Jump to content

Usa Thread


TroyinEwa/Perv
 Share

Recommended Posts

GOP lawmaker calls for change to how government measures unemployment

 

 

A Republican lawmaker is intensifying his push for legislation that would change how the government measures the unemployment rate.

 

Rep. Duncan D. Hunter (R-Calif.) intends to press GOP leaders to move his bill to include the number of individuals who gave up looking for work in the percentage of jobless claims.

 

Should the government measure unemployment with Hunter's figure, the unemployment rate would be higher than the current rate of approximately 8 percent – a potentially devastating assessment for the White House, especially in an election year.

 

The San Diego-based lawmaker contends that he did not introduce his bill to make the president look bad, since the number would reflect poorly on all individuals in charge of government.

 

On a recent interview with Fox News Channel’s Martha MacCallum, Hunter said, “it makes me look bad too when unemployment is sliding … it makes the Republican Congress, the president and the Democratic Senate - anybody who is an elected representative and in charge look bad. I don’t think it goes one way.â€

 

His one-page legislation, the “REAL Unemployment Calculation Act†would require “the federal government [to] cite, as its official unemployment calculation, the figure that takes into account those who are no longer looking for work,†not only those individuals actively seeking jobs.

 

For example, the most recent unemployment rate released on Friday with 8.2 percent unemployment, would be officially considered 9.6 percent, the so-called U-5 rate that was also released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS.)

 

The measure would not require any additional numbers to be calculated, it would simply use a statistic that the BLS already calculates each month, alongside the so-called official unemployment rate and a handful of other stats.

 

The U-5 stat measures, “total unemployed, plus discouraged workers, plus all other persons marginally attached to the labor force, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force,†while the U-3 stat or the “official unemployment rate,†measures, “total unemployed, as a percent of the civilian labor force.â€

 

Though the government modernized how unemployment was surveyed in 1994 – adding the several different calculations, including the U-5 rate to the mix – the official unemployment calculation has remained largely the same, according to a report on the “alternative unemployment measures†released by the BLS in 1994.

 

“Since the inception of the survey in 1940, only relatively minor changes have been made to the official definition of unemployment, despite numerous outside reviews and ongoing assessments by academicians, business and labor organizations and various interest groups. The official measure has withstood the test of time largely because of its objectivity,†John Bregger, former Assistant Commissioner for Current Employment Analysis wrote.

 

For the past two decades, there has been a consistent spread between the U-3 and U-5 rates, until several years ago during President Obama’s administration, when the U-3 began to improve while the U-5 rose, according to a recent study of Labor Department data released by Investor’s Business Daily in late February.

 

Therefore, Hunter believes that it is imperative to deem that U-5 rate as the “official unemployment rate,†as he says, the U-3 avoids “a subset of Americans who are not counted.â€

 

“The Bureau of Labor Statistics does in fact provide alternative measurements of unemployment, but they are consistently overshadowed by the U-3 rate, which ignores a large group of people. We need to be realistic and focus our attention on the figure that provides the most accurate representation of national unemployment—not the figure that under-represents the challenge we face,†Hunter said in a recent statement.

 

Still, the U-5 rate does not factor the reasons that individuals stopped looking for work, such as, deciding to go to school, inheriting money, or realizing that jobs were not available in their local area. It also does not account for the number of individuals who are on unemployment insurance, according to a source familiar with the monthly survey.

 

The Bureau of Labor Statistics refrained from commenting on Hunter’s legislation.

 

The Education and Workforce Committee has no action on Hunter’s bill planned at this time, according to committee spokesman Brian Newell.

 

Regardless, Hunter intends to pursue additional co-sponsors for his bill, spokesman Joe Kasper told The Hill. He will “definitely†make his case for consideration of the measure to leaders “in the coming weeks.â€

 

Hunter conceded that should his measure become law, it could be politically detrimental to his party, but to him the most accurate picture of unemployment in the U.S. ranks above politics.

 

“If a Republican gets elected this year and gets sworn in next year this will be their unemployment figure too. So you have to have truth no matter who it hurts or who it actually affects. You have to have the actual truth, that’s what we need here - truth to power. And that’s how things start getting fixed,†Hunter said on Fox News.

 

My link

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sad news about Mike Wallace. I'd sit there and cringe at how hard he went after some folks. Deservedly but still, it was tough journalism.

 

As for the way time employment numbers are counted, they have been cooked for a long time. They need to be changed. The guy is right. My only question is the timing of it. It was all well and good for 6 years when it was Republicans using those same calculations. The timing of it is hypocrical and the bit about Republicans having to use the same number is exactly what he wants since it will be used to get Obama out.

 

The Martin-Zimmerman case has opened up racial wounds and animosity again. This sign appeared in Michigan recently : http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/04/09/11102214-racial-slur-on-mich-road-sign-targets-trayvon-martin?lite

Some would argue it was always there under the surface and just needed an event to bring it back out. America and South Africa have such painful, bitter racial histories I fear it will take a century to get rid of, at least in America. There is hypocracy and insensitivity on both sides. Blacks don't seem to share nearly as much empathy or sympathy when Whites are targeted for racial animus. We cater to the fringe elements too much (the Rev Als). We are often over sensitive. That is subjective. There are things I don't think are a big deal that others have. I will say its changing. I see far more Blacks today saying what's the big deal over all manor of things. Younger blacks especially and I think its because we have a larger part of the Black population growing up in diverse communities, schools, etc. where they have friends from different races, unlike a generation ago. My nephews are a prime example. Their best friends were non black kids growing up.

 

There are some things many whites are still a bit to callous about. Many have a 'get over it already' view of things and I can certainly understand that. However, I saw a pic once that kinda sums it all up to some blacks. There was a picture of the German concentration camps and under it, the caption read 'Never forget' and the next pic was of the towers burning in NYC at 911 and the caption said 'Never forget' and the last pic was of slaves being marched chains and the caption said 'Get over it'. It kinda sums it up the view by many Blacks.

 

My view is that continued integration is the key. Moving more Blacks from poor to working and middle class and kids growing up going to the same schools and living together in the same areas is the key. There will be growing pains but continued interaction and open and frank exchange of views and mutual empathy is the only way.

 

Going back to the Martin case. Politically its bad for Obama. Socially, while I empathize with the parents of the slain Martin and can understand their cry for Zimmerman's arrest. I don't think the rest of 'us' should be inflaming things. Wait to see how it plays out. Demand a fair, impartial and thorough investigation and then see what happens. America has made great strides. I think that Rev Al and others would have us believe things haven't for their own personal benefit. Zimmerman is being labled, probably falsely, as some junior member of the KKK. No evidence in his background to suggest that. I recall a black friend of his saying he's no racist. Too much overreaction and emotion on the Martin side. I also think some people are supporting Zimmerman's view of things, no matter how implausible, because of animosity towards the often one sided media coverage of any interracial violence which usually shows Black victims and minimizes or ignores whites who are accosted by Blacks simply because they are white. Also supporting Zimmerman out of distaste for the Rev Als out there supporting Martin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://news.yahoo.com/team-obama-skewers-romney-tax-fairness-220349951--abc-news-politics.html

"Romney supports tax policies that reward people like him, and now he's trying to obscure just how much he would benefit, by hiding his own financial records," said Obama campaign manager Jim Messina.

"Our message to Mitt is simple: if you don't have anything to hide, release your taxes just like every other candidate for president does," he said.

Romney has released his 2010 and 2011 income tax returns but fewer from previous years than any of his recent predecessors. The documents show he earned roughly $42 million over the two year period and paid $6 million in income taxes - or an effective tax rate of 14 percent.

 

Got no problem with Mitt paying as less taxes as he can...as long as its done legally. I also view Obama's campaign person of playing politics. It will happen on both sides in this upcoming election.

 

I just find it a bit hypocritical for millionaires in politics to claim the rich are paying too much when in pretty much every case we see multi-millionaires paying far less than any one else. I hope to be a mulit-millionaire one day (as unlikely as that is). Obama is now a mulitmilionaire and I'd be interested to see what he actually pays in taxes as well. My guess is he'll pay a high amount (if he's smart), knowing he can make a lot on the speech circuit, etc. after he leaves office plus he gets a lifetime salary so he won't have to really work again anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...