"You're the only person that decides how far you'll go and what you're capable of." - Ben Saunders (Explorer and Endurance Athlete)
So a nation can't go from middle managers being fired and rehired as Wal Mart greeters and have meaningful wage growth.
Technical Paper 66 states: "The institutional population refers to a population universe consisting of inmates or residents of CPS-defined institutions, such as prisons, nursing homes, juvenile detention facilities, or residential mental hospitals." I was assuming, perhaps mistakenly, that at least some assisted living facilities and retirement homes would also fall into that definition because of their lack of free participation in the labor force. But regardless of specific facilities, it remains that many social security receipients are not in the population, and at the same time, some who are receipients do (limited) work, so it's better to go off of Table A-6. Employment status of the civilian population by sex, age, and disability status, not seasonally adjusted and other specific categories to determine the not in the labor force breakdown.
My point was that using sources other than the CPS for Not in the Labor Force breakdown will be inaccurate as they are different samples of different statistical universes with different definitions. You looked at full time students assuming none were in the labor force, while the tables I showed were all enrolled with many in the labor force. Sure, what you posted was close enough to make the overall point, but I feel it's better to use more accurate and specific data, if available.So your BLS table refutes 7.8M of the 22M students, suggesting that 7.8M are indeed in the work force, but the other 14.2M are not. So, other than taking issue with 7.8M of my 90M number, you really haven't offered much in the way of refinement of the composition of Not in Labor Force.
I wasn't trying to refute that overall point, and there are plenty of other categories as well. About 93% of those Not in the Labor Force do not want to work and of those who say they do, most are only hypothetical in that they haven't done anything about work in the last year, or are not available for work.Until you have a better set of numbers, it stands. So, we still have more than 90% of NILF explained by something the reflects positively on the economy: that is the people can afford to retire, be stay at home moms or go to school without having to work.
If you receive any profits from a business (or would receive profits if the business was profitable) then you are considered employed regardless of how many hours you worked unless the ownership is no more than an investment. Those are the first questions on the survey...establishing business or farm ownership. From the Interviewer's Manual: "If a person receives part of the profits from the business/farm, or would have received part of the profits if theOne of the biggest components of NILF are persons that are entrepreneurs / free lance consultants. I, for one, am not in the labor force as I have no job. I do own a business that employs 80 persons, who are in the labor force. Though I have my moments of discouragement in owning a business, I am not considered a worker, unemployed or discouraged worker.
business/farm had not operated at a loss, consider him/her to be working. This is regardless of the number of hours worked during the reference week unless (s)he owns the business for investment purposes only. The part of the profit received can be in cash or pay "in kind.""
Even just buying and selling on Ebay is considered a business if you're buying things specifically for resale and intend to make a profit.
Therefore, since the world has still/Much good, but much less good than ill,
And while the sun and moon endure/Luck's a chance, but trouble's sure,
I'd face it as a wise man would,/And train for ill and not for good.
Now weekly jobless claims are surging again.
Jobless Claims in U.S. Unexpectedly Climb to Four-Month High - Bloomberg
'What kind of sick and twisted toy factory is this?'
'We are all the sum of our tears. Too little and the ground is not fertile, and nothing can grow there. Too much, the best of us is washed away.'
"Better to be dead and cool, than alive and uncool."
If we remember back to the primary season of 2008. An attack Obama used successfully against Clinton was calling for Fair trade versus Free trade. To the best of my knowledge, no one on either side of the aisle has picked up this mantle.
And I agree about "free" trade. The Trans pacific agreement PROCESS is a joke - negotiated by lobbyists, with many Congress critters literally unable to see the draft language. The public is only getting occasionally leaked documents, and presumably it will be brought up under some kind of fast track BS so it can be jammed through before public opposition has time to build. It's as good an example of any how the process has been corrupted, and in both parties - Obama supports this process, obviously.
I do not know of a reliable unbiased statistic but, it would seem to me that if we are indeed recovering that we would see a corresponding drop in public assistance spending. I am not calling on Social Security, but actual assistance. Have we seen a corresponding drop in these programs, either in spend rate or applications?
Another measure would be the rate at which disability is applied for and granted, that spiked along with the UE rate.
Any good sources on these indicators?
It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion.
"Wealth of Nations," Book V, Chapter II, Part II, Article I, pg.911