Shock employment figures: Fewer than 46% of Americans have jobs

[X Factor]

The percentage of Americans who have jobs has fallen to the lowest point in three decades and now hovers just above 45 percent of the total population, according to an analysis of labor data published by USA Today.

*Snip*

"The bad economy, an aging population and a plateau in women working are contributing to changes that pose serious challenges for financing the nation's social programs," the paper noted.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/04/...gures-fewer-than-half-of-americans-have-jobs/

Soooo, basically, less than half of the population is supporting everyone else. Anybody see any problem with this?

Another change: the bulk of those not working has shifted from children to adults.

http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/employment/2011-04-13-more-americans-leave-labor-force.htm

 

[StillBallin75]

Shock employment figures: Fewer than 46% of Americans have jobs | The Raw Story

Soooo, basically, less than half of the population is supporting everyone else. Anybody see any problem with this?

what has that rate been historically?

 

[X Factor]

what has that rate been historically?

I added the USA Today link. At it's highest point it was something like 49.9%, being at less than 46% hasn't happened since 1986 (or something like that). One difference now, though, is that it's more adults who are not working instead of children.

 

[StillBallin75]

I added the USA Today link. At it's highest point it was something like 49.9%, being at less than 46% hasn't happened since 1986 (or something like that). One difference now, though, is that it's more adults who are not working instead of children.

Yeah it is concerning that an increasing aging population will rely on the younger generation to provide for it.

 

[X Factor]

Yeah it is concerning that an increasing aging population will rely on the younger generation to provide for it.

Well, theoretically, the older folks are just getting out of Social Security what they already paid into it, right? So the problems not retirees so much as it is younger people who aren't working and aren't paying taxes (and, in fact, are supported by taxes).

 

[StillBallin75]

Well, theoretically, the older folks are just getting out of Social Security what they already paid into it, right?

And that's the nub of it. It's unsustainable, yet it is also somewhat unfair to curb the benefits for those who qualify, seeing as they've paid into it and think that they are entitled to all of the benefits. I would be pissed too.

 

[X Factor]

And that's the nub of it. It's unsustainable, yet it is also somewhat unfair to curb the benefits for those who qualify, seeing as they've paid into it and think that they are entitled to all of the benefits. I would be pissed too.

Don't mean to quibble but it's not that they think they're entitled to it, they are entitled to it. I'm sure they saw that big chunk taken out of their check when they were working. They should get out of it what they paid in.

 

[StillBallin75]

Don't mean to quibble but it's not that they think they're entitled to it, they are entitled to it.

Yeah I agree, my wording wasn't the best choice. All i'm saying is that the situation sucks.

 

[X Factor]

Yeah I agree, my wording wasn't the best choice. All i'm saying is that the situation sucks.

Agreed. I've actually heard of people arguing for "means testing" (I think that was what it was called) for SS. If that means what it sounds like, that's crap.

 

[StillBallin75]

Agreed. I've actually heard of people arguing for "means testing" (I think that was what it was called) for SS. If that means what it sounds like, that's crap.

It means that since Social Security in its current form is unsustainable, the beneficiaries should be tested for their "means," i.e., need. People who need more (people who have less means) will get more, people who don't need as much (people with more means to take care of themselves) will have their benefits cut.

I'm not sure how I feel about the whole issue yet. There is no question SS needs to be reformed if it is to remain sustainable.

 

[X Factor]

It means that since Social Security in its current form is unsustainable, the beneficiaries should be tested for their "means," i.e., need. People who need more (people who have less means) will get more, people who don't need as much (people with more means to take care of themselves) will have their benefits cut.

But how is that fair? If they paid more in, they should get more out. Theoretically it's already their money anyway.

 

[StillBallin75]

But how is that fair? If they paid more in, they should get more out. Theoretically it's already their money anyway.

Yes that's why I assume there are many people against it.

 

[X Factor]

Yes that's why I assume there are many people against it.

Yeah, that's gonna be a hard sell for anyone who watched that chunk get taken out of their paycheck every two weeks over the last 20 years.

 

[washunut]

what has that rate been historically?

I think that the statistic that most economists use is something called the participatin rate. That is the nmber of working age that are either employed or seeking employment that number is usally about 64%. That number has come down just a bit, still in the 60s.

What is interesting when people look at the labor statistics is that the labor force has not grown in about three years. Most usual. On average about 125K workers enter the labor force each month. So a bif question is where are those 4 or 5 million people. Probably a large part are in th discouraged worker numbers. You probaby have heard about the U6 statistic when measuring unemployment, many feel it is a better reflection of the real number. U6 counts unemployed which he country counts as peole getting unemployment benefits, then there are people whse unemployment has run out, the fovernment calls these people discouraged workers, then we have part timers that have indicated that would be willing to work full time.
An interesting topic for thi site might be the number of uneployed youth in America. A lot of the unrest in the ME has come from disenchanted youth ad high unemployment in nations such as Egypt. I wonder when facebook will do its magic here in the states and have youth start voicing their outrage at what how they are being left behind by bth parties.

Makes e think back to my youth in the 60s, when we did take to the streets to rail against what was happening in the south and those old guys in congress sending kids to be killed in Vietnam, for what? I guess I got a bit off target sorry.

 

[PeteEU]

Shock employment figures: Fewer than 46% of Americans have jobs | The Raw Story

Soooo, basically, less than half of the population is supporting everyone else. Anybody see any problem with this?

More Americans leaving the workforce - USATODAY.com

What an idiotic statistic and spin.

First of all, according to the latest numbers (2009), 24.3% of the US population is under 18. Or are you part of the working children to death crowd?

Secondly the amount of people over 65 (aka retired) is 12.9%.

So there you already have 37.1% of the population covered.

Considering you real unemployment is around 16%, and then all those that are not counted, then no it is not a "shocking" number. Like it or not you should only worry about 62.9% of the population since the retired have paid for themselves, and since when do children pay for themselves?

 

[Kandahar]

There are at least three distinct issues at play here: Unemployment, women's rights, and demographics.

Unemployment - The only solution in the short-term is massive economic stimulus and deficit spending. In the longer term, we'll need to revise our tax codes and labor laws to keep our businesses competitive.

Women's rights - Men still have a higher participation in the labor force than women. To some extent, that's by choice: Women are more likely to be family-oriented and men are more likely to be money-oriented. But I think we should make it easier for women to join the labor force if they want to. Some countries offer subsidized childcare for working mothers, for example. That's something that's at least worth exploring.

Demographics - It's true that our population is going to get old quickly unless we do something about it. Policies that increase birth rates are a bad idea: They tend to reduce overall well-being, and are often incompatible with women's rights. Instead, I think we should focus on allowing more legal immigration to the United States. This will keep our work force relatively young and more able to support the elderly and the children.

 

[lpast]

I would think moving jobs to china for 2 decades has alot to do unemployment numbers and are illegal aliens not working in those numbers.
Theres alot of things that need fixing in this country and everyone wants to focus the blame on SS, medicare and Unions and overlook all the other wasteful expenditures...that neither democrats or republicans are even mentioning. Like Foreign aid and Subsidies cuts need to start at the top and go down and everyone needs to share the pain...proportionately

 

[Renae]

Shock employment figures: Fewer than 46% of Americans have jobs | The Raw Story

Soooo, basically, less than half of the population is supporting everyone else. Anybody see any problem with this?



More Americans leaving the workforce - USATODAY.com

I'm not shocked. I'm annoyed at the people of this country not seeing the truth.

 

[BWG]

But how is that fair? If they paid more in, they should get more out. Theoretically it's already their money anyway.

Yes, it's true that if you pay more in you'll receive more at retirement, but the calculation is heavily weighted at the lower end of earnings.

Your benefit level is calculated as 90% of your first $749 in monthly pre-retirement earnings, 32% of earnings up to $4,517, and 15% of your earnings above that. This means that high-income earners get a smaller benefit as a percentage of their income than low earners do.

Some of the so called 'Social Security fixes' call for eliminating the salary cap and expand/modify the above weighted distribution calculation.

 

[whysoserious]

I wonder what the statistic used to be like 40 years ago when women did not generally work?

 

[Barbbtx]

Agreed. I've actually heard of people arguing for "means testing" (I think that was what it was called) for SS. If that means what it sounds like, that's crap.

I agree. However, most people will get back way more in SS then they paid in. What if the wealthy people were just given a one time lump sum of everything they actually paid to SS?

 

[Barbbtx]

I think that the statistic that most economists use is something called the participatin rate. That is the nmber of working age that are either employed or seeking employment that number is usally about 64%. That number has come down just a bit, still in the 60s.

What is interesting when people look at the labor statistics is that the labor force has not grown in about three years. Most usual. On average about 125K workers enter the labor force each month. So a bif question is where are those 4 or 5 million people. Probably a large part are in th discouraged worker numbers. You probaby have heard about the U6 statistic when measuring unemployment, many feel it is a better reflection of the real number. U6 counts unemployed which he country counts as peole getting unemployment benefits, then there are people whse unemployment has run out, the fovernment calls these people discouraged workers, then we have part timers that have indicated that would be willing to work full time.
An interesting topic for thi site might be the number of uneployed youth in America. A lot of the unrest in the ME has come from disenchanted youth ad high unemployment in nations such as Egypt. I wonder when facebook will do its magic here in the states and have youth start voicing their outrage at what how they are being left behind by bth parties.

Makes e think back to my youth in the 60s, when we did take to the streets to rail against what was happening in the south and those old guys in congress sending kids to be killed in Vietnam, for what? I guess I got a bit off target sorry.

How does youth rioting in the streets because they don't have jobs, create jobs for them? Perhaps they should try being a bit more creative.

 

[Taylor]

Well, theoretically, the older folks are just getting out of Social Security what they already paid into it, right? So the problems not retirees so much as it is younger people who aren't working and aren't paying taxes (and, in fact, are supported by taxes).

No, theoretically older folks are getting much more out of Social Security than what they paid in. Back in 1983, they made the system solvent for a minimum of 50 years by increasing the payroll tax to cover the boomer generation. The boomers than took that surplus tax, which was supposed to be invested, and spent it on themselves. They now don't have enough money for the benefits they want and are pissed that the younger generation doesn't want to pay for their irresponsibility.

The only thing that's "unfair" is that many of them didn't understand this was going on. The question now is whether they should be responsible for being naive, or whether their children and grandchildren should be responsible for their being naive.

 

[X Factor]

I agree. However, most people will get back way more in SS then they paid in. What if the wealthy people were just given a one time lump sum of everything they actually paid to SS?

Not a bad idea, but I don't think that should just apply to wealthy people.

 

[Gladiator]

"the Social Security Administration claims that nearly 30% of working Americans become disabled before reaching their normal retirement age. In this article, we are going to explain some of the disability benefits under the Social Security program. We also have a separate publication that talks about the benefits of purchasing supplementary disability insurance."

Social Security Disability Insurance


Mental Health is a cause of 15% of recipients for SSI Disability.


Musculo Skelatal disabilities are about 50% of SSI Disability.

Access to Disability Data: Chartbook on Mental Health


Factors affecting Employability, Transportation, Dependent obilgations, Education, Specialized Employment skill Training:

http://www.dhs.state.mn.us/main/idc...wInterrupt=1&noSaveAs=1&dDocName=dhs16_146291



How much of SSI Disability payments are preventable? How can the number or disabled people, elibable for SSI Disablity, be reduced? How can the Mental and Physical health of people entering work age, become more employable, and less disabled? How can those non-dsabled workers who are not disabled when young, be kept employable, until retirement age?


It seems that improved utilization of all-option Family Planning could help to reduce the number of individuals applying for SSI Disablity. Defunding Planned parenthood seems likely to increase applications for SSI Disability.




//