"the 'unemployment rate' is the number of people receiving
unemployment benefits
and does not count the people who are no longer eligible or who have
stopped looking for work"
This number is at 88 million, an all time US high.
If the labor-participation number were the same as the pre-recession
the "unemployment rate" is the number of people receiving unemployment
benefits and does not count the people who are no longer eligible or who
have stopped looking for work
On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 6:19 AM, C. Hatton Humphrey wrote:
>
> So they released the unemployment numbers today:
>
> http://
On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 9:19 AM, C. Hatton Humphrey wrote:
> This article, however, says that even though the job creation number was
> 80k off the mark, the unemployment rate ticked down by .1?
The count of unemployed people can change due to an unemployed person
getting one of these newly crea
On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 9:19 AM, C. Hatton Humphrey wrote:
> This article, however, says that even though the job creation number was
> 80k off the mark, the unemployment rate ticked down by .1?
>
Federal unemployment insurance don't go for 99 weeks anymore. Think that
just went into effect.
ht
So they released the unemployment numbers today:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/07/business/economy/us-added-only-12-jobs-in-march-report-shows.html?_r=1&emc=na
On the ride in and in news stories last night I kept hearing something to
the effect of, "If the jobs numbers come out as expected a
