On Sun, 7 Aug 2011 15:08:22 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:



"wf3h" wrote in message ...

On Fri, 05 Aug 2011 12:43:57 -0400, wrote:


So you agree the real unemployment rate is a lot worse than the
numbers. I think that is what the OP was going for.


nope. what i said was that you're too stupid to understand how it's
measured and so is he

----------------------------------------------------------

I am "stupid" because I posed a legitimate question?

no. you're stupid because you expect the metrology to change so that
bush looks better and the

black

president looks worse


Not counting those who have given up looking, even though employable, is
dishonest and
totally misleading to the public


maybe so. but obama didnt change the method of measurement.