I understand that this will be
somewhat quite annoying. I can’t think of any other way, but it needs to be done. Perhaps, Matt Yglesias can help on the communication front.
Phil Izzo writes
People dropping out of the labor force are making the unemployment rate look smaller, but not as much as some might think.
The jobless rate was reported to be 8.3% in January, marking the fifth consecutive decline. Some greeted the drop with skepticism, noting that the labor force — the number of people working or actively looking for a job — has declined and that is distorting the number.
The unemployment rate is calculated by taking the number of unemployed and dividing it by the labor force. When people stop actively looking for work because they get discouraged, it reduces both the number of unemployed and the size of the labor force.
In the second bolded passage, Phil notes that when people drop out of the labor force it causes the unemployment rate to fall.
In the first bolded Phil says that people dropping out of the labor force makes the unemployment rate look smaller.
In the third bolded passage Phil says that there is fear that there is distortion.
In the post he moves on to provide empirical evidence.
Yet none is needed.
A thing cannot be distorted if it appears faithfully, which is what the bolded passages imply by syntactic construction.
This matters because virtually all of the errors that have been made by economists, analysts and the administration in regards to this recession have been logical errors, not misinterpretation of evidence.