Henwood's 'labor market slack' vs. the Bureau of Labor Statistics

Doug Henwood dhenwood at panix.com
Mon Mar 4 06:52:17 PST 2002


Charles Jannuzi wrote:


>I've just done hours of online reading and as far as I can tell the
>'official' US statistics on unemployment are largely determined by analysis
>of data gathered from 60,000 selected households. If that doesn't scare the
>shit out of you, then it ought (just the fact that you have to be part of an
>official household should set off the bullshit detectors). This then is
>generalized to a population that now tops 280,000,000. I'll bet it's at
>least as accurate as the registered voter rolls of the state of Florida.

60,000 households is a very large sample. Why is that scary? And what's with this "official household" business? The sample is constantly changing.


>Also, the idea that people who are not actively looking for employment (not
>going to a state employment security office since it doesn't help them to
>find work and it is not giving them money to show up) as not being among the
>unemployed is obviously absurd.

Not if you're measuring labor market slack, buddy.

Doug



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list