| Topic Name: |
When side-jobs hurt your chances.. |
| Message Name: |
1 of 2: no clearer way.... |
| 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: |
"the actual number of unemployed professionals in the united states of america is not accurate by
the federal measurements in place. "
the following para you posted is not "random." you may subscribe (or view for free)
pollingreport.com to see what random means.
(john: ??Every month, one-fourth of the households in the sample are changed, so that no household is
interviewed more than 4 consecutive months. This practice avoids placing too heavy a burden on the
households selected for the sample. After a household is interviewed for 4 consecutive months,
it leaves the sample for 8 months and then is again interviewed for the same 4 calendar months a year
later, before leaving the sample for good. This procedure results in approximately 75 percent of
the sample remaining the same from month to month and 50 percent from year to year. ??)
(john: "Who is going to call millions of people each month?")
not necessary. for the majority of us workerbees...SS# is sufficient.
some options are:
1.) earning money and therefore paying taxes,
2.) earning money and exempt,
3.) not earning money,
4.) retired,
5.) dead
SS# / your tax ID number is tracked efficiently by the employer and the IRS. the only SS#s which need
to be monitored on the "unemployment" front are those who make no income for a given amount of
time. this would begin upon layoff -- the IRS sees the end date of your job.
debatable how long the measurement should be... this eliminates 1 and 2, 4 and 5 should not be
included.
next question would be "3" -- why? sitting at home? in college full time? or trying to find a job
and having no success? i care about the 'no success' number. this is what the current president says
is not a problem.
(john: You act as if you can??t find these numbers on BLS and that the LAT is actually performing
their own research. I was hoping that I could get you to figure this out for yourself but I??ll let you in
on a little secret. What the LAT??s did was go to BLS:)
the LAT has been keeping records --to the best of their ability-- of a much truer number of unemployed
and underemployed since 911. they used more than BLS to compile their data. and disagree most
strongly in how BLS reports the data....hence the reason they do this work.
their own research provides 16m in 2003, twice that of BLS.
you may not agree; however, i suggest you take it up with them.
CONTD on next thread.
|
|
