7 Comments
User's avatar
Robert Rolfe's avatar

corral

Loic's avatar

There should have been a correction with reference to fat finger error. They seemed to have mixed the 2-5-8s around

Guy Lindeman's avatar

You mean someone at the BLS transposed a couple of numbers?

Loic's avatar

It would be an acceptable way to explain how far off they were with their expert predictions. With predictions like this who needs “experts”?!

Roland Friestad's avatar

You state that the real unemployment is 9.6% - But you also state "The real unemployment rate is9.6%. Nearly 100 million Americans are out of the workforce" - With a stated population of under 350 million that's 28 percent - Unless my high school math is missing something here, what's going on? - Either a typo or can't we trust your numbers ? -

Thomas M's avatar

What happened to the birth, death rate adjustment ???

Thomas

Roland Friestad's avatar

Sure, if you count children under 12 years old and seniors over about 70 as "out of the workforce" and the inference is that they are there part of "unemployment" you can come up with any level of unemployment desired - The statement I was referring to sounds like either written by a politician or someone who is trying to confuse the issue -