Results 1 to 10 of 10
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Korean
      • Home Country:
      • South Korea
      • Current Location:
      • South Korea

    • Join Date: Jun 2007
    • Posts: 1,271
    #1

    had millions not left ...

    I can't follow the logic in the following in red.

    Unemployment has also been higher as a consequence of the declining dollar. During the World War 2 gold standard era, from 1947 to 1970, unemployment averaged less than 5%. Even with the economy's ups and downs, it never rose above 7%. Since Nixon gave us the fiat dollar it has averaged over 6%: it averaged 8.5% in 1975, almost 10% in 1982, and around 8% since 2008. The rate would have been higher had millions not left the workforce.

    Is this saying "The unemployment rate would have been higher if millions of people had not stopped working"? Acyually the rate wasn't higher because millions left the workforce (quit working)? It sounds strange.

    Thank you.
    Last edited by unpakwon; 21-Sep-2014 at 16:45. Reason: to provide more context.

  1. BobK's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • UK

    • Join Date: Jul 2006
    • Posts: 16,038
    #2

    Re: had millions not left ...

    It's ambiguous. I'm not convinced that the writer knows what s/he means. There are various interpretations - at least three:
    • Yours, the illogical one.
    • People who were actually looking for work dropped out of the statistics. I don't know how the unemployment statistics are recorded in the USA, but in the UK 'unemployed' isn't the same as 'not having (paid) employment'. In order to count as 'registered unemployed' you have to be claiming Unemployment Benefit. And many people (myself included at one stage) find the process of claiming too dispiriting to bother with.
    • The 'rate' referred to in the final sentence is the rate of inflation. The underpinning of this interpretation started in the first sentence in the words 'the declining dollar', and the ambiguous 'it' in the second sentence seals the potential confusion!


    b

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • Laos

    • Join Date: Nov 2002
    • Posts: 57,845
    #3

    Re: had millions not left ...

    They could also leave the workforce if they emigrate or go back to study to retrain, etc.

  2. Roman55's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • Italy
      • Current Location:
      • France

    • Join Date: Feb 2014
    • Posts: 2,309
    #4

    Re: had millions not left ...

    I am not a teacher.

    I got lost at 'fiat dollar'!

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Korean
      • Home Country:
      • South Korea
      • Current Location:
      • South Korea

    • Join Date: Jun 2007
    • Posts: 1,271
    #5

    Re: had millions not left ...

    Quote Originally Posted by BobK View Post
    It's ambiguous. I'm not convinced that the writer knows what s/he means. There are various interpretations - at least three:
    • Yours, the illogical one.
    • People who were actually looking for work dropped out of the statistics. I don't know how the unemployment statistics are recorded in the USA, but in the UK 'unemployed' isn't the same as 'not having (paid) employment'. In order to count as 'registered unemployed' you have to be claiming Unemployment Benefit. And many people (myself included at one stage) find the process of claiming too dispiriting to bother with.
    • The 'rate' referred to in the final sentence is the rate of inflation. The underpinning of this interpretation started in the first sentence in the words 'the declining dollar', and the ambiguous 'it' in the second sentence seals the potential confusion!


    b
    I provided full context in the original post. Could it still be possible that the "rate" in the final sentence refers to the rate of inflation?
    Last edited by unpakwon; 21-Sep-2014 at 16:55.

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Korean
      • Home Country:
      • South Korea
      • Current Location:
      • South Korea

    • Join Date: Jun 2007
    • Posts: 1,271
    #6

    Re: had millions not left ...

    Quote Originally Posted by Tdol View Post
    They could also leave the workforce if they emigrate or go back to study to retrain, etc.
    Does this mean people are not counted as unemployed if they for any reason quit working voluntarily?

  3. Roman55's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • Italy
      • Current Location:
      • France

    • Join Date: Feb 2014
    • Posts: 2,309
    #7

    Re: had millions not left ...

    I am not a teacher.

    If there are no other missing sentences that you'll be adding later, it does seem that the rate in question isn't the rate of inflation.

    People are not counted as unemployed if they are no longer in the country, or if they are considered to be students or trainees. It's not because they voluntarily give up their jobs.

  4. MikeNewYork's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Nov 2002
    • Posts: 24,983
    #8

    Re: had millions not left ...

    The unemployment rates are bogus. In the US, people who are unemployed and who stopped looking for a job because they cannot find a job are not counted. How dumb is that?

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • American English
      • Home Country:
      • United States
      • Current Location:
      • United States

    • Join Date: Apr 2009
    • Posts: 12,307
    #9

    Re: had millions not left ...

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeNewYork View Post
    The unemployment rates are bogus. In the US, people who are unemployed and who stopped looking for a job because they cannot find a job are not counted. How dumb is that?
    Exactly. The numerator in the unemployment rate typically used by media and politicians is how many people are presently, officially unemployed. That is, getting benefits.

    The denominator is the number of people "in the work force." When unemployed people give up on ever finding a job, they are no longer counted as "in the work force," so the unemployment rate decreases. Not because more jobs have been added, but because fewer people are looking.

    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • British English
      • Home Country:
      • UK
      • Current Location:
      • Laos

    • Join Date: Nov 2002
    • Posts: 57,845
    #10

    Re: had millions not left ...

    Quote Originally Posted by unpakwon View Post
    Does this mean people are not counted as unemployed if they for any reason quit working voluntarily?
    Quitting voluntarily may affect your right to benefits, but you're still unemployed if you're not working. However, if you're studying or abroad, that's different.

Similar Threads

  1. MANY MILLIONS OF SENTENCES
    By sitifan in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 28-Apr-2014, 16:53
  2. [Vocabulary] about millions of people
    By LiuJing in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 20-Jul-2010, 12:02
  3. millions
    By cat's_eyes in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 29-Nov-2009, 12:55
  4. What is Sales in CHF millions?
    By bkk_kid in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 27-Aug-2006, 11:01
  5. million or millions
    By jose rocha in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 21-Feb-2004, 19:06

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •