Replies to post #139242 on ajtj99's Market Pulse

[ajtj99]

Exagerrated? How could that possibly be? U-6 is at 13.5% as of last month. Orthodox unemployment is at 7.2% also. Birth/death rate is currently understating unemployment.

However, you could make a case that the statistics create the impression that 7.2% or 13.5% of the households are without a wage earner, which is not the case as it would have been in the 1930's due to the advent of the 2-income household.

It's likely U-6 extrapolated per household would be more like 8%-10% of households without a wage earner. That's still about 70% lower than the peak of the Great Depression, so you can see how the numbers can often times paint a different picture depending on how they're interpreted.

[choad]

That's not quite accurate Porter. Coxe didn't say the numbers were exaggerated but he did say that he feels that after subtracting unemployable out of the 7.2 he sees a real number of about 4.5......which he doesn't view as critical. I believe his point had a lot to do with his opinion that the peoplehttp://events.startcast.com/events/199/B0003/code/eventframe.asp reporting in the media are likely going to be part of the unemployed figure going forward and thus there's a heavy bias to the dark side. He did say that he expects a market bottom this year. Here's the CC for anyone who might want to take a listen. EDIT...I don't have a clue why it pasted in the middle of my post, but it did. LOL

[Stormrider]

Coxe is a complete moron if he really believes that rubbish! Maybe he should really dig into how many people employed are working much less than the 40 hour work week; I know many individuals who are working much less than the 40 hour week, not to mention the layoffs. That doesn't even take into consideration the under-employed. The guy needs to pull his head out of the sand!