2 ms·
This stuff drives me nuts. Everybody’s like “omg did you know that the unemployment rate doesn’t count people who stopped looking for work?!” Yes, I did know th
by wat10000 1mo ago
This stuff drives me nuts. Everybody’s like “omg did you know that the unemployment rate doesn’t count people who stopped looking for work?!” Yes, I did know that, from the ten thousand times people said the same thing before you did. I also know it because I can read and BLS is completely up front about how their numbers are calculated. There isn’t even a single official rate. They put out six different numbers that mean different things.
I totally get it if people decide that one of those six numbers are the measure they want, and come up with something they think is better. But why does it always have to be framed as, they’re lying to you? Can you not advocate for your technique without turning it into another stupid conspiracy theory?
- 8note 1mo ago> But why does it always have to be framed as, they’re lying to you? the most obvious answer is that the not-included groups are usually not reported, and when general media and politicians repeat the numbers, they are treated as gospel rather than with nuance. sure, you know that the "unemployment" number has little to do with employment at all and its a name just as good as "the orange number" but most people who talk about "the unemployment rate" actually treat it as if its unambiguously the unemployment rate.
- wat10000 1mo agoI suppose that makes sense when "they" is politicians and media. It's just weird that pretty much nobody mentions the other official numbers. Politicians/media tend to talk about "the" number, but then so do people like the organization linked here. It's so rare to see anyone saying, "the" number you read about is pretty limited, there are five other official numbers that may be more informative, here's what they mean.