http://www.factcheck.org/specialreports.aspx?docid=178
It's NOT partisan, it's not about Kerry, so don't stop after the first paragraph.
no no, don't ask, just go read it.
have you read it yet?
Stop it, go read.
Ok, good. Yes, it's a basic article about unemployment but that's such an easy topic to make assumptions on and never bother checking out for yourself.
I'm sure by now, thru my rants, y'all know that the unemployment figure doesn't count many people, so there ya go. And the key fact I'd like to point out is that unemployment, using a different method could really be ~150% of the numbers reported. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY PARTICULAR ADMINISTRATION, but I think it's fair to suggestion that they should change the reporting to include the 4.9%.
Another tidbit that wasn't mentioned is that the BLS calls ~50k homes and asks people these questions. What I don't know is the sampling and research method... like how many times do they call the same house back before giving up on getting in touch with someone?
It's NOT partisan, it's not about Kerry, so don't stop after the first paragraph.
no no, don't ask, just go read it.
have you read it yet?
Stop it, go read.
Ok, good. Yes, it's a basic article about unemployment but that's such an easy topic to make assumptions on and never bother checking out for yourself.
I'm sure by now, thru my rants, y'all know that the unemployment figure doesn't count many people, so there ya go. And the key fact I'd like to point out is that unemployment, using a different method could really be ~150% of the numbers reported. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY PARTICULAR ADMINISTRATION, but I think it's fair to suggestion that they should change the reporting to include the 4.9%.
Another tidbit that wasn't mentioned is that the BLS calls ~50k homes and asks people these questions. What I don't know is the sampling and research method... like how many times do they call the same house back before giving up on getting in touch with someone?
