Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
Do you think California, by not submitting their September's Jobs Report on time, had anything to do....?
..... with unemployment numbers dipping below 8% and resulting in one of the largest unemployment drops in the last 30 years?
The Wall Street Journal:
8 Answers
- ?Lv 59 years agoFavorite Answer
absolutely. the job market is dismal here. the liberal locusts have ravaged this state beyond recognition, not even the illegals want to come here anymore
- The TaxpayerLv 79 years ago
No. That was the unemployment claims.
The below 8% was taking a few hundred thousand out of the people looking for work. They've given up. If unemployment were calculated the same way it was when Bush was in office, it would be over 11%. Have no fear, once Romney gets in it will calculated in the old way again.
- megLv 79 years ago
NO, They unemployment numbers are from a survey of 60 thousand households, and the number submitted by the states is the number of people who filed for unemployment benefit during the week. Just looking at the numbers should give you a clue, How could plus of minus 30,000 change 12 million by .3%
- ?Lv 69 years ago
No
a) your question is about unemployment rates
b) your article is about "new jobless claims"
c) those numbers are not used in calculating each other.
But good job showing you don't understand what the numbers are or mean.
- justaLv 79 years ago
Actually they were estimated with an increase in joblessness of two thousand people, which wouldn't have made a difference.
They didn't have their statistics in by the deadline probably because they put their state workers on three and four day weeks and cut back on employees, less workers equal delays.
- YB LogicalLv 79 years ago
I can't understand why they didn't just claim the the rate of unemployment has dropped to 4.8%.
That number would look even better and Obama could still depend on liberals to accept and defend it.
- 9 years ago
I think that's technically in two different months... California's error was for LAST WEEK'S NUMBERS...
and as last week wasn't in September... it shouldn't have impacted Sept's numbers...
EVEN IF IT WAS IN SEPTEMBER, WHICH IT WASN'T, BUT JUST DEVIL'S ADVOCATE...
THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH HOW THEY FIGURE UNEMPLOYMENT DIRECTLY... it's just an indicator that you can use...
EDIT: lol... keep thumbs downing the facts cons... hehe
- regeruggedLv 79 years ago
Trying to be reasonable with liberals is always an exercise in futility. Your first answer is making excuses for bad or dishonest reporting.