BLS hides true unemployment picture-"2.7m less jobs" may be double

[papau]

ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/suppl/empsit.cpseea2.txt

And this afterr one notes that "Not strictly comparable with prior years. For an explanation, see "Historical Comparability" under the Household Data section of the Explanatory Notes and Estimates of Error.The population figures are not adjusted for seasonal variation.Beginning in January 2003, data are not strictly comparable with data for 2002 and earlier years because of the revisions in the population controls used in the household survey."

Amazing! :-(

Only average annual numbers are now linked - all the old Clinton spreadsheets that gave one 40 years of monthly data have been removed. But the US Media does not object - so why should I? :-(

year..........unemployed...................discouraged/or not looking

2000........2975 male+2717 female.......25684 male+ 44310 female
2001........3690......3111..............26396.......44962
2002........4597......3781..............27085.......45621

It looks like the first two years of Bush (6 months of "recession and 18 months of expansion) have resulted in lost jobs by U3 definition of 2,686,000 and new discouraged workers of as many as 2,702,000.

I wonder if the financial media will ever dig and find the true extent of the Bush economic disaster. and if the broadcast media will ever tell folks how bad it really is.

[Racenut20]

1. It all got fuzzy

When the "Ronnie Regime" decided you were not unemployed if your benefits had run out. That has become a BIG number during the current "Bush Boom".

[mhr]

2. Good Exposure Papau

I use the following article on unemployment rates almost daily. But did not realize that the BLS was no longer reporting U6. That suggests that the * administration is worried about the truth.

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascitystar/business/5962629.htm

Regardless, every time I speak with anyone that believes the economy is fine out comes this article. Understandably most people have never heard of the other unemployment rates.

I have been unemployed for a very long time and can quote many stats by heart. Those that still have employment cling to the belief that only the lazy are out of work. I have resorted to many tactics to find employment. The latest is magnetic signs for my car doors.

[papau]

3. Good Luck - BTW - MSNBC and CNBC and Fox see progress in

the fact more folks age 56 to 65 - as a percentage of the total group of 56 to 65 - are employed these days.

As if the old fellow that retired early only to lose much of his pension via company collapse or brokerage account collapse really wants to work at Home Depot as a greeter at $6 per hour.

One hell of a benefit from the Bush economic plan.

But all over the tube folks are saying this is a sign of a labor shortage that the good Bush policies have produced.

Our "we are not controlled by the GOP right wing" media - we just act like we are - has less self respect than a whore on the street.

[Brucey]

4. I heard

One out of five workers were laid off since Stump took office. Reagan screwed the economy so bad that his protege Papa Stump had to break his "read my lips" promise and do what no repug is ever allowed to do - raise taxes. Of course, repugs raise taxes all the time, but they are tricky about which ones they raise so as not to affect the rich, and then lie about it.