5 ms·

> Politicians used to brag about those levels being full employment. That was before they began openly fudging the numbers. Following 2008 they began removing

> Politicians used to brag about those levels being full employment. That was before they began openly fudging the numbers. Following 2008 they began removing people from the unemployment numbers once their unemployment benefits expired. The unemployment rate was never 5% after 2008 and it’s not 3.8% now, millions and millions of people have been written off by politicians using those fake numbers for their reelection campaigns.

prepend 5y ago
> Following 2008 they began removing people from the unemployment numbers once their unemployment benefits expired. The BLS unemployment rate that’s referenced here is the number of people looking for work who can’t find work [0] so it is meant to measure the percent of the labor force that isn’t working. There are six different rates estimated (U1-U6) and I’m not aware of any that stop counting once unemployment benefits run out. There is a specific stat (U1) to estimate those who have been unemployed for long periods. [0] https://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm https://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm [1] https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-economics/chapter/measuring-unemployment/ https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-economics/chapte...
- throwaway_kufu 5y ago
  See the last section of your link: > Unemployment insurance (UI) programs are administered at the state level and provide assistance to jobless people who are looking for work. By definition those receiving unemployment are looking for work. Once you come off unemployment, you are not automatically considered unemployed and seeking work, instead the burden is on you to prove to the BLS you are actively looking for work, this is called marginally attached to the labor force but the catch all is discouraged workers a subset and nearly anyone unemployed that has run through their benefits and still not employed is nearly always going met this definition and they are not considered part of the labor force. (See your link - Who is not in the labor force? )
  - prepend 5y ago
    This is normally true, but the condition of looking for work was removed with the pandemic unemployment programs, I think because it wasn’t possible to look for work and people needed help. “Proving” to BLS just means answering a question on a survey, so it’s not burdensome compared to what is required to do continue unemployment insurance. So workers who run out of benefit and answer something like “yes, I’d like to work, am looking, and can’t find” will be included in U3. There are other measures for underemployed, or people who gave up working, etc. I think those are U4-U6, described in the second link I posted. I find lots of these arguments are people not understanding the unemployment measures or people arguing with different versions.
    - throwaway_kufu 5y ago
      I don’t disagree it amounts to answering a question, and it’s easy to say it’s not a burden. But on the ground it can be a tremendous burden, we are talking about people who may be avoiding calls because it’s creditors, we are talking about people who don’t have a phone (it’s impossible for most in power to even acknowledge there are people without a phone or even the continuity of continuous phone service - they point to a FCC pledge carriers signed not to do that, but the carriers have do it anyway). There are many reasons this larger demographic of hidden workforce is not included in the BLS surveys to any meaningful degree, certainly the homeless are not, which I don’t believe in the homeless numbers either, or maybe more diplomatically I should say I believe they are political numbers. Just as a example, early on we heard politicians discussing mortgages and rent, evictions protections, but once the lawmakers passed the stimulus have you heard any meaningful discussion about any of that? Pre pandemic there were 1M student loans defaulted per year, a long standing trend of adults living at home with parents in record numbers. Before any of it can be addressed it needs to be acknowledged, it doesn’t help when both sides of the two party political system have consistently taken credit for record unemployment and record stock markets, or eviction protections or FCC pledges to waive late fees and not cut of service, it’s not all fake but it is fake to a meaningful degree. Again we saw something similar with the 2008 bank bailouts and the HAMP and HARP programs, I worked for a law firm briefly that tried to help people and we did to an extent, but for the most part maybe 80% it was banks saying you didn’t submit the paper work, we don’t have it, for months while simultaneously forging ahead in foreclosure cases often with fraudulent documents. To this day politicians champion those programs pointing to a return of the loans with interest, not once addressing the very real systemic problems, fraud and human costs.
- jl2718 5y ago
  http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/unemployment-charts http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/unemployment-chart... What about the 20 million working age on social security? Not counted. 21% of Americans are on means-tested public assistance, which, by definition, requires lack of sustainable employment. Not counted. A huge number of students can’t find a job. Not counted. Not that ‘employment’ is a meaningful measure of a society’s desirability.
  - prepend 5y ago
    It depends on what I’m trying to count. If someone is working age and on SSI, then they aren’t capable of working. The U3 number is trying to measure how much of the total workforce is able to find work. If I can’t or don’t want to work, I’m not part of the workforce. It’s not that unemployment rate is a measure of “desire ability” (whatever that means) but as a measure of how much labor is available and can work. It’s a useful economic measure, but not an absolute one.
snarf21 5y ago
Right, it doesn't count non-employment. Politicians got smart, it only matters what the numbers claim to be true. Inflation is calculated differently than it was 30 years ago. It feels to me like healthcare, education, housing, food, etc. are going up year over year.
LorenPechtel 5y ago
I also think the gig economy is messing with the numbers. You have a bit of income from some gig job, you're not unemployed.

prepend 5y ago

> Following 2008 they began removing people from the unemployment numbers once their unemployment benefits expired. The BLS unemployment rate that’s referenced here is the number of people looking for work who can’t find work [0] so it is meant to measure the percent of the labor force that isn’t working. There are six different rates estimated (U1-U6) and I’m not aware of any that stop counting once unemployment benefits run out. There is a specific stat (U1) to estimate those who have been unemployed for long periods. [0] https://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm https://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm [1] https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-economics/chapter/measuring-unemployment/ https://courses.lumenlearning.com/boundless-economics/chapte...

throwaway_kufu 5y ago
See the last section of your link: > Unemployment insurance (UI) programs are administered at the state level and provide assistance to jobless people who are looking for work. By definition those receiving unemployment are looking for work. Once you come off unemployment, you are not automatically considered unemployed and seeking work, instead the burden is on you to prove to the BLS you are actively looking for work, this is called marginally attached to the labor force but the catch all is discouraged workers a subset and nearly anyone unemployed that has run through their benefits and still not employed is nearly always going met this definition and they are not considered part of the labor force. (See your link - Who is not in the labor force? )
- prepend 5y ago
  This is normally true, but the condition of looking for work was removed with the pandemic unemployment programs, I think because it wasn’t possible to look for work and people needed help. “Proving” to BLS just means answering a question on a survey, so it’s not burdensome compared to what is required to do continue unemployment insurance. So workers who run out of benefit and answer something like “yes, I’d like to work, am looking, and can’t find” will be included in U3. There are other measures for underemployed, or people who gave up working, etc. I think those are U4-U6, described in the second link I posted. I find lots of these arguments are people not understanding the unemployment measures or people arguing with different versions.
  - throwaway_kufu 5y ago
    I don’t disagree it amounts to answering a question, and it’s easy to say it’s not a burden. But on the ground it can be a tremendous burden, we are talking about people who may be avoiding calls because it’s creditors, we are talking about people who don’t have a phone (it’s impossible for most in power to even acknowledge there are people without a phone or even the continuity of continuous phone service - they point to a FCC pledge carriers signed not to do that, but the carriers have do it anyway). There are many reasons this larger demographic of hidden workforce is not included in the BLS surveys to any meaningful degree, certainly the homeless are not, which I don’t believe in the homeless numbers either, or maybe more diplomatically I should say I believe they are political numbers. Just as a example, early on we heard politicians discussing mortgages and rent, evictions protections, but once the lawmakers passed the stimulus have you heard any meaningful discussion about any of that? Pre pandemic there were 1M student loans defaulted per year, a long standing trend of adults living at home with parents in record numbers. Before any of it can be addressed it needs to be acknowledged, it doesn’t help when both sides of the two party political system have consistently taken credit for record unemployment and record stock markets, or eviction protections or FCC pledges to waive late fees and not cut of service, it’s not all fake but it is fake to a meaningful degree. Again we saw something similar with the 2008 bank bailouts and the HAMP and HARP programs, I worked for a law firm briefly that tried to help people and we did to an extent, but for the most part maybe 80% it was banks saying you didn’t submit the paper work, we don’t have it, for months while simultaneously forging ahead in foreclosure cases often with fraudulent documents. To this day politicians champion those programs pointing to a return of the loans with interest, not once addressing the very real systemic problems, fraud and human costs.
jl2718 5y ago
http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/unemployment-charts http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/unemployment-chart... What about the 20 million working age on social security? Not counted. 21% of Americans are on means-tested public assistance, which, by definition, requires lack of sustainable employment. Not counted. A huge number of students can’t find a job. Not counted. Not that ‘employment’ is a meaningful measure of a society’s desirability.
- prepend 5y ago
  It depends on what I’m trying to count. If someone is working age and on SSI, then they aren’t capable of working. The U3 number is trying to measure how much of the total workforce is able to find work. If I can’t or don’t want to work, I’m not part of the workforce. It’s not that unemployment rate is a measure of “desire ability” (whatever that means) but as a measure of how much labor is available and can work. It’s a useful economic measure, but not an absolute one.

snarf21 5y ago

Right, it doesn't count non-employment. Politicians got smart, it only matters what the numbers claim to be true. Inflation is calculated differently than it was 30 years ago. It feels to me like healthcare, education, housing, food, etc. are going up year over year.

LorenPechtel 5y ago

I also think the gig economy is messing with the numbers. You have a bit of income from some gig job, you're not unemployed.