4 ms·
The statistic is not meant to be a trick and the BLS discloses exactly how the number is computed: https://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm https://www.bls.gov/cps
by js2 9y ago
The statistic is not meant to be a trick and the BLS discloses exactly how the number is computed:
https://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm https://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm
It's still a useful number for comparing unemployment over time as long as the rules for how it's computed don't change.
Also:
Some have argued, however, that these unemployment measures are too restricted, and that they do not adequately capture the breadth of labor market problems. For this reason, economists at BLS developed a set of alternative measures of labor underutilization. These measures, expressed as percentages, are published every month in The Employment Situation news release.
https://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm#def https://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm#def
- Retric 9y agoNot really because you can have constant unemployment as the situation becomes worse. Or a rise in unemployment while the situation improves. At best it allows you to compare snapshots in identical situations over very short time periods assuming nothing significant is going on.
- Bartweiss 9y agoIt's a perfectly good statistic for economists, because they know those limitations. There are lots of other measures for wages, labor participation, etc, and 'unemployment' does capture useful info about the ease of finding a job after you leave a previous one. It's just abused in the public sphere as a whole-story statistic.
- mamon 9y agoIt is perfectly good statistic for POLITICIANS because 4.4% uneployment rate does sound much better that 22.1% reported by ShadowStats. Former is typical for rich (e.g. G-7) countries, latter would make US look like 3rd world country in that regard. You might be right that it does capture info about how hard it is to find a new job as the software developer, or a lawyer, but tells almost nothing about blue collar jobs.