Rand, the BLS doesn't count those not looking for work in their numbers. Once people get discouraged or stop looking (or retire, for that matter), that actually makes the employment rate look better.
Printable View
Rand, the BLS doesn't count those not looking for work in their numbers. Once people get discouraged or stop looking (or retire, for that matter), that actually makes the employment rate look better.
Rand, part-time workers are included as "employed". Not 'fully employed' if they what they really want/need is a full-time job, and they may be 'under-employed' as well. But those things are only reflected in broader measures the U-3 doesn't count.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
I think you're wrong saying that the majority of people who want a job, will get one. Our long-term unemployment numbers are horrible; something around half of all out-of-work job seekers exceed the 99 week unemployment benefit limit.
Some claim that's a reflection of our unemployment insurance "scheme"---when a salaried worker who used to earn $50,000/year won't take a burger-flipping job at $15,000/year AND lose their unemployment benefits; that they'll wait until benefits run dry to actually accept a job that pays less than the insurance product they bought.
There is probably some truth to that. How long can pride, personal expectations, and UI keep an unemployed person going before they finally cave, and take any damn job offered? Depends on things like age, marital status, if they rent or own (a mortgage, possibly underwater), or have dependent children. Depends on their health status and if they're insured, or not. Depends on if they have extended family who can take them in, or not. And it also depends on if they have assets to draw from while they look for the next job, like their previous employer's 401-K, stocks or bonds, their retirement "nest egg".
I've seen enough reports on [previously] middle-class, unemployed professionals 'borrowing' from their 401-K, drawing down retirement funds, cashing out mutual funds, trying to sell their homes at a loss....just to stay afloat. To say the picture is quite ominous is probably an understatement. :(
No you pig-headed idiot. My explanation is that jobs come and jobs go, c'est la vie. 3 years ago more jobs went than came.Quote:
Originally Posted by CitizenCain
Is it? You got proof for that? Anyway, I don't blame a lack of desire, I blame more than anything else time. As I have said repeatedly it takes time and effort to find a job.Quote:
The hell you didn't. I remember it well, because I rolled my eyes so hard they hurt. You were discussing the topic with OG, and were making him look like the level-headed voice of reason. Not that it really matters all that much, because it's also pretty crazy to blame a lack of desire to work for the majority of unemployment.
Are you sure its not? How certain?Quote:
147% of them. :rolleyes:
I do understand the question, and it's irrelevant. The figure you want isn't measured or recorded by anyone, and has no bearing on whether unemployed people want jobs or not. :|
In the UK we get figures on how many people are "long-term unemployed" (1 year and longer) and how many are unemployed. I've not worked it out, but I would have thought if you look at this month last years total unemployment figures, and this months long-term unemployment figures, it shouldn't be too hard for someone of reasonable intellect to work out how many of last years unemployed found a job.
The US economy added 117,000 new jobs in July.
WHERE ARE ALL THE JOBS
http://www.frbatlanta.org/filelegacy...KISS-final.pdf
We need that many new jobs each month just to keep the unemployment rate from increasing.
I know that.
So you're being obtuse and disingenuous on purpose, then? :|
Sure, jobs come and go, creative destruction, more efficiency and productivity, and all that jazz. We've got a new economy now, and that Time element would ideally be producing new jobs, but it's not. (Also sounds like you're backtracking now, when earlier you said those who want a job can find one, if they just try hard enough.)Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
I'm not sure how UK does its figures, but the US stops counting people as unemployed once they stop looking for work. That means our long-term unemployed numbers could go down and appear those people found a job....when in reality maybe they decided to be a stay-home-parent, start a new business as self-employed, or simply retire.
Nope, this hysteria present here seems to think there are no new jobs, no churn in employment. Instead once again hundreds of thousands of jobs are being churned every single month. That is about one and a half million new jobs every year. Yet there's hystrionics if 100 people get laid off.Quote:
Originally Posted by CitizenCain
GGT: There won't be a nation in the world I suspect that counts people not trying to find work as unemployed. I respect those who've chosen to be stay at home parents (my mum was one for many but not all years), those who choose to retire (my granparents all have) etc - if you think my mum was unemployed then I think she'd be quite offended by that statement.
I'm not sure. I keep looking behind various boulders and trees... not there, apparently.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
I suppose OG, GGT etc will agree with this then, their slogan appears to be throughout on the cards :rolleyes:
GGT being hysterical and/or ridiculous is no excuse to paint everyone with that same brush, nor is it an excuse to be obtuse and/or disingenuous with the rest of us.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
I told you so. J00s don't hide things behind trees or under rocks. You have to think like a j00, and look where they'd hide things. If you're not going to take my advice and even try to look for stolen j00 jobs, you really don't have any right to complain about not finding any. :downcast:Quote:
Originally Posted by agamemnus
Anyway, the jobs come from j00s. Currently, the j00s are hoarding the Amerikan jobs they've stolen, so to get the jobs back, we simply need to round up the evil, job-stealing j00s and repatriate the jobs they have locked away. It's hard to say exactly where the j00s are hiding these hoarded, ill-gotten jobs, but by searching the most common hiding places, we should be successful in getting enough jobs back. Inside the freezer, behind the toilet tank, false bottoms in cabinets/drawers, and of course, concealed behind the j00 gold in their safes and safety deposit boxes.
I'm not being obtuse. How many times have I said in this thread that I don't think everyone can easily get a new job like a snap of their fingers? I keep having to defend against things I didn't say.Quote:
Originally Posted by CitizenCain
Is Rand's old shell of "enough jobs for everyone who wants one bad enough" starting to crack? Even as he continues to hid behind taking a 9.2% unemployment rating out of context?
That's why our unemployment is 9.2% though....people still wanting and looking for jobs but can't find them, because the jobs are not available. It's not because people aren't trying hard enough, or being patient enough, as you said. :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
And I'm not hysterical about this at all, just reading the writing on the wall. Take off those rose-colored glasses. ;)
It's 1 and a half year till elections. :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Don't mean jack. We're already breaking stories on the crazy shit we should expect on mystery funding this year. Like companies being created and dissolved at will so they can make 7 figure Super PAC donations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust
Good thing that campaign finance reform went through, and kept corporate money outta politics, right?
Greatest Democracy in the World! Yeah baby! :banana:
In Soviet Rusmerica, jobs increase down!
So much for adding enough jobs to tread water... sounded too good to be true anyway. :sour:Quote:
Originally Posted by Washington Post
:( I saw a chart today, sourced from either NBER or BLS (but can't remember which) showing how our long-term unemployment never really recovered after the '01 recession, and continued to worsen after this last recession was supposedly in "recovery phase". No bounce-back that usually follows from growth after a down-turn.
They can call it whatever they want....jobless recovery, more productivity with fewer workers in an efficient economy, risk of a double-dip recession, whatever....but the reality is grim. Millions out of work for almost two years (or more) who want a job but can't find one. Those who are too afraid to look for new jobs or move up the ladder, paralyzed in place with fear. Business not hiring, even though collectively they've re-balanced their books, deleveraged and gone from debt to holding $2 Trillion in cash, paralyzed in place with fear. (Plus a hefty dose of greed, I might add.) Banks still in bad shape, having gone from Too Big To Fail to even Bigger and Failing (especially in Europe). Housing sector limping along but mostly another zombie (like some banks), and Fannie Mae sniffing around for more billions in public support.
My God, we've managed to royally fuck things up, with no clear way how to turn it around. Republicans say it's all about national debt and deficit, and taxes. Cut-Cap-Balance. Shrink the government, because it's teh Evil. (I won't go into their hypocrisy at the moment.) Growth will come from the magic mist of Freee Markets, and wealth will Trickle Down. Democrats say it's about jobs and workers, with some government spending to kick-start the growth engine. Use the government for times like this, citing history of The Great Depression and WPA (or even central bankers) as an example of government that works. But government is broke (and broken), on federal and state levels, because not enough people are working to briing in tax revenues. :bulb:
I'm not convinced either political party knows what the fuck to do. Even the "expert economists" are admitting there's no blue print for this time, with all our globalization, inter-connected financial tools and fuzzy maths. Everyone is either too heavy in debt, broke, or bankrupt. Those developing nations with hot growth can't keep up without the US and Europe, and they can't lead the world out of this mess.
China is like the teenager not quite ready to drive alone, with a learner's permit, but their parents are sick in bed. The developed nation-parents are too sick to drive themselves, and can't figure out what medicine is needed anyway. Cough, check fever, go back to bed and wait....malaise mixed with the feverish delusion that this is just a cold. Not the flu, not a virus spreading out of control, nothing to be done but wait it out. Calls made to adult neighbors are fruitless---they don't wanna take the kid out driving either, they might get in a wreck! Occasionally the fever breaks and things look on the mend, and that teenager might just have the adult driver needed. Until that rebound hits like a Mack Truck, flat in bed again, with nobody driving anywhere.
The US now has 46 million people on food stamps. That's one in every seven people, in the largest economy in the world. Mostly children. Jeff Bridges (and others) are trying to end childhood hunger in America. A worthy mission. On the other hand, Somalia is facing record famine, with 500,000 children on the verge of starving to death and WHO due to run out of its food aid in a couple of weeks. But that's not really making headlines. In the 21st century. What a wonderful world.....
/rant :sour:
Record corporate profits, no jobs. The increase in output in the third quarter was driven primarily by stronger consumer spending. Companies however prefer to wait until they have some security before hiring.
Bloody Obama :mad:
Yeah, it's all Obama's fault. :pQuote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust
I think we need new metrics for measuring the overall health of economies, to reflect the lives of real people, especially the middle masses or those on the lower cusp. GDP, corporate profits, and unemployment numbers don't cut the mustard, even though they're always stated in the "news" as measures of a nation's strength.
So many people are adamant that growth and jobs can only come from Freee Market Capitalism, few/no Regulations or government oversight, low corporate tax rates....to unleash the animal spirits ofgreedgrowth. And that growth will progress under its own power, will somehow find its way down the chain, to benefit the workers as much as the corporate owners.
That's describing how moss might grow on a stationary rock, at the end of a babbling brook which started from a powerful waterfall waaay waaay far away. That's not a very good description of how people want to be more than some rock, waiting to grow moss.
Good. Key then is to cut regulations and taxations to allow corporations to make more profits, so they have more security and then can start hiring more. Good to see that companies aren't being so stupid as to over-stretch so the slightest knock sends them out of business making everybody lose their jobs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust
Yes. Record profits aren't enough. More profits! And then they'll hire. You'll see!
Unfortunately, this administration’s talk about pro-job policies is sounding a bit like O.J. looking for his ex-wife’s killer. The culprit is standing right there. Yet, the Obama administration insists on more of the same: tax hikes, spending and a nonstop flood of regulatory measures. Administration officials would rather whimper about the S&P analysis than to reevaluate and revise their economic approach. And with Tim Geithner staying on as treasury secretary, don’t expect any creative economic policies anytime soon.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ziggy Stardust
Yes, we really do need to focus our efforts on finding the real killers, don't we? :downcast:
Ah yes, Obama and his tax hikes. Like the tax hikes from the stimulus and those recent ones he shoved down republicans throats. Bloody Obama :mad:
Lets look at the culprits.
Wall Street Journal: Taxes, unemployed people to blame for unemployment
Everything You Need To Know About How Liberals Kill The Economy
Why I'm Not Hiring
Poor Job Creators :(
Dude, you need to find new material for your stand-up comedy routine. The Obama administration is more like Bush lite, and you know it.Quote:
Originally Posted by CitizenCain
Okay, since Bush was to blame for everything, and PresBo is Bush-lite, what is he to blame for?Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
Almost everything.
We've been over this before, GeeGee. Don't pull things out of your ass that you can't back up. The Obama administration is like Bush heavy, not Bush lite. It's more Bush than Bush was, at least according to the popular left-wing narrative of why Bush was evil.
And, to both of you, the italicized part is a quotation, from the article I linked with that job loss factoid. If y'all are going to get all knee-jerk "Obama the wonder-god, Bush the Satan-spawn," you should at least make the effort to direct that inane drivel in the proper direction.
Oh I do apologize for reacting to it good Sir. I didn't realise it was a quotation. I know how that's like holy scripture and all.Quote:
Originally Posted by CitizenCain
Obama is not my wonder-god, he's my messiah (PBUH), or so I have been told. He's also a very naughty boy.Quote:
If y'all are going to get all knee-jerk "Obama the wonder-god, Bush the Satan-spawn," you should at least make the effort to direct that inane drivel in the proper direction.
:haha:Quote:
Originally Posted by CitizenCain
Wait, what part of my post sounded like Obama was the wonder God and Bush the Satan spawn? :confused:Quote:
And, to both of you, the italicized part is a quotation, from the article I linked with that job loss factoid. If y'all are going to get all knee-jerk "Obama the wonder-god, Bush the Satan-spawn," you should at least make the effort to direct that inane drivel in the proper direction.
A) Government can't (and shouldn't) create jobs. Unless it's a national emergency.
B) Private sector could (but won't) create jobs. Even if it's a national emergency.
C) Public and private sector are busy fighting. During a national emergency.
D) Workers and the middle class are screwed. The national emergency is one of our own making.
Well then, back to square one. Who creates jobs and Where Are The Jobs?
:mad:
Growth "creates" jobs, most other factors simply move jobs around.
That goes without saying. :p How is growth created, and by whom? Especially now, during tough times like this, with many countries treading water while Asia is growing fast. Growth and demand mean new jobs, but not necessarily in the "right" places (like the US) or the "right" industries (like finance). Cheap labor acts like a vacuum sucking away jobs at home.Quote:
Originally Posted by termite
What to do about that? :hmm: Do we want Hoover or FDR, or something else?
I suggest we hold out for someone who's at least a little right of Stalin, personally. Then again, that idea didn't fly last election, so it might not fly next time either.Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
:haha: :sour:Quote:
Originally Posted by CitizenCain
What's that make Bush, Jr.? Stalin lite? :p
I hear tell Rick Perry is a Texas "job creator". Something like half all new jobs since the recession were in Texas. Never mind they were mostly minimum wage/temporary/part-time, or that Texas students rank at the national bottom, but tops in drop-outs....and numbers of people without healthcare. A job's a job, right? :rolleyes:
A job is better than no job so to one extent yes. In addition how long has Perry been leading Texas? I genuinely don't know, but is he responsible for the education issues you've mentioned.Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
I don't know, either. Perry's governorship in Texas has both allies and critics. Just as Romney's governorship in Massachusetts does.Quote:
Originally Posted by RandBlade
Seems to me we can't "run" a country like we would any single state, even if those states saw some limited or state-specific successes. Not if we are to be a United States of America.
A job might be better than none, but to what extent? I watched CNN's coverage of saving Blair Mountain in West Virginia....and nope, giving 200-300 people temporary jobs to strip mine mountain coal is NOT worth the permanent and irreparable damage done to water-soil-air-health for thousands/millions of people, or next generations.
We can't just permanently fuck up our planet in exchange for our daily dose of energy. Like an addict's fix, needing what we need, and needing it right now, no matter who gets hurt in the process, or in the long run.
West Virginia is a beautiful place of trees, mountain hills, streams, rivers, rocks, wildlife. As part of the Appalachian region, it's more valuable than its coal. It'd be a crime to let the coal industry, or our energy consumption craven society, ruin such a magnificent region. Once it's gone, it can't be replaced.