You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of Commercial Advance. It is not 30 second skip; the replay has that too. It marks the start and end of a whole segment of commercials and skip them all...instantly. It's gets it right about 90% of the time for me; YMMV depending on video signal quality.
Precisely my point, since she is of working age but not actively seeking employment, she is not participating and thus boosting the 35% figure.
I'm not making the case that she's unemployed; I'm making the case that her situation is included to make a number like 35% sound worse than it really is.
Also it appears your numbers came from the Daily Kos http://stevo.dailykos.com/story/2004/4/2/21018/295 20 (which, as most blogs do, has an agenda). He defines the Employment Participation Rate as "the number people either employed or looking for work divided by the number of potential workers". By most definitions my wife would be considered a "potential worker"; but she would tell you she is not.
Slashdot Mirror
You seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding of Commercial Advance. It is not 30 second skip; the replay has that too. It marks the start and end of a whole segment of commercials and skip them all...instantly. It's gets it right about 90% of the time for me; YMMV depending on video signal quality.
Precisely my point, since she is of working age but not actively seeking employment, she is not participating and thus boosting the 35% figure.
5 20 (which, as most blogs do, has an agenda). He defines the Employment Participation Rate as "the number people either employed or looking for work divided by the number of potential workers". By most definitions my wife would be considered a "potential worker"; but she would tell you she is not.
I'm not making the case that she's unemployed; I'm making the case that her situation is included to make a number like 35% sound worse than it really is.
Also it appears your numbers came from the Daily Kos http://stevo.dailykos.com/story/2004/4/2/21018/29