You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer
supported by the Administrators.
Visit
The New DU.
Reply #15: Thanks for the link.
[View All]
rkc3
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Tue Jun-15-04 12:33 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
|
You've got to scroll to near the middle of the report to get to the U-# reportings. Tables A-7 and A-8 are likely targets.
It looks like the differences between U-5 and U-6 ranged from around 35% to 50% for parts of Clinton's presidency. It would be a stretch to say Bush's numbers are much worse than recent history.
The U-6 numbers list those who are marginally employed for economic reasons - for instance, my wife has to work because my employment can't support both of us. If we saw those numbers well outside historical norms over the past 2-3 years, the economy would be in a sad state.
What would be more difficult to assess is the methodology or the algorithms used to derive unemployment. Let's hope the parameters haven't changed since Bush came to office.
|
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.