On Fri, 5 Aug 2011 14:19:24 -0400, "Eisboch"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 5 Aug 2011 09:41:45 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

I am not very good at math.

Can someone explain that how adding 117,000 new jobs/mo (good news) when
it
takes 157,000 or more/mo to keep up with the population growth causes
the
unemployment rate to *drop*?

Clearly. It's better than 18K jobs added or even a negative number. I
guess you don't remember the US bleeding 700K jobs per month during
the last part of the Bush admin/beginning of the Obama admin.

I understand that. I didn't understand how 117K/mo of new jobs lowered the
official unemployment rate if it takes at least 157K/mo of new jobs just to
stay even.

Oh.. sorry.. I didn't address that. I think it's probably that people
stopped being counted. Obviously, that's not good news.

However, someone else gave a plausible explaination. The government only
counts
people who are actively looking for jobs. Those that aren't or gave up are
not
counted.

In other words : Fuzzy math.

Well, I guess it is, but it's not any more misleading that it always
has been. So, I guess I'd say the new fuzzy math is the same as the
old fuzzy math. (Seems like there's a rock tune along the same lines,
but I can't recall which one.)