Raise your hand if you actually trust any of this data though. I know my hand isn't up.
If anything, my guess is that number is way higher. I'd imagine they'd rather just lie and say that jobs are actually going up. If they can't even say that I imagine the numbers are beyond fucked.
I saw a breakdown the other day postulating that the true unemployment rate is masked by the gig economy, because people are more likely to drive Uber than file for unemployment
If Uber and the other gigs didn’t exist the unemployment rate would probably be at least double what it is now, then again would something else have taken over in its place? Different conversation but kinda does highlight the power of these gig companies. Uber for example would be like these third largest US employer behind Walmart and Amazon if they did employ most the people who do it as the same equivalence of a part or full time job.
Here, I found the video
It's youtube because I couldn't find it anywhere else. But I think it addresses some of your points. The biggest point it makes is that at the same time that the greater economy lost 3 million jobs (or had that many layoffs), the gig economy gained roughly the same number of people.
The ADP numbers for November have us at losing 30k in November though they had us up in October
Came here to say this.
It's very complicated to define and measure something as nebulous, nuanced, and politically charged as unemployment in a precise, meaningful, objective, and cost-effective way (amongst other vital characteristics).
In the USA, we're measuring and defining unemployment with methodologies that are essentially the lowest common denominator. That these numbers also obscure and obfuscate the reality of the situation is part of the design. To further complicate the issue, a lot of policies are being made essentially to game those simplified metrics -- perverse incentives.
These numbers may very well be extremely precise and highly accurate and still it doesn't mean that they are reflective of what Americans are experiencing as a whole or on an individual basis. And yet, policy makers are (or appear to be) focusing on these singularly to make them look better and keep up appearances.
My situation and experience are completely anecdotal, of course, but from my vantage point, it looks like there's an uncontrolled downward economic spiral being swept under the rug. Folks who can work and want to work (or at least wouldn't mind it) are sitting outside the system, idle. Employers are reducing their workforce and then placing added burden on those that remain to make up the difference. Those folks are burning out, taking leave, quitting, retiring early, etc. Employers aren't replacing them, just slathering the work onto fewer and fewer plates. So, if the government isn't doing anything meaningful about it (and in fact making it worse) and employers aren't doing anything meaningful about it (besides taking advantage), it'll be interesting to see how this is resolved. "It'll work itself out in a few years" is not a reasonable stance, whether it's true or not.
Unemployment numbers that aren't as bad as everyone expected are missing the point, and certainly not a cause to rally and celebrate, in my opinion.
There are many different accepted methodologies for measuring unemployment. For some reason the media only focuses on the U-3 value, and I agree that is highly misleading.
It sounds like the relevant statistic you are looking for is the U-6 value. U-6 is currently measured at a relative high of 8.7%. That is 30 million Americans who are unemployed or underemployed.
You can find all the data at the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Alternative measures of labor underutilization
Yeah. I'll never understand why people have accepted the corporate media's use of mostly U-3 data. I think U-6 likely reflects things in a much more realistic way.
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.