United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: AP Quietly Lowers the 'Normal' Unemployment Bar to 6%
Source:
newsbusters.org
URL Source: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tom-bl ... wers-normal-unemployment-bar-6
Published: Jul 3, 2010
Author: Tom Blumer
Post Date: 2010-07-03 17:17:10 by WhiteSands
Keywords: Gobbles and current socialist
Views: 514
Comments: 3
Perhaps it's valid for reporters Jeannine Aversa and Christopher Rugaber to refer to 6% unemployment as "normal," if by that they mean "typical non-recessionary" or "long-term average" unemployment. But I couldn't help but remember that during the Bush 43 and Reagan years, unemployment rates just above and occasionally even below that level were described by wire service reporters and other journalists as "persistent unemployment" -- i.e., decidedly not "normal." I quickly found several AP and other reports from those eras that confirmed my recall of what is now a demonstrated double standard. Here is the opening sentence from the AP report, followed by the term-redefining paragraph (bold is mine): A second straight month of lackluster hiring by American businesses is sapping strength from the economic rebound. ... Unemployment is expected to stay above 9 percent through the midterm elections in November. And the Fed predicts joblessness could still be as high as 7.5 percent two years from now. Normal is considered closer to 6 percent, and economists say it will probably take until the middle of this decade to achieve that. "Closer to 6%" seems to imply that "normal" is really "slightly above" that level. It's legitimate to question whether there has really been an economic rebound when people who are looking for work aren't finding it and so many others have abandoned their quest. The truth is that the number of people reported as working according to the Establishment Survey in yesterday's Employment Situation Report is lower than it was a year ago, when the recession as normal people define it ended. It's also worth remembering, assisted by an updated version of the indispensable chart from Innocents Bystanders, that the administration predicted that its stimulus plan would return the economy to the AP's new "normal" by the first quarter of 2012, three years earlier than "the middle of this decade": Oops. Here are some previous examples of situations described by the establishment press as "persistent unemployment": But what was once "persistent unemployment" is now "normal." No double standard there (/sarcasm). Oh, wait a minute. Maybe the AP pair is subtly informing us that as long as the Obama administration is in power and Democrats control Congress, "persistent unemployment" will be "normal." If so, guys, thanks for letting us know. Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com. —Tom Blumer is president of a training and development company in Mason, Ohio, and is a contributing editor to NewsBusters
Those looking for evidence that there is a move afoot in the establishment press to lower the bar for whatever economic accomplishments might be accomplished during the Obama administration will be interested in how the Associated Press's report on the government's June jobs report defined "normal" unemployment. 
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: WhiteSands (#0)
Moronic article.
#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace I'm biased, obviously, given the shit I'm subjected to daily here from the anti groupie. Badeye posted on 2010-06-10 11:34:31 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
And they never used the word 'depression' from 1929-1941 either. And no one knew that 7 million Americans died of starvation either. And anyone doubting that can explain how sharecroppers kicked off their farms in the Fall of 1932 got thru the Winter. LA Shrimper, 'Oh teah, they have a plan. The Plan is to let us all die.'
The new 'norm' under Owe-bama is record numbers of unemployed Americans wholly dependent on the government to survive. Its not acceptable, as the Leftwingnuts will learn come November, and again in 2012.
Obama's first all-by-his-lonesome budget, btw, calls for a $1.17 trillion deficit.
#2. To: WhiteSands (#0)
#3. To: WhiteSands (#0)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]