Out of work vs unemployed...

[mothhawk]

My BIL in the US just emailed me this. Another weasel idea to massage figures.


COSTELLO: I want to talk about the unemployment rate in America.

ABBOTT: Good Subject. Terrible Times. It’s 5.6%.

COSTELLO: That many people are out of work?

ABBOTT: No, that’s 23%.

COSTELLO: You just said 5.6%.

ABBOTT: 5.6% Unemployed.

COSTELLO: Right 5.6% out of work.

ABBOTT: No, that’s 23%.

COSTELLO: Okay, so it’s 23% unemployed.

ABBOTT: No, that’s 5.6%.

COSTELLO: WAIT A MINUTE. Is it 5.6% or 23%?

ABBOTT: 5.6% are unemployed. 23% are out of work.

COSTELLO: If you’re out of work you’re unemployed.

ABBOTT: No, Obama said you can’t count the “Out of Work” as the unemployed. You have to look for work to be unemployed.

COSTELLO: BUT THEY’RE OUT OF WORK!

ABBOTT: No, you miss his point.

COSTELLO: What point?

ABBOTT: Someone who doesn’t look for work can’t be counted with those who look for work. It wouldn’t be fair.

COSTELLO: To whom?

ABBOTT: The unemployed.

COSTELLO: But ALL of them are out of work!

ABBOTT: No, the unemployed are actively looking for work. Those who are out of work gave up looking and if you give up, you are no longer in the ranks of the unemployed.

COSTELLO: So if you’re off the unemployment roles that would count as less unemployment?

ABBOTT: Unemployment would go down. Absolutely!

COSTELLO: The unemployment just goes down because you don’t look for work?

ABBOTT: Absolutely it goes down. That’s how it gets to 5.6%. Otherwise it would be 23%.

COSTELLO: Wait, I got a question for you. That means there are two ways to bring down the unemployment number?

ABBOTT: Two ways. That’s correct.

COSTELLO: Unemployment can go down if someone gets a job?

ABBOTT: Correct.

COSTELLO: And unemployment can also go down if you stop looking for a job?

ABBOTT: Bingo.

COSTELLO: So there are two ways to bring unemployment down, and the easier of the two is to have people stop looking for work.

ABBOTT: Now you’re thinking like a Democrat.

COSTELLO: I don’t even know what the hell I just said!

ABBOTT: Now you’re thinking like Hilary.

[Lumpy]

With a huge hint of British politicians me thinks.

[Alison]

To be fair, there is some logic. Not everybody who isn't employed is looking for work and therefore shouldn't be listed in unemployment figures. The gap between the two does seem high but would include my friend who has actively chosen with her husband to give up work for a few years to look after the home and their son. She shouldn't be listed as unemployed and isn't claiming any benefits on that basis. She is however technically out of work in that she doesn't have a paid job although is obviously working very hard.

[Bigmallly]

I also think it's logical. Anyone not claiming benefits should not be included in the unemployment figures. I for example have taken early retirement & am living off my works pension, I do not claim any benefits & am not actively seeking employment so I would not be expected to be included in the unemployment figures.

[bearded bloke]

Similarly we decided I should stay home & "improve our investment" after being made redundant at a 'senior age', having never claimed a penny I'm also 'out of work' rather than unemployed, as far as finacial gain is concerned, however my time is fully employed

[veggiechicken]

Similarly, I took early retirement and had no intention of looking for work afterwards. I took myself out of the work force. I'm voluntarily "out of work" and all the happier for doing so.

As I understand it in the UK - you have to be actively seeking work in the last 4 weeks and be able to start work within 2 weeks, or be waiting to start a job they have been offered to be "unemployed".
Otherwise, you're out of the labour force.

I really don't see the problem with MH's post - or is it too early in the morning?

[Sarico]

Being only 28 yrs old is too early to be out of work. But that make sense. There is also a third category of people claim unemployment but not having intention to actually get a job. So real unemployment is lower then you think.

[Alison]

I really don't see the problem with MH's post - or is it too early in the morning?

I thought there was an inference that it was government fudging of the figures by claiming the two things meant something different. There MAY be some of that but we've already given very valid reasons why they are different things.

[Nannysally99]

Ditto for me. I am out of work - through choice when I was 52.
My hubby has been looking after us financially since then.
It's a much nicer life than the rat race I was in
Call me whichever one you like - I'm happy

[veggiechicken]

I thought there was an inference that it was government fudging of the figures by claiming the two things meant something different. There MAY be some of that but we've already given very valid reasons why they are different things.

My mistake for not being clearer The "conversation" implies that the figures are being manipulated to suit politicians, whereas, to me, its misunderstanding about the meaning of the words. That's why I didn't see the problem with it.

Bet that's even more confusing now than when I started

[bearded bloke]

^^^ yep

[bearded bloke]

I found it a light hearted & well thought out way to show how statistic can be used to make two different answers to the same question

My favourite was the for/against crash helmets data gathered in Amerrycar : statistics proved that ...

Lives are saved because of the reduction in fracured skulls when a crash hemet is worn
Lives are lost because of necks being broken when a crash helmet is worn


While I have no desire to test either theory I do find that wearing a crash helmet is 100% guarenteed to keep my ears warm

[cptncrackoff]

I heard something similar to this for us a while ago, something about the figures getting twisted between different brackets, unemployed, claiming benefits, NEETs, long term sick.. I can't remember.

All I know is know is I started work two months after leaving school and haven't stopped since, I'm now 32 and can see no other situation other than never retiring and working til I drop!

Happy Sunday peeps!

[Guest]

I am a stay at home Mum out of choice and supported by hubby and savings. I really dislike form filling where the choice is part-time employed, full-time employed, unemployed.

Mini rant over

[Bigmallly]

I'm now 32 and can see no other situation other than never retiring and working til I drop!

I thought the same when I was 32..............wait till you get to 52 or maybe 62 in your case, your perspective will change.