July unemployment rate really 9.9%

[ALS]

Looks like the government hacks are rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic as it's going down.

Hmm. In June, the Bureau of Labor Statistics said the civilian labor force was 154,926,000 people.

In July, 796,000 of those were taken out of their definition of the workforce, and thus their unemployment calculations for this month, because they have stopped looking for work "because they believe no jobs are available for them." Ten percent of the June workforce would be 15.4 million, 1 percent would be 1.5 million, and so 796,000 is roughly one half of one percent.

In other words, BLS took .5 percent of what you and I would consider unemployed and took them out of their total. And with that, unemployment went down one tenth of one percent.

Of course, if you take the July number of unemployed, 14.5 million, and add that 796,000 of discouraged workers, you get a total of 15,296,000.

In a work force of July’s number of 154,504,000, that’s an unemployment rate of 9.9 percent.

In a work for of June’s number of 154,926,000, that’s an unemployment rate of 9.8 percent.

nationalreview

[dc dalton]

Actually it's more like 15% no matter what they say (or have said for years). You have to remember those 'official' numbers ignore the underemployed and the ones that have dropped of unemployment because their unemployment benefits expired.

Funny too how they downplayed the news that 34+ MILLION people are now on welfare ... wonder how many of them are ones that ran out of unemployment benefits.

[stephpd]

Actually it's more like 15% no matter what they say (or have said for years). You have to remember those 'official' numbers ignore the underemployed and the ones that have dropped of unemployment because their unemployment benefits expired.

Funny too how they downplayed the news that 34+ MILLION people are now on welfare ... wonder how many of them are ones that ran out of unemployment benefits.

Twisting numbers is an art, not science. I saw on MSNBC's Morning Joe as Erin Burnett choked her way through these numbers.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036789/...28675#32328675

Apparently these numbers aren't based on anything close to reality. Fox news said about the same thing but said both parties use this method so it's OK.

Another way they twist the numbers is by saying that only 247,000 newly unemployed and over 700,000 who's benefits ran out and are a plus towards the total. Yeah, like they all suddenly found jobs.

But since both parties have been active in this twisted notion of counting it's fine and dandy.

If we were to actually count those of age that are capable of working and aren't we'd have a huge number. What percent I can only guess. I've seen numbers from 15 -30%. Those numbers change in how you count the underemployed.

Much like them seeing this as a light at the end of the tunnel. But most folks I know have taken pay cut and/ or reduced hours just to keep their jobs.

Wages are down, unemployment and welfare are up and the press is singing 'Happy days are here again'.

[dc dalton]

Wages are down, unemployment and welfare are up and the press is singing 'Happy days are here again'.

Yup, it's a mindfuck they want to get people into, make everyone happy happy and looking forward to the next boom. Only problem is that next boom could be the implosion of the economy.

But hey, I'd be as happy as the next guy IF (and that's a big if) the economy turned around. It would help my business out big time BUT I will look at reality for now, all while hoping beyond hope that things could get better.

[ALS]

Real unemployment Gov numbers 16.8%. Private numbers are showing between 18.4% and 20.2% unemployment.

[andrewjs18]

regardless..Obama and his staff said it wouldn't go above 8% once we passed the stimulus..so he LIED to the American people.

[God's Country]

Actually it's more like 15% no matter what they say (or have said for years). You have to remember those 'official' numbers ignore the underemployed and the ones that have dropped of unemployment because their unemployment benefits expired.

They don't count. If they aren't drawing DIRECTLY off the system...well lets just call them screwed.

[FNG19]

regardless..Obama and his staff said it wouldn't go above 8% once we passed the stimulus..so he LIED to the American people.

As much as I loathe the Boy King's administration, he no more lied about unemployment than Bush lied about Iraq. Being wrong and making poor decisions based on bad information is not a lie, but it is awfully embarrassing when you have to man up and admit you blew it. Had we a press with a spine, every single mention of unemployment would be coupled with a reminder of Obama's broken crystal ball.

Personally, I think Obama made a critical miscalculation in predicting future unemployment given the volatility of the present economic environment. If there's any justice, he'll be excoriated for both that and the stimulus-that-was-never-about-stimulus package.

[stephpd]

My problem with guessing is it's not tied to reality. Even in the short term they have been off by quite a bit. Even with the way they fudge the numbers unemployment is higher then expected. Same thing with the cash for clunkers that was supposed to be enough for several months and ran out in a week. So we just add 200% more to that program and hope it makes it another month, still short of the 4 month time frame.

Yet somehow we are suppose to believe that this health care plan will only be $1 trillion over 10 years. What if that number is way short too? Can we expect it to be closer to 10-20 trillion if the numbers don't come out as rosy as expected? The 5.5% projected growth for all 10 years is far above the norm of ~3%. I'm guessing that unemployment numbers they're using for those years would be about average of 5-6% but what if they are higher, like now and the near future?

Forget bending the curve, either/or both of those numbers could make the shortfall bend the curve the opposite way, approaching the exponential curves of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid and the National Debt.

All to soon we'll be paying everything we make for nothing in return.

[TXDMERC73]

here is another report (i dont believe it)

http://www.dailyfinance.com/2009/08/...o-9-4-percent/