Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
Unemployent Poll — Parallax Forums

Unemployent Poll

NWCCTVNWCCTV Posts: 3,629
edited 2012-10-11 13:41 in General Discussion
So, With jobless claims "supposedly" being down I am curious if anyone else thinks the Government is fudging the numbers due to the upcoming election. It seems odd to me that everyone I know that have been out of work for 6 or more months are still out of work. Not to mention the fact that 30K plus claims did not get reported from CA. Does anyone else think this is fishy.

Comments

  • mindrobotsmindrobots Posts: 6,506
    edited 2012-10-11 12:30
    My wife is still out of work, 18 months or so. Fell off the unemployment roles sometime this past summer.

    Numbers are open to interpretation and manipulation - they are what they are, don't blame the numbers. :smile:
  • Mike GreenMike Green Posts: 23,101
    edited 2012-10-11 12:31
    It's not fishy in the sense that you're feeling. The definitions for jobless claims are such that they don't really reflect the numbers of "true" jobless. For example, they don't include people who have given up looking for work. The definitions, while misleading, are consistent and, barring human error, the numbers themselves are not fudged.
  • PublisonPublison Posts: 12,366
    edited 2012-10-11 12:32
    Probably not a good topic to bring up in the threads? Boarding on political which will bring out the monkey.
  • frank freedmanfrank freedman Posts: 1,983
    edited 2012-10-11 12:33
    When the BLS says "We did not exclude any number.... But perhaps california did not provide their numbers in time to be counted??????"

    That kinda screams manipulation. Especially from a source of that size. Jack Welch was right on his observations, just not informed as to the how... Wonder what the effect of Ca's numbers would have been.
  • mindrobotsmindrobots Posts: 6,506
    edited 2012-10-11 12:34
    Publison wrote: »
    Probably not a good topic to bring up in the threads? Boarding on political which will bring out the monkey.

    You've been issued the "Pre-Monkey" warning! :lol:

    ...and threads like this have fewer lives than say......cats who like shrimpz??
  • frank freedmanfrank freedman Posts: 1,983
    edited 2012-10-11 12:35
    Mike Green wrote: »
    It's not fishy in the sense that you're feeling. The definitions for jobless claims are such that they don't really reflect the numbers of "true" jobless. For example, they don't include people who have given up looking for work. The definitions, while misleading, are consistent and, barring human error, the numbers themselves are not fudged.

    No, not fudged, merely incomplete...
  • PublisonPublison Posts: 12,366
    edited 2012-10-11 12:37
    mindrobots wrote: »
    You've been issued the "Pre-Monkey" warning! :lol:

    ...and threads like this have fewer lives than say......cats who like shrimpz??

    If Mikey (Mike Green) likes it, it must be OK.
  • NWCCTVNWCCTV Posts: 3,629
    edited 2012-10-11 12:48
    Publison wrote: »
    Boarding on political which will bring out the monkey.

    Sorry, I was not trying to be political. More "Matter Of Factly". I just think it is odd that most people I know gave up long ago but suddenly the numbers just dropped last week, Apparently Wall Street is perportedly not even paying attention to the numbers. With forclosures up 70% in WA state it seems like less people are working or are at best under working to their abilities.
  • Mike GreenMike Green Posts: 23,101
    edited 2012-10-11 13:00
    I've met people who've lost their jobs and never found another one like mindrobots' wife. I also have met others who are newly hired in decent jobs with benefits. It depends on where you are, what skills you have and what industry you're looking at. Some industries are starting to recover and some are lost forever. A lot of people are still hurting. Many of the new jobs are at lower pay scales and with fewer or worse benefits than in the past. People are being hired for part-time or temp jobs, ok for now, but with no certain future. A few people are doing well. The job statistics don't reflect that. I'm sure Ken could lecture us in depth as to what Parallax goes through in trying to decide whether to create a new position or not and the true costs of a new hire above and beyond the obvious costs of salary and benefits.
  • ctwardellctwardell Posts: 1,716
    edited 2012-10-11 13:00
    frank freedman wrote: »
    When the BLS says "We did not exclude any number.... But perhaps california did not provide their numbers in time to be counted??????"

    That kinda screams manipulation. Especially from a source of that size. Jack Welch was right on his observations, just not informed as to the how... Wonder what the effect of Ca's numbers would have been.

    Many years ago when I worked at a very large shipping company we would generate peformance reports based on the previous days production stats. The report would include all the locations in the district. Whenever a location had missing data for some reason we would use data for that location from the previous year that had similar characteristics such as a holiday the day before. In some cases multiple locations, maybe accounting for 25% of the data would use previous year data. Management would still treat the report as absolute fact of what actually happend the previous day and pass out "beatings and rewards" based on that data.

    This was probably handled the same way, they massaged the data to get plausible numbers without CA's data and then gave themselves a pat on the back because the number came out in their favor.

    C.W.
  • jazzedjazzed Posts: 11,803
    edited 2012-10-11 13:05
    Definitely not presented in a way that is consistent with the forum policy of avoiding overt political and religious discussions.

    We don't want this forum turning into another yahoo news fist-fight. This thread needs moderation.
  • Heater.Heater. Posts: 21,230
    edited 2012-10-11 13:13
    Never mind any particular election. The fudging has been going on for decades and is party wide, at least here in Europe.

    For example:

    1) We have had an explosion of the number of universities in England and elsewhere in the last thirty years. The number of people expected to have been studying for a degree has gone up from 10 percent of the population when I was in uni. to 50 or more percent today. This looks really good for the jobless figures as they are not jobless but studying. Never mind that the value of degrees is correspondingly reduced and the graduates chance of finding a good old fashioned secure job is no better. I even see positions advertised now a days in England where not only do they require a 1st or upper 2nd class degree but it must be a from a "top tier" university. That is to say don't bother applying if you are a poor sap from one of those technical schools converted to a new university recently.

    2) Reducing the statistics for "long term unemployed" is easy. Every few years the unemployment office will find you some work to do for 6 months or so. Probably at some pitiful wage in a state run concern, like care working for the elderly, or gardening in the city parks. That might even be OK, but when your six months is up, your contract is over and it's time for the next guy on the jobless register to take your place. By cycling people that way there is no such thing as "long term unemployed".

    How long we can keep up this fiction is a puzzle to me.
  • TinkersALotTinkersALot Posts: 535
    edited 2012-10-11 13:26
    thumbs down on this topic.

    It would be nice to have at least one place in this modern life where the chattering heads and the bickering classes are held beyond the outer rim
  • Moderator MonkeyModerator Monkey Posts: 36
    edited 2012-10-11 13:41
    Dir Sirs,

    By request I am locking this thread as is it in violation of the Parallax Discussion Forum's rules and guidelines.

    Please see: http://forums.parallax.com/showthread.php?134682-Forum-Guidelines for further information

    Sincerely,
    Moderator Monkey



    Political or religious beliefs:
    The Parallax Discussion Forums is not the venue to discuss religious/non-religious agendas, nor is it a place for political rants or arguments. As stated above: the forums were created to promote and allow ongoing discussions about, but not limited to, products designed and developed by Parallax Inc. If you wish to discuss the existence of things divine or the most recent upheaval in the legislature of man, find another forum.
This discussion has been closed.