she is attending school. Although she has taken specific steps to find a job, Julia is classified as not in the labor force because she is not currently available for work. (She could not have started a job if one had been offered.) Students are treated the same as other persons; that is, they are classified as employed or unemployed if they meet the criteria, whether they are in school on a full- or part-time basis.

[Slutter McGee]

People forget about hours worked and worker productivity statistics. If I can find the stuff on the BLS I believe it shows a lack of improvement in these areas.

But yeah, for what it is UR is pretty accurate. The ADP report correlates pretty high with it.

Slutter McGee

[paleocon1]

If people don't want a job, should they be counted as unemployed? ..........................

Absolutely, as the odds are 90% or better that these 'don't want to works' are Parasites on those who DO work. The real economy sucks and the root cause of tis bad economy is the doubling in size of the bread and circuses class under obama. Perhaps the Stat we should measure is something like percent of population who as a household are able to pay their own costs of food/clothing/shelter/medical/transportation/incidentals without taxpayer funds and the reasons/excuses for other population segments being parasites.

[Zippyjuan]

People forget about hours worked and worker productivity statistics. If I can find the stuff on the BLS I believe it shows a lack of improvement in these areas.

But yeah, for what it is UR is pretty accurate. The ADP report correlates pretty high with it.

Slutter McGee

I can get average weekly hours. Given that the number of people working has been rising, the total hours worked will also be up.

http://data.bls.gov/generated_files/graphics/CES0500000002_650833_1424112505604.gif
http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet?request_action=wh&graph_name=CE_cesbref2

(03/06 means March of 2006- not March 6 of last year).

[Zippyjuan]

Absolutely, as the odds are 90% or better that these 'don't want to works' are Parasites on those who DO work. The real economy sucks and the root cause of tis bad economy is the doubling in size of the bread and circuses class under obama. Perhaps the Stat we should measure is something like percent of population who as a household are able to pay their own costs of food/clothing/shelter/medical/transportation/incidentals without taxpayer funds and the reasons/excuses for other population segments being parasites.

Would you consider retired persons, stay at home Moms and Dads and students to all be parasites? These comprise most of the people
"not in the labor force".