Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

DonViejo

(60,536 posts)
Mon Mar 13, 2017, 02:40 PM Mar 2017

Spicer: We Still Think Unemployment Percentage Can Be 'Manipulated'

Source: Talking Points Memo



By MATT SHUHAM Published MARCH 13, 2017, 2:13 PM EDT

Sean Spicer said the President continues to believe that the unemployment percentage was “manipulated” because, the White House spokesman said, surveys to determine the unemployment rate discarded those who were looking for work after a certain length of time.

Spicer was originally asked about the director of the Office of Management and Budget, who said Sunday that “the Obama administration was manipulating the numbers in terms of the number of people in the workforce to make the unemployment rate, that percentage rate, look smaller than it actually was.”

Spicer dodged that question, but said that the President believed that the unemployment percentage was “manipulated” because of how the government counts those who have been jobless for an extended period of time.

“To look at a number and say we have 4.7 or 4.8 or 5.9 percent unemployment is not necessarily an accurate reflection of how many people are actually working, seeking work or want to work. And if you know how they conduct those surveys, there’s a lot of times where people, whether they’re older or younger, or because of how long they’ve been searching for work, are not considered statistically viable anymore, and they’re quashed away,” Spicer said. “How you look at the percentage of people working can sometimes be a a manipulated number. The number of people that are added to the rolls every month is a much more accurate understanding of what's happening in the economy.”

Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/spicer-employment-percentage-manipulated






Spicer: 'Of Course' You Can Trust Whatever Trump Says 'If He's Not Joking'

By ESME CRIBB Published MARCH 13, 2017, 2:22 PM EDT

White House press secretary Sean Spicer said Monday that "of course" President Donald Trump's comments should be taken as fact "if he's not joking."

"The question in simple terms is, when he says something, can we trust that it's real or should we assume that it's phony?" NBC News' Peter Alexander asked Spicer during his daily briefing, referring to the Congressional Budget Office's reports on Obamacare and its expected analysis of House Republicans' new repeal bill.

"Yes!" Spicer interjected. "It's real. Absolutely."

Members of Trump's administration joined congressional Republicans over the weekend in preemptively knocking down the non-partisan CBO's analysis of the repeal bill's costs and how many people would lose coverage if it passes.

more
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/sean-spicer-of-course-you-can-trust-trump-when-hes-not-joking
10 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

procon

(15,805 posts)
2. Trump cherry picks favorable numbers from rightwing think tanks to prop up
Mon Mar 13, 2017, 03:00 PM
Mar 2017

his policies. Trump's use of numbers is fluid and varies from day to day, depending on which Faux News program he is watching. He is paranoid, feckless and impulsive, a lying charlatan, who will say anything on the spur of the moment and then deny that he said it, claim it was a joke or he was misquoted, then send his minions out to translate what he really meant.


The government has one reliable source of factual data that is used throughout the country, and it comes from the CBO without prejudice or deception.

George II

(67,782 posts)
3. Ask Ronald Reagan - he was a master at manipulating unemployment and inflation statistics....
Mon Mar 13, 2017, 03:14 PM
Mar 2017

He reduced the time that people could receive unemployment benefits, which is a governing factor in determining the "unemployment rate" - I think it went from 52 to 26 weeks. Bingo, "unemployment" was cut in half.

He removed interest rates and energy costs from the calculation for inflation, which were the two biggest contributors to inflation back then. Bingo, "inflation" was reduced.

Then he turned to "reducing" income taxes. He reduced the RATES at which income tax was assessed, "reduced taxes". But at the same time he eliminated many normal deductions that had been in effect for years - biggest thing was credit card interest paid and "income averaging". Then he imposed and increased an unbelievable number of "fees", which are not normally considered taxes. He also imposed income tax on unemployment compensation - compensation that was funded by TAXES!

I was unemployed in 1981 when he "reduced" taxes - I paid more that year than the previous year when I was employed.

I think a lot of congressmen saw that as manipulation, and the way those rates were calculated going forward became pretty stable.

progree

(10,909 posts)
8. They don't consider unemployment benefit status at all in determining the unemployment rate.
Mon Mar 13, 2017, 07:44 PM
Mar 2017

# Myth: "those who have exhausted their unemployment insurance benefits are not counted as unemployed. If they were counted, the official unemployment rate would be much higher" (you often hear this claim from the RepubliCONS and JPRers when a Democratic president is in the White House, and vice versa when a RepubliCON is in the White House).

# Fact: The count of the unemployed and the unemployment rate is NOT a count of those receiving unemployment benefits, nor is unemployment benefit receiver status factored at all into any of the official national unemployment rate statistics (U1, U2, U3, U4, U5, U6). Rather, the national unemployment rate is based on a survey of 60,000 households chosen at random. See: http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm (and search the page for the word "insurance&quot .

People in the survey are counted as unemployed (and thus part of the official (U3) unemployment rate) if they are jobless and looked for work some time in the past 4 weeks. They are counted as unemployed in the U4, U5, and U6 statistics if they looked for work some time in the past 12 months. It has nothing at all to do with whether they are collecting unemployment benefits or not, or how long they have been unemployed.


[font color = blue]>>He reduced the time that people could receive unemployment benefits, which is a governing factor in determining the "unemployment rate" - I think it went from 52 to 26 weeks. Bingo, "unemployment" was cut in half. <<[/font]

Absolutely false. Except maybe he cut the standard time to receive unemployment benefits by half. I hadn't heard of that one before, but sounds like something he would do.

progree

(10,909 posts)
10. I don't think they did it that way back then either
Mon Mar 13, 2017, 08:37 PM
Mar 2017

There was a small change in the official unemployment rate methodology in 1994 --

In the old survey, the official rate was called U-5, and in the new one it is called U-3, but they both are almost identical -- principally that the jobless person must have looked for work sometime in the past 4 weeks. Anyway they say they estimate that with the redesigned questionnaire the official unemployment rate was increased by about 0.2 percentage points in the new survey compared to the old. (p. 26 column A of http://www.bls.gov/mlr/1995/10/art3full.pdf )

The above gives a history of the changes going back to 1948.

See also for a synopsis of the above:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141009906#post67

The big changes were in the alternate measures of unemployment (today's U4 - U6).

Beartracks

(12,820 posts)
4. "Jobless rate is EASY to manipulate! But don't worry, it was, uh, the OTHER guy doing it, not us!!"
Mon Mar 13, 2017, 03:25 PM
Mar 2017

Uh-huh.



====================

Beartracks

(12,820 posts)
5. "Trust me when I'm not joking" No Accountability
Mon Mar 13, 2017, 03:27 PM
Mar 2017

Trump or his minions can just claim anything he says was a joke whenever the shit hits the fans.

They really are like middle-schoolers.

================

NastyRiffraff

(12,448 posts)
6. So how do we tell if Dump is joking?
Mon Mar 13, 2017, 03:41 PM
Mar 2017

Especially when he seems to have no sense of humor. Wars have started over a country's leader's "jokes."

progree

(10,909 posts)
7. Bullshit Spicer. It does not matter how long one has been unemployed
Mon Mar 13, 2017, 07:40 PM
Mar 2017

Last edited Mon Mar 13, 2017, 08:53 PM - Edit history (2)

They count every jobless person who has looked for work in the past 4 weeks as officially unemployed (U3 - the headline statistic). No matter how long it has been since they were last employed.

The alternative BLS measures of unemployment (U-4 thru U-6) count everyone that has looked for work in the past 12 months. No matter how long it has been since they last worked.

If you count every jobless person age 16+ who says they want a job, no matter how long it has been since they looked for work or had a job, the figure was 11.6% in January (that figure includes part-timers who say they want full-time work). Sucks but it's a lot less than the 23% or 40% that the Trumpistas and the JPRs (here and elsewhere) tout by citing a figure that counts happily retired centenarians as "unemployed".

See: http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm (and search the page for the word "insurance&quot


Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Spicer: We Still Think Un...