Re:Universal Basic Income and the New Corporatist Democrats
by toomuchtodo on Thursday August 11, 2016 @01:04PM
(#12269910)
> It's a way better number than unemployment rate, but it's misleading to cite it as though it's the same number politicians reference.
Respectively disagree! U-6 is the perfect indicator of why we're having a terrible recovery.
Re:Universal Basic Income and the New Corporatist Democrats
by Bartweiss on Thursday August 11, 2016 @01:37PM
(#12270195)
I don't think we actually disagree?
I meant "better number" as in "far more representative than the jobless-and-looking rate". I objected to calling it the "unemployment rate" without caveat, because that term usually refers to jobless-and-looking and therefore threatens to cause confusion.
Re:Universal Basic Income and the New Corporatist Democrats
by toomuchtodo on Saturday August 13, 2016 @06:37PM
(#12283409)
HN was throttling me, preventing from me responding, but I believe you're correct and we're not disagreeing. Apologies for that!
Re:Universal Basic Income and the New Corporatist Democrats
by evanpw on Thursday August 11, 2016 @01:10PM
(#12269965)
It seems to be mostly back to normal: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/U6RATE
Re:Universal Basic Income and the New Corporatist Democrats
by Bartweiss on Thursday August 11, 2016 @01:38PM
(#12270201)
Interesting - I wonder why that's basically recovered, but labor force participation is still at a 30 year low?
Re:Universal Basic Income and the New Corporatist Democrats
by toomuchtodo on Thursday August 11, 2016 @01:52PM
(#12270315)
The 9% figure is all-source underemployment, though. It's a way better number than unemployment rate, but it's misleading to cite it as though it's the same number politicians reference.