Page 11 of 20 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 197

Thread: Record 92,269,000 Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Matches 36-Year Low

  1. #101
    Tavern Bartender
    #NeverOprah
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,567

    Re: Record 92,269,000 Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Matches 36-Year Low

    Quote Originally Posted by StillBallin75 View Post
    How much of this is explained by baby boomers deciding to retire?
    Baby Boomers turned 65 in 2011.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  2. #102
    Ideologically Impure
    Simon W. Moon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Fayettenam
    Last Seen
    12-18-17 @ 11:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,981
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: Record 92,269,000 Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Matches 36-Year Low

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    Record 92,269,000 Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Matches 36-Year Low | CNS News
    The number of those not unemployed, but employable and not working seems to be going up. This is a crisis in my opinion.
    If we could just get those Baby Boomers to keep working on into their nineties and stop retiring, the ungrateful ****s.

    There are about 65 million Boomers.
    The country is unusually top-heavy in that the generation following the Boomers was smaller than the Boomers generation.
    Iirc, most generations have had more babies than the generation before them did.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baby_boomers#Size_and_economic_impact
    The age wave theory suggests an economic slowdown when the boomers start retiring during 20072009.[21] Projections for the aging U.S. workforce suggest that by 2020, 25% of employees will be at least 55 years old.[22]


    Help out the good folks playing along at home...
    Is there anyway that we can rule out demographics as a cause for this statistical trend so that we can place the blame entirely on Obama?
    I may be wrong.

  3. #103
    Tavern Bartender
    #NeverOprah
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,567

    Re: Record 92,269,000 Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Matches 36-Year Low

    Quote Originally Posted by Simon W. Moon View Post
    If we could just get those Baby Boomers to keep working on into their nineties and stop retiring, the ungrateful ****s.

    There are about 65 million Boomers.
    The country is unusually top-heavy in that the generation following the Boomers was smaller than the Boomers generation.
    Iirc, most generations have had more babies than the generation before them did.

    Baby boomers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    The age wave theory suggests an economic slowdown when the boomers start retiring during 2007–2009.[21] Projections for the aging U.S. workforce suggest that by 2020, 25% of employees will be at least 55 years old.[22]


    Help out the good folks playing along at home...
    Is there anyway that we can rule out demographics as a cause for this statistical trend so that we can place the blame entirely on Obama?
    Keep building Walmarts so we can get those greeter jobs.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  4. #104
    Ideologically Impure
    Simon W. Moon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Fayettenam
    Last Seen
    12-18-17 @ 11:02 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    16,981
    Blog Entries
    5

    Re: Record 92,269,000 Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Matches 36-Year Low

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    Considering the population is growing every year, that is not saying anything good.
    But the population didn't grow at the same rate every year.
    Some years it grew much faster than others.
    The flip side is that this means that there will be years when the rate of people retiring will be greater than other years.

    Or so it seems.
    ymmv
    I may be wrong.

  5. #105
    Tavern Bartender
    #NeverOprah
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,567

    Re: Record 92,269,000 Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Matches 36-Year Low

    Quote Originally Posted by Simon W. Moon View Post
    But the population didn't grow at the same rate every year.
    Some years it grew much faster than others.
    The flip side is that this means that there will be years when the rate of people retiring will be greater than other years.

    Or so it seems.
    ymmv
    People aren't all retiring at 65 today. Due to the greed of the Greatest Generation we're paying more in SS taxes and retiring later.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  6. #106
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    IL
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    37,324

    Re: Record 92,269,000 Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Matches 36-Year Low

    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    Due to the greed of the Greatest Generation we're paying more in SS taxes and retiring later.
    The greed of the Greatest Generation huh American?
    You mean the ones like my Mother who paid into SS for well over 40 years?

    You've got a lot of nerve to smear the Greatest Generation who fought and died
    for people like you so you can sit here and smear them as being greedy.

    We'll see how you feel when you get to their age, since they were all so greedy and dirt poor during the GOP Depression .
    Physics is Phun; Chemists Have Solutions

  7. #107
    Tavern Bartender
    #NeverOprah
    American's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Virginia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:34 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    76,567

    Re: Record 92,269,000 Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Matches 36-Year Low

    Quote Originally Posted by NIMBY View Post
    The greed of the Greatest Generation huh American?
    You mean the ones like my Mother who paid into SS for well over 40 years?

    You've got a lot of nerve to smear the Greatest Generation who fought and died
    for people like you so you can sit here and smear them as being greedy.

    We'll see how you feel when you get to their age, since they were all so greedy and dirt poor during the GOP Depression .
    Yeah, like my parents too. They voted themselves benefit increases that the system didn't cover, so our payroll taxes went up. Yeah that generation.
    "He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
    "Fly-over" country voted, and The Donald is now POTUS.

  8. #108
    Sage


    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    IL
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:26 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    37,324

    Re: Record 92,269,000 Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Matches 36-Year Low

    You mean the ones who donate to a public 401K which should be paying for itself.
    Just as with ALL public pensions, both parties AFTER the Greatest Generation have screwed this pooch.

    And it was a very smart GOP Paul Ryan who tried to take away one of the three COLA points from bloated VA pensions, saving billions.
    And who fought him, neo-clowns and military politicians from both parties.

    While I may disagree with some of Ryan's priorites, he is by far the smartest man in D.C. to handle the economy
    and has forged an important relationship with Dem. Sen. Murray.

    Ryan is supported by a Sen. Coburn who I have tremendous amount of respect for.
    His back-in-black plan of 2011 is still the best grand bargain I've seen, though Simpson/Bowles is close.

    And I'm torn as to why it didn't get the 14-4 vote needed--with Ryan voting no--and Coburn backing him--
    due to concerns about what they felt Dems were doing.
    Quote Originally Posted by American View Post
    Yeah, like my parents too.
    They voted themselves benefit increases that the system didn't cover, so our payroll taxes went up. Yeah that generation.
    You won't have to worry about collecting SS if Ryan doesn't get this House in order,
    as he takes over the House Ways and Means Chair next year--and basically runs it now.

    There are plenty of mod/con Dems out here like me that are looking for some sanity from the House and ready to work with that sanity.
    I will not back down from defending Obama from unfair criticism leading up to an election.

    And yes I have a plan to rid ourselves of the National albatross of Reid even if Dems keep the Senate--
    not to brag--but I have the ear of a few people on my Senator's staff, though he still supports Reid publicly for now--until after the election IMHO .
    Physics is Phun; Chemists Have Solutions

  9. #109
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,773

    Re: Record 92,269,000 Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Matches 36-Year Low

    Quote Originally Posted by Hari Seldon View Post
    Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) contribute to foreclosures and the financial crisis? And, is the CRA being reformed?

    The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) of 1977 was passed by Congress to ensure that banks meet the credit needs of their local communities and to encourage investment in the immediate communities served by depository institutions. Banks are rated periodically on their efforts to achieve these goals.

    The Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) provides an interagency CRA rating database on its website.

    In addition, each bank has available for public review a file giving its CRA rating and additional information that it is required to prepare.

    The Federal Reserve Board has found no connection between CRA and the subprime mortgage problems. In fact, the Board's analysis (102 KB PDF) found that nearly 60 percent of higher-priced loans went to middle- or higher-income borrowers or neighborhoods, which are not the focus of CRA activity. Additionally, about 20 percent of the higher-priced loans that were extended in low- or moderate-income areas, or to low- or moderate-income borrowers, were loans originated by lenders not covered by the CRA. Our analysis found that only six percent of all higher-priced loans were made by CRA-covered lenders to borrowers and neighborhoods targeted by the CRA. Further, our review of loan performance found that rates of serious mortgage delinquency are high in all neighborhood groups, not just in lower-income areas.

    The Fed, in collaboration with the other financial regulatory agencies, is currently considering what can be done to make CRA a more effective regulatory incentive and how CRA can be revised to address the new community needs that have emerged in the wake of the foreclosure crisis. As part of this regulatory initiative, the agencies held CRA hearings and invited written comments on how to improve CRA in June 2010. In December 2010, the agencies published amendments to the rule to encourage financial institutions to participate in activities aimed at revitalizing areas designated by the Department of Housing and Urban Development for funds under the Neighborhood Stabilization Program.

    FRB: Did the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) contribute to foreclosures and the financial crisis? And, is the CRA being reformed?


    LOL !!

    Yes, the GSEs are bankrupt because they bought " PRIME " loans.

    Trillions in CDOs all over the world went belly up all at once because their tranches were filled with Securities backed by " Prime " Loans.

    Give me a break.

    Problem with that assertion is even Clintons AG disagreed with it as she specifically mentioned the 1995 CRA changes as the mechanism for the 86 percent increase in CRA commitments from 1995 to 1998.

    What's qualifies as a CRA loan ? Well according to Clinton appointee Jamie Gorelick ( Vice Chair at Fannie Mae ) they were ANY loan made with " flexible underwriting techniques " and up to 3 percent down.

    AThe Federal Reserve Boards assesment lacks allot of credibility considering they didn't even mention that the CRA laws were CHANGED in 1995.

  10. #110
    Guru
    pinqy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:25 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    4,399

    Re: Record 92,269,000 Not in Labor Force; Participation R ate Matches 36-Year Low

    Quote Originally Posted by DA60 View Post
    I don't usually do long, multi-quote posts...life is way too short, no offense (that goes for everyone). They usually just go on and on and on as both parties often answer every bloody quote.
    I understand, and while I'll still multi-quote, I will, for this post, restrict it to your factual errors and not discussion of concepts.

    a) those that 'Did not search for work in previous year' (I wish the bloody BLS would label the lines) I count because they want to work but gave up looking.
    Untrue. The criteria is "Did not search for work in previous year." That's it. Nothing about ever having looked or "giving up." There are many reasons besides "giving up" for someone to leave the labor force and it is factually inaccurate to characterize all those who did not look in the previous year as having given up. And it is certainly incorrect to apply it to those who have never held a job.


    I could care less what the BLS calls them, I call them unemployed. And I don't care how long they have been not searching - if they have no job, want a job and are available to work on reasonably short notice, then they are unemployed to me. Whether they have looked 'actively' or not is completely irrelevant to me on this. They are called 'discouraged' for a reason.
    No, they are not called discouraged. Discouraged has a specific definition and it is factually incorrect to apply that to all who want a job. Additionally, those Not in the Labor Force, Want a Job Now, have not looked in previous year, includes many people who are not available for work. It is not published how many or any reasons why they haven't looked in the previous year. So it is factually incorrect to apply any characterization to them.


    So, they [marginally attached] don't have a job, they want a job and were available to take a job when asked. The secondary reasons are just that, secondary.
    The fact some of them have ill health or a disability does not mean they are not available to work...it just adds a secondary reason for their discouragement.
    Again....discouraged has a specific meaning and definition and it is factually incorrect to apply it to all marginally attached. Discouragement is one of the "secondary reasons" you're talking about.
    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.

Page 11 of 20 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... 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
  •