Productivity Slump Threatens Economy’s Long-Term Growth

[pinqy]

again this proves its all a lie to count 20 hours equal to 40 hours.... that is what they are counting proving totally dishonest in pretending they are the same


RAT -TRAPPED !!!

Do you think someone who works 20 hours a week should be classified as unemployed? Yes, or no?

 

[SailaWay]

Do you think someone who works 20 hours a week should be classified as unemployed? Yes, or no?

when 20 hours are classified as the same as 40 hours THEN its a LIE and totally dishonest

they are not the same RAT _TRAPPED

 

[pinqy]

when 20 hours are classified as the same as 40 hours THEN its a LIE and totally dishonest

they are not the same RAT _TRAPPED

Do you think that classifying 20 hours the same as zero is honest? Why do you keep avoiding the question of how 20 hours should be classified? You keep saying they shouldn't be considered the same as 40 hours, but what should they be considered? There are 3 choices: Employed, Unemployed, and Not in the Labor Force.

Please don't bother telling me again 20 is not the same as 40, tell me how 20 hours should be classified.

 

[SailaWay]

Do you think that classifying 20 hours the same as zero is honest? Why do you keep avoiding the question of how 20 hours should be classified? You keep saying they shouldn't be considered the same as 40 hours, but what should they be considered? There are 3 choices: Employed, Unemployed, and Not in the Labor Force.

Please don't bother telling me again 20 is not the same as 40, tell me how 20 hours should be classified.

RAT -TRAPPED....... the problem is they COUNT 40 hours as the same as 20 hours.... and that is a LIE

Rat-TRAPPED

 

[SailaWay]

Do you think that classifying 20 hours the same as zero is honest? Why do you keep avoiding the question of how 20 hours should be classified? You keep saying they shouldn't be considered the same as 40 hours, but what should they be considered? There are 3 choices: Employed, Unemployed, and Not in the Labor Force.

Please don't bother telling me again 20 is not the same as 40, tell me how 20 hours should be classified.

can you READ?

///////////////////
if you are so hopelessly out of work that you’ve stopped looking over the past four weeks — the Department of Labor doesn’t count you as unemployed.
//////////////////

as you see totally dishonest and crooked

 

[SailaWay]

more proof that the unemployment rate is dishonest

////////////
But the government’s statistical sleight-of-hand tricks don’t stop there in this administration’s numbers shell game. Many others are uncounted, too.

“Say you’re an out-of-work engineer or health care worker or construction worker or retail manager: If you perform a minimum of one hour of work a week and are paid at least $20 you’re not officially counted as unemployed in the much reported 5.6 percent. Few Americans know this.”

Another labor survey scandal that doesn’t get much if any attention in the news media: “Those working part time but wanting full-time work,” Mr. Clifton explains. “If you have a degree in chemistry or math and are working 10 hours part time because it is all you can find — in other words, you are severely underemployed — the government doesn’t count you in the 5.6 percent,” he goes on to say.

 

[pinqy]

can you READ?

///////////////////
if you are so hopelessly out of work that you’ve stopped looking over the past four weeks — the Department of Labor doesn’t count you as unemployed.
//////////////////

as you see totally dishonest and crooked

Can you read? I've asked you a question multiple times and you keep refusing to answer. Let's make it even simpler...here is the official definition of Unemployed. You reply with your alternative definition.


Unemployed people


All people who were not employed during the reference week but were available for work (excluding temporary illness) and had made specific efforts to find employment some time during the 4-week period ending with the reference week are classified as unemployed. Individuals who were waiting to be recalled to a job from which they had been laid off need not have been looking for work to be classified as unemployed. People waiting to start a new job must have actively looked for a job within the last 4 weeks in order to be counted as unemployed. Otherwise, they are classified as not in the labor force.

 

[SailaWay]

Can you read? I've asked you a question multiple times and you keep refusing to answer. Let's make it even simpler...here is the official definition of Unemployed. You reply with your alternative definition.


Unemployed people


All people who were not employed during the reference week but were available for work (excluding temporary illness) and had made specific efforts to find employment some time during the 4-week period ending with the reference week are classified as unemployed. Individuals who were waiting to be recalled to a job from which they had been laid off need not have been looking for work to be classified as unemployed. People waiting to start a new job must have actively looked for a job within the last 4 weeks in order to be counted as unemployed. Otherwise, they are classified as not in the labor force.

see can you not read... it says if a person looks for work for 4 weeks and stops looking they are NOT COUNTED as UNEMPLOYED.... BUT THEY ARE UNEMPLOYED !!! see you RAT -TRAP your own self with overlooking

 

[SailaWay]

UNEMPLOYED MEANS UNEMPLOYED.. but they are not counted as unemployed if they quit wasting time looking after 4 weeks

BUT THEY ARE INDEED UNEMPLOYED ............ CHECKMATED !!!

 

[pinqy]

see can you not read... it says if a person looks for work for 4 weeks and stops looking they are NOT COUNTED as UNEMPLOYED.... BUT THEY ARE UNEMPLOYED !!! see you RAT -TRAP your own self with overlooking

Actually, that's not what it says. It says if you looked for work in the last 4 weeks you are unemployed and if you did not, you are not unemployed (you're "Not in the labor force."

When the census collector is talking to the respondent, s/he asks if the person owned a business or farm or worked last week. If the answer is no, the person is asked: "What did you do to find a job in the last 4 weeks?" If the person says "nothing," then s/he is not in the labor force for that month. That's because s/he is not competing for jobs that month. When the person starts looking again, s/he will be classified as employed again.

 

[WCH]

Same here. Anecdotal, but from what I see, more work is being done by fewer people, with less hours.

So, if GDP is not down, it seems counter intuitive to suggest that production is down, unless we suggest fluctuations in pricing is a culprit. Which, I will say, in the grocery business, at least, most things are significantly cheaper this year over last. My company comps over LY is break even or even down some weeks, but tonnage or product sold is WAY up, with payroll remaining relatively unchanged.

Ergo, productivity has increased. At the company I work at, anyway.

Makes me glad that I work for myself...by myself. I would go postal in the first few weeks if I had to put up with corporate bosses and their screwed up business theories.

 

[SailaWay]

Makes me glad that I work for myself...by myself. I would go postal in the first few weeks if I had to put up with corporate bosses and their screwed up business theories.

BOTH productivity and GDP scores are falling more and more

 

[SailaWay]

Actually, that's not what it says. It says if you looked for work in the last 4 weeks you are unemployed and if you did not, you are not unemployed (you're "Not in the labor force."

When the census collector is talking to the respondent, s/he asks if the person owned a business or farm or worked last week. If the answer is no, the person is asked: "What did you do to find a job in the last 4 weeks?" If the person says "nothing," then s/he is not in the labor force for that month. That's because s/he is not competing for jobs that month. When the person starts looking again, s/he will be classified as employed again.

this post rat traps you again

///////////////////////

Actually, that's not what it says. It says if you looked for work in the last 4 weeks you are unemployed and if you did not, you are not unemployed (you're "Not in the labor force."
///////////////

see that croookedness? are you blind? if you looked for work for 4 weeks you are UNEMPLOYED..... but if if you look for only 2 weeks then you are not unemployed....... see that is the LIE... when you are unemployed that means YOU ARE UNEMPLOYED because you do not have a job..... see that is the big lie that gallup and zogby both caught but somehow you don't...... do you need magoo glasses?

 

[pinqy]

this post rat traps you again

///////////////////////

Actually, that's not what it says. It says if you looked for work in the last 4 weeks you are unemployed and if you did not, you are not unemployed (you're "Not in the labor force."
///////////////

see that croookedness? are you blind? if you looked for work for 4 weeks you are UNEMPLOYED..... but if if you look for only 2 weeks then you are not unemployed....... see that is the LIE... when you are unemployed that means YOU ARE UNEMPLOYED because you do not have a job..... see that is the big lie that gallup and zogby both caught but somehow you don't...... do you need magoo glasses?

Ok, you've overplayed your hand. No one is dumb enough to think "in the last 4 weeks" means "for a minimum of four weeks"
I suspected, but now it's clear you're not serious.

 

[SailaWay]

Ok, you've overplayed your hand. No one is dumb enough to think "in the last 4 weeks" means "for a minimum of four weeks"
I suspected, but now it's clear you're not serious.

yes you have proved it ... for sure... saying unemployed is NOT unemployed THAT proves this 100%

saying looking for work for 1 day one week or 4 weeks or one hour does NOT change the FACT which is unemployed

CHECKMATED !!

 

[ajn678]

yes you have proved it ... For sure... Saying unemployed is not unemployed that proves this 100%

saying looking for work for 1 day one week or 4 weeks or one hour does not change the fact which is unemployed

checkmated !!

wow what a rat trap!

 

[pinqy]

yes you have proved it ... for sure... saying unemployed is NOT unemployed THAT proves this 100%

saying looking for work for 1 day one week or 4 weeks or one hour does NOT change the FACT which is unemployed

CHECKMATED !!

You're not even trying to pretend you think you make sense now.

 

[pinqy]

yes you have proved it ... for sure... saying unemployed is NOT unemployed THAT proves this 100%

saying looking for work for 1 day one week or 4 weeks or one hour does NOT change the FACT which is unemployed

CHECKMATED !!

You're not even trying to pretend you think you make sense now.

 

[SailaWay]

You're not even trying to pretend you think you make sense now.

you say unemployed does not mean unemployed.. that it means something else

how can unemployed NOT mean Unemployed??? RAT- TRAPPED AGAIN !!

 

[pinqy]

you say unemployed does not mean unemployed.. that it means something else!

Where are you claiming I said that? The definition of Unemployed is
All persons who had no employment during the reference week, were available for work, except for temporary illness, and had made specific efforts to find employment some time during the 4-week period ending with the reference week. Persons who were waiting to be recalled to a job from which they had been laid off need not have been looking for work to be classified as unemployed.

The ILO definition is

Unemployment is defined as follows in the Resolution concerning statistics of the economically active population, employment, unemployment and underemployment, adopted by the Thirteenth International Conference of Labour Statisticians (Geneva, 1982):


(1) The "unemployed" comprise all persons above a specified age who during the reference period were:
(a)"without work", i.e. were not in paid employment or self-employment, as defined in paragraph 9; (b)"currently available for work", i.e. were available for paid employment or self-employment during the reference period; and (c)"seeking work", i.e. had taken specific steps in a specified reference period to seek paid employment or self-employment. The specific steps may include registration at a public or private employment exchange; application to employers; checking at worksites, farms, factory gates, market or other assembly places; placing or answering newspaper advertisements; seeking assistance of friends or relatives; looking for land, building, machinery or equipment to establish own enterprise; arranging for financial resources; applying for permits and licences, etc.


How am I going against the definitions.

And again....Is someone who works 20 hours a week employed or unemployed?

 

[SailaWay]

wow what a rat trap!

the RAT-TRAP went off when he said unemployed does not mean Unemployed..... then that SOUND..... RAT-TRAPPED came again


putting up a con artist trick of saying unemployed means something else.. that gets you RAT-TRAPPED every time