Per the bureau of labor statistics the unemployment rate is 3.8%. Per LISP the true unemployment rate is 24.2%. Which is more accurate?

[Kelley1]

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/unemployment-rate

https://www.lisep.org/tru

[MrOracle]

The "official" unemployment rate is and has always been a joke. It only counts people who are ACTIVELY SEEKING a job, and not even all of them. It doesn't count the people who aren't interested in working (even though they should be), nor does it count those who want a job, and perhaps have been trying to get one for months and months and have given up.

The official stats also count people with more than one job as 2 (or more) employed people, rather than 1 employed person with 2 or more jobs. It's all designed to make the numbers look a lot better than they are, and both sides of the aisle are guilty of this fraud, because everyone wants their numbers to look better.

It's the same with Inflation. The "official" number is a complete joke - which anyone who has been buying food or gas or paying rent or electricity bills can tell you.

[jahaims]

Statistics are super easy to manipulate and still not technically be a lie.

[patois]

Labor Force Participation Rate is what you should really monitor.

[HawkPerception]

I wouldn't be able to say which is more accurate as I haven't done a census of the population myself so I have nothing to compare it with. However from my observation and logic, LISEP's statistics certainly seem more accurate.

[Surely]

Figures don’t lie. But liars figure!
When you have to wait to be seated at a restaurant because of staffing shortages. You know that the government numbers are a lie.

[Dargil]

The latter. Includes people who have given up.

[OtterMan68]

not if you read their methodology

[nawtee_me]

Dept of labor only shows those on unemployment and not all who are out of work but not drawing unemployment

[OtterMan68]

the LISP considers people who have jobs but are earning low wages "unemployed."

[Anonymous]

How about both are wrong.