The bogus unemployment numbers

[Loren Pechtel]

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/big-lie-56-unemployment-jim-clifton

Something I didn't realize: The guy who gets an odd job and makes $20 isn't classified as unemployed.

 

[coloradoatheist]

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/big-lie-56-unemployment-jim-clifton

Something I didn't realize: The guy who gets an odd job and makes $20 isn't classified as unemployed.

Things like this have been known for a long time, and it's the consistency that matters more. You can the bigger picture with the other unemployment numbers along with workforce employment numbers.

 

[ksen]

Someone is listening to Rush Limbaugh today.

 

[Bronzeage]

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/big-lie-56-unemployment-jim-clifton

Something I didn't realize: The guy who gets an odd job and makes $20 isn't classified as unemployed.

If your income over the previous 5 days were $20 for raking a yard, would you consider yourself unemployed, or a self employed lawn maintenance professional?

 

[KeepTalking]

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/big-lie-56-unemployment-jim-clifton

Something I didn't realize: The guy who gets an odd job and makes $20 isn't classified as unemployed.

I have seen this particular meme all over Facebook today, did all you conservatives suddenly wake up this morning with an epiphany regarding how unemployment statistics are put together?

I mean it's not like this is the way unemployment statistics have always been put together, or anything.[/sarcasm]

Did you conservatives also not realize that no one who does an odd job for $20 reports that income, ever?

 

[TV and credit cards]

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/big-lie-56-unemployment-jim-clifton

Something I didn't realize: The guy who gets an odd job and makes $20 isn't classified as unemployed.

I have seen this particular meme all over Facebook today, did all you conservatives suddenly wake up this morning with an epiphany regarding how unemployment statistics are put together?

I mean it's not like this is the way unemployment statistics have always been put together, or anything.[/sarcasm]

Did you conservatives also not realize that no one who does an odd job for $20 reports that income, ever?

Yeah. That's what I was wondering. I was hoping the Gallup guy would have explained how they found me out when I made $100 hanging some blinds while I was unemployed.

- - - Updated - - -

Oops.

 

[Metaphor]

There's nothing bogus about it. "Unemployed" is operationalised in a specific way and it's been that way consistently for decades. To be unemployed, you have to be not working in the week you are surveyed, you have to be looking for work (otherwise you're not in the labour force), and you have to be available to start work if a job were offered to you.

In any case, if you're not interested in including the 1-hour a week people in the 'employed' category, there isn't just one statistic available.

 

[Axulus]

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/big-lie-56-unemployment-jim-clifton

Something I didn't realize: The guy who gets an odd job and makes $20 isn't classified as unemployed.

If your income over the previous 5 days were $20 for raking a yard, would you consider yourself unemployed, or a self employed lawn maintenance professional?

My question is, who the heck is reporting the $20?

- - - Updated - - -

There's nothing bogus about it. "Unemployed" is operationalised in a specific way and it's been that way consistently for decades. To be unemployed, you have to be not working in the week you are surveyed, you have to be looking for work (otherwise you're not in the labour force), and you have to be available to start work if a job were offered to you.

In any case, if you're not interested in including the 1-hour a week people in the 'employed' category, there isn't just one statistic available.

And furthermore, if one doesn't like that definition, the (US) report releases data with 5 other definitions for 6 in total.

 

[ronburgundy]

So the reason for this meme making the rounds is actually the CEO of Gallup wrote conspiratorial bullshit piece to promote himself and his company which publishes its own "good jobs" or "payroll to population" numbers which it claims are more valid.

I generally thought Gallup was a methodologically respectable organization, but this clown's article has me questioning that. He actually claims the Unemployment numbers are a "Big Lie" which implies deliberate intent to deceive, even though everyone not living under rock is aware of the criteria.

He also touts Gallups "good jobs" method which can be at least as misleading and hard to interpret. It is the % of the total population that has a 30+ hour per week job for a particular company that cuts them a check. It fails to consultants, and free lancers who might work plenty of hours and make plenty of money and don't want or need to work more. Also, it doesn't just put people looking for more work in the denominator. It puts every human in the country in the denominator from infants to the disabled to the retired. These things all can fluctuate in ways having nothing to do with economic health.

Amusingly, he links to a chart showing this "good jobs" measure, an "underemployed" measure (which he seems to like), and the clasic "unemployed" measure.
What is easy to see is the extremely high correlation among all these measures. Under and Un employed go up and down together over time, while "good jobs" mirrors them in the opposite direction. So any change stats in one tells you basically the same thing as change stats in the other.

They only differ in their avg magnitudes.

 

[dismal]

If your income over the previous 5 days were $20 for raking a yard, would you consider yourself unemployed, or a self employed lawn maintenance professional?

My question is, who the heck is reporting the $20?

Part of the unemployment numbers are coming from the community and current population surveys. That people are not reporting the $20 to the IRS is not relevant. They may be reporting they worked 2 hours on the community survey.

 

[bilby]

My question is, who the heck is reporting the $20?

Part of the unemployment numbers are coming from the community and current population surveys. That people are not reporting the $20 to the IRS is not relevant. They may be reporting they worked 2 hours on the community survey.

Well back in the day when I did cash-in-hand work for small sums that I didn't declare for tax purposes, I sure as shit wasn't about to rat on myself to some guy with a clipboard, no matter how much he promised to keep the survey results anonymised or confidential.

The first rule of lawbreaking is 'Don't tell anyone who doesn't need to know that you are doing it'.

 

[Duke Leto]

So the reason for this meme making the rounds is actually the CEO of Gallup wrote conspiratorial bullshit piece to promote himself and his company which publishes its own "good jobs" or "payroll to population" numbers which it claims are more valid.

I generally thought Gallup was a methodologically respectable organization, but this clown's article has me questioning that. He actually claims the Unemployment numbers are a "Big Lie" which implies deliberate intent to deceive, even though everyone not living under rock is aware of the criteria.

Gallup's presidential opinion polling has been pretty bad for the last few cycles.

 

[Earl IV]

Someone is listening to Rush Limbaugh today.

Apparently, two people.

 

[ksen]

yeah, but I listen for the lulz. loren is listening for talking points.

 

[dismal]

Part of the unemployment numbers are coming from the community and current population surveys. That people are not reporting the $20 to the IRS is not relevant. They may be reporting they worked 2 hours on the community survey.

Well back in the day when I did cash-in-hand work for small sums that I didn't declare for tax purposes, I sure as shit wasn't about to rat on myself to some guy with a clipboard, no matter how much he promised to keep the survey results anonymised or confidential.

The first rule of lawbreaking is 'Don't tell anyone who doesn't need to know that you are doing it'.

You just did pal.

I wouldn't dispute that numbers derived from surveys can be bogus, though it does seem an odd point to make in defense of the accuracy of the numbers.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

If your income over the previous 5 days were $20 for raking a yard, would you consider yourself unemployed, or a self employed lawn maintenance professional?

My question is, who the heck is reporting the $20?

- - - Updated - - -

There's nothing bogus about it. "Unemployed" is operationalised in a specific way and it's been that way consistently for decades. To be unemployed, you have to be not working in the week you are surveyed, you have to be looking for work (otherwise you're not in the labour force), and you have to be available to start work if a job were offered to you.

In any case, if you're not interested in including the 1-hour a week people in the 'employed' category, there isn't just one statistic available.

And furthermore, if one doesn't like that definition, the (US) report releases data with 5 other definitions for 6 in total.

And the definitions have been rather static. One word you never heard Limbaugh use between 2001 and 2008 was "unemployment".

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Just got called in for two interviews today. I didn't know I was looking for a new job this morning.

The job market must suck.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/big-lie-56-unemployment-jim-clifton

Something I didn't realize: The guy who gets an odd job and makes $20 isn't classified as unemployed.

Things like this have been known for a long time, and it's the consistency that matters more. You can the bigger picture with the other unemployment numbers along with workforce employment numbers.

I knew that not-full-time work still counted, I didn't realize an odd job counted.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/big-lie-56-unemployment-jim-clifton

Something I didn't realize: The guy who gets an odd job and makes $20 isn't classified as unemployed.

If your income over the previous 5 days were $20 for raking a yard, would you consider yourself unemployed, or a self employed lawn maintenance professional?

I would consider myself unemployed. If there's no reasonable expectation of more of it next week it isn't a job to me.

The IRS doesn't consider it a job, either--there's a threshold below which you don't report odd job income. (IIRC $600/yr.)

- - - Updated - - -

My question is, who the heck is reporting the $20?

Part of the unemployment numbers are coming from the community and current population surveys. That people are not reporting the $20 to the IRS is not relevant. They may be reporting they worked 2 hours on the community survey.

Yeah--even if they reported the $20 to the IRS there's nothing on your tax form that indicates when you made the money thus it's useless for figuring out if you had income in a given week.

 

[funinspace]

If your income over the previous 5 days were $20 for raking a yard, would you consider yourself unemployed, or a self employed lawn maintenance professional?

I would consider myself unemployed. If there's no reasonable expectation of more of it next week it isn't a job to me.

The IRS doesn't consider it a job, either--there's a threshold below which you don't report odd job income. (IIRC $600/yr.)

Well, I would agree that the mass media does a pretty crappy job, but the BLS does a pretty decent job breaking down the numbers for those that want more than sound bites. Table A-15, U-6 provides the "Total unemployed, pus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force"; which happens to be 11.2% now.

IMPOV, we will know when the unemployment rate is low, when there is steady hourly wage pressure....