Join the Debate!
All comments and users are subject to Townhall's new comments policy.
Login in to Post Your Comments
Michael47 Wrote: Oct 05, 2012 6:10 PM
Many people have been objecting to the methodology (on this site as well as other places) for a long time. So...apparently nothing changed. Any thinking person can see by looking at the raw numbers that the only reason unemployment is below 10% is because of the methodology.
Login to Reply
Flag as Offensive
Post Comment
Swimware Wrote: Oct 05, 2012 5:56 PM
If you pulled the cotton out your ears and the cucumber out of your a$$, you'd know that those numbers were questioned for the same reason.
Login to Reply
Flag as Offensive
Post Comment
There are More Comments on this Thread. Click Here To See them All
Aura Wrote: Oct 05, 2012 5:35 PM
You didn't seem to object to the methodology when unemployment was reported as over 8%. What changed??
Login to Reply
Flag as Offensive
Post Comment
DemocratPartyMendacity Wrote: Oct 05, 2012 5:25 PM
My points is for the 7.8 % to be correct 450,000 + 114,000 dropped off the unemployment rolls. 114,000 got low paying jobs and the others are standing in the welfare lines.
Login to Reply
Flag as Offensive
Post Comment
badgerpat Wrote: Oct 05, 2012 5:23 PM
How do you not follow? If they didn't get a job, they're not looking for a job, they're not collecting unemployment, and they're not in the "given up looking for a job, not collecting unemployment checks, and still unemployed" group, then they have apparently just simply disappeared, ie, the statistic is garbage.
Login to Reply
Flag as Offensive
Post Comment
Unemployment statistics unfiltered and not cooked in Obama's hopenchange oven.
Romney on Obama's REAL Unemployment Number