Unemployment in the Modern Era Made Simple (and Scary!)

mykevermin

mykevermin

CAGiversary!
Feedback
34 (97%)
2s7gwnc.jpg
 
Good question, and I don't know. I suspect that nations as industrialized as ours might, but those who still rely on developing industries (i.e., not fully formed/realized), those that rely on agriculture/pastoral labor (and bartering instead of a formal currency-based economy) probably aren't comparable for some big reasons.
 
A couple weeks ago on the Daily Show, Jon was talking to one of his guests (forget who, but he was in some federal position as a financial authority) and he mentioned unemployment in passing, saying something along the lines of ". . . with unemployment what it is now, around 15%, not the 7% we're being told it is, . . ." continued on with his point and his guest just let it fly as common knowledge. That was the first I had even heard of the government reported rate being inaccurate.
 
Yep; in my area of study, I've known about the shortcomings of unemployment methodology for years now. But it's not something I assume other people think very deeply about (not that I'm blaming them, but we're simply told one constant number and expected to believe it). I like Paul Krugman, who often reports the % of adults 18-64 who are employed. Which, given cultural changes (e.g., growth of dual-income households in the past few decades), we can't expect to be constant. But, in terms of identifying short-term fluctuation, is actually pretty useful. But, still, I'm sure you can identify problems with that which aren't perfect.

It's a complex issue to try to capture in a single percentage. Should "underemployed" people (either those who want full time that can only get part time, or those working below their pedigree - someone with a postgraduate degree working in a position that requires no formal education) be counted? They are working, after all. Then you have work-to-work variation that complicates things. WM counts 32 hours+ as "full time," but while that affects your wages and benefits, people report that they work full time.

What about jaded workers. Seeing no job prospects, saying "fuck it," and not applying for work means you don't count in the numbers. Is that fair? Is that accurate?

It's like when we see numbers like "median household income" in the US, and assume it's meaningful. Well, it is meaningful, but it doesn't mean much. Ha. In short, 50% of US households make about 46K annually, and 50% below: but so what? 46K when living in East Jesus, Iowa is good money; meanwhile, you can't pay for shit if you're making that in Manhattan. So regional variation fucks things up too.

Three cheers for the soft sciences! We deserve it!
 
Even if it were possible, what good comes of the common man knowing the severity of the situation? I think the skewed unemployment statistics probably aren't so bad, as long as our leaders know how to interpret the wide range of tracked statistics in order to get an accurate pulse
 
Great point about the unemployment figures...

...it's a huge scam, just like the low-ball inflation numbers!

I'm fed up with all the bastards and whores in government... recall them all!!!! We need a revolt!
 
[quote name='Koggit']Even if it were possible, what good comes of the common man knowing the severity of the situation? I think the skewed unemployment statistics probably aren't so bad, as long as our leaders know how to interpret the wide range of tracked statistics in order to get an accurate pulse[/QUOTE]

Wow.

Translation = We need to trust only our leaders to know the truth and do what's best for us. Most of us should have the truth hidden from us, because all we do is panic, make it worse, and we can't really do anything about it anyway.
 
That's how I took it. :lol: The most terrifying part is it's largely true.
[quote name='thrustbucket']Wow.

Translation = We need to trust only our leaders to know the truth and do what's best for us. Most of us should have the truth hidden from us, because all we do is panic, make it worse, and we can't really do anything about it anyway.[/quote]
 
close, but...

[quote name='thrustbucket']translation = We need to trust only our leaders to know the truth. . .[/QUOTE]

[quote name='me']. . . as long as our leaders know how to interpret the wide range of tracked statistics in order to get an accurate pulse[/quote]

It's more of an "IF we can trust our leaders to know the truth", rather than "we need to trust. . . "
 
Look, it is a scary number but wouldn't it also mean that during the "good times" when unemployment was aroun 4-5% that it was actually closer to 9-10%?

The worse number now it jobs opening and firm that plan to higher new workers.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']Wow.

Translation = We need to trust only our leaders to know the truth and do what's best for us. Most of us should have the truth hidden from us, because all we do is panic, make it worse, and we can't really do anything about it anyway.[/quote]

That's partly true.

What?

The debt's here, the problems are here, what are we (the American people) going to do? Complain and make it all go away? At one point you're going to realize that a full scale revolt isn't feasible. We're just in deep shit right now. We're better of trying to work together to fix things. I understand the desire for people to see the truth, but what truly productive comes out of that? Will that suddenly clear up the debt and create jobs, make everything better? No. it'll just cause mass hysteria, which I believe is what you want.

When I really think about it, we've had it so good. Life has sucked for all of the past generations. World War I, II, and Vietnam ( with drafts and such ), the Great Depression, Segregation and mass government supported racism in the US, generally piss poor living conditions, oddly enough, the gilded age. I'm not even really going back so far. Realizing this, I'm getting a truly better understand on life and how it has always sucked, always.

Responding to the article, good thing I live in a low income neighborhood. Funny thing is, fuckin guy asked my why I was wearing a blue jacket the other day. Luckily he was wearing an all red outfit, complete with bandana around the neck and head. I honestly don't even give a shit right now about pretty much anything. All I have is my dreams and hopes, if I can believe in them ( no matter how silly) I can at least live. Even looking at those figures, I'm still determined not to go to college. Guess I'm not accepting of all tyranny.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Life has always sucked because the rich have always been in control. The ignorant masses continue to follow those with a plan. The plan may suck, but the people aren't able to come up with anything better.

I don't have any problem with Muhammad in Iran and he probably doesn't give a damn about me either, however, I'm supposed to hate him because my leaders want to make money raping his land for oil. So they make the media tell my stupid ass that all stinky towel heads are terrorists and I shouldn't second guess the government because they know what's best for me.

95% of the people on this planet could only use power for their own benefit... hell, maybe 99%. Life will always "suck" as long as people are selfish. Only people that desire power aspire to it. They want to be in control because it suits their needs, not because they want to help anyone. You can't hold them accountable because they're the ones that make the rules and they have no incentive to level the playing field.
 
[quote name='HovaEscobar']That's partly true.

What?

The debt's here, the problems are here, what are we (the American people) going to do? Complain and make it all go away? At one point you're going to realize that a full scale revolt isn't feasible. We're just in deep shit right now. We're better of trying to work together to fix things. I understand the desire for people to see the truth, but what truly productive comes out of that? Will that suddenly clear up the debt and create jobs, make everything better? No. it'll just cause mass hysteria, which I believe is what you want.
[/QUOTE]

To some extent you are right. But to another extent - most of us now agree the governments way of spending our way out of this problem is a bad idea, but how many of us have called our representatives and demanded they not vote these packages into law? Perhaps these packages wouldn't get passed if we were more proactive instead of just sitting back, feeling it's out of our control, and hoping our leaders know best. They work for us, remember.

I argue that the complacency in the public is just as much to blame for our problems as anything.
 
The system doesn't allow for much more than complacency. After working a 50 hour week you can't just go home and annoy political figures. You have to cook, clean, bathe, manage kids, shop for food... Shit rolls downhill and the American public is at the bottom of the valley. We can't print off 20k to pay a maid to take care of all our needs or otherwise spend money we don't have. Do you have time to read and understand a 1000 page bill? If you can't read it, you're hardly informed and then in no position to make a justifiable complaint. Hell, the people passing this shit don't read it.

The reason we have elected officials is so that all 300 million of us don't have to be experts in the political sciences and sociology. Unfortunately, no one can actually be trusted to do the job.
 
[quote name='Koggit']Even if it were possible, what good comes of the common man knowing the severity of the situation? I think the skewed unemployment statistics probably aren't so bad, as long as our leaders know how to interpret the wide range of tracked statistics in order to get an accurate pulse[/quote]

[quote name='Kayden']That's how I took it. :lol: The most terrifying part is it's largely true.[/quote]

Ahh, I see there are two new neo-cons on the board.

You missed the party boys - you'll want turn around and go back 8 years.
 
Why must you categorize everyone's views? Does it make it easier for you to assume what I think and allow you to more readily dismiss my opinions before they're even given?

What I meant by largely true is that that's how it is, not how I think it should be. Most people just sit on their asses and leave the work up to politicians. Sure, some people bitch about it amongst themselves and on forums, but that really doesn't mean they don't follow any less blindly. Most people want to just stick to their own problems and have the government to blame for whatever doesn't go right.

[quote name='camoor']Ahh, I see there are two new neo-cons on the board.

You missed the party boys - you'll want turn around and go back 8 years.[/quote]
 
[quote name='Kayden']


95% of the people on this planet could only use power for their own benefit... hell, maybe 99%. Life will always "suck" as long as people are selfish. Only people that desire power aspire to it. They want to be in control because it suits their needs, not because they want to help anyone. You can't hold them accountable because they're the ones that make the rules and they have no incentive to level the playing field.[/quote]

That individualism is what made America what it is, be it good or bad. Growing up an American and aspiring to get a higher place in life and willing to work hard to get there, I couldn't picture living in a communist country ( which I assume is where you're getting at ). I personally think it would suck balls.
 
What made America great is actually the infrastructure that allows people who want to get ahead to be able to. That is to say the commons and also the taxation that allows a middle class to exist, which then in turn allows democracy to function. That will to work hard by itself gets you nowhere.
 
I'm not saying we should all toil for the motherland and wait in line for shoes, no. However, there is a difference between getting ahead by working hard and being better and just oppressing those that don't have wealth.

I have no problem with people being rich. I have a problem with politicians creating laws to benefit corporations at the expense of average citizens to pay back "campaign contributions". I have a problem with politicians spending the few months of the year they work arguing for the sake of arguing. If they put half the effort into doing what they campaigned on that they put into scheming to make the other party look incompetent, we would have almost no social ills.

I don't know how you get socialism from me saying I don't like people abusing their power. I have no problem with someone being in control; my issue lies with the fact that no one has proven worthy of such powers. How many "Public Servants" actually server the public?

You probably heard about the 35W bridge collapse. What you may not have heard, was that one of the people in the DOT that was some sort of "higher up" in the department was unreachable for a week after the accident because she went on vacation. Not a big deal, but she expensed the whole trip to the state. She'd been doing it for years to go visit a boytoy at some resort and costing the state 10s of thousands of dollars. Abuse of public trust isn't a valid method to "get ahead".



[quote name='HovaEscobar']That individualism is what made America what it is, be it good or bad. Growing up an American and aspiring to get a higher place in life and willing to work hard to get there, I couldn't picture living in a communist country ( which I assume is where you're getting at ). I personally think it would suck balls.[/quote]
 
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']What made America great is actually the infrastructure that allows people who want to get ahead to be able to. That is to say the commons and also the taxation that allows a middle class to exist, which then in turn allows democracy to function. That will to work hard by itself gets you nowhere.[/quote]

I actually said " what it is", not "great". You can't argue that individualism has made America what it is.

Just saying. :p

[quote name='Kayden']
I don't know how you get socialism from me saying I don't like people abusing their power. I have no problem with someone being in control; my issue lies with the fact that no one has proven worthy of such powers. How many "Public Servants" actually server the public?
[/quote] I agree with that entire thing. I don't know how I picked up socialism.
 
Our whole system of government is based on people not being that actively involved. It's a representative democracy, we elect people to represent us and make decisions for us.

Unfortunately, to work ideally that still requires a reasonably informed electorate who at least research candidates before voting etc. which we don't have anymore.
 
[quote name='Kayden']Why must you categorize everyone's views? Does it make it easier for you to assume what I think and allow you to more readily dismiss my opinions before they're even given?

What I meant by largely true is that that's how it is, not how I think it should be. Most people just sit on their asses and leave the work up to politicians. Sure, some people bitch about it amongst themselves and on forums, but that really doesn't mean they don't follow any less blindly. Most people want to just stick to their own problems and have the government to blame for whatever doesn't go right.[/quote]

Fair enough.
 
[quote name='Dr Mario Kart']What made America great is actually the infrastructure that allows people who want to get ahead to be able to. That is to say the commons and also the taxation that allows a middle class to exist, which then in turn allows democracy to function. That will to work hard by itself gets you nowhere.[/QUOTE]

Is this a joke? Taxation is what made America great, and taxation allows a middle class to exist? :lol:
 
[quote name='rickonker']Is this a joke? Taxation is what made America great, and taxation allows a middle class to exist? :lol:[/QUOTE]

I think there's a good bit of truth in that actually.

Taxation has led to opportunities for all. Public schools that anyone can attend. Emergency care for all (so people with out money don't simply die), etc. etc.

One could argue we've had way more taxation than we needed, but I think taxation is a large part of the American Dream of anyone being able to succeed if they work hard, get an education or learn a trade etc.

We still have absurd inequality, but imagine how bad it would be if there was on free schooling etc. available to the poor (and everyone else)?
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']I think there's a good bit of truth in that actually.

Taxation has led to opportunities for all. Public schools that anyone can attend. Emergency care for all (so people with out money don't simply die), etc. etc.

One could argue we've had way more taxation than we needed, but I think taxation is a large part of the American Dream of anyone being able to succeed if they work hard, get an education or learn a trade etc.

We still have absurd inequality, but imagine how bad it would be if there was on free schooling etc. available to the poor (and everyone else)?[/QUOTE]
I'm not surprised that you agree with him. I think it makes a good story. What you've built up in your post sounds good and everything. But history tells a very different story. Freedom has led to opportunities for all, not taxation. What the American Dream represents became famous long before taxes were at the levels they're at now.

As for inequality, I agree that there's an absurd amount of it, but we would probably disagree on the causes.
 
I agree, but in our current society what chance would the poor have without taxes support school, health care etc.?

They already have much more limited opportunities. Without those systems in place they'd have next to no opportunities. And again the level of taxes may be to high.

But without taxation in a capitalist system the rich would get richer (as they do now) and the poor would just starve and die in large numbers.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']I agree, but in our current society what chance would the poor have without taxes support school, health care etc.?[/quote]

I'm not sure, but then I have no interest in defending all aspects of our current society.

But without taxation in a capitalist system the rich would get richer (as they do now) and the poor would just starve and die in large numbers.
Click to expand...

Whether this is correct or not possibly depends on your definition of "capitalist system".
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Taxation has led to opportunities for all. Public schools that anyone can attend. Emergency care for all (so people with out money don't simply die), etc. etc.[/quote]

Community funded schools were around before the government got into that business. As for emergency care, when did the government start paying ER bills? There are laws on the books requiring hospitals to give care; but as far as I know the hospital doesn't get reimbursed so they pass on the charges by increasing the rates for those who do pay.
 
No, he's not. At the hospital I work at, we are required to treat any and all patients regardless of their insurance. We are required by law (seeing as we are a non-profit organization) to treat every patient. We are not always reimbursed, and when we seldomly are we receive little to no money. There are hospitals that are built to make profit, and they can turn away whomever they would choose to.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Fair enough; but b/w Medicare/Medicaid, it's unfair and incorrect to act as if you don't see any returns from poor patients.[/quote]

Payment of services changes from patient to patient (Medicaid). You also have to consider that you have to apply for Medicare and Medicaid, and many of our patients that don't have health insurance and would be eligible for those programs just haven't taken the time to apply.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Fair enough; but b/w Medicare/Medicaid, it's unfair and incorrect to act as if you don't see any returns from poor patients.[/quote]

Never said that, I was simply correcting the incorrect statement that taxes fund "emergency care for all".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top