Discussion with Pilot About Unemployment

[Super Ordinary Guy]

SOG: I want to talk about the unemployment rate in America.

PILOT: Good subject. Terrible times. It's about 9%.

SOG: That many people are out of work?

PILOT: No, that's 16%.

SOG: You just said 9%.

PILOT: 9% unemployed.

SOG: Right: 9% out of work.

PILOT: No, that's 16%.

SOG: Okay, so it's 16% unemployed.

PILOT: No, that's 9%.

SOG: WAIT A MINUTE. Is it 9% or 16%?

PILOT: 9% are unemployed. 16% are out of work.

SOG: If you're out of work you're unemployed.

PILOT: No, you can't count the "Out of Work" as the unemployed. You have to look for work to be unemployed.

SOG: But ... they're out of work!

PILOT: No, you miss my point.

SOG: What point?

PILOT: Someone who doesn't look for work can't be counted with those who look for work. It wouldn't be fair.

SOG: To whom?

PILOT: The unemployed.

SOG: But they're ALL out of work.

PILOT: No, the unemployed are actively looking for work... Those who are out of work stopped looking. They gave up. If you give up, you're no longer in the ranks of the unemployed.

SOG: So if you're off the unemployment roles, that would count as less unemployment?

PILOT: Unemployment would go down. Absolutely!

SOG: The unemployment goes down just because you don't look for work?

PILOT: Absolutely it goes down. That's how you get to 9%. Otherwise it would be 16%. You don't want to read about 16% unemployment do ya?

SOG: That would be frightening.

PILOT: Absolutely.

SOG: Wait, I got a question for you. That means there are two ways to bring down the unemployment number?

PILOT: Two ways is correct.

SOG: Unemployment can go down if someone gets a job?

PILOT: Correct.

SOG: And unemployment can also go down if you stop looking for a job?

PILOT: Bingo.

SOG: So there are two ways to bring unemployment down, and the easier of the two is to just stop looking for work.

PILOT: Now you're thinking like an economist.

SOG: I don't even know what the hell I just said!


And now you know why Pres Obama's unemployment figures are improving.

[Major Eaton]

Don't look HERE (shadow stats) unless you want to continue this conversation.

You'll further understand why 16% is actually closer to 25%....

but, you're liver will need more proof. Something along the lines of 80 or 90....

[Blackthorn]

Shut up, SOG, my mind is made up!! Stop confusing me with the truth!!

[davidg]

And now you know why Pres Obama's unemployment figures are improving.

...and it was under the tenure of Ronald Reagan that this logic was first employed.

[n11pilot]

And now you know why Pres Obama's unemployment figures are improving.

...and it was under the tenure of Ronald Reagan that this logic was first employed.

You are absolutely correct. My follow up questions would be: Does this in any way make it a right and proper thing? Does this in some way make it right and correct to continue the practice? Does this fact make the true unemployment situation under Obama one bit better?

I'm pretty sure the answer to all those is, no.

[Cousi]

Scary chart of the week:

Alternate Unemployment Charts

The seasonally-adjusted SGS Alternate Unemployment Rate reflects current unemployment reporting methodology adjusted for SGS-estimated long-term discouraged workers, who were defined out of official existence in 1994. That estimate is added to the BLS estimate of U-6 unemployment, which includes short-term discouraged workers.

The U-3 unemployment rate is the monthly headline number. The U-6 unemployment rate is the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ (BLS) broadest unemployment measure, including short-term discouraged and other marginally-attached workers as well as those forced to work part-time because they cannot find full-time employment.

No wonder I can't find work!

I better get back to work on that novel - I'm more likely to get published than I am to get employment!

To wax poetic about the "heady days of yesteryear" a.k.a. the Reagan era is to deny that there were problems during that time-frame and that Reagan did not always make the right decision. Reagan made plenty of mistakes. He was human like the rest of us and his Presidency was not without issues of his own making. As Pilot said,

Does this in any way make it a right and proper thing? Does this in some way make it right and correct to continue the practice? Does this fact make the true unemployment situation under Obama one bit better?

I would submit that we would need to discontinue the practice because it is the wrong thing. I am a troubleshooter: it has been my job for over twenty years to eliminate problems and I can tell you with certainty that there is no way possible to solve a problem without first identifying the problem, preferably by the root cause. In the tech industry this is called a root cause analysis and it is essential to fully resolving any problems. Apparently in governmental circles this is called partisan politics of which both parties are guilty.

I have become more and more convinced that we need to find solutions independent of party affiliation. Just because a problem was identified by a Democrat doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Just because a Republican comes up with a solution doesn't mean it doesn't have merit. The reverse is true as well. We need to elect responsible adults into office instead of the overgrown children that have been occupying K Street for far too many decades.

[Henri Defense]

I have become more and more convinced that we need to find solutions independent of party affiliation. Just because a problem was identified by a Democrat doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Just because a Republican comes up with a solution doesn't mean it doesn't have merit. The reverse is true as well. We need to elect responsible adults into office instead of the overgrown children that have been occupying K Street for far too many decades.

Now THAT is the best thing I've heard in a long time.



Henri

[Blackthorn]

I have become more and more convinced that we need to find solutions independent of party affiliation. Just because a problem was identified by a Democrat doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Just because a Republican comes up with a solution doesn't mean it doesn't have merit. The reverse is true as well. We need to elect responsible adults into office instead of the overgrown children that have been occupying K Street for far too many decades.

Now THAT is the best thing I've heard in a long time.



Henri

Hear, hear!

[davidg]

I have become more and more convinced that we need to find solutions independent of party affiliation. Just because a problem was identified by a Democrat doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. Just because a Republican comes up with a solution doesn't mean it doesn't have merit. The reverse is true as well. We need to elect responsible adults into office instead of the overgrown children that have been occupying K Street for far too many decades.

I agree with you 110%!!! I have heard solutions from both the Left (which I tend to) and the Right (which I typically do not) and wondered what a$$ they pulled them from!?
There have been times when I have longed for the days of LBJ when he, at least, would force some sort of coalition or decision and not just allow floundering to be the dance of the day.

[Cousi]

My greatest fear is that the days of political consensus across party lines may be a footnote in history.

[News Hound]

Economy Creates 163,000 New Jobs but Rate Rises to 8.3%

'Real' Unemployment Rate Shows Far More Jobless

"195,000 Fewer Americans Had Jobs in July; 150,000 Dropped Out of Labor Force," By Terence P. Jeffrey August 3, 2012

[MacFett]

Here's a thought, elect people who actually care about what is best for the country not what is best for my party or state.
And then allow them to only serve for 2, maybe 3 terms that way they can stay focused on what is best for the country not how to get re-elected.
Does that help the unemployment number right now? Probably not. But it could go a long way in getting the country back on track.
As long as career politicians are allowed to continue indefinitely; nothing will change.

[davidg]

Here's a thought, elect people who actually care about what is best for the country not what is best for my party or state.
And then allow them to only serve for 2, maybe 3 terms that way they can stay focused on what is best for the country not how to get re-elected.
Does that help the unemployment number right now? Probably not. But it could go a long way in getting the country back on track.
As long as career politicians are allowed to continue indefinitely; nothing will change.

But isn't that precisely against TERM LIMITS? If they were in office longer, they might not have to stay in campaign mode for their entire term! They might learn how the system is SUPPOSED to work and the whips on both sides of the aisle might be able to reign in some of their nutjobs.

[Super Ordinary Guy]

You used the word MIGHT 3 times. That gives me as much confidence as coconut might cure cancer

[n11pilot]

You used the word MIGHT 3 times. That gives me as much confidence as coconut might cure cancer

Actually, I think that coconut thing might be more likely.