3 ms·
It's well known that the unemployment figure widely cited doesn't include discouraged workers and underemployed workers. In fact, the BLS says that when they pu
by williamscales 9y ago
It's well known that the unemployment figure widely cited doesn't include discouraged workers and underemployed workers. In fact, the BLS says that when they publish the number. They also publish all of the other data you would need to get a great picture of discouraged workers and underemployment.
The fact that you find it difficult to believe but have made no effort to enlighten yourself further is telling.
- ryanmarsh 9y agoThis isn't about me. My comment was about a perspective shared by many people that unemployment numbers are fudged because they are a political football and how this further undermines reporting. Project less, empathize more.
- williamscales 9y agoI totally agree with you. And I do empathize completely with people who do not understand what is being put in front of them but are still asked to make a value judgment. I'm in that position myself sometimes and it's awful. I think it's furthermore definitely a problem that politicians tout one number. But it's unfortunate that folks blame the number in that case. There's nothing wrong with the number - and all numbers are fudged, by definition! So I think we have a massive failure to teach critical thinking in our education system. We can't continue to, on the one hand have a political system predicated on informed citizenry and on the other do everything possible to prevent those citizens from enlightening themselves.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]