Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 90

Thread: Sessions: 'For Every One Job Added, Nearly 5 People Left the Workforce'[W:88]

  1. #21
    Pragmatist
    SouthernDemocrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    KC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:51 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,420

    Re: Sessions: 'For Every One Job Added, Nearly 5 People Left the Workforce'

    Quote Originally Posted by scatt View Post
    Was this backed into at a later date?
    What do you mean? You are being rather obtuse. Do you have an issue with math? The Baby Boomer Generation started in 1946. They started turning 65 in 2011. That is retirement age. Its been a concern for quite some time because they are the largest generation in American history, and thus as they leave the workforce and start drawing Social Security and Medicare benefits, the subsequent generations are not as large, and thus an additional financial strain results. Even if we had some miraculously booming economy, we would still see some decline in the labor force participation rate as the Baby Boomer generation hit retirement age and thus left the workforce.
    "You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)

  2. #22
    feckless bon vivant

    radioman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    lotusland
    Last Seen
    12-13-17 @ 08:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    3,761

    Re: Sessions: 'For Every One Job Added, Nearly 5 People Left the Workforce'

    Quote Originally Posted by US Conservative View Post
    Lets focus on jobs in this thread. Thats the thread topic.
    Okay.
    If the job situation is so bad, why don't GOPers support extended unemployment benefits?
    No matter how cynical I become toward politicians, it's never enough.

  3. #23
    Guru
    scatt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Last Seen
    02-09-17 @ 10:57 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,721

    Re: Sessions: 'For Every One Job Added, Nearly 5 People Left the Workforce'

    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernDemocrat View Post
    What do you mean?
    Did they take this and back it into reality? They predict 300k a month, did they compare that with reality? Can they take the released numbers since 2011 and see if it holds true?

    Quote Originally Posted by radioman View Post
    Okay.
    If the job situation is so bad, why don't GOPers support extended unemployment benefits?
    Did Obama say it was bad?

  4. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Between Athens and Jerusalem
    Last Seen
    05-18-16 @ 07:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    33,522

    Re: Sessions: 'For Every One Job Added, Nearly 5 People Left the Workforce'

    Quote Originally Posted by radioman View Post
    Okay.
    If the job situation is so bad, why don't GOPers support extended unemployment benefits?
    Again, stop deflecting from the topic. This isnt a wellfare thread, and the facts-while perhaps inconvenient to you-are what they are.

    Heres a better question-why cant the democrat party, after 5 years, implement ANY demonstrably helpful policies? Surely more green jobs might help eh?

  5. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Between Athens and Jerusalem
    Last Seen
    05-18-16 @ 07:06 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    33,522

    Re: Sessions: 'For Every One Job Added, Nearly 5 People Left the Workforce'

    Quote Originally Posted by SouthernDemocrat View Post
    As I mentioned earlier, an average of 10,000 Baby Boomers hit retirement age a day now. Baby Boomers Retire | Pew Research Center

    The economist has a really good article on the the job numbers here: America's jobs report: Both better, and worse, than it looks | The Economist

    Not to say the numbers are not abysmal for December, but the picture is pretty complicated when you dig down into it.
    The trend started well before 2011. Im sure its a factor, but the trend remains. Can we agree on this?

  6. #26
    Pontificator
    iliveonramen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
    Last Seen
    12-16-17 @ 05:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    9,213

    Re: Sessions: 'For Every One Job Added, Nearly 5 People Left the Workforce'

    Quote Originally Posted by US Conservative View Post
    Folks, we can't keep this up, the numbers released by the Obama administration after 5 years of failed policies and smoke and mirrors are damning. 92 million outside the workforce. The jobs added are crap. This is what the democrat party gets us. Take a look at these trends.

    People Not In Labor Force Soar To Record 91.8 Million; Participation Rate Plunges To 1978 Levels | Zero Hedge

    This has been predicted for decades as the Boomers leave the markets.

    For example...lets look at the age group 16 to 24 and 25 to 54. That's pretty much "working age".

    In the age group 16 to 24
    1992-66%
    2012-54%
    The biggest drop has been ages 16 to 19 from 51%('92) to 34%('12)

    In 25 to 54...the bulk of "working age" individuals.

    83.6% ('92) to 81.4% ('12).

    Definitely a drop but not anything mind blowing.
    “Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.” John Maynard Keynes

  7. #27
    Sage

    ocean515's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,705

    Re: Sessions: 'For Every One Job Added, Nearly 5 People Left the Workforce'

    Quote Originally Posted by iliveonramen View Post
    This has been predicted for decades as the Boomers leave the markets.

    For example...lets look at the age group 16 to 24 and 25 to 54. That's pretty much "working age".

    In the age group 16 to 24
    1992-66%
    2012-54%
    The biggest drop has been ages 16 to 19 from 51%('92) to 34%('12)

    In 25 to 54...the bulk of "working age" individuals.

    83.6% ('92) to 81.4% ('12).

    Definitely a drop but not anything mind blowing.
    How does the BLS calculate the actual number of people leaving the workforce?

  8. #28
    Guru
    Samhain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Northern Ohio
    Last Seen
    12-16-17 @ 12:34 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    3,888

    Re: Sessions: 'For Every One Job Added, Nearly 5 People Left the Workforce'

    Quote Originally Posted by iliveonramen View Post
    This has been predicted for decades as the Boomers leave the markets.

    For example...lets look at the age group 16 to 24 and 25 to 54. That's pretty much "working age".

    In the age group 16 to 24
    1992-66%
    2012-54%
    The biggest drop has been ages 16 to 19 from 51%('92) to 34%('12)

    In 25 to 54...the bulk of "working age" individuals.

    83.6% ('92) to 81.4% ('12).

    Definitely a drop but not anything mind blowing.
    % of participation of above 55 has risen from 31% to 40% since 1990. It appears to have peaked at 40% around 2007.

  9. #29
    Pragmatist
    SouthernDemocrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    KC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:51 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,420

    Re: Sessions: 'For Every One Job Added, Nearly 5 People Left the Workforce'

    Quote Originally Posted by scatt View Post
    Did they take this and back it into reality? They predict 300k a month, did they compare that with reality? Can they take the released numbers since 2011 and see if it holds true?
    Well it could not possibly be 10,000 a day because that would mean every Baby Boomer survived to retirement age. Plus some continue working. I am trying to find numbers on it, but from what I have read before, it accounts for about 30% of the decline in the labor force participation rate.
    Last edited by SouthernDemocrat; 01-10-14 at 05:50 PM.
    "You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)

  10. #30
    Pragmatist
    SouthernDemocrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    KC
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:51 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    17,420

    Re: Sessions: 'For Every One Job Added, Nearly 5 People Left the Workforce'

    I really don't think the mediocre job growth the last few years has much to do with anything that has gone on in Washington other than the dysfunction in congress and resulting economic uncertainty that has placed a small drag on growth.

    Part of the problem is worldwide. The United States actually has one of the lower unemployment rates in the developed world: List of countries by unemployment rate - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    I can't imagine any economic policies, left right or center, that would have had us back to full employment when you consider that few other comparable nations have been able to accomplish this since the 2008 to 2009 recession. Taxes are historically quite low. The Feds have infused tons of money into the economy via Quantitative Easing, corporate profits are quite high as well as investment. However, hiring remains mediocre.

    In terms of economic policy, I think the problem actually lies at the states. If you look at unemployment by state, there is huge variation:
    Unemployment Rates for States

    Part of this is attributable to energy booms in states like North Dakota, Wyoming, and Texas. However, there is obviously more to it than that, and its not just a blue state / red state divide either. Hawaii, Vermont, and Minnesota are all solidly blue states, yet are in the top 10 for low unemployment despite not having any type of energy booms in those states. 5 of the top 10 states with the highest unemployment rates are red states. So I don't think being a republican ran state necessarily leads to better economic growth, nor does being a blue state mean a state is anti-business. However, when you look at the poor performance in recent years by states like California, New Jersey, Connecticut, and Oregon, that has to be at least partially attributed to bad policy at the state level. Point being there is conservatism that is good for economic growth - Utah for example, and there is conservatism that is bad for economic growth - Kentucky or Nevada. Similarly, there is liberalism that is good for economic growth - Minnesota for example, and there is liberalism that is bad for economic growth - California. Setting aside states with energy booms like Texas and North Dakota, I think what good performing states have in common is not that they are all red or blue states, but rather that they are states that are pragmatic in their governance (Utah on the right, Minnesota on the left). The worst economic polices at the state and national level are those that are overly ideological and lack moderation and pragmatism. Point being our polarization and radicalization at all levels of government is our biggest impediment to economic growth in my opinion.
    "You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)

Page 3 of 9 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •