Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's a strange coincidence but we have one 4-wheeler for every working person in Wv. 800,000 of them so far. That's where the money goes...
I think the answer would be to import about 500,000 people who have educations and want to work...That would be #1 India....#2 Mexico...#3 Ukraine all workable...
"although 2 reviews are quite critical ("A shrieking propagandist" wrote one." crap - i hate when i read propagandist literature and don't realize it !! :-)
"Unemployment Rate (2006): 4.9% (U.S. = 4.6%" this was one of the items in the book that i found interesting. i would have thought that this was a ratio of people without jobs vs people with jobs. but it appears that if a person is out of work and is "actively seeking" a job - then that person is counted in the unemployment rate. if the person is "not actively seeking" employment, then they are not counted in the unemployment rate. it seems that the term "unemployment rate" is one of those items that is often mentioned, but isn't clearly defined.
"although 2 reviews are quite critical ("A shrieking propagandist" wrote one." crap - i hate when i read propagandist literature and don't realize it !! :-)
"Unemployment Rate (2006): 4.9% (U.S. = 4.6%" this was one of the items in the book that i found interesting. i would have thought that this was a ratio of people without jobs vs people with jobs. but it appears that if a person is out of work and is "actively seeking" a job - then that person is counted in the unemployment rate. if the person is "not actively seeking" employment, then they are not counted in the unemployment rate. it seems that the term "unemployment rate" is one of those items that is often mentioned, but isn't clearly defined.
The blame really belongs with the media on this. The gov't has always been consistent, at least, that to count as unemployed, the person must be actively seeking employment. I think that's for convenience as much as anything... it's easy to count unemployment compensation claims. The media, though, treats the number as if it includes everyone who's not working, and that's not the case, as you point out.
Lately, the "non-farm employment number" (not rate) has been getting more attention. For example, last week I think that statistic fell by 90,000, and that's not a good sign for the economy in the months ahead.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
