3 ms·
The point I've always taken away from the US's faniciful unemployment numbers is that the USG could be doing A LOT more research in this area, but instead choos
by AndyMcConachie 6y ago
The point I've always taken away from the US's faniciful unemployment numbers is that the USG could be doing A LOT more research in this area, but instead chooses not to. The Department of Labor, or some other government agency, could publish many different metrics that explore the issue of unemployment in many different ways. Because like any social phenomenom, there are lots of different ways to slice this pie.
Instead the USG deliberately chooses not to, because they don't want the issue of unemployment explored. Congress could mandate that unemployment metrics be gathered in dozens of different ways, with dozens of different definitions for what it means to be unemployed. But they don't. This is the point, and really the only point that matters.
- alistairSH 6y agoThat's patently false. The government has an array of measurements, all public. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm I would argue the number they report to press is the wrong one (U-3 vs U-5 or U-6), but a single figure is used for consistency and ease of consumption.