# What's the REAL unemployment rate under Obama? 10.5% or 5.1%? Or Other? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 22, 2015, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-10-5-or-5-1-or-other/732247 "2015-09-22T23:54:34Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![MyFootsZZZ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/myfootszzz/32/12580_2.png) [@MyFootsZZZ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MyFootsZZZ)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2015, 11:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-10-5-or-5-1-or-other/732247/1 "2015-09-22T23:54:34Z")
I ask because I posted a graphic that said Obama’s 5.1% beats George W’s 7.2%, then someone posted this link: > **[Bernie Sanders: ‘Real unemployment’ rate under Obama is 10.5 percent](https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jul/7/bernie-sanders-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-/)** > > Sen. Bernie Sanders said Monday that the Obama administration is not being forthright with the American people about the real unemployment rate. Where Bernie Sanders says it’s 10.5% Any links with accurate information would be helpful. ---
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2015, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-10-5-or-5-1-or-other/732247/2 "2015-09-23T00:05:54Z")
What does REAL unemployment rate mean? There are different measures of unemployment. Make sure you use the same measure when you’re making comparisons. ---
**Author:** ![MyFootsZZZ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/myfootszzz/32/12580_2.png) [@MyFootsZZZ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MyFootsZZZ)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2015, 12:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-10-5-or-5-1-or-other/732247/3 "2015-09-23T00:07:42Z")
Thanks Snarky. I’m sorry I posted this in the wrong forum. I guess I want whatever number they are using to compare to GWB’s. ---
**Author:** ![Mahaloth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mahaloth/32/1079_2.png) [@Mahaloth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mahaloth)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2015, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-10-5-or-5-1-or-other/732247/4 "2015-09-23T00:13:43Z")
I don’t know, but it was a great show. ---
**Author:** ![MyFootsZZZ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/myfootszzz/32/12580_2.png) [@MyFootsZZZ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MyFootsZZZ)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2015, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-10-5-or-5-1-or-other/732247/5 "2015-09-23T00:17:06Z")
> [@Mahaloth](#): > > I don’t know, but it was a great show. With a twist at the end. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2015, 1:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-10-5-or-5-1-or-other/732247/6 "2015-09-23T01:06:57Z")
Basically, there are, and traditionally have been, six different ways to measure unemployment, which we call U1 through U6. U1 is the percentage of people unemployed for 15 weeks or over. U2 is the percentage of people who lost their jobs or finished temporary work. U3 is what’s usually used when you hear “the unemployment rate is x”. It’s the percentage of people who aren’t working and who have looked for work in the past 4 weeks. U4 is U3 plus “discouraged workers”; people who have stopped looking for work because they think the economy is such so that they can’t find a job. U5 is U4 plus “marginally attached workers”; people who have looked for work in the past 12 months and are not currently looking for work, but say they want a job. U6 is U5 plus people who want full time work but are working part time because they can’t find a full time job. 5.1 is the official unemployment rate; U3. 10.3 is the U6 unemployment rate. Here’s the BLS chart listing the various rates: > **[Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization - 2023 M04 Results](https://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t15.htm)** ---
**Author:** ![MyFootsZZZ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/myfootszzz/32/12580_2.png) [@MyFootsZZZ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MyFootsZZZ)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2015, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-10-5-or-5-1-or-other/732247/7 "2015-09-23T01:17:56Z")
Thank you **Captain Amazing**. So is unemployment up or down from the Bush Jr’s 7.2%? Basically, of the U1-6, what’s Bush Jr’s 7.2%? ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2015, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-10-5-or-5-1-or-other/732247/8 "2015-09-23T01:40:31Z")
You can retrieve data here: [http://www.bls.gov/cps/#data](http://www.bls.gov/cps/#data) But, in answer to your question, the most standardly-quoted unemployment rate as currently 5.1% and that compares to 7.8% in January 2009 when Obama took office. Furthermore, the economy was in freefall when Obama took office, so by April the rate was up to 9.0% and by October it was up to 10.0%. And, realistically, the President doesn’t have a magic wand where he can wave it the day he takes office and the economy magically stops hemorrhaging like 3/4 million jobs per month. Hence, the 7.8% number itself is a low-ball number for what Obama was left with by the previous White House occupant when he took office. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2015, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-10-5-or-5-1-or-other/732247/9 "2015-09-23T01:47:24Z")
That would also be the U3 stat. Here’s the unemployment rate (U3), from January 2005 to August 2015: [http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000](http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000) Unemployment was lowest in the end of 2005/beginning of 2006, where it hovered around 4.4 or 4.5%. It was highest in October 2010, where it got up to 10%. Here’s the U6 unemployment rate (seasonally adjusted) for the past ten years: [http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet](http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet) I don’t know that that chart is going to actually show. But basically, the highest U6 unemployment got was 17.1% and it stayed at about that from October, 2009 to April, 2010. ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2015, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-10-5-or-5-1-or-other/732247/10 "2015-09-23T01:48:37Z")
If you want to look at the U6 unemployment rate, which you can at this BLS site: [http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpsatab15.htm](http://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cpsatab15.htm) , it is currently at 10.3% (Bernie Sanders’s number being a couple month out of date). It was 14.2% when Obama took office in January 2009 and was up to 16.5% by that May, finally peaking at 17.1% in late 2009 and early 2010. ---
**Author:** ![Flyer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/flyer/32/7298_2.png) [@Flyer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Flyer)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2015, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-10-5-or-5-1-or-other/732247/11 "2015-09-23T21:07:17Z")
It’s fairly common for people who have an ax to grind to use the current U6, so that they can claim the economy is in a horrible state. They conveniently ignore times when U6 would have been vastly higher. ---
**Author:** ![Fuzzy\_wuzzy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/a8b319/32.png) [@Fuzzy\_wuzzy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fuzzy_wuzzy)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2015, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-10-5-or-5-1-or-other/732247/12 "2015-09-23T23:32:02Z")
> [@Flyer](#): > > It’s fairly common for people who have an ax to grind to use the current U6, so that they can claim the economy is in a horrible state. > > They conveniently ignore times when U6 would have been vastly higher. Using the current U6 figure is no less ax grinding than those who give Bush an unemployment figure of 7.8%. versus Obama’s 5.1%. The 7.8%(and Obama’s 5.1) is simply a snaphsot at a certain period in time, though admittedly the rate was headed upwards as Bush left office. We can all interpret these figures differently. As of now the headline unemployment figures for Obama look very good. However, I can just as easily point out that the \*employment \*rate is not great, and that at the height of an economic boom the U6 figure should perhaps be lower than it is. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2015, 12:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-10-5-or-5-1-or-other/732247/13 "2015-09-24T00:19:08Z")
> [@Fuzzy\_wuzzy](#): > > We can all interpret these figures differently. As of now the headline unemployment figures for Obama look very good. However, I can just as easily point out that the \*employment \*rate is not great, and that at the height of an economic boom the U6 figure should perhaps be lower than it is. The US is at the height of an economic boom? ---
**Author:** ![Stringbean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Stringbean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stringbean)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2015, 12:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-10-5-or-5-1-or-other/732247/14 "2015-09-24T00:48:02Z")
Bernie Sanders showcasing economic ignorance and pandering? I’m SHOCKED!!! ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2015, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-10-5-or-5-1-or-other/732247/15 "2015-09-24T01:29:25Z")
Wrong forum. Also, incorrect; there’s no “showcasing [of] economic ignorance.” ---
**Author:** ![Flyer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/flyer/32/7298_2.png) [@Flyer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Flyer)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2015, 5:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-10-5-or-5-1-or-other/732247/16 "2015-09-24T05:41:51Z")
> [@Fuzzy\_wuzzy](#): > > Using the current U6 figure is no less ax grinding than those who give Bush an unemployment figure of 7.8%. versus Obama’s 5.1%. The 7.8%(and Obama’s 5.1) is simply a snaphsot at a certain period in time, though admittedly the rate was headed upwards as Bush left office. > > We can all interpret these figures differently. As of now the headline unemployment figures for Obama look very good. However, I can just as easily point out that the \*employment \*rate is not great, and that at the height of an economic boom the U6 figure should perhaps be lower than it is. So do you think that this writer is unbiased? > [@](#): > > When will this country stop publicizing this meaningless unemployment statistic and begin telling the real story concerning our job situation? A real unemployment rate would include so-called discouraged workers, who have given up looking for a job, and part-time workers who would prefer full-time employment. That statistic is about double the highly publicized unemployment rate. > > I guess telling everyone the truth would be too painful, so the government continues to fill us with the false hope that things are getting better. In actuality, they are worsening every day. [http://www.newsday.com/opinion/letters/letter-jobless-numbers-are-misleading-1.10878362](http://www.newsday.com/opinion/letters/letter-jobless-numbers-are-misleading-1.10878362) Or what about this guy? > [@](#): > > The most recent recession began in December 2007. In January 2008, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) listed Ohio’s unemployment rate at a low 5.7 percent.[1] BLS reported Ohio’s unemployment rate in August 2012 at 7.2 percent. This figure is 3.4 points less than the high reached in July 2009 when Ohio’s unemployment rate stood at 10.6 percent. This turnaround is quite impressive. > > But, is this revival story entirely true? Though the state has seen marked improvement, the current unemployment rate overstates the recovery in Ohio because it fails to account for everyone who has been in the employment system in Ohio. > **[Ohio’s Real Unemployment Rate Is 9.3 Percent – Opportunity Ohio](https://www.opportunityohio.org/ohios-real-unemployment-rate-is-9-3-percent/)** Or what about this? > [@](#): > > Anyway, I have had, as you know if you listen regularly, I’ve had a lot of doubt about the accuracy of an unemployment rate of 5.5% when, at the same time, we have 92, 93 million Americans not in the workforce. It just hasn’t made sense to me. Now, as you know, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the government releases the unemployment numbers every month, and there are different categories, and the U, letter U-3 is what gets reported. That’s the 5.5% now, whatever it is, that’s the U-3 number. The U-3 number – and, by the way, it’s increasingly obvious that all of this is bogus and meaningless now as well. > **[David Stockman Shock Blog: The Real Unemployment Rate Is 42.9%](https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/06/30/david_stockman_shock_blog_the_real_unemployment_rate_is_42_9/)** > > RUSH: Ladies and gentlemen, the unemployment rate, what is the latest reported unemployment, 5.5%, is that what it is, 5.3, 5.6? It’s in that neighborhood, right? I don’t know what the exact number is. Not that this matters to anything anymore. I... Just about any time that somebody _who is not an actual economist_ talks about the “real unemployment rate,” you can pretty much bet that they have an ax to grind. If you pay attention to the quoted examples, you can see why. But just in case you don’t see it, I’ll point it out. They **NEVER** compare the current U6 to a previous U6. Instead, they compare the current U6 to a previous U3! ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2015, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-10-5-or-5-1-or-other/732247/17 "2015-09-24T13:31:02Z")
> [@Stringbean](#): > > Bernie Sanders showcasing economic ignorance and pandering? > > I’m SHOCKED!!! So, in other words, you have let your own biases come up with the conclusion that you like and your not surprised about that. Well, I am not either. The fact is that the ones who are showcasing their ignorance or lying are the ones who compare the U6 unemployment rate now to the U3 unemployment rate in the past. I don’t see any evidence that Bernie Sanders is doing that. The only people I hear doing that is conservative apologists quoting Bernie Sanders. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2015, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-10-5-or-5-1-or-other/732247/18 "2015-09-24T14:55:21Z")
> [@jshore](#): > > The fact is that the ones who are showcasing their ignorance or lying are the ones who compare the U6 unemployment rate now to the U3 unemployment rate in the past. I don’t see any evidence that Bernie Sanders is doing that. The only people I hear doing that is conservative apologists quoting Bernie Sanders. I think what Sanders is doing is to say that (AFAICT) the U6 unemployment rate is the “real” rate - > [@Bernie Sanders](#): > > There is another set of government statistics, and that real unemployment if you include those people who have given up looking for work and the millions of others who are working part-time 20, 25 hours a week when they want to work full-time, when you put all of that together, real unemployment is 10.5 percent. [Cite](http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jul/7/bernie-sanders-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-/). It appears that Sanders does not believe that the “most standardly quoted unemployment rate” is not a valid measurement, and was not valid in the past either. Whether that in itself makes him ignorant or lying I couldn’t say. I suspect now that he is running for President his point is that capitalism is bad, and the U6 figure proves it. He would have said the same under Bush, for much the same reasons. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/do_not_taunt/32/2968_2.png) [@Do\_Not\_Taunt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Do_Not_Taunt)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2015, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-10-5-or-5-1-or-other/732247/19 "2015-09-24T15:06:05Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > [Cite](http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jul/7/bernie-sanders-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-/). It appears that Sanders does not believe that the “most standardly quoted unemployment rate” is not a valid measurement, and was not valid in the past either. Whether that in itself makes him ignorant or lying I couldn’t say. I suspect now that he is running for President his point is that capitalism is bad, and the U6 figure proves it. IMHO, U6 is the better number to use. It would be better if the media had started using it thirty years ago as “The Unemployment Rate.” But that ship has sailed, and pretty much any attempt to use the U6 number as the real unemployment rate by a politician without setting the historical context is basically intending to mislead. Only a very small subset of wonks is going to have any idea if a 10.5% U6 is good, bad, or middling by historical standards. Everyone else is going to compare it to the 4-5.5% good, 5.5-7% middling, 7%+ bad standard that they’ve internalized from hearing decades of unemployment reports. It’d be like me saying, “hey, it’s a brisk day; it’s 50 degrees out” and you respond “the real temperature is 10 degrees.” It’s not a false statement, but it’s going to sound a hell of a lot colder to those of calibrated on a different scale. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2015, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-10-5-or-5-1-or-other/732247/20 "2015-09-24T15:19:49Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > He would have said the same under Bush And pretty much did. But…look, I know you disagree with the man on many issues. But surely there are possible explanations beyond “lying, ignorant, or anti-capitalist.” [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-real-unemployment-rate-under-obama-10-5-or-5-1-or-other/732247.md?page=2)