Unemployment Rate falls to 4.4%

Grover,

Why is it that you consider "Your" statistics as accurate, and others as not?

If you are going to suspect statistics, then in order to be fair, should you not suspect them all?

Semper

Semper,

While I see your point about providing facts rather than IRL experiences, I don't see how one is necessarily more valuable than the other.
Experiences about local economic conditions may, in fact, be more reliable indicators of economic distress.

When I see Classified Ads that are not thick enough to wrap fish....
When many of those ads are for come-on jobs...
Dozens of filled out applications for one or two part time low paying seasonal jobs....
A lack of help wanted signs....
When the papers are full of buyouts and labor cuts and the housing markets are stagnant and new housing stands unfinished....
When families are separated so the breadwinner can move to another state to support the family...
I'd say that is real evidence that the 4.4% unemployment figure is not reality in many parts of America.

DontTreadOnMe

Thanks for that post, I am trying to point out to the same issue, we lost three major companies in my city in two years.

But guess what we got Wal-Mart to show that we have job grow.

But the difference of pay is the killer of middle class America.

DTOM,

I'll concede that what your saying may appear that way to someone.

However,

That can in no way be representative of a National Trend, which is what the figures given represent.

Also, there are many that see it somewhat differently. Though I do live in an area that is controlled more or less by the seasonal influx of tourists, I have just moved here a few years ago and have called WV, MD, and DE home. I just don't see the lack of Want Ads in any paper that I currently read. I see plenty of jobs, and many higher paying ones. I see work forces that are healthy and companies making money.

I just don't see the doom and gloom in it all.

Semper

Originally posted by semperfortis

what the figures given represent.

As WyrdeOne outlined earlier:

The unemployment numbers are not a reflection of how many people in the country are unemployed.

They do not count people who never applied for benefits after losing their job.

They do not count people who have exhausted their benefits and are still out of work.

They do not count people who are critically underemployed.

They do not count people who are not eligible for benefits.

They do not count people who are self-employed (and not getting by).

The unemployment numbers are a reflection of one thing, and one thing only - how many unemployed people are on the government tab at any one time.

Anyone who thinks that only 4.4% of the country is out of work needs a reality check.


.

Originally posted by semperfortis
Grover,

Why is it that you consider "Your" statistics as accurate, and others as not?

If you are going to suspect statistics, then in order to be fair, should you not suspect them all?

Semper

I do suspect all statistics...BUT statistics from this administration are especially suspect since they have repeatedly manuiplated them to suit their needs. Of course I know ALL administrations do that but this one has brought the practice to a new low.

All that aside the ones I quoted reflect more what I have actually seen and experinced so I tend to believe them more.

After all as I have said one of the ways they fool ya is get the average man to identify with Mr. Burns when in all actuality it is how well Homer Simpson is doing that is the real gauge of the economy, but nobody wants to identify with Homer (though I have known some who I suspect were models for him ) and Homer is not doing so well in this economy.

I think where I am coming from, and this may help clarify my position, is that although unemployment may be scored at 4.4%, the percent of persons according to the last census living at or below 125% percent of the poverty level is still around 20 percent of the population as a whole.

www.census.gov...

(unless I misread the numbers on record)

[edit on 10-11-2006 by smirkley]