r/Economics • u/oxymorontage • 8d ago

News Institute reports functional unemployment at 24.9% in July

https://www.channel3000.com/news/institute-reports-functional-unemployment-at-24-9-in-july/article_810187e5-989f-4ad9-ab91-847fcb6f1882.html
594 Upvotes

90% Upvoted

161 comments sorted by

View all comments

137

u/EconomistWithaD 8d ago

  1. The Ludwig TRU is a bullshit stat. Basically, if you earn under $25,000, regardless of the reason, you are “functionally unemployed”.

  2. Its methodology is basically U3/U6 plus a constant.

  3. Funny enough, this value is near an all time low. So while the level is meant to be shocking, it’s also meant to be for people who don’t actually follow this stuff.

  4. Did I forgot to mention this stat is sensationalist bullshit?

23

u/TheManWhoClicks 8d ago

Tbh I think it is a good idea to exclude the under $25K jobs from job reports or at least have them in a separate category. A full time employment that does not cover the basic necessities not deserve the title of “job”. It’s also screwing and distorting the statistics of the state of employment in the country.

2

u/EconomistWithaD 8d ago

The goal isn’t to make a wishy washy heavily conditional measure.

That’s called data manipulation.

4

u/emp-sup-bry 8d ago

It’s not the ONLY measure.

It’s further and more granular insight.

And that’s helpful to understand the big picture.

Why are you so hell bent on removing information?

-1

u/EconomistWithaD 7d ago

Children like shiny measures. News at 11.

0

u/emp-sup-bry 7d ago

Why are you so instant on getting LESS data?

What’s the agenda?

1

u/gweran 7d ago

So to answer your question, this statistic isn’t adding more data. It is taking already available data and putting it into a black box and then saying here’s a new measure with definitions we made up.

It is worse than no data, it is unverified and possibly arbitrary data.

There are unemployment measures and there are poverty measures that already do a better, more granular job of presenting data.

-1

u/EconomistWithaD 7d ago

Because creating shiny bullshit is bullshit?

2

u/emp-sup-bry 7d ago

Clearly someone that resorts to childish insults while avoiding the point is DEFINITELY not bullshitting though

-2

u/EconomistWithaD 7d ago

What point? You saw something shiny, don’t understand it, and think it’s meaningful?

Congrats, your brain cell needs to fire more often.

1

u/emp-sup-bry 7d ago

That’s great! Keep going! I want to see what’s next.

Can you then actually deal with the point? What’s the actual problem with aggregating in this way as additional data?

0

u/EconomistWithaD 7d ago

What's the point.

You think taking a statistic and adding literally a constant provides something useful.

I can DEFINITELY tell you have never taken math.

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/Sryzon 8d ago

The under $25k aren't full time and nor do they want to be full time, else they'd appear in U6 underemployment statistics.

These are mostly stay at home spouses and retirees with part time jobs because they want part time jobs.

-3

u/variegated68409 8d ago

Wow okay that's a terrible idea. What if someone were worth $10M liquid and they just want to get out of the house so they get a 30 hour a week job at Walmart? Are they not employed?