“ just think it strange that a person so adamantly disbelieving of government stats ”

I find it strange someone confuses misleading with disbelieving.

“The easiest way to see whether or not the U3 and U6 models are effective, is to see if businesses use those in their models industry wide, and the same types of polls for specific markets.”

Because businesses can understand how the numbers are misleading and adjust according to still make them useful doesn’t make the stars 100% accurate.

The liberal mind at work......

Four people same the exact same thing.

Two people are heroes and are the hope for the future.

Two people are scum and destroying the planet.

As you can see the final verdict is not about what is said, it is based on perceived political beliefs.

Key word being perceived. Not verified.

If businesses feel they can use them, they’re accurate.

If they weren’t accurate they’d be ignored. Everyone who needs to read them knows what they’re looking at. You moved the goalposts from “they’re totally inaccurate” to “they can be misleading.”

@kansas you didn’t answer my question. Was the question proposed biased ??

"If they weren’t accurate they’d be ignored. Everyone who needs to read them knows what they’re looking at"

If they were accurate, they wouldn't have to be adjusted according to "you know what you are looking at"

"If businesses feel they can use them, they’re accurate."

Yes, if the businesses didn't have to make known adjustments for what data is left out of the number.

But now you are splitting hairs over inaccurate and misleading.

If something is misleading, that means it is inaccurate as to what it is defining.

"@kansas you didn’t answer my question. Was the question proposed biased ?? "

I guess you will have to ask it again. It must have been too stupid to register to me. Sorry.

Businesses DONT make known adjustments... you have provided NO evidence of that

“But now you are splitting hairs over inaccurate and misleading.”

No, that’s you shifting the goalposts in response to us pointing out that you’re wrong.

"
No, that’s you shifting the goalposts in response to us pointing out that you’re wrong. "

Nope.

That is you splitting hairs cause what I have shown is accurate

"Businesses DONT make known adjustments... you have provided NO evidence of that "

LOL!!!!

Ok chief.

You’ve shown literally nothing. You’ve posted conjecture, and we’ve responded with fact. You respond to fact with shifting goalposts to try and make your argument easier to prove, but you’re objectively wrong. The BLS doesn’t pretend their data represents something it doesn’t. They say what it represents outright, in the title, and in their definitions. The pure data isn’t misleading. And it’s not inaccurate.

“The govt provided unemployment statistic is one of the least accurate statistics you can find.“

This was, verbatim, your initial argument. You are no longer putting that argument forward. Ergo, shifting goalposts.

"You’ve shown literally nothing."

Wrong.

I've posting exactly where the unemployment rates are missing.

You ignore that and claim it is conjecture.

Using incredible similar words like inaccurate and misleading are not moving the goalposts no matter how much you cry about it.

"The pure data isn’t misleading. And it’s not inaccurate. "

Please show me the formula the unemployment rates use to show the total number of citizens 18 plus that are without jobs.

Because you translate the phrase unemployment rate to unemployment rate of those actively looking for work in the last month,.

If the unemployment rate was called that it would be accurate.

But guess what, that is not the term the government uses.

It is the phrase people translate it to.

"This was, verbatim, your initial argument. You are no longer putting that argument forward. Ergo, shifting goalposts."

Wrong.

Because you are dumb enough to confuse inaccurate and misleading as two separate things does not make it moving goalposts no matter how desperately you whine and cry.

They are seaparate things, but the BLS data is neither, so you’re wrong either way.

It’s 16+, and it’s what you get taking the employment-population ratio and reverse it

https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000

Also collected by BLS. But it’s not a sign of economic health.

"They are seaparate things, but the BLS data is neither, so you’re wrong either way. "

Nope.

Please show me the formula the unemployment rates use to show the total number of citizens 18 plus that are without jobs.

I see you are moving the goalposts by refusing to answer the question.

It’s just under 40%, but no one uses it because it includes retirees, school kids, and stay at home parents, none of whom really matter when it comes to looking at employment.

"It’s 16+, and it’s what you get taking the employment-population ratio and reverse it

https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS12300000

Also collected by BLS. But it’s not a sign of economic health. "

But that is not what is used as the unemployment rate.

"It’s just under 40%, but no one uses it because it includes retirees, school kids, and stay at home parents, none of whom really matter when it comes to looking at employment"

But it IS the ACCURATE unemployment rate no matter if no one looks at it or not.

Ha, says I refuse to answer the question in an xpost where I provide the data.

“But it IS the ACCURATE unemployment rate”

NO IT IS NOT

"Ha, says I refuse to answer the question in an xpost where I provide the data. "

Ha, says the one lacking the ability to understand people might be typing at the same time.

The unemployment rate is specifically and was formulated around people who work or want to work, so the rest of the data is excess and does literally nothing. It’s cultural, not economic.

"“But it IS the ACCURATE unemployment rate”

NO IT IS NOT "

Yes it is.

It is not accurate in terms of people unemployed who have looked for a job in the past four weeks if they answered the survey honestly.

"The unemployment rate is specifically and was formulated around people who work or want to work, so the rest of the data is excess and does literally nothing. It’s cultural, not economic. "

No.

It doesn't include those who want to work but may not have tried in the last four weeks.

“Ha, says the one lacking the ability to understand people might be typing at the same time.”

That’s what an xpost is.