Tuesday, August 7, 2012

Now and then

20025.75.75.75.95.85.85.85.75.75.75.96.0
20035.85.95.96.06.16.36.26.16.16.05.85.7
20045.75.65.85.65.65.65.55.45.45.55.45.4
20055.35.45.25.25.15.05.04.95.05.05.04.9
20064.74.84.74.74.64.64.74.74.54.44.54.4
20074.64.54.44.54.44.64.74.64.74.74.75.0
20085.04.95.15.05.45.65.86.16.16.56.87.3
20097.88.38.78.99.49.59.59.69.810.09.99.9
20109.79.89.89.99.69.49.59.69.59.59.89.4
20119.19.08.99.09.09.19.19.19.08.98.78.5
20128.38.38.28.18.28.28.3

As to Professor DeLong's claim that the recovery from 2001-2004 was 'more anemic' than...whatever he is calling the current period, note that the above chart of unemployment rates from the Bureau of Labor Statistics shows that not to be remotely accurate.

In the summer prior to the election of 2004 (the proper comparison year to now) the unemployment rate was 5.5%.  Almost 3 points lower than it is today.

No comments:

Post a Comment