One of the most misleading statistics possible.
There is no qualative to the depreciation of the quality of jobs. for instance the manufacturing jobs that would pay $10-$15 (or more)/per hour are vaporizing, almost gone, while these same people take jobs for $7-10 (maybe less) hour. So there is a depreciation in middle class work forces, little doubt about this.
That's just the nature of the beast, I am not making an argument either way about the job market, my point is that the UE stats are shit.
Also, if you were laid off, from Ford Auto for example, and you collect UE benefits, you show up on these stats..if you don't have a job and aren't eligbile for benefits, you don't. That's my understanding anyhow.
It fluctuates also, it has very very little to do with Presidential politics, so while you can say it's good news for Bush, which is probably correct in a political sense, also it has almost nothing, and maybe nothing at all to do with his policies. It was also misleading for the Dems to attack the White HOuse because of the UE number alone, it was a bigger picture, obviously they couldn't articulate it well enough. I can;t either but I'm not a Dem or a leftist apologist, even if I am a self admitted social liberal libertarian.
The biggest factor towards Presidential politics/job growth and all the like is confidence in the market, in general. The job market plummeted after 9/11 because the confidence level was in the tank. It has gradually gotten better. For my money, I'd argue Pres. Bush has done very little to help reccesitate the job market and 4 1/2 years after the fact, the numbers are looking better. Has little to dowith the UE numbers, which as I said are misleading.
Trickle down bitches, I guess. That's just my view from the blue collar middle calss cheapseats.