1
108

[–] Sikozen 1 points 108 points (+109|-1) ago 

That's because there was a change in the classification of 'unemployment' - it doesn't really factor in the permanently unemployed (too old to work, not disabled enough for disability), the long-term unemployed, and the under-employed (less than 20 hours a week) the way it used to. It's a way of boosting numbers to hide a failing economy.

1
32

[–] Crashmarik 1 points 32 points (+33|-1) ago  (edited ago)

No idea who downvoted you or what they were thinking, but you are spot on and easily the most informative. Have an upvote.

0
5

[–] WeekendBaker 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago  (edited ago)

There is another report you may enjoy, called something like "adults outside the workforce". It includes unemployed like students and elderly, spouses raising children, disabled and chronically unskilled. Just beware there is often a "record number" headline but those are often total numbers, and because population keeps rising, that is always the case at equal % of population. Edit- mobile, spell check failed to deploy

1
4

[–] indiglo_girls 1 points 4 points (+5|-1) ago 

Not to be partisan (but to be lazy since I could look it up myself), wasn't this change in calculating employment made by the Obama administration?

6
2

[–] Lodley 6 points 2 points (+8|-6) ago 

wasn't this change in calculating employment made by the Obama administration?

Nope, that's how unemployment has always been classified. Obama did declare some areas depressed labor markets, or something like that, so that the long term unemployed could get benefits but most of that has expired. It's just a conservative talking point because they can't accept that the economy is doing well by their metrics.

1
0

[–] Sikozen 1 points 0 points (+1|-1) ago 

Yes but it wasn't only him - presidents have been doing it since Clinton. It's about reporting the statistics you want people to see while excluding ones that don't flatter you.

0
1

[–] Broc_Lia 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Also people in training. If you get on a government training scheme then you're no longer unemployed.

0
0

[–] Sikozen 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Which is such BS because you get minimum wage for less than a day's worth of work and it doesn't so anything for your resume.

0
0

[–] CatNamedJava 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Thst is how unemployment was always figured. Not a change in the stats but people dropping out of the workforce

3
40

[–] Ilikebordercollies 3 points 40 points (+43|-3) ago 

Many poor people that qualify for food stamps have jobs. Think: Wal-mart.

2
28

[–] Doomking_Grimlock 2 points 28 points (+30|-2) ago 

There's your real welfare queen. How much does Walmart get in subsidies?

0
20

[–] Baseborn 0 points 20 points (+20|-0) ago 

Wal-Mart recieves approximately 7.8 Billion per year according to this study: http://www.americansfortaxfairness.org/files/Walmart-on-Tax-Day-Americans-for-Tax-Fairness-1.pdf

The $7.8 billion includes an estimated $6.2 billion in public assistance for low-wage Walmart employees, including programs like food stamps, subsidized housing, and Medicaid. It also includes an estimated $70 million per year in “economic development subsidies” from state and legal governments eager to host Walmart in their cities.

0
6

[–] jxfaith 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

Depends on whether you count the money spent by the government supporting their employees or not.

0
38

[–] RayZfox 0 points 38 points (+38|-0) ago 

You can work 1 hour a month and not be considered unemployed.

0
24

[–] pangaea 0 points 24 points (+24|-0) ago 

Or just not make enough money to afford food without food stamps. Not saying 4.9% is totally accurate but I'm sure many people work and still need food stamps.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
4

[–] SaneGoatiSwear 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

still tho, the u-6 is a fucking lie.

0
28

[–] Amadameus 0 points 28 points (+28|-0) ago 

That's absolutely believable - in my area it's possible for someone to be working a full time job at minimum wage and still barely be able to afford rent.

Food stamps are also encouraged, because they're essentially a subsidy for the food industry. The problem is it's also an excuse for employers to pay even less than a living wage.

0
4

[–] LetsBeNakedOutside 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

I think that's every area someone can work full time at minimum wage and not make rent.

1
2

[–] Amadameus 1 points 2 points (+3|-1) ago  (edited ago)

Voat seems so conflicted about issues like these - wasn't /v/politics just recently hating all over the idea of raising minimum wage?

If it takes 110% of your energy every day just to stay afloat due to things like high rent, low wages, mandatory insurance and so forth - doesn't it make sense that people would be stuck in a state of perpetual immaturity? If all you can do is barely pay rent, then what is there to look forward to but getting drunk and playing video games?

Raising minimum wage and forcing employers to actually pay their workers a wage that a family can be built upon doesn't just recreate the nuclear family, but it gives America massive consuming power and raises the bar for what a full-time job really involves. No more of this sitting in a cubicle pretending to work! Why are Voaters so against these concepts?

0
17

[–] Porphyrogennetos 0 points 17 points (+17|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Every week I hear this exact story on the radio, "The economy lost X number of full time jobs last month, but this was offset with a net gain by increases in part time positions."

EVERY. WEEK. For at least the last few years. It's getting worse all the time.

These numbers are complete bullshit. It's got to be at least 3 or 4 times as bad as they say.

0
1

[–] rob_white 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I used to work in finance and there is a statistic called the Nonfarm payroll that is released monthly by the Department of Labor, it has a big influence on several markets. Watch them long enough and you realize it's all bullshit. NFP is still useful for trading around but the numbers are kept in certain ranges and highly massaged.

0
11

[–] Kar98 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

People working unreliable hours at minimum wage, students, the elderly, people with shitty jobs and lots of kids...

0
8

[–] gramman74 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

The unemployment rate is people actually looking for a job.

The unemployment rate is just a feel good number. The number that is important is the labor participation rate. 50% of the population is not in the workforce.

3
-2

[–] Lodley 3 points -2 points (+1|-3) ago 

The number that is important is the labor participation rate. 50% of the population is not in the workforce

God damn children, retired people, stay at home parents leeching off their private means. The actual important numbers are things like actual people on welfare which is really low which is why the labor participation numbers are brought up because the right needs the economy to be shitty but they don't have any good metrics to show that, because it's doing as well as it ever did.

0
5

[–] gramman74 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

If were doing so well why is the economy about to tank. Why have we been at almost 1% growth for years. You obviously have no money in the markets. The economies is tanking and has been doing so for a while

0
2

[–] Voat_a_Goat_Mamma 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Children aren't counted. They usually only count people 16-65.

0
6

[–] jaceame 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

Does it work in the United States where you have to be on unemployment insurance to count as unemployed? Because we had a thing in Canada where the prime minister paraded around how low unemployment was then after the election it came out that he just changed the rules of UI so that half the people on were taken off the list. So the amount of unemployed people was the same the government just wasn't paying as many people.

0
1

[–] Voat_a_Goat_Mamma 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

That is exactly how it works.

0
0

[–] CatNamedJava 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

You have to be actively looking. So a job application with last week or so.

load more comments ▼ (14 remaining)