Unemployment rates incorrect?

A person can only be on unemployment for so long. After a few month a person is kick off unemployment and is no longer listed as unemployed. But that person is still unemployed they are just not counted by the government. So that would make the current unemployment rate incorrect? Right?

Unemployment rates incorrect?child tax credit

Correct. And people who are employed only part time are still counted as employed. And people who activly looked for work within 4 weeks prior to the date the rate was counted are considered employed.

In 2004 there were 5 million part time workers who wanted to be employed full time Total (official) unemployment for Jan 2004 was 8.9 mill. not included in this number was 4.9 part time workers, and 2 million that had not looked for work in the prior 4 weeks. if these are added the unemployment rate would actually be around 10%. Sufficient to scare the crap out of all americans. and crating a huge surplus of Labor!

Unemployment rates incorrect?

loan

Very much so. It has been that way for a long time.Its one of the things that need to be changed.|||You are absolutely correct. The government uses %26quot;reported jobless claims%26quot; as their tally, which does not take into account those whose benefits have run out, nor those who have never gotten a job yet. It%26#039;s probably double the number reported.|||I agree.|||Correct, and a similar formula is used in calculating who does not have health insurance coverage.

Some Macroeconomic Questions (unemployment rates)?

Is it possible that unemployment rates go up while the employment goes up too?

Also, what does full employment mean? The book says that full employment is not 100% employyment, but the level of employment that corresponds with the natural rate of employment. Can someone explain?

In addition, Is it possible for real GDP to decrease when only nominal GDP increases?

Is season unemployment something worrisome or is it not since they get their jobs back as the seasons comes back around.

Finally, is unemployment always accompanied by a decrease unemployment?

Some Macroeconomic Questions (unemployment rates)?mortgage lenders

A) no possible

B) full unemployment is 5% 100% is not possible think about it, everyday people retire get fired quit or enter the work force also there would be massive inflation if there was0%

C) yes bc of inflation

D) season unemployment is the least important bc those people know they will be unemplored

E) that question doesnt make sense

Unemployment rates at high, recession.....economic geeks where r u?

I need articles for a current event paper about the current unemployment rate and how it is going to affect our economy. Any good articles? Any good suggestions on what to talk about? What do you think should be done to improve this situation? I am only looking for those with vast knowledge on the economy and those who really enjoy the subject, because I am not up-to-date on the subject nor is it my favorite. I know you are out there..the economic geek squad only please! Show Yahoo viewers how intelligent you really are!! Spread your ideas and help me get the grade! :)

Unemployment rates at high, recession.....economic geeks where r u?unemployment rate

look up The Economist

or the Wall Street Journal

look at the bear stearns crisis...etc...

Unemployment rates at high, recession.....economic geeks where r u?

loan

Unemployment is not high when you compare it to the past 30 years. I have done my own research and have found that in areas where there is a higher min. wage there is also higher unemployment. Keep it mind that people being unemployed is not a bad thing. A 0% unemployment rate would be crazy. People need to get fired when they make mistakes constantly and screw up bad. If you%26#039;re looking for a current event paper maybe The Economist, or the Wall Street Journal might have something. I can%26#039;t think of a specific place to go to find articles. The type of economics they teach in most schools is repulsive. Austrian-economics is the way to go.|||All the good economic journalist now work for the media. The media is owned by the leaders of capalistic society whos fortunes are tied up in stock. 90% of the media is owned by a few people. They don%26#039;t want a recession or thier stock to fall, so noone will be reporting about it. Try looking for a small independant publication.

Bush's unemployment rates... where are the lies coming from?

http://data.bls.gov/PDQ/servlet/SurveyOu...

This government site clearly shows that unemployment was lower under Clinton than it was under Bush, yet I hear again and again about how Bush%26#039;s unemployment rate is lower than Clinton%26#039;s on here... always without a source...

I%26#039;ve heard this several times... and I must say... it makes the Republicans look like they either:

A. don%26#039;t know what they are talking about

or

B. are just flat out lying...

Where do these lies get started? People are clearly believing it, because I keep hearing it like it%26#039;s the gospel?

Bush%26#039;s unemployment rates... where are the lies coming from?payment calculator

I was trying to figure it out too, every time I get into a conversation or debate with a self-styled conservative I get this reference to a report about how %26quot;magically well our economy is doing%26quot;. I%26#039;ve found a few conservative blogs quoting things that quite obviously skewer the numbers and twist the comparisons in odd ways.

Some examples (don%26#039;t have the numbers) of what I found in this twisting of logic:

More jobs were created last year (2005) under Bush than in the same year (1997) under Clinton. This is a true statement. However, they failed to point out that overall unemployment was LOWER under Clinton, and far fewer jobs were destroyed in that same year. They also didn%26#039;t point out that the new jobs created to replace the old were on average much lower paying (in both apportioned and real dollars and benefits) than the jobs that were destroyed.

3 engineering jobs being destroyed or shipped elsewhere cannot be made up for by 4 fast-food jobs being created, no matter how you cut it.

American economy also seems really strong, but the %26quot;wealth-gap%26quot; is opening up at a very fast pace. The middle class is disappearing at a rate faster now than under any other president, including Reagan.

Americans are financed up to their necks in credit to fund %26quot;the American dream%26quot;. This is NOT real prosperity, this is debt-slavery. Our own government is financed up to their necks in credit to foreign banks, at an exponentially faster rate than under Clinton. Our great-great-grandkids paying taxes under the current rates will still be paying just the interest on our recent government spending boom.

This is not a partisan issue, this is an American issue.

Bush%26#039;s unemployment rates... where are the lies coming from?

loan

Yeah, thank God i don%26#039;t watch Fox or CNN.

I think that is where most of the BS instills itself into the gullible.|||I%26#039;ve seen that site and well %26quot;There you go again!%26quot;.

Proving once again that figures don%26#039;t lie...Lie-bral...Liberals Do!

Remember the unemployment rate under Carter?

America would like to forget also!|||Wait until the Chinese stop loaning us money. It will be interesting to see how his appologists spin the Bush Administration%26#039;s failed economic policy THEN.

Phillips Curve data for the 1960s and 70s-Unemployment and Inflation rates?

Does anyone know a link that shows statistical data (inflation rates and unemployment rates) for the 60s or 70s. I have seen graphs that outline the Phillips curve for these time periods but I can%26#039;t find any exact numbers...like in 1972 unemployment rate was 4.2 and inflation was 2.1 percent.

Can anyone tell me a link? Thanks

Phillips Curve data for the 1960s and 70s-Unemployment and Inflation rates?credit check

The Fed Reserve database (see link below) has all of the data that you want for the US. For Australia, see (www.abs.gov.au).

For the US, CPI data is at (http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/dat... - calculate the growth rate for each observation compared to the same month 12 months earlier to get an inflation rate.

Unemployment rate data is available at (http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/dat...

Since teenagers and younger workers tend to have higher unemployment rates than older workers, some

argue that changes in the composition of the labor force partly explain a shift in the natural rate of unemployment. Compare the age composition of the labor force today with 10 years ago. What is your interpretation of the data.

Since teenagers and younger workers tend to have higher unemployment rates than older workers, some economistsstudent finance

Not sure I understand question- can you clarify?

Since unemployment for college educated people is nearly record low right now, and the baby boomers are retiring and there is a shortage of educated young people in the job market, I would have to interpret that demographic factors (fewer gen X and Y than boomers, aging boomers) and technology are changing the labor market faster than wage growth or political pressure.

Since teenagers and younger workers tend to have higher unemployment rates than older workers, some economists

loan

Which just shows that even educated people can make something simple so complicated no one gets it.

Teenagers work less because a) more are staying in school and b) they lack job skills in a labor market that is requiring more job skills.|||Older people make better employees, period.

I was just on a web-site that has companies that hire workers through AARP. I don%26#039;t have a problem with that at all though.

these are people who have retired from job, and now take fairly good paying part-time jobs. They can afford the part-time work because they have already paid off their homes, sent the kids through college. They just work to get out of the house or to save for vacations.

There just aren%26#039;t enough good paying jobs for people without college or without a lot of experience. Younger workers who have management jobs such as small retail outlets, are treated unfairly, by being forced to work sixty to seventy hours a week, and only receiving a salary that is based on fourty hours. And the reason is because of this %26quot;exemt%26quot; or %26quot;non-exempt%26quot; classification. With one you are entitled to over-time, the other you aren%26#039;t. But the criteria to determine which one you are, is so screwed up, you need a lawyer to figure it out.

I have been looking for some forums for these kinds of workers, but haven%26#039;t really found any good ones that aren%26#039;t anything more than places to whine. If anyone knows of some useful, meaningful, forums for workers rights, please post them.

Is it true that IT/computers caused higher world's unemployment rates?

The world%26#039;s / US unemployment rate is much higher n 90s and 00s than it was in 70s, 60s, and 50s

Is it true that IT has someting to do with that fact?

Is it true that IT/computers caused higher world%26#039;s unemployment rates?credit union

Actually the US unemployment rate is far lower than in the 70s. You could even argue that if you include the millions of undocumented immigrants working here, the effective unemployment rate is negative (since there are more people working than there are legal workers).

According to the US Government, unemployment in the 1970s ranged mostly between 6 and 8%, while in this decade it has been between 4 and 6%. It was between about 3% and 6% in the 50s and 60s.

Note also that during the past most of the workforce was men, and the population was smaller. Women have entered the workforce in greater numbers so that total employment is far higher. Total employment in the US was 58,918,000 in 1950; it was 144,427,000 in 2006.

During the postwar boom, US economic output rose steeply and was helped by the demand from other countries whose industrial base had been destroyed by war.

Generally, productivity improvements result in short term job losses, but long term job creation- as businesses become more productive, prices drop and demand rises. This creates more jobs than it destroys.