File :-(, x, )
Anonymous
Does anyone have the original of this in super large?
>> Anonymous
i need this too
>> Anonymous
Unemployment rockets? Where, the ghettoes?
>> Anonymous
>>98761
the reported rate of unemployment is biased. it counts people who are receiving unemployment and actively seeking a job. it doesn't include people who are unemployed and not seeking a job, people who are underemployed (ie. have a college degree and still working in fast food) or people who have been unemployed for over 6 months.
>> Doyen
>>98773
>>it doesn't include people who are unemployed and not seeking a job, people who are underemployed (ie. have a college degree and still working in fast food) or people who have been unemployed for over 6 months.

Oh, you mean the lazy fuckers.
>> Anonymous
>>98773

Biased? What the fuck are you talking about? It has been calculated that way since it was first calculated. Any change to the unemployment will come from actual shifts in people collecting unemployment checks. We're not going to suddenly see a drop in check registrations because people don't feel like it.
>> Hunter
Go buy it.
It's a poster.
>> Pff
>>98676

Boooooooo.
>> Anonymous
>>98793
Fail. Unemployment checks have nothing to do with the unemployment rate. It is based on a sample survey of households.

sage for politics
>> Anonymous
>>98882

FAIL for not knowing SHIT about CES

Each month the Current Employment Statistics (CES) program surveys about 160,000 businesses and government agencies, representing approximately 400,000 individual worksites, in order to provide detailed industry data on employment, hours, and earnings of workers on nonfarm payrolls.

http://www.bls.gov/ces/

These two sources have different classification criteria, and usually produce differing results. As noted, most economists these days see the CES as a more accurate estimate of the state of the job market. Because the CES only surveys employers, it does not produce an unemployment rate statistic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unemployment_Rate

Age to be an ass
>> Anonymous
FWIW, the record deficit has a lot to do with the currently skyrocketing, untaxed volume of online goods sold. Costing Uncle Sam tens (hundreds now?) of billions in revenue each year.
>> Anonymous
Fail for politics and knowing nothing about them.
>> Anonymous
speaking for everyone except fat burgermunchers: fuck america alltogether
>> Anonymous
>>98891
Err, you do realize that there is no such thing as a federal sales tax? Unless you're really arguing that the loss in taxes states are getting is then being passed on to the federal government, in which case you'd need to show a bunch of proof that the state governments have been getting more funding from the feds.

Personally, I think that's irrelevant. If the government is getting less tax revenue, they should figure out what things they can stop spending money on. It's required anytime taxes are going to be lowered, so why should this be any different?
>> Anonymous
>>98923
Says the retard who fails at spelling and visits a cartoon porn imageboard.
>> Pff
>>98923
Go listen to your ICP, faggot.
>> Anonymous
???? ?????
>> Anonymous
>>98884
MASSIVE FAIL. From your own Wiki link: "The BLS counts employment and unemployment (of those over 16 years of age) using a sample survey of households."

Which is what the BLS says: "Because unemployment insurance records, which many people think are the source of total unemployment data, relate only to persons who have applied for such benefits, and since it is impractical to actually count every unemployed person each month, the Government conducts a monthly sample survey called the Current Population Survey (CPS) to measure the extent of unemployment in the country."

CES != Unemployment Rate. gb2/Econ 101/
>> Anonymous
there is no accurate measurement of unemployment which is why it's a shitty measure

consumer spending is a much better way to see how things are going, fyi