2 ms·

I find it amusing when people think they have discovered for the first time that the unemployment numbers are "wrong" in some way, e.g. only people who are acti

I find it amusing when people think they have discovered for the first time that the unemployment numbers are "wrong" in some way, e.g. only people who are actively looking for work are considered unemployed (as opposed to people who gave up looking), people who take new jobs for lower wages than their old jobs are considered fully employed. The unemployment figures have been that way the entire time! It was never a secret.

david927 10y ago
Not "the entire time" -- they have changed the way that unemployment is calculated multiple times over the years, and always in favor of lower unemployment. And while it's not a secret, it's definitely not actively publicized. That's the point; lower unemployment numbers are published to try to lower unemployment. Never trust numbers if the one collecting the data has any inclination towards the result, no matter how trustworthy the source seems to be; bias will find a way in. Any government's numbers on unemployment and inflation will always be suspect for that reason. S&P/Moody's/Fitch? Years ago, I remember a trader in Zurich laughing at my question as to their trust-worthiness. If I was a full-time investor with a large portfolio, I would pay to do my own tracking of prices across a wide basket of goods, as well as research to get my own numbers on unemployment, underemployment and jobless, the same with credit ratings. Any large discrepancies with the official numbers would be a sign as to what is being sold and how desperately.