Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
First of all, you have to link to the portal because after you enter the search data and go to the page with the completed search you get this if you post that link:
Notice: Data not available: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
Secondly, the numbers we were discussing were retiring Boomers working part-time for noneconomic reasons, which is listed as "Employed part-time (usually work less than 35 hours)" so it doesn't matter that part-time for economic reasons wasn't listed as far as our discussion goes. That is just a diversion from admitting you used the wrong data to claim that the number of Boomers working part-time for noneconomic reasons was declining when it is actually increasing as I rightly said.
Finally, I would remind you that the numbers YOU linked to regarding part-time for noneconomic/economic came from the same Current Population Survey.
Here is YOUR link:
A-18. Employed and unemployed full- and part-time workers by age, sex, race, and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity
Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
Have you ever heard of the Straw Man Fallacy?And again, YOU came up with the 1.2 million figure, I merely repeated YOUR figure that you now attacked as wrong, all the while telling ME to "pay attention."
The 1.2 Million figure deals with your initial point. You claimed that this figure has increased because you have more retirees reducing their hours as they are reaching retirement age. This is false. You have less workers 55 and over who are part-time due to noneconomic reason than you did since 2012. 299,000 less workers in this category to be exact.
Retiring Boomers are 65 and over, not 55. The number of noneconomic part-time workers 65 and older is INCREASING every year and by larger amounts each year.
Bureau of Labor Statistics Data
Year Annual
2009 2,635,000
2010 2,658,000
2011 2,762,000
2012 3,025,000
OKFirst of all, you have to link to the portal because after you enter the search data and go to the page with the completed search you get this if you post that link:
Notice: Data not available: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
Secondly, the numbers we were discussing were retiring Boomers working part-time for noneconomic reasons, which is listed as "Employed part-time (usually work less than 35 hours)" so it doesn't matter that part-time for economic reasons wasn't listed as far as our discussion goes. That is just a diversion from admitting you used the wrong data to claim that the number of Boomers working part-time for noneconomic reasons was declining when it is actually increasing as I rightly said.
For whatever reason, you don't know nor understand that the 'Employed Part-Time' statistical category lumps non-economic & economic part-time workers together. I'll use the '55 Years and Over' Demographic to show you what I mean.
Finally, the demographics of workers regarding Part-Time for noneconomic/economic reasons are found in the Household Survey. You are trying to look up these statistics in the Current Population Survey.
...From the Current Population SurveyFinally, I would remind you that the numbers YOU linked to regarding part-time for noneconomic/economic came from the same Current Population Survey.
Here is YOUR link:
A-18. Employed and unemployed full- and part-time workers by age, sex, race, and Hispanic or Latino ethnicity
Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
That's the Household data...
Have you ever heard of the Straw Man Fallacy?The 1.2 Million figure deals with your initial point. You claimed that this figure has increased because you have more retirees reducing their hours as they are reaching retirement age. This is false. You have less workers 55 and over who are part-time due to noneconomic reason than you did since 2012. 299,000 less workers in this category to be exact.
Retiring Boomers are 65 and over, not 55. The number of noneconomic part-time workers 65 and older is INCREASING every year and by larger amounts each year.
Bureau of Labor Statistics Data
Year Annual
2009 2,635,000
2010 2,658,000
2011 2,762,000
2012 3,025,000
OKFirst of all, you have to link to the portal because after you enter the search data and go to the page with the completed search you get this if you post that link:
Notice: Data not available: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
Secondly, the numbers we were discussing were retiring Boomers working part-time for noneconomic reasons, which is listed as "Employed part-time (usually work less than 35 hours)" so it doesn't matter that part-time for economic reasons wasn't listed as far as our discussion goes. That is just a diversion from admitting you used the wrong data to claim that the number of Boomers working part-time for noneconomic reasons was declining when it is actually increasing as I rightly said.
For whatever reason, you don't know nor understand that the 'Employed Part-Time' statistical category lumps non-economic & economic part-time workers together. I'll use the '55 Years and Over' Demographic to show you what I mean.
For 2009 subtract 210,000 for workers over 65 working part-time for economic reasons.
For 2010 subtract 218,000 for workers over 65 working part-time for economic reasons.
For 2011 subtract 224,000 for workers over 65 working part-time for economic reasons.
For 2012 subtract 235,000 for workers over 65 working part-time for economic reasons.
You STILL get the number of noneconomic part-time workers 65 and older INCREASING every year and by larger amounts each year.
Persons with a Disability: Labor Force Characteristics - 2009Have you ever heard of the Straw Man Fallacy?
Retiring Boomers are 65 and over, not 55. The number of noneconomic part-time workers 65 and older is INCREASING every year and by larger amounts each year.
Bureau of Labor Statistics Data
Year Annual
2009 2,635,000
2010 2,658,000
2011 2,762,000
2012 3,025,000
OKFor whatever reason, you don't know nor understand that the 'Employed Part-Time' statistical category lumps non-economic & economic part-time workers together. I'll use the '55 Years and Over' Demographic to show you what I mean.
For 2009 subtract 210,000 for workers over 65 working part-time for economic reasons.
For 2010 subtract 218,000 for workers over 65 working part-time for economic reasons.
For 2011 subtract 224,000 for workers over 65 working part-time for economic reasons.
For 2012 subtract 235,000 for workers over 65 working part-time for economic reasons.
You STILL get the number of noneconomic part-time workers 65 and older INCREASING every year and by larger amounts each year.
Don't make up your own statistics.
Now you're arguing against human nature. Humans are herd animals. From the beginning of time, we've chosen to live with others of our own kind. We start with families and move to towns and cities and then to national communities. Our nature demands and expects loyalty and support from every member of the community because solidarity is our defense against danger. When we see someone putting himself above the interests of the community, we are suspicious to say the least. Often that suspicion leads to being judgmental. It leads us to think of the rebel as being immoral.
We don't live with each other and we are not a family. I have my own property and you have yours. I have my own goals and you have yours. I have my own interest and you have yours. I have my own needs and you have yours. I have my own decisions. No one is in any position to tell me what I should be doing with my own resources.
Now you're arguing against human nature. Humans are herd animals. From the beginning of time, we've chosen to live with others of our own kind. We start with families and move to towns and cities and then to national communities. Our nature demands and expects loyalty and support from every member of the community because solidarity is our defense against danger. When we see someone putting himself above the interests of the community, we are suspicious to say the least. Often that suspicion leads to being judgmental. It leads us to think of the rebel as being immoral.
We don't live with each other and we are not a family. I have my own property and you have yours. I have my own goals and you have yours. I have my own interest and you have yours. I have my own needs and you have yours. I have my own decisions. No one is in any position to tell me what I should be doing with my own resources.
Being a member of a national community does not require sharing living quarters. Nor does it require perfect alignment of everyone's efforts to fill his needs. It demands only that we recognize a level of commonality and insist everyone acknowledge his duty to it.
Persons with a Disability: Labor Force Characteristics - 2009OK
For 2009 subtract 210,000 for workers over 65 working part-time for economic reasons.
For 2010 subtract 218,000 for workers over 65 working part-time for economic reasons.
For 2011 subtract 224,000 for workers over 65 working part-time for economic reasons.
For 2012 subtract 235,000 for workers over 65 working part-time for economic reasons.
You STILL get the number of noneconomic part-time workers 65 and older INCREASING every year and by larger amounts each year.
Don't make up your own statistics.
PERSONS WITH A DISABILITY: LABOR FORCE CHARACTERISTICS?2010
PERSONS WITH A DISABILITY: LABOR FORCE CHARACTERISTICS?2011
PERSONS WITH A DISABILITY: LABOR FORCE CHARACTERISTICS?2012
Being a member of a national community does not require sharing living quarters. Nor does it require perfect alignment of everyone's efforts to fill his needs. It demands only that we recognize a level of commonality and insist everyone acknowledge his duty to it.
It's not my duty to support your goals, nor is it my obligation.
Damn you are helpless! Table 2 breaks out the number who usually work part time for economic reasons for those over 65.
Damn you are helpless! Table 2 breaks out the number who usually work part time for economic reasons for those over 65.
Okay?
Being a member of a national community does not require sharing living quarters. Nor does it require perfect alignment of everyone's efforts to fill his needs. It demands only that we recognize a level of commonality and insist everyone acknowledge his duty to it.
It's not my duty to support your goals, nor is it my obligation.
You should not consider such an opinion absolute. At varying levels you may or may not have a duty to support the community. Secondly, the choice is not yours to make. The rule of the majority will govern your behavior.
Gee, table 2 shows BOTH disabled and non-disabled workers over 65 as well as showing part-time for noneconomic reasons for workers over 65 increasing each year since 2009, while breaking out the working part-time for economic reasons from the usually works part-time. Table 2 proves everything I said is true and not made up like your bullshit.Damn you are helpless! Table 2 breaks out the number who usually work part time for economic reasons for those over 65.Okay?
There is a reason why disability has it's on characteristics. You do know this right?
Besides, it doesn't show part-time for noneconomic reasons, which is what you are trying to prove is 'increasing.'
Focus please.
It's not my duty to support your goals, nor is it my obligation.
You should not consider such an opinion absolute. At varying levels you may or may not have a duty to support the community. Secondly, the choice is not yours to make. The rule of the majority will govern your behavior.
My individual rights supersede your majority rule.
Gee, table 2 shows BOTH disabled and non-disabled workers over 65 as well as showing part-time for noneconomic reasons for workers over 65 increasing each year since 2009, while breaking out the working part-time for economic reasons from the usually works part-time. Table 2 proves everything I said is true and not made up like your bullshit.Damn you are helpless! Table 2 breaks out the number who usually work part time for economic reasons for those over 65.
There is a reason why disability has it's on characteristics. You do know this right?
Besides, it doesn't show part-time for noneconomic reasons, which is what you are trying to prove is 'increasing.'
Focus please.
Admit it, you are blind to reality.
Whenever the Right gets caught with their foot in their mouth they play dumb, in your case, too dumb to do simple subtraction.Gee, table 2 shows BOTH disabled and non-disabled workers over 65 as well as showing part-time for noneconomic reasons for workers over 65 increasing each year since 2009, while breaking out the working part-time for economic reasons from the usually works part-time. Table 2 proves everything I said is true and not made up like your bullshit.There is a reason why disability has it's on characteristics. You do know this right?
Besides, it doesn't show part-time for noneconomic reasons, which is what you are trying to prove is 'increasing.'
Focus please.
Admit it, you are blind to reality.
Table 2 only shows part-time for economic reasons. You are, once again, making an assumption based one particular statistic. I don't know why you are so hellbent on creating your own statistics, but that isn't going to work with me.
the 'Employed Part-Time' statistical category lumps non-economic & economic part-time workers together.
Whenever the Right gets caught with their foot in their mouth they play dumb, in your case, too dumb to do simple subtraction.Gee, table 2 shows BOTH disabled and non-disabled workers over 65 as well as showing part-time for noneconomic reasons for workers over 65 increasing each year since 2009, while breaking out the working part-time for economic reasons from the usually works part-time. Table 2 proves everything I said is true and not made up like your bullshit.
Admit it, you are blind to reality.
Table 2 only shows part-time for economic reasons. You are, once again, making an assumption based one particular statistic. I don't know why you are so hellbent on creating your own statistics, but that isn't going to work with me.
Funny how you knew the usually works part-time category lumps together the "non-economic & economic part-time workers together." Table 2 breaks out the number working part-time for economic reasons, so all you have to do is subtract the 272,000 for economic reasons from the 3,025,000 total to get the 2,753,000 people 65 and older working part-time for noneconomic reasons. So with only the most basic arithmetic, Table 2 shows BOTH the number of "non-economic & economic part-time workers" 65 and over, that is for those of us capable of doing simple subtraction, which you would have me believe leaves you out!!!
the 'Employed Part-Time' statistical category lumps non-economic & economic part-time workers together.
Since both A and B are known, X is easily CALCULATED without any guesswork. But since simple subtraction is far beyond you, algebra is in orbit for you.Whenever the Right gets caught with their foot in their mouth they play dumb, in your case, too dumb to do simple subtraction.Table 2 only shows part-time for economic reasons. You are, once again, making an assumption based one particular statistic. I don't know why you are so hellbent on creating your own statistics, but that isn't going to work with me.
Funny how you knew the usually works part-time category lumps together the "non-economic & economic part-time workers together." Table 2 breaks out the number working part-time for economic reasons, so all you have to do is subtract the 272,000 for economic reasons from the 3,025,000 total to get the 2,753,000 people 65 and older working part-time for noneconomic reasons. So with only the most basic arithmetic, Table 2 shows BOTH the number of "non-economic & economic part-time workers" 65 and over, that is for those of us capable of doing simple subtraction, which you would have me believe leaves you out!!!
the 'Employed Part-Time' statistical category lumps non-economic & economic part-time workers together.
Just because you know the variable of one statistic doesn't entail you can guess the other. It's already been established that Part-Time For Noneconomic reasons has decreased for ages 55 and up, and the same thing can be shown for those ages 65 and above. You seen an increase in Part-Time for economic reasons because it is increasing faster than those who are working part-time for non-economic reasons. I'll break this down to you in simple algebra:
A + -B = X
Unless you can actually prove what the statistics are, do yourself a favor and don't guess.
Since both A and B are known, X is easily CALCULATED without any guesswork. But since simple subtraction is far beyond you, algebra is in orbit for you.Whenever the Right gets caught with their foot in their mouth they play dumb, in your case, too dumb to do simple subtraction.
Funny how you knew the usually works part-time category lumps together the "non-economic & economic part-time workers together." Table 2 breaks out the number working part-time for economic reasons, so all you have to do is subtract the 272,000 for economic reasons from the 3,025,000 total to get the 2,753,000 people 65 and older working part-time for noneconomic reasons. So with only the most basic arithmetic, Table 2 shows BOTH the number of "non-economic & economic part-time workers" 65 and over, that is for those of us capable of doing simple subtraction, which you would have me believe leaves you out!!!
Just because you know the variable of one statistic doesn't entail you can guess the other. It's already been established that Part-Time For Noneconomic reasons has decreased for ages 55 and up, and the same thing can be shown for those ages 65 and above. You seen an increase in Part-Time for economic reasons because it is increasing faster than those who are working part-time for non-economic reasons. I'll break this down to you in simple algebra:
A + -B = X
Unless you can actually prove what the statistics are, do yourself a favor and don't guess.
Since it has already been established that 55 and over is a Straw Man you invented because you could not rebut the facts I gave about RETIRING Boomers 65 and older, and it has already been established that Part-Time For Noneconomic reasons has been INCREASING by larger amounts each year for those 65 and older, it is moronic to claim the data for 55 and older are comparable to the data for 65 and older.
As is typical of the Right, you accuse others of doing what you, in fact, do. In this case making up your own statistics. You made up the claim that the increase in part-time for economic reasons for the retiring Boomers we are discussing is greater than the increase in part-time for noneconomic reasons, but from 2011 to 2012 the part-time for economic reasons grew 9.2% while the part-time for noneconomic reasons grew by 10.1%. Again math is not in your weelhouse.
Both A and B ARE known. A, the total of part-time workers 65 and older for both economic and noneconomic reasons for 2012 is 3,025,000. B, the number who work part-time for economic reasons is 272,000. X, the number who work part-time for noneconomic reasons is 2,753,000, A - B.Since both A and B are known, X is easily CALCULATED without any guesswork. But since simple subtraction is far beyond you, algebra is in orbit for you.Just because you know the variable of one statistic doesn't entail you can guess the other. It's already been established that Part-Time For Noneconomic reasons has decreased for ages 55 and up, and the same thing can be shown for those ages 65 and above. You seen an increase in Part-Time for economic reasons because it is increasing faster than those who are working part-time for non-economic reasons. I'll break this down to you in simple algebra:
A + -B = X
Unless you can actually prove what the statistics are, do yourself a favor and don't guess.
A is known. B is not. You're making a faulty assumption that both categories are increasing, when they are not.
If you do not know, do not guess.
Since it has already been established that 55 and over is a Straw Man you invented because you could not rebut the facts I gave about RETIRING Boomers 65 and older, and it has already been established that Part-Time For Noneconomic reasons has been INCREASING by larger amounts each year for those 65 and older, it is moronic to claim the data for 55 and older are comparable to the data for 65 and older.
55 and older includes individuals who are 65 and older as well, you 'moron.' My statistics makes a clear distinction between the two. It's not my fault your research is faulty.
As is typical of the Right, you accuse others of doing what you, in fact, do. In this case making up your own statistics. You made up the claim that the increase in part-time for economic reasons for the retiring Boomers we are discussing is greater than the increase in part-time for noneconomic reasons, but from 2011 to 2012 the part-time for economic reasons grew 9.2% while the part-time for noneconomic reasons grew by 10.1%. Again math is not in your weelhouse.
Again, do not make a faulty assumption that both variables are increasing. If don't see these numbers clear as day, don't bother showing me anything else.
