I would like to believe that the editors and writers of the Financial Times have as much fluency with economics as they do with English. However, when I read bylines such as "The US continued to shed workers in January although the unemployment rate edged lower as the labour market struggles to recover", doubts creep into my mind.

You and I know that when an economy sheds jobs, a falling unemployment rate implies that more workers have lost hope and ceased searching for work. This certainly seems like a negative, yet the writer holds it in contrast to the loss in jobs as if one of the two statements were viewable in some positive light.

As a loyal reader of the FT, my difficulty lies in knowing that writers filter the transmission of current news by their understanding of the world. When one part of that understanding becomes suspect, then the whole becomes suspect.

Thank you for your time and attention,