Waterj, if you still have it, go ahead.
Unemployment statistics in the US were started in the 1930’s as a result of the Great Depression. Originally, “employed” was defined as someone with an occupation, and “unemployed” was defined as not working but “willing and able to work.” Better concepts were developed and implemented by 1940 and while there have been several changes since then, there have been no major redefinitions. and
is just plain wrong. Here are the US definitions
From the Bureau of Labor Statistics Handbook of Methods:
All others are considered “not in the labor force.”
The last change in definitions was with the Current Population Survey redesign in 1994 when the definition of “discouraged workers” (those who want to work but are not looking because they don’t believe they will find any) was modified as was the defintion of “new entrants” and “reentrants” to the Labor Force. Prior to that, the survey (and thus the definitions) had remained the same since 1967.
As for different definitions from Europe, our methods are pretty much the same as Canada, Mexico, Australia, Japan, and all of the EEC.
and more info is to be found at http://stats.bls.gov/cps_faq.htm
Any other questions, or if somebody still instists that definitions have been “manipulated” please call (202) 691-6378 to talk to a staff member of the Office of Employment and Unemployment at the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
pin"don’t mess with me on my turf"qy
So it sounds like you’re saying that Alan Greenspan is basically re-thinking economic theory? Doing something different than what was supposed to be the accepted procedure, and lo and behold, it’s working?
250 million Americans: just lab rats for the Harvard Business School?
Just to reinforce what pinqy said: the definition of “unemployed” is problematic. Standard definitions draw a particular line, which people may or may not quibble with. In Australia, if you have done a couple of hours voluntary work in the week of the survey, then you are not counted.
This is still a good method of measuring unemployment, since it is the changes in the unemployment rate (and the participation rate) that provide a measure of the state of the labour market and the economy overall.
picmr
And now that I’ve been sitting here thinking about all this, the next logical question is, “Will this all change, depending on whether one or t’other political candidate takes up residence at 1600 Penn Ave next November?”
Please forgive my basic ignorance of political stuff–will he be out of a job, depending on whether Bush or Gore gets elected? Will they mess with his head, even if he gets to keep his job? Or will both (either) of them understand that “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”?
(Sorry, I absolutely DO NOT pay attention to campaign platforms.)
Well, that’s pretty easy, in part. At the height of Japans roaring economy, the city of Tokyo, on paper, was worth more than the entire United States. Real estate valuations in turn were used to issue bonds, which backed up other loans, which supported their banking system.
When real estate prices dropped to reflect somewhat more rational prices, the entire system of course came unwond. I strongly urge everyone who hasn’t, read “Extraordinary popular delusions and the Madness of Crowds” or something like that. It’s on the web as well, complete. Every so often, we as humans go off on the deep end with regard to the “value” of things.
Pinqy–Thanks for being there on the lack of manipulation in unemployment figures.
DDG said
If you mean will they abandon Greenspan, or will they try to tamper with the currently succesful economic policy–Who knows? I consider it a moot point.
My opinion is that the bear market which started in the first quarter of this year, but is now in suspension, will return sometime in the August/September time frame to bite investors in the ass. It won’t wait for the elections. Second quarter/Third quarter earnings will do the trick.
So, stake out the best prime corner you can right now. But don’t buy your apples/pencils until Fall when you may pick them up cheeper 