<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Less-Bad Jobs Report</title>
	<atom:link href="http://dmarron.com/2009/08/07/a-less-bad-jobs-report/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://dmarron.com/2009/08/07/a-less-bad-jobs-report/</link>
	<description>Musings on Economics, Finance, and Life</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 20:27:13 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Google Is Still Wrong About Unemployment &#171; Donald Marron</title>
		<link>http://dmarron.com/2009/08/07/a-less-bad-jobs-report/#comment-640</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Google Is Still Wrong About Unemployment &#171; Donald Marron]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 04:06:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmarron.com/?p=1308#comment-640</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] 13, 2009 by Donald Marron    Everyone who follows the U.S. economy closely knows that the unemployment rate was 9.4% in July, down 0.1% from [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] 13, 2009 by Donald Marron    Everyone who follows the U.S. economy closely knows that the unemployment rate was 9.4% in July, down 0.1% from [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Donald Marron</title>
		<link>http://dmarron.com/2009/08/07/a-less-bad-jobs-report/#comment-591</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Donald Marron]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Aug 2009 17:05:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmarron.com/?p=1308#comment-591</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Looking at the release, I think the 796,000 figure is the number of discouraged workers in total in July. BLS estimates that in the same way it estimates the other unemployment-related statistics -- by surveying households. As far as I know, nothing unusual in how the number was estimated.

Those workers are included in the U-6 rate in the chart.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Looking at the release, I think the 796,000 figure is the number of discouraged workers in total in July. BLS estimates that in the same way it estimates the other unemployment-related statistics &#8212; by surveying households. As far as I know, nothing unusual in how the number was estimated.</p>
<p>Those workers are included in the U-6 rate in the chart.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ROA</title>
		<link>http://dmarron.com/2009/08/07/a-less-bad-jobs-report/#comment-590</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[ROA]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Aug 2009 16:47:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dmarron.com/?p=1308#comment-590</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Some conservative columnists have pointed out that the BLS reduced the number of people looking for jobs by 796,000.  If these people had not been removed, the unemployment rate would have been higher.  Is this a legitimate point, or is this type of adjustment normal?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Some conservative columnists have pointed out that the BLS reduced the number of people looking for jobs by 796,000.  If these people had not been removed, the unemployment rate would have been higher.  Is this a legitimate point, or is this type of adjustment normal?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

