5 ms·

No, 5.3% unemployment number is cooked. Even the BLS stats say 10.3% & that's probably gamed too. http://www.cnbc.com/2015/09/04/-the-real-unemployment-rate.ht

• jjoonathan 11y ago
  Understand the definitions of "unemployed" here (U1-U6): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unemployment#United_States_Bureau_of_Labor_statistics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unemployment#United_States_Bur... Look up the time-series here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unemployment#/media/File:US_Unemployment_measures.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unemployment#/media/File:US_Un... It's a little silly to say that one of these measures is "cooked" while using as evidence an alternative metric that was measured and published by the same agency with the explicit understanding that the two metrics measured different things.
• randomname2 11y ago
  Not to mention the plummetting labor force participation rate, in the US at least (some other countries do better): http://charleshughsmith.blogspot.com/2015/12/why-has-labor-participation-rate-plunged.html http://charleshughsmith.blogspot.com/2015/12/why-has-labor-p...
• dragonwriter 11y ago
  Obviously, you are using U-6 instead of the headline rate, and using non-current numbers; U-6 is now 9.9% (with seasonal adjustment, 9.6% by the raw numbers.) But while debating about which measure is "real" unemployment is fun, I guess, U-6 follows the same trend as the headline U-3 measure, so while the number is different, the relation to different points in the past is basically the same whichever measure you look at. http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm