home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: alt.conspiracy
- Path: sparky!uunet!convex!darwin.sura.net!wupost!sdd.hp.com!decwrl!pacbell.com!rtech!ingres!reb
- From: reb@Ingres.COM (Phydeaux)
- Subject: Re: Bush team said to skew latest economic-growth data
- Message-ID: <1992Nov16.231807.12565@pony.Ingres.COM>
- Reply-To: reb@Ingres.COM (Phydeaux)
- Organization: E 4th St Home For The Overeducated Underemployed - Chicago Div.
- References: <Bxo2BM.7nu@mail.boi.hp.com> <1992Nov14.003819.10859@swbatl.sbc.com> <1992Nov16.171504.17347@pony.Ingres.COM> <1992Nov16.183456.19709@scic.intel.com>
- Distribution: alt
- Date: 16 Nov 92 23:18:07 GMT
- Lines: 18
-
- In article <1992Nov16.183456.19709@scic.intel.com> sbradley@scic.intel.com (Seth Bradley) writes:
- >In article <1992Nov16.171504.17347@pony.Ingres.COM> reb@Ingres.COM (Phydeaux) writes:
- >>I don't care about the media ... what nobody tells you is that people
- >>who have given up and stopped looking for work, or who have been
- >>unemployed so long that they no longer receive unemployment
- >>compensation are *not* *counted* in the statistics. The statistics are
- >>for unemployment insurance claims, *not* the total number of
- >>unemployed people who want jobs.
- >
- >Not quite true. There are actually seven unemployment numbers (U-1 through
- >U-7) and one of those numbers _does_ included those who have given up looking
- >for work. The one the media most often reports on does not, however. I
- >found this out while doing some research for a paper. If anyone wants to
- >know the definitions for the 7 figures, I could post it.
-
- Please do! (along with any figures you may happen to have!)
-
- reb
-