Unemployment rate 10.2%

[jamesbressi]

No one get upset over the problematic math behind the unemployment rate.

Even when I took economics in university and we got on this topic, our professor said that it is a very flawed number for such a numerous amount of reasons, but until the government adopts a better way of substantiating, view it as nothing more than a number that may or may not help you gauge the economic climate.

In other words, there is some benefit in understanding our situation with this surveyed number, but you should always question it and the media and government will use it how they please for their own agendas.

The debate on the unemployment rate is very interesting; Google it if you have time and read up.

[RyanMcGreal]

Judging unemployment via the unemployment rate is a bit like judging your website's popularity via Alexa. The question becomes: is lousy data better or worse than no data?

[jeromec]

It's still a useful number as long as it's measured consistently. It may not be a verbatim reflection of worker to full employment, for example, since it doesn't count "under employed" or the people that want to work more hours, but can't. However, if we know that the 10% it represents is more than triple what we might consider normal then it can be a telling gauge.

[sireat]

You are right, it is a flawed number, it does not take into account "the discouraged(people who gave up looking for work)", "the startup(ie most of YC)", prisoners(1.5% of theworking population in US) and some other groups.

However, 10.2% unemployment even by flawed definition is still significant.

[Femur]

It is important to note that unemployment is a lagging indicator; we may be in recovery while unemployment worsens for some time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lagging_indicator

[jswinghammer]

U-6 is now at 17.5%. If unemployment continues to climb all next year is it still lagging or just an indication that our economy is a mess?

I'm voting total mess.

[fnid]

An extended period of unemployment will be very bad for a society based on consumption. Consumer spending accounts for two-thirds of the US economy and consumers are a dying species.

I see few signs that we are in recovery. What I see is boredom with gloom. People want the economy to be in recovery, so they find reasons to believe it so.

[jamesbressi]

A very good point that I was going to include in my comment on this article and left out in an effort to stay on my topic about the flaws of the calculation.

To support your point, I think it is more well known after this last year that "recession indicators" are lagging and we are typically in a recession a good 3-6 months before it is declared and the reverse is true for when we get out of it.

Thanks for bringing this up.

[Agathos]

Did it lag so much on the way down?

[skushch]

Historically, unemployment peaks after the official recession has ended.

http://media-files.gather.com/images/d637/d49/d746/d224/d96/...

[btilly]

Two things about these figures. The first is that you shouldn't believe any historical comparisons. Over the years the US definition of unemployment was revised multiple times, and each time it was revised it was to a methodology that gave lower numbers. Therefore you aren't comparing apples to apples when you compare current figures with, say, the recession in the early 80s.

The other thing to consider is that we aren't out of the woods yet economically. There are still a lot of credit issues out there. You can see http://bentilly.blogspot.com/2009/11/is-financial-crisis-rea... for a list of some of them. And continued jobless numbers are not about to help.

[vire]

Great link. Thanks. Funny thing is, when just about everyone I knew was "getting their war on" and "getting their granite countertops on", it all felt ominous to me. I'm afraid that the U.S. is in for a very humbling penance.