| Topic Name: |
When side-jobs hurt your chances.. |
| Message Name: |
utgoff doesn't agree with you |
| Date Posted: |
08/31/2004 |
| In Reply To: |
I'm glad you actually did some of your own research and saw that the USDA also uses sampling (which goes against the original reason you brought them up) and that you don't have a better way to collect the information unless "they offer you a job". Have you stopped eating beef?
I don't understand how any objective person ("journalist") can think that I have not proven my case. Do you still believe that you "fall off the BLS statistics after 26 weeks"? Do you still think that the EU uses something other then a survey and the same basic definition of unemployment as the US? Do you think the LAT used something other then ??white house statisticians?? to collect data? You can stand by articles full of false information all you want but make no mistake about it your article is wrong and anyone who read the links I??ve posted throughout this thread can see that.
If I'm writing false articles at some point in the future I hope it does "come around" to me. But unlike you I will correct mistakes when someone has cited sources and shown me that I'm wrong. I also was happy to debate (teach you) until you resorted to suggesting that I put your articles on a porn web site (why would I do that again?). I realize that you want to deflect attention away from your article which is full of inaccuracies but you??ll have to do better then that. Who is trying to smear again? You wouldn??t have been on a swift boat a while back would you?
|
| Message: |
what surprises me is how much free time you have to post on this board from work...
your posts are not addressing the original story on thinkandask. you are talking about
the household survey, i'm talking about the largely unknown unemployed figures.
(john: I'm glad.....you stopped eating beef?)
if you read the proposal for the USDA plans in 2005 you'd find that they are not intending
to sample... historically they've sampled a fraction and that will no longer be the case.
and this example is perfect for how their sister-org, labor department, should keep track
of those without jobs. you mentioned that it is too difficult to keep track of everyone, and
i'm saying that if a federal agency can track animals with such detail why can they not
track people too?
(john: I don't understand ... this thread can see that.)
your case is not addressing the story published on thinkandask. the example
shows how people fall off the weekly/monthly claims and therefore 'appear' to show
the economic outlook is improving on the job front. i stand by my assertion that BLS
data is flawed and does not measure the true impact of the jobless claims. i am not
alone... Kathleen Utgoff spends much time 'defending' her agency's data... why
would she have to defend data unless it is not accurate? even with the surveys you
claim to support, she says: "Utgoff said economists at the BLS would continue to
look into why the surveys have come uncoupled." even she doesn't sound optimistic
about these same surveys you claim are trustworthy... interesting.
http://money.cnn.com/2004/08/06/news/economy/job_survey.reut/
(john: If I'm writing false articles... swift boat a while back would you? )
you have not shared with us where your articles are published....
as of yesterday afternoon the 'porn' problem is now with those who can act legally
on my behalf. as for swifties, sounds like lawyers are going to run after them too.
|
|
