The Incredible Shrinking Labor Force

[longknife]

While I got this from Vox Popoli Blog, it linked to Zero Hedge.

1. 1. 
      
      
      96 million Americans not in Labor Force.
      

So all of these glowing unemployment figures mean absolutely nothing! Just more number crunching to make things look better than they are to save the butts of those Obamabot Democrats running for office.


Read more @ Labor Participation Rate Drops To 36 Year Low Record 92.6 Million Americans Not In Labor Force Zero Hedge

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

While I got this from Vox Popoli Blog, it linked to Zero Hedge.

1. 1. 
      
      
      96 million Americans not in Labor Force.

So all of these glowing unemployment figures mean absolutely nothing! Just more number crunching to make things look better than they are to save the butts of those Obamabot Democrats running for office.


Read more @ Labor Participation Rate Drops To 36 Year Low Record 92.6 Million Americans Not In Labor Force Zero Hedge

yes and those who work earn less too!

 

[Mr. H.]

If you're not in the labor force you can't be counted as unemployed.

Genius.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

If you're not in the labor force you can't be counted as unemployed.

Genius.

those folks are often counted in U6
depending on their attachment to the idea of working,

 

[pinqy]

If you're not in the labor force you can't be counted as unemployed.

Genius.

Ummm other way around. The labor force Is defined as employed plus unemployed.

People are not in the Labor Force if they're not unemployed or employed.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

If you're not in the labor force you can't be counted as unemployed.

Genius.

Ummm other way around. The labor force Is defined as employed plus unemployed.

People are not in the Labor Force if they're not unemployed or employed.

Wait...What? Say that again.......

 

[pinqy]

If you're not in the labor force you can't be counted as unemployed.

Genius.

Ummm other way around. The labor force Is defined as employed plus unemployed.

People are not in the Labor Force if they're not unemployed or employed.

Wait...What? Say that again.......

When the survey is conducted, people are asked if they own a business or farm or if they worked for pay. (Or 15+ hours unpaid in a family business or farm) if yes, they are classified as employed.

If no, they're asked if they could have started a job the previous week and what they did to find work in the previous 4 weeks. If it wa more than just reading the want ads, they are classified as unemployed.

Once all the employed and unemployed are aggregated up, the 2 are added together and that's the labor force.

Everyone not working or not looking or not available is classified as "Not in the Labor Force".

So saying someone has to be in the labor force to be classified as unemployed is getting things backwards.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

If you're not in the labor force you can't be counted as unemployed.

Genius.

Ummm other way around. The labor force Is defined as employed plus unemployed.

People are not in the Labor Force if they're not unemployed or employed.

Wait...What? Say that again.......

When the survey is conducted, people are asked if they own a business or farm or if they worked for pay. (Or 15+ hours unpaid in a family business or farm) if yes, they are classified as employed.

If no, they're asked if they could have started a job the previous week and what they did to find work in the previous 4 weeks. If it wa more than just reading the want ads, they are classified as unemployed.

Once all the employed and unemployed are aggregated up, the 2 are added together and that's the labor force.

Everyone not working or not looking or not available is classified as "Not in the Labor Force".

So saying someone has to be in the labor force to be classified as unemployed is getting things backwards.

Clear as mud.............
And Mr.H had it right.
If you stopped looking for work you aren't counted as unemployed.

 

[longknife]

But, the bottom line is - what good are all those figures if they don't include all who could be working?

How many are no longer seeking jobs because they've found living off welfare is easier?

 

[edthecynic]

But, the bottom line is - what good are all those figures if they don't include all who could be working?

How many are no longer seeking jobs because they've found living off welfare is easier?

None

 

[pinqy]

But, the bottom line is - what good are all those figures if they don't include all who could be working?

How many are no longer seeking jobs because they've found living off welfare is easier?

If you're trying to see how easy or hard it is to get a job…to see how many can't find work, what good is it to include people not trying to work? What does that tell us?

 

[pinqy]

If you're not in the labor force you can't be counted as unemployed.

Genius.

Ummm other way around. The labor force Is defined as employed plus unemployed.

People are not in the Labor Force if they're not unemployed or employed.

Wait...What? Say that again.......

When the survey is conducted, people are asked if they own a business or farm or if they worked for pay. (Or 15+ hours unpaid in a family business or farm) if yes, they are classified as employed.

If no, they're asked if they could have started a job the previous week and what they did to find work in the previous 4 weeks. If it wa more than just reading the want ads, they are classified as unemployed.

Once all the employed and unemployed are aggregated up, the 2 are added together and that's the labor force.

Everyone not working or not looking or not available is classified as "Not in the Labor Force".

So saying someone has to be in the labor force to be classified as unemployed is getting things backwards.

Clear as mud.............
And Mr.H had it right.
If you stopped looking for work you aren't counted as unemployed.

Of course not, why would you?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

But, the bottom line is - what good are all those figures if they don't include all who could be working?

How many are no longer seeking jobs because they've found living off welfare is easier?

If you're trying to see how easy or hard it is to get a job…to see how many can't find work, what good is it to include people not trying to work? What does that tell us?

They stopped looking because they couldnt find a job...in other words they gave up!
Hardly a shining endorsement of the job market.

 

[boedicca]

But, the bottom line is - what good are all those figures if they don't include all who could be working?

How many are no longer seeking jobs because they've found living off welfare is easier?

The stats are useful propaganda for the Progs to spin for gullible people who cannot make the connection that Prog Policies are killing the private sector economy.

 

[pinqy]

But, the bottom line is - what good are all those figures if they don't include all who could be working?

How many are no longer seeking jobs because they've found living off welfare is easier?

If you're trying to see how easy or hard it is to get a job…to see how many can't find work, what good is it to include people not trying to work? What does that tell us?

They stopped looking because they couldnt find a job...in other words they gave up!
Hardly a shining endorsement of the job market.

Most who stop looking stop for personal reasons, not job market reasons. But in any case, if someone stopped looking for work in February, what does that tell me about the job market in August? At most it tells me what someone believes.

 

[pinqy]

But, the bottom line is - what good are all those figures if they don't include all who could be working?

How many are no longer seeking jobs because they've found living off welfare is easier?

The stats are useful propaganda for the Progs to spin for gullible people who cannot make the connection that Prog Policies are killing the private sector economy.

So, why did the numbers continue to get worse under Obama?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

But, the bottom line is - what good are all those figures if they don't include all who could be working?

How many are no longer seeking jobs because they've found living off welfare is easier?

The stats are useful propaganda for the Progs to spin for gullible people who cannot make the connection that Prog Policies are killing the private sector economy.

So, why did the numbers continue to get worse under Obama?

his socialist policies most notably highest tax rate in world, support of unions, and huge deficits.

 

[pinqy]

But, the bottom line is - what good are all those figures if they don't include all who could be working?

How many are no longer seeking jobs because they've found living off welfare is easier?

The stats are useful propaganda for the Progs to spin for gullible people who cannot make the connection that Prog Policies are killing the private sector economy.

So, why did the numbers continue to get worse under Obama?

his socialist policies most notably highest tax rate in world, support of unions, and huge deficits.

Well that went right over your head..

I was responding to the false claim that the statistics are manipulated.

 

[SteadyMercury]

But, the bottom line is - what good are all those figures if they don't include all who could be working?

So if someone has a kid and decides to end her career to be a homemaker while her husband continues working to support the family, you think it would make sense to count her as unemployed and attempt to measure the state of the job market based on her decisions to raise a kid?

That is absurd.

 

[SteadyMercury]

They stopped looking because they couldnt find a job...in other words they gave up!
Hardly a shining endorsement of the job market.

Link?

If you know that "they" stopped looking because they couldn't find a job, surely you have a source that provides information from the survey that made this conclusion.