| Topic Name: |
When side-jobs hurt your chances.. |
| Message Name: |
reply 2 of 2 |
| Date Posted: |
08/24/2004 |
| In Reply To: |
(john: We aren??t disagreeing about anything. You simply
refuse to admit you had/have no clue about what you are
talking about when you wrote your ??article??.)
hi john, if we aren't disagreeing... what is this about then?
the sentence you wrote above is exactly why the usa is in
a political bind at the moment... rather than discussing issues
rationally, the subject turns to personal attack -- which is only
evidence that the 'attacker' lost ground...
i'm saying to you, and rather kindly, that we can disagree.
this argument of the *true collection* of the unemployed and
underemployed is not new... in the story i published i
successfully explain in simple terms how the actual
unemployment rate can decrease without the unemployed
professional finding a new job. it is an example, again, using
the BLS philosophy. two surveys. same sample up ticks and
downturns as they apply to a sample of 100 people. time
permitting, you can apply the same data and will come out
with the same results.
i do not need to prove anything more than i have. :) if you
disagree, i encourage you to write an article and submit
to thinkandask, with your *real* name, phone #, and city, for
consideration... we don't publish e-mail addresses. you can
see on thinkandask that we post reader comments pro/con to
articles published... i know some articles on t&a are
controversial because in cases such as this, the story
upsets people who have long believed one way. a good
journalist is not in the business of pleasing friends. ;)
(john: They are polled at random......)
we disagree. please note... the word "random" is not
listed.
from BLS:
"Each month, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)
analyzes and publishes statistics on the labor force,
employment, and unemployment, classified by a
variety of demographic, social, and economic
characteristics. These statistics are derived from
the Current Population Survey (CPS), which is
conducted by the Census Bureau for BLS. This
monthly survey of the population uses a sample of
households that is designed to represent the civilian
noninstitutional population of the United States."
from CNN:
"The household report is derived from a poll of about
60,000 households, while the payrolls count comes from a
sampling of about 400,000 work sites -- about one-third
of all nonfarm payroll workers.
Unlike the establishment survey, the household survey
includes farm workers, the self-employed, unpaid family
workers, private household workers and people on unpaid
leave among the employed -- possibly boosting its count."
|
| Message: |
CONTD from reply 1
(john: I can??t read the story in question you refuse to cite
post a link to anything you are talking about. You just pull
things out of your ass and expect people to accept it as fact.)
? i thought you read the story ? my purpose on vault
is not to drive visitors to thinkandask. our traffic has
already topped 2 million this year so i'm pleased.
so no, i don't post urls to my stories... see following
request for a copy/paste.
(john: How about the OECD publications which uses
the same method across each country?)
the OECD also says this:
"Did you know that since 1970, people work 20% less
hours in France and 20% more hours in the United States?"
(john: I hate to break it to you but no major country uses
??actual numbers of people??. Here is a link to the French
agency that collects their unemployment data.)
they also say this:
"They concern two specific unemployment boundaries:
the unemployed whose only form of job seeking is being
registered with the public employment office (the ANPE
in France) and the unemployed who have found a job due
to start in three or more months time."
IOW, the french count you if you are registered. but
as i've stated, even though i'm currently registered for
unemployment benefits stateside, i no longer count
when benefits run out in september. i'm not on the
household survey and i'm no longer registered
for unemployment even though i am 'unemployed.'
so for the week of 26 september the claims filed
will not be 321,842, but 321,841... assuming i'm
the only one, for example. indicates by default that
only because i've not filed, i'm now employed.
(john: Here you can read about their ??Employment Survey??
but I??m sure this is just an election year ploy by Bush to keep
himself in power, right? I would look up the links for other
EU members but something tells me you wouldn??t read
them because you don??t care about the truth only spewing
what you think is right.)
what i think is right -- is to count every professional today
who does not have a job and *not* due to their lack of
search. i'm advocating that we indeed hear from the feds
if the number is what the LAT says - 16,000,000, or
what the feds *estimate to be* 8,200,000 in july....
that is a hefty difference and the feds should be
accountable, the LAT already proved their case in print.
i would hope that everyone agrees we deserve the
true numbers for what we pay in taxes.
(john: Please post a link to this.......)
i thought you read the story before making comments
c/p
thinkandask.com/news/jobs.html
(john: Can you post anything that suggests that the BLS is
doing anything different right now then it has since it
started collecting data? Or is doing anything diffrent then
INSEE their French counterparts?)
the french conduct their survey quarterly, because those
on benefits have two years (lowered to two in 2004.)
again, registration is key, if a worker does not register
s/he is not counted. i'd agree for similar registration
practice in the usa.
the issue is not about BLS changes to their method for they
have not. no one disagrees. however, the BLS is under
continuous fire for the very reasons we discuss here.... the
numbers are not all inclusive and this upsets some who
want to believe BLS is somehow tidy.
the argument is that BLS *should* change their method and
collect data from those who apply for unemployment benefits,
and even when those benefits run out, the SS# of said person
is tracked until that SS# once again earns a salary or
reaches age of retirement; at which time s/he is no longer
counted.
the feds have the ability to collect this information...
and the story published explains why said method is not
used... the number of unemployed would reflect higher rates
and show our economy is not as good as the feds would like.
|
|
