Labor Force Participation Rate

[edthecynic]

A lot of hay is being made out of the declining labor force participation rate by those who want to distract from the very positive job creation numbers lately. Therefore, it is a good idea to understand what the LFPR is and what it is not. It is also a good idea to understand the actual underlying causes instead of manufacturing a lot of wishful thinking over the matter.

First, the LFPR is defined as "a measure of the active portion of an economy's labor force."

There are some who believe the retiring of baby boomers has a lot to do with the declining LFPR. But when we break the rate down by age, that myth is exploded.

Take a look at this study by the Americans for Limited Government.

You will find the participation rate of the over-65 age group has gone up since 2003.



So what is actually causing the LFPR to drop?

The cause is that younger people are not going to work at the rate they used to.

Damn you wing-nuts are gullible!!!

The LPR is a worthless economic indicator because it is mostly effected by demographics, like the birth rate, retirement rate, immigration, etc., rather than economic health!!!

There are more people in the 55 and older labor force because the Boomers are aging. The youngest Boomers are now 50. There are less young people in the labor force because the birth rate keeps declining.

You suckers will swallow any bullshit you are fed as long as it is what you want to hear. 82% of Boomers are retiring by age 65, which comes to about 3 million Boomers leaving the workforce each year since 2010.

So, the 55+ participants are declining, but their participation rate is increasing.

This makes sence if the calculation of participation rate = # 55+ employed/ total # 55 persons.

It does not make sense if participation rate = # 55+ employed/ total # employed.

I sometimes wonder how the Right ever got out of Kindergarten reading class.

 

[Samson]

Damn you wing-nuts are gullible!!!

The LPR is a worthless economic indicator because it is mostly effected by demographics, like the birth rate, retirement rate, immigration, etc., rather than economic health!!!

There are more people in the 55 and older labor force because the Boomers are aging. The youngest Boomers are now 50. There are less young people in the labor force because the birth rate keeps declining.

You suckers will swallow any bullshit you are fed as long as it is what you want to hear. 82% of Boomers are retiring by age 65, which comes to about 3 million Boomers leaving the workforce each year since 2010.

So, the 55+ participants are declining, but their participation rate is increasing.

This makes sence if the calculation of participation rate = # 55+ employed/ total # 55 persons.

It does not make sense if participation rate = # 55+ employed/ total # employed.

I sometimes wonder how the Right ever got out of Kindergarten reading class.

And I wonder how you passed Math.

with MORE #55, the denominator in the participation rate function increases in any case.

This decreases the participation rate.

 

[edthecynic]

So, the 55+ participants are declining, but their participation rate is increasing.

This makes sence if the calculation of participation rate = # 55+ employed/ total # 55 persons.

It does not make sense if participation rate = # 55+ employed/ total # employed.

I sometimes wonder how the Right ever got out of Kindergarten reading class.

And I wonder how you passed Math.

with MORE #55, the denominator in the participation rate function increases in any case.

This decreases the participation rate.

I passed because I understand that the number of 55 and older staying in the workforce can also increase. By what rule can't both the numerator and denominator increase???

 

[Darp]

Yes the LPR is dismal, but all indicators are dismal in apples to apples comparison. Have asked twice what indicator is really good, as in the average good #s of all prior Presidents in last 70 years.

No one has been able to mention one. So LPR is meaningless as to whether it is legit or not, all the other indicators are saying the same thing.


Here are some real important ones, as in how long does it take to get a job.

Can anyone mention one indicator that is today on a par with a full recovery, nevertheless a boom (that word has not been used in so long hard to remember what a boom is).

Cheers