Good enough to avoid a panic, bad enough to not spook anticipation of fed cuts. Will see what the market thinks. I suspect the reaction will be positive. Next, we watch what Powell says in Zurich around 12:30 EST.
True unemployment chart comparison. U-3,U-6 and "shadow stat." of 21.6%.
The seasonally-adjusted SGS Alternate Unemployment Rate reflects current unemployment reporting methodology adjusted for SGS-estimated long-term discouraged workers, who were defined out of official existence in 1994. That estimate is added to the BLS estimate of U-6 unemployment, which includes short-term discouraged workers.
This is hilarious Cliff. In this economy, anyone who wants to work is working. But of course, if you work for the SGS, you can adjust your way into any #'s you want.
As an aside, I bet you will never post anything from the ominous sounding "Shadow Government Statistics" while a dem is in office.
i'd make reference to shadow stats no matter who is in office.
my opinion. the official numbers you see coming from washington are often too optimistic. (no matter who is in the WH). and i think the numbers coming from shadow stats are often too pessimistic. i hink a more accurate number is somewhere in between. (whether it is an inflation figure, or a gdp number, or an unemployment number).
it is useful to sometimes look at altenative methodologies for financial figures.
Ya know what Bear? I'm as sure that you would use numbers from a source like this, if they made any sense, regardless of who is in office as I am sure Cliff would not. As Sam said, you are amongst the least biased here. Cliff is one of the most, IMO.
But, let's talk about these numbers.
21% Unemployment. That's a little over 1 in 5 members of the workforce long term unemployed.
So, if you know 100 of these workforce folks, 21 have been unemployed for a long time. Do you know these people?
I know a few hundred. 1 got laid off last week and I doubt he'll be out of work for long. But maybe I'm not typical.
Does anyone on the forum know a large percentage of their acquaintances who have been out of work for more than a few weeks? 5 out of 100? 10? 20? 21?!!! MORE?!?!?!?!?
I'm betting the honest answer is "no".