Unemployment inaccurate?

Ageing baby boomers are leaving the work force. Shocking.
How many people have left because they can now afford their own health insurance? I know several, and soon will be one myself. Not having to shell out ten grand a year for health coverage is liberating.
Check out the U6 unemployment rate....



U6 Unemployment Rate

The unemployment number that is most often used in the media (and by the government) is known as the "U-3". The "U-6" is considered to be a broader measure of the unemployment situation in the United States.

The "U-6" includes two groups of people that the "U-3" does not:

1. "Marginally attached workers" - people who are not actively looking for work, but who have indicated that they want a job and have looked for work (without success) sometime in the past 12 months. This class also includes "discouraged workers" who have completely given up on finding a job because they feel that they just won't find one.

2. People who are looking for full-time work but have to settle on a part-time job due to economic reasons. This means that they want full-time work, but can't find it.

Two pretty important groups of people, no? Not just Baby Boomers who have decided to "retire"
Some guy wants a job but isn't doing anything about it, even though he tried once in the last twelve months, or isn't even looking and we are supposed to care about him?
Compassionate Conservatism at its finest.
By the way, how are people in the gig economy counted? Let's say a company like Uber, that has some 200,000 independent contractors working with them. Haven't those people disappeared from the traditional workforce.

By the chart, it looks like today's U6 numbers are the same as they were in 2003-2005, and have declined 40% in the last couple of years.
What exactly is there to complain about?
Quote

Originally posted by: billryan
Some guy wants a job but isn't doing anything about it, even though he tried once in the last twelve months, or isn't even looking and we are supposed to care about him?
Compassionate Conservatism at its finest.
By the way, how are people in the gig economy counted? Let's say a company like Uber, that has some 200,000 independent contractors working with them. Haven't those people disappeared from the traditional workforce.

By the chart, it looks like today's U6 numbers are the same as they were in 2003-2005, and have declined 40% in the last couple of years.
What exactly is there to complain about?


Hey, it's the LVA resident Republican fun factory you're talking to. They complain as long as a (black) democrat is running the show. They don't need a reason, they just make up one......or two.....or a new one every day.

Independent contractors count as part of the work force.

BLS stats show that those over 55 participation rates are going up while the rate for those under 55 is going down.

The GDP rate has been under 1% in 3 of the last 8 quarters.


The Republican House and Senate have been just as responsible for this economy as President Obama. Why aren't the Democrats praising them if things are so great? Why aren't the Republicans attacking them if things are so bad? If you think the President actually controls the economy then you are sadly mistaken. The President can't get any legislation passed. The congress can't override a veto. There's a word for that. Gridlock. Yay Gridlock!
I posted a chart so people could interpret the results. My interpretation:

Are things getting better? Yes, but very slowly. A 10% G6 unemployment rate is still as bad as it was after 9/11 and pretty much as bad as it has been since 1994, with the exception of the 2008 financial crisis. One had to wonder how much better the economy could be with a pro-growth economic policy as opposed to a tax and spend policy. It also makes me wonder how we will ever pay off the $19 trillion US debt or when we will see our day of reckoning for this.
Quote

Originally posted by: jphelanIt also makes me wonder how we will ever pay off the $19 trillion US debt or when we will see our day of reckoning for this.

There was an answer to this a few years back. President Obama's very own bipartisan Simpson-Bowles debt commission. Unfortunately President Obama didn't have the ability to push through their recommendations. It would have eliminated all of this budget time drama and put us on a sustainable financial course. We lost a few years because our politicians couldn't muster up the will to work together.

My friend lives in a million dollar house. He bought it in 1996 for $400,000 with 25 % down and financed the rest. As the house appreciated, he refinanced several times and now owes more than when he bought it twenty years ago.He and his family are quite content living in their million dollar home and using their 38 foot boat. They figure the boat was almost free since it was paid for with money from a refi, as was much of their sons college.
They figure they will pass the house to their oldest son in a few years, after they do another refi to purchase a Florida Condo. The son will inherit a million dollar home after a lifetime of luxury living, and inevitably pass it on to his kids.
How sad.
Everyone who supported George W. Bush or especially Ronald Reagan, raise your hand. Now put it over your mouth and clamp down firmly. And STFU when it comes to the deficit or the national debt. You obviously have NO standing to be lecturing others such things.
Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:
Diamond Membership
$3 per month
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Limited Member Rewards Online
Join Now
or
Platinum Membership
$50 per year
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Exclusive Member Rewards Book
Join Now