What was that Lucrum was saying about google? : ) Fair enough. I'll assume the blogger's chart uses the same definition of LFPR that your site does. And what about students, are they in or out? We know that they are unemployed (after graduation) at nearly three times the general rate (young people in general). What about productivity gains (they're quite good in the US)? The last question goes back to the statement I've made earlier, the US economy, on the face of it, excepting the harm to individual lives for a moment, does not need everyone working, not in a basics sense. We are a net food exporter. We are (now) a fuel exporter. [The point of the latter is this, we appear to be accomplishing the dream of the early 20th century, an automated economy where robots largely do the "needful but irksome drudgery". The distribution is terrible, of course.]
I googled it to find a link so you wouldn't think I was making it up. I could quote that stuff from memory, believe you-me. As for what the blogger's site uses, there's only one LFPR. Students are generally not counted - didn't you read my post? As for your comment regarding the US Economy not needing everyone to work, ok, I'll grant you that. But we're not talking about EVERYONE here. Spain doesn't need everyone to work either, but close to 21% unemployment will be their undoing.
There is only one formula. Whatever you're finding is some weird crap that has nothing to do with the BLS stat. Post links, please and I'll happily disassemble it. LOL indeed.
Here you go, Sir Goog-A-Lot: http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000 Right from the "horse's" mouth. Same stat as the "blogger".
That's fine, Mr. First Googler, but the equation varies. I note that you were either shrewd, or lucky, to find the one that makes the cut "unemployed but looking". Wiki has a much more in depth discussion. So, which "horse"? : )
Since 2010, when they changed the way the Unemployment Rate is calculated, the reported number has little to do with telling the truth, and everything to do with convenient political agendas.
Hello *taps mic* is this thing on?? Ricter, please read closely. Are you ready? The BLS reports unemployment several ways. The U3 statistic, which conveniently leaves out just about anyone who has given up, accepted part time working while they are looking for an equal job to the one they lost, etc...the stat that is the most bogus, is the headline number. That's the number that is picked up in all the media publications (main stream) and that's the one Obama was just touting on tv an hour ago. Are you still with me? The BLS publishes a lot of other data that is far better an indication of the unemployment situation, such as the Labor Force Participation Rate. Even the U6 (which includes all the aforementioned individuals) that indicates an unemployment rate somewhere around 11.6%, comes from the BLS. But since it's buried deep in the report and not discussed (and because the media is not interested in the gloomy truth) it's all irrelevant. You follow now? The light beginning to turn on? So the monthly Non-Farm Payrolls report that is intended to paint a picture of the employment situation in the United States uses the statistic most beneficial (and consistently the most inaccurate) picture of the employment situation.