Idiot, I never claimed to have a monopoly on facts. I simply asked you for the basis for your contention.
Yes, the pool of people actually looking for work changes depending on whether they have resources that allow them to NOT look. But also, one's desire to look for work can be rather independent of one's resources, depending instead on demand for workers and the prospects of actually finding work. Let me restate so you can understand - the likelihood of actually finding a job at attractive pay (greater demand) influences one's decision as to whether to look for work (stimulates supply). That's a big part of how we had such huge job growth with very low unemployment for so long without inflationary pressures - the labor pool grew. Demand isn't exactly stimulating supply now, though.
Now, what do we know to be fact? Only that the method of calculating the unemployment rate has not changed and that the rate has been rising (from very low levels). If the official rate consistently understates the pool of unemployed (counting those who could work even if they aren't looking), then it is disingenuous to raise alarm over the difference between the two, as you have done, instead of the trend in either one alone.
We also have expectations, most of us expecting the rate to continue rising for at least a few months.
Anything beyond that is speculation. You are speculating, for example, that some 30% of the people without jobs that really want jobs won't admit it to surveyors. You are also speculating that large numbers of people who are collecting unemployment, for which they must swear to be looking for work, are telling surveyors they are NOT looking. Lastly, you are speculating that large numbers of those not working, who were recently laid off from jobs, will suddenly decide that they should rejoin the labor pool, driving the unemployment rate up to your "real" level. Why? Because they lost money in the stock market? Gee, do you really think a large number of those laid off in the last six months thought until now that they could just live fat off their portfolios? Get real. |
