Unemployment in the UK is Now So Low It's in Danger of Exposing the Lie Used To Create Numbers

As Zippy explains, the odds of being surveyed are extremely low: 60,000 surveys / 125 million households = 0.048% chance per month.

I've never been surveyed and don't know anyone who has, but that's not surprising.

You'd have to know and ask over 1000 people for there to be a 50% chance that one of them was surveyed in a given month.

I'm pretty sure "in a given month" was not the question DamianTV asked. It was probably "ever". If you assume that the average person you ask has worked 20 years that would be 240 months X .048% = 11.52% per person. So if you ask 1000 if they've ever been surveyed that answer should be around 110 people (if my math is accurate).
 
I'm pretty sure "in a given month" was not the question DamianTV asked. It was probably "ever". If you assume that the average person you ask has worked 20 years that would be 240 months X .048% = 11.52% per person.

That's correct. So if you ask 9 households (it goes by household, not person) or so, the odds are very good that you'd have found 1 that at some point had a member that did a survey. I personally have never done a survey, or ever asked anyone else if they did. You'll have to ask Damian how many he's asked. Note also that there's some overlap in the families surveyed each month (they track them over several months), so the real probability is less than 0.048%/household/month.

Anyway, what's the thesis here? They don't really do surveys at all and just make it all up from whole cloth?
 
Last edited:
I probably only asked about a hundred or so people when I was out of work for as long as I was.

What I see here is a ton of rationalizations doing nothing but trying to make stuff up to validate the govts claim that unemployment is as low as they claim. Govt has lied to everyone about just about everything else in order to support their own agenda. Do you guys who believe the claim really think govt would not have any problems lying about the Unemployment Rate also?
 
What I see here is a ton of rationalizations doing nothing but trying to make stuff up to validate the govts claim that unemployment is as low as they claim.

What you're seeing is people correcting your misunderstanding of how the BLS purports to collect its data, to which your response is accusation. If you want to assume that the BLS simply fabricates all its data, and then assume that the unemployment rate is X, where X is whatever you believe to be based on anecdotes, by all means. I give exactly zero shits what you think the unemployment rate is. I for one do believe that the BLS does the surveys which it claims to do, because it would be far too easy to be caught not doing them. I also know that they manipulate the analysis of that raw data, as by disregarding the fact that many "discouraged workers" are only discouraged because they're on welfare (as I explained in an earlier post).
 
What you're seeing is people correcting your misunderstanding of how the BLS purports to collect its data, to which your response is accusation. If you want to assume that the BLS simply fabricates all its data, and then assume that the unemployment rate is X, where X is whatever you believe to be based on anecdotes, by all means. I give exactly zero shits what you think the unemployment rate is. I for one do believe that the BLS does the surveys which it claims to do, because it would be far too easy to be caught not doing them. I also know that they manipulate the analysis of that raw data, as by disregarding the fact that many "discouraged workers" are only discouraged because they're on welfare (as I explained in an earlier post).

I have no misunderstandings of either lies perpetuated by govt, nor the actual unemployment statistics. And since it sounds like you think I am dreaming, lets also consider that under Obama, the legal definition of "Long Term Unemployed" was reduced from two years to one year in order to further manipulate those statistics.

Smoke and mirrors with numbers. Just like our money system. Just like WMDs. Just like 911, Pearl Harbor, the sinking of the Lusatania, Gulf of Tonkin, Alchohol Prohibition, Greenbacks, nah, govt has NEVER EVER lied to us, we are just too dumb to understand any of it.

As humans, it is possible for anyone to be duped and lied to. We are fallible. We make mistakes. The only mistake that I see is NOT that people do not understand either the employment statistical manipulations or even how money works, it IS that people hear what they want to hear because it validates their view of the world. If you really take a look around, not just at me, but the whole damn world, we are in very very deep shit, the boat sank, and we never even had a paddle. That is a reality that is so terrifying to grasp that people, my own family members included, do NOT want to see so they just go with any lies they are told. Reality is terrifying and is what will bite you in the ass if youre not prepared. R3v, I dont think you will personally benefit when the economy goes sideways and makes 2008 look like a walk in the park like I think Zippy will prosper from the suffering of others.

Other points I do agree with, such as welfare / "discouraged workers". That makes sense, to a certain extent, and that is also quite scary. If the 102.6 million working age adults that are not included in the Workforce are mainly there because they've responded to the incentive to just go on welfare (reasonable exceptions from that 102.6 million like students or stay at home moms, etc) that is a terrifying prospect, and a perfect example of why both Socialism and Fiat Currencies always fail. It would be the embodiment of the Cloward Piven Strategy. At 102.6 million, thats roughly a 30% unemployment rate, which I also think sounds way way way too high. I'd estimate 15% to 18%, even right now. Even the difference between the U3 and U6 still shows a very large disagreement with their official and now just phoney sounding numbers. Things do appear to be better than they were. I see "Now Hiring" signs in many minimum wage jobs. So some progress has been made. Im just saying we have not really recovered from 2008 by a very wide margin.

(Cloward Piven Strategy - Overload a nations social support structures to the point the system collapses from the burden on finances and resources)
 
That's correct. So if you ask 9 households (it goes by household, not person) or so, the odds are very good that you'd have found 1 that at some point had a member that did a survey. I personally have never done a survey, or ever asked anyone else if they did. You'll have to ask Damian how many he's asked. Note also that there's some overlap in the families surveyed each month (they track them over several months), so the real probability is less than 0.048%/household/month.

Anyway, what's the thesis here? They don't really do surveys at all and just make it all up from whole cloth?

No, I think they do them, I'm just bored. :)
 
I probably only asked about a hundred or so people when I was out of work for as long as I was.

What I see here is a ton of rationalizations doing nothing but trying to make stuff up to validate the govts claim that unemployment is as low as they claim. Govt has lied to everyone about just about everything else in order to support their own agenda. Do you guys who believe the claim really think govt would not have any problems lying about the Unemployment Rate also?

Odds of being picked are actually one in 16,000.
 
I have no misunderstandings of either lies perpetuated by govt, nor the actual unemployment statistics. And since it sounds like you think I am dreaming, lets also consider that under Obama, the legal definition of "Long Term Unemployed" was reduced from two years to one year in order to further manipulate those statistics.

To be considered "long term unemployed" you need to be out of work at least six months. What was extended was how many years you can be unemployed and still be counted. That was raised from two years to five years in 2010. http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-12-28-1Ajobless28_ST_N.htm

So many Americans have been jobless for so long that the government is changing how it records long-term unemployment.
Citing what it calls "an unprecedented rise" in long-term unemployment, the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), beginning Saturday, will raise from two years to five years the upper limit on how long someone can be listed as having been jobless.

The move could help economists better measure the severity of the nation's prolonged economic downturn.

The change is a sign that bureau officials "are afraid that a cap of two years may be 'understating the true average duration' — but they won't know by how much until they raise the upper limit," says Linda Barrington, an economist who directs the Institute for Compensation Studies at Cornell University's School of Industrial and Labor Relations.

Extending the time period will increase the number of people counted as long term unemployed.

The number of long term unemployed people peaked at 6.8 million that year. It is currently down to 1.66 million. https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS13008636
 
To be considered "long term unemployed" you need to be out of work at least six months. What was extended was how many years you can be unemployed and still be counted. That was raised from two years to five years in 2010. http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2010-12-28-1Ajobless28_ST_N.htm



Extending the time period will increase the number of people counted as long term unemployed.

The number of long term unemployed people peaked at 6.8 million that year. It is currently down to 1.66 million. https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS13008636

Wow. Even more validation for "Govt is always right", and "I should only listen to Govt" even tho that is EXACTLY what I have been calling bullshit on for years. Get your damn finger away from the LIE Dept.
 
Some BLS numbers (in thousands)...

Using BLS BS to defend BLS BS? I am disappointed. I know it usually takes new Zippies a little while to get up to speed, and quality suffers a bit during the transition. But this really takes the cake.

Well? The Zippy Account's whole schtick is to bombard us poor, unbrainwa--er, I mean uneducated slobs with the facts, figures, and most of all, charts cooked up for our benefit. The Zippy Account prides itself on its ability to do research, like a good little personal assistant intern. So, in deference to the fact that we've suffered through a few 'free elections' and know a thing or two about pollster methodology, why not help us out with some BLS pollster methodology? After all, private pollsters publish that stuff. The BLS not so much, but surely with the position you hold you have connections!

So, please, ferret that out for us. Do they ever phone homeless shelters? Do they send agents under bridges? Do they ever dial Obamaphones? Or do they confine themselves to discovering the 'truth' about unemployment by dialing only landlines...?

Maybe the OP should add a poll to this thread so we can take bets. Zippy will...
1. ...find that methodology out right away and post it here.
2. ...ignore this post, just the way he's ignoring afwjam's excellent point that Fed policy has brought us to where professions which used to support families of four no longer pay enough to feed, house and clothe the worker him/herself.
3. ...run away from this thread and never bump it again.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top