[typography font="Droid Serif" size="20" size_format="px" color="#660000"]Real U-3 Unemployment Rate: 11.6%[/typography]
Propaganda unemployment rate: 8.1%; Real unemployment rate: 11.6%.
Reason for difference: organic growth of labor force which grows alongside the broader population. Don’t be confused by cheap explanations on TV why the labor force should be declining (especially with ZIRP meaning pre-retirement workers have to stay in the labor force ever longer to supplant their meager fixed income): the widely accepted definition of the labor pool, that used by the CBO and all other government forecasting agencies, assumes a 90,000 growth in the labor force every month as it has to keep in line with the growth of the US population! The implication is simple: using a real labor force participation rate long-term average of 65.8%, the real unemployment rate in April was 11.6%, based on the 5.4 million additional workers that should be counted as part of the U-3 which then means that the real number of unemployed is not 12.5 million but 17.9 million, which in turn implies a 11.6% unemployment rate in the US. This also means that the spread between the propaganda, and the real number is now 3.5%: the most it has been since the early 1980s.
You know what they say about assuming…
Sounds about right.
And that doesn’t count those who have simply given up looking or have timed out of unemployment checks without finding new jobs or the underemployed. I suspect the actual unemployment number is far higher than even 11.6.
Thing is, when unemployment gets that high, the propagandists can tell us everything is coming up roses all they want – there are enough out there who are experiencing the dandelions and rag weed of reality to cause the lefty-eegits some serious heartburn.
Yep! There are too many living the truth to believe the lie…!
Do you notice which years the implied and reported are just about the same (coughbushcough) and which years the implied and reported are just totally out of whack (coughobamacough)
No, thanks for [cough] pointing that out! Good catch! :thumbs:
And actually looking at it again you can tell when there was a democrat in office (implied/reported out of whack) and when a republican was in office (implied/reported almost in line)
Odd that things like this don’t catch on with the mainstream media… Gee, wonder why?
Yeah, just kidding. We all know why…