Jobless Rate Plummets

[dogman_1234]

http://money.cnn.com/2011/12/02/news/economy/jobs_report_unemployment/index.htm?hpt=hp_t1

 

[chunkymonster]

Another interesting aspect to the jobless numbers is the overall reduction of the workforce due to the aging of the Baby Boomers and the Boomers retiring or otherwise leaving the workforce.

It stands to reason that if the total number of person in the workforce is reduced, the overall number of person either looking for work or applying for unemployment benefits will also be reduced.

As Gamer said, it's just a big numbers game.

If the jobless rate had dropped to below 9% two years ago this would be a significant improvement and justification by Obama and the Democrats for the success of the stimulus packages. However, given this is two years too late, it is nothing more than Democrats and Obama Administration grasping at straws.

 

[dogman_1234]

From what?!??!

 

[dogman_1234]

By whom?

( If you say rey...)

 

[Pyree]

Of course they are going to report the U3 rate which shows the country in a better shape. That makes people optimistic and want to invest/buy stuff and shift the country to the road of recovery. I am not saying that media should not report the truth but if everyone in the country is gloomy for too long, they loose hope and society decay.

 

[Reynod]

I was banned for 3 days; for speaking the truth of course!!

I hope your going to let this go and settle down.

 

[dogman_1234]

Over what?

 

[jsc]

A claimed 9.0% dropping to a claimed 8.6% is hardly a "plummet".

 

[Pyree]

Well, if the difference is statistically significant then there is some support for using the term "plummet". But we don't know whether it is significant or not.

 

[Pyree]

Yeah, got the U6 vs U3 bit.

I am just saying that sometimes in statistic, a small difference can still be detected as significant, not just some error (depends on how carefully you design your sampling scheme). In this case, the U3 before and now differs by 0.4%. That difference can be significant and not due to error and thus support a "plummet" in unemployment rate as described by the U3 definition.

 

[Pyree]

An error is not a lie.

Error in statistic just gives you lack of support for your claim or the wrong information for your conclusion. A lie is what the politician do and it is a matter of choice. A statistician can have good statistic to support the claim, or have little evidence to support their claim. The politician can choose not to believe in the statistic and lie to the public or misinterpreted the statistic and makes the statistic with little evidence to support their claim.