i am watching tucker carlson on his PBS show (1st time, i promise) . . . he just pointed out that almost 1/2 of the jobs that were reported yesterday or the day before were gov't jobs. that's hilarious. a conservative trying to brag about creating jobs and really just creating a bigger gov't to do so. that's too funny.<br><br><br>--<br>one of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors. -Plato
I wish someone would explain to me the whole unemployment figure schtick. I've heard that in order to keep up with new people entering the job market, the economy has to produce 135,000 or so jobs per month. And yet even though the latest figures show that fewer than 96,000 jobs were created, the unemployment rate stayed at 5.4%. Does that mean that 39,000 or so people dropped off the unemployment rolls because they'd been on unemployment for too long, so it's a wash in the percentages but not in reality?<br><br>
_________________________ MACTECHubi dolor ibi digitus
I also wonder how they count the created jobs. If one person takes on two jobs to fill one lost job, does that count as a 1 or 2 new jobs? If the latter, then they need to rewrite the rules to base it on the number of people who enter the workforce. <br><br>
#197893 - 10/10/0410:53 AMRe: Psst! about those recent jobs figures
Yeah your right. The numbers will never be accurate. There are going to be people who have 2 jobs to equal a full time job (and still not have health care coverage). Of course they don't take into account all the temps that are out there that working for a quarter but not working after that. It almost seems like there's no such thing as a stable "job" anymore.<br><br>
The figures ARE manipulated. They tout the job loss figs but they don't account for the jobs that drop off the books because people start their own businesses. So if somebody "loses" a job because they go into business for themselves, the books only show the loss of that job.<br><br>
<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>because they go into business for themselves, the books only show the loss of that job<p><hr></blockquote><p>Are you sure about that? If people are running their self-run businesses by the book, they are supposed to file quarterly estimated self-employment taxes. That should put them "back on the books" as technically employed because they are paying the FICA and other taxes.<br><br>
Xplain's use of MacNews, AppleCentral and AppleExpo are not affiliated with Apple, Inc. MacTech is a registered trademark of Xplain Corporation. AppleCentral, MacNews, Xplain, "The journal of Apple technology", Apple Expo, Explain It, MacDev, MacDev-1, THINK Reference, NetProfessional, MacTech Central, MacTech Domains, MacForge, and the MacTutorMan are trademarks or service marks of Xplain Corp. Sprocket is a registered trademark of eSprocket Corp. Other trademarks and copyrights appearing in this printing or software remain the property of their respective holders.
All contents are Copyright 1984-2010 by Xplain Corporation. All rights reserved. Theme designed by Icreon.