CdnFox Posted April 22, 2023 Report Share Posted April 22, 2023 5 minutes ago, robosmith said: Yes, they do. YOU ARE WRONG AGAIN Ohhh - sorry little guy, the problem here is you don't really undestand the issues. The jobless rate went down because labour force participation went down. In other words - people gave up looking for work. You see - unemployment only counts people actively looking for work. So if 5 people are looking and 1 gets a job, and the ohter four give up or work under the table, then magically we're at 100 percent employment! Yay! except - we're not. As you can see - it nosedived for his entire time as people simply gave up looking for a regular job. https://www.forbes.com/sites/gregorymcneal/2012/10/13/labor-force-participation-under-obama/?sh=29acd70532b8 So no - there were still a large amount of non working workers. Wrong again kiddo But hey - at least you made an effort. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robosmith Posted April 23, 2023 Report Share Posted April 23, 2023 55 minutes ago, CdnFox said: Ohhh - sorry little guy, the problem here is you don't really undestand the issues. The jobless rate went down because labour force participation went down. In other words - people gave up looking for work. You see - unemployment only counts people actively looking for work. So if 5 people are looking and 1 gets a job, and the ohter four give up or work under the table, then magically we're at 100 percent employment! Yay! except - we're not. As you can see - it nosedived for his entire time as people simply gave up looking for a regular job. https://www.forbes.com/sites/gregorymcneal/2012/10/13/labor-force-participation-under-obama/?sh=29acd70532b8 So no - there were still a large amount of non working workers. Wrong again kiddo But hey - at least you made an effort. Despite ^this fantasy, IT WAS FULL EMPLOYMENT as defined by the EXPERTS. Like I SAID. Your EXCUSES notwithstanding. People who are not looking for a job don't count. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted April 23, 2023 Report Share Posted April 23, 2023 8 minutes ago, robosmith said: Despite ^this fantasy, You mean the 'fantasy' that's backed up by actual statistics and reported in forbes? Is that you're new line - "NO need to LISTEN to this FACT backed by FACTS!!!!" LOLO(L 8 minutes ago, robosmith said: IT WAS FULL EMPLOYMENT as defined by the EXPERTS. Like I SAID. Nope. Sorry kiddo, as noted in the article i posted that's not accurate. 8 minutes ago, robosmith said: Your EXCUSES notwithstanding. People who are not looking for a job don't count. Of course they do. Labour force participation is a huge indicator - Statcan reports it every month along with the job numbers because it's integral to the issue of employment. Many economists in the states take it further and add in factors like are they working above the poverty line - It gives what they call the 'true' unemployment rate. Here's some info about that in the states and it explains why the unemployment rate can be much higher than just the jobless rate. https://www.politico.com/newsletters/morning-money/2022/05/31/true-unemployment-is-a-lot-higher-than-you-think-00035922 So sorry kiddo - you were wrong again Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.