1 In 4 Americans 25-54 Not Working" "economy Working?" Ask These People!

[jasonnfree]

. Liberals and conservatives are both responsible for the illegal invasion.

too stupid and 100% liberal!! Republicans want to build a wall to control the border while liberals do not!! What planet have you been on??

Businesses can be fined for hiring illegals. Republicans wilI never push for this. I never saw the border guarded any better when republicans were in. Also, Reagan did the amnesty which started the big invasion. I'm on your side with stopping the illegal invasion but neither party will ever do anything about it but grandstand. . Still waiting for proof that unions sent those millions of jobs out of the country. How many again? 33 million? You're too slow with proof or links over there on planet Ed.

 

[saveliberty]

The Demise of the American Middle Class In Numbers.

Causes:
1) liberal unions drove 30 million middle class jobs off shore
2) liberal corporate taxes drove 30 million jobs off shore
3) liberal social policies destroyed the family thus rendering many not qualified to be middle class
4) liberals invited 10 million illegals in to take what jobs were left and to drive down wages

And strangely it all happened under Pub tax rates and policy, fool.

Masters in History, fluent in 3 languages. You, chump?

I hope you do not consider English one of them.

 

[Billy000]

Umm what?

dear, you said you wanted to ask for more jobs because as a liberal you lack the IQ to understand how real jobs are created.

So...they aren't created by our wealthier-than-they've-ever-been job creators?

dear, real jobs are not created by asking for them!! Slow????

That's really not the point now is it?

dear, as a liberal you have no idea how real jobs are created so why comment at all. Why not just read or ask questions until you have the knowledge base to contribute?

Oh right. Getting rid of the corporate tax rate. Well guess what? That would do little to create jobs in reality. The amount of jobs created wouldn't nearly be worth the national debt we would accumulate.

 

[pinqy]

Did Not Want a Job: 20,899,000 Hello?!?

Maybe a few month out on the streets will cure some of them.

Why would they be out on the streets? Not everybody needs a job.

Seriously pinqy, twenty million?[/QUOTE]
Off the top of my head.....independently wealthy, disabled, stay home spouses, older students, and some in less legal endeavors and some on welfare. Unfortunately, no details are published for not in the labor force does not want a job now.

 

[saveliberty]

Did Not Want a Job: 20,899,000 Hello?!?

Maybe a few month out on the streets will cure some of them.

Why would they be out on the streets? Not everybody needs a job.

Seriously pinqy, twenty million?

Off the top of my head.....independently wealthy, disabled, stay home spouses, older students, and some in less legal endeavors and some on welfare. Unfortunately, no details are published for not in the labor force does not want a job now.[/QUOTE]

Again, why the large increase in that sector during lower wages and increasing inflation?

 

[saveliberty]

Looks more like one in five to me.

 

[pinqy]

There is a lie in that chart...that ALL those not in the labor force are so discouraged they left the labor force.
As of August the breakdown of those age 25-54 Not in the Labor Force was:
Total: 23,624,000
Did Not Want a Job: 20,899,000
Wanted to work, did not look for work in over a year: 1,461,000
Wanted to work, looked in last year but not last 4 weeks, not available to start now: 301,000
Wanted to work, looked in last year but not last 4 weeks, available to work, stopped looking for personal reasons (family issues, school, transportation etc) 639,000
Wanted to work, looked in last year but not last 4 weeks, available to work, stopped looking due to discouragement: 324,000

Source: A-38. Persons not in the labor force by desire and availability for work age and sex

Did Not Want a Job: 20,899,000 Hello?!?

Maybe a few month out on the streets will cure some of them.

Many of those could be housewives/husbands.

Some could be people with unusual circumstances who don't need a job that counts in the statistics (I fall into this category. I have a job, but I would not show up as a member of the workforce in any stats).

The definition of employed for these numbers is own a business or farm; or worked one or more hours for pay during the reference week; or worked 15 or more hours unpaid in a family business or farm.

So I'm at a loss as to what job you could have that wouldn't meet one of those conditions.

 

[Londoner]

It's called deindustrialization. We shipped manufacturing to China so that our capitalists could make higher returns. Now we have a massive superfluous population who must go into ever increasing debt in order to keep pace.

This is why Bush 43 had the worst job creation of any modern president. [FYI: I defended him when my liberal friends tried to blame him] He inherited a middle class that could no longer consume in sufficient volume to sustain economic growth. This is why he tried to fuel economic growth through the housing sector (which was achieved by loaning money into the economy on the backs of even the non-credit-worthy).

During the postwar years when wages and benefits were high, we had wage based consumption, that is, average workers didn't have to assume massive debt to survive because they had high paying jobs and a low cost of living along with affordable college costs thanks to massive government subsidies to public universities.

Unfortunately, it all changed in 1973 when the Keynesian model broke down, leading to huge inflation followed by high unemployment: stagflation.

By 1980, after years of economic floundering, the republicans finally had their opening, claiming that the high cost of production (high taxes, strict regulations and the world's highest labor costs) was stifling investment and destroying economic growth.

So we listened to Reagan. We lowered taxes, and we deregulated several industries (energy and finance chief among them), and we waged war on unions and the punitive trade laws that prevented our noble patriotic capitalists from shipping production to Chinese sweatshops.

In short, we spent the last 30 years lowering wages and shipping jobs to cheaper labor markets so that our late corporations could make more money. (Clinton is also a huge culprit in this problem)

Unfortunately, the delivery of lower labor costs to our corporations created a problem because our middle class no longer had the requisite wage & benefit structure to sustain economic growth through consumption. So guess how Reaganomics solved the problem? Answer: the gipper and his movement radically expanded credit so that struggling Americans could keep consuming. This is why we all started receiving three credit card offers a week in the 80s. When the money and jobs failed to trickle down, we had to stimulate the economy with something....

Reagan's radical expansion of credit to the middle-class paid off huge in the short-term. We experienced sustained economic growth for a number of years, with only little recessionary hick ups all the way through the 90s.

But guess what happens when fuel economic growth with credit (debt) for too long? Eventually you run into your borrowed-against future. This is why the middle-class can no longer consume enough in the aggregate to drive economic growth - because their jobs have been shipped to China and, after 30 years of borrowing to survive, they are no longer solvent enough to borrow.

This is a structural problem endemic to the kind of capitalism that Reagan/Thatcher introduced in 1980. When you cannibalize too many members of your lower classes (through wage/benefit reduction) you eventually lose those same classes as consumers. And then you take the easy way out - like Washington always does - by covering up the problem with a whole variety of financial gimmicks (mostly involving asset bubbles and the expansion of credit)

(And yes, you may not be able to solve the problem by going back to the postwar wage/benefit structure - but you cannot expect to resurrect aggregate demand until the economic gains given to capital over the last 30 years trickle down to the folks whose jobs you've shipped to Taiwan)

 

[pinqy]

Again, why the large increase in that sector during lower wages and increasing inflation?

There is a category called "loosely attached to the labor force." There are no statistics on this group because you can't objectively measure them, but these are the people who do not need a job but may want one and take one. These are often stay home spouses taking a job for their own spending money....social security recipients taking a job to supplement...etc. They drop out of the labor force quickly when conditions get difficult because they have no need or desire to compete for work. There's just no way to know how much that is, though.

Of course there are still those who are just lazy, or live off welfare, or mooch off of everyone they know.

But regardless, when talking about the labor market..either people want a job or not. those who don't have and will have zero effect on the market.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Remember Baiamonte is a von Mises clone. Just pat the tool on the head, smile, and walk on by.

 

[edthecynic]

Did Not Want a Job: 20,899,000 Hello?!?

Maybe a few month out on the streets will cure some of them.

Yeah, kick those "Stay at Home Moms" and the disabled out on the streets. How dare those moms raise a family, the lazy bums.

 

[edthecynic]

Seriously pinqy, twenty million?

Do the math, 33.3% of working households have stay at home moms and 3.5% of working households have stay at home dads.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

'1 In 4 Americans 25-54 Not Working" "economy Working?" Ask These People!'

You and others on the right are ridiculous with your failed, inane, and pathetic efforts to deny the fact that the economy is indeed improving.

 

[edthecynic]

Again, why the large increase in that sector during lower wages and increasing inflation?

But there was not a large increase if you go by percentage! The OP is deliberately deceptive because they used the increase in the number of "not in labor force" + unemployed without the corresponding increase in population. When you calculate the percentage the increase will match the increase in stay at home spouses + disabled.

 

[AntiParty]

A new chart from the minority side of the Senate Budget Committee shows a startling fact: Almost 1 in 4 Americans between the ages of 25-54 (or prime working years) are not working.

Here's a chart showing those in that age group currently employed (95.6 million)
and those who aren't (28.9 million):

View attachment 32325

1 in 4 Americans 25-54 Not Working The Weekly Standard

We didn't see this coming.........


^^^^^^^^^^^Oh, hell.......we did...

 

[Politico]

And yet the Republicans continue to fight against job creation in the US in favor of sending our jobs overseas.

They won't even come back from their vacation to support their own country in a war though so how can we expect them to suddenly decide to work for their own citizens.

If the Repubs ever show up for work again, they should be brought up on charges of treason.

Oh Blah Blah Blah Stupid Prog Pablum ^^^^

What causes job creation: Economic Growth

What causes economic growth: A Healthy Private Sector (businesses large and small)

What causes a Healthy Private Sector: Free Markets that aren't oppressed by Big Government

We are still suffering the after effects of the 2nd Great Depression caused by the Republican Deregulation of the Wall Street Casino.

At best we will recover around the end of this decade but the damage to the economy was severe. The current imbalance between hardworking Americans and the wealthy has never been greater and there needs to be a reset on that wealth gap.

When a CEO is being paid 350 time more than the average worker than means that 300+ workers are out of jobs that could otherwise be helping the economy.

This won't happen out of the kindness of the hearts of greed obsessed CEO's either therefore this has to be done via We the People using the government OF the People FOR the People.

Yes, I know, your blood pressure is rising and you are calling me a commie and a socialist and all of the other idiotic kneejerk names.

But that doesn't alter the reality of (a) where we are now, and (b) how and why we got here, and (c) what we have to do in order to turn this around.

So use your outrage creatively and find a way to convince a CEO to create more jobs even if it means taking a pay cut. That would do more to help this nation than just venting your feelings at me.

Oh quit with the email buzz words. The fact you think we are in a great depression shows you have no idea what one is. Ask someone who lived through the 30's and they'll explain it to you.

 

[Derideo_Te]

And yet the Republicans continue to fight against job creation in the US in favor of sending our jobs overseas.

They won't even come back from their vacation to support their own country in a war though so how can we expect them to suddenly decide to work for their own citizens.

If the Repubs ever show up for work again, they should be brought up on charges of treason.

Oh Blah Blah Blah Stupid Prog Pablum ^^^^

What causes job creation: Economic Growth

What causes economic growth: A Healthy Private Sector (businesses large and small)

What causes a Healthy Private Sector: Free Markets that aren't oppressed by Big Government

We are still suffering the after effects of the 2nd Great Depression caused by the Republican Deregulation of the Wall Street Casino.

At best we will recover around the end of this decade but the damage to the economy was severe. The current imbalance between hardworking Americans and the wealthy has never been greater and there needs to be a reset on that wealth gap.

When a CEO is being paid 350 time more than the average worker than means that 300+ workers are out of jobs that could otherwise be helping the economy.

This won't happen out of the kindness of the hearts of greed obsessed CEO's either therefore this has to be done via We the People using the government OF the People FOR the People.

Yes, I know, your blood pressure is rising and you are calling me a commie and a socialist and all of the other idiotic kneejerk names.

But that doesn't alter the reality of (a) where we are now, and (b) how and why we got here, and (c) what we have to do in order to turn this around.

So use your outrage creatively and find a way to convince a CEO to create more jobs even if it means taking a pay cut. That would do more to help this nation than just venting your feelings at me.

Oh quit with the email buzz words. The fact you think we are in a great depression shows you have no idea what one is. Ask someone who lived through the 30's and they'll explain it to you.

A recession is defined as negative GDP growth for 2 or more quarters. Recessions occur in response to an overheated economy and rarely last more than 4 quarters, 6 tops.

On the other hand a "depression is characterized by "unusual" increases in unemployment, restriction of credit, shrinking output and investment, price deflation or hyperinflation, numerous bankruptcies, reduced amounts of trade and commerce, as well as highly volatile/erratic relative currency value fluctuations, mostly devaluations."

We have seen the collapse of currencies, shrinking output and investment, reduction in trade, restrictions on credit and lending and very unusual increases in unemployment since 2008.

The fact that unemployment is still as high as it is this long after the 2008 collapse is what makes this a depression rather than a recession. If 2008 were only a recession unemployment would be back down to normal levels but they aren't. Savings are at an all time low meaning that people are living off whatever equity they have because of the shortage of jobs. The high unemployment amongst graduates is another reason why this is a depression rather a recession.

All of the factors are in place pointing to a depression and the only reason that term is not being used is because that would have political ramifications. But from the impact on those who can't find jobs this is a depression.

 

[zeke]

We NEED DEMAND, fool.

dear, I know you have not been to college but can you tell us why we need demand rather than supply.

You seem to be to stupid to understand words, so try action.

Go out and spend all the money you can get your hands on to build the product of your choice.
Borrow as much money as you can to pay for the product your company builds.

Then find out why a company needs demand for the product they are making/selling.

When the demand for whatever you made doesn't materialize and you've gone bankrupt, then maybe you will understand what demand does for a company that supply will never do.

Demand makes a company money. Supply costs the company money. Why would a company spend its money for a product that there is no demand for?

I think GM used to try that. Build a car no one wanted to drive. How'd that work out for GM?

 

[Montrovant]

There is a lie in that chart...that ALL those not in the labor force are so discouraged they left the labor force.
As of August the breakdown of those age 25-54 Not in the Labor Force was:
Total: 23,624,000
Did Not Want a Job: 20,899,000
Wanted to work, did not look for work in over a year: 1,461,000
Wanted to work, looked in last year but not last 4 weeks, not available to start now: 301,000
Wanted to work, looked in last year but not last 4 weeks, available to work, stopped looking for personal reasons (family issues, school, transportation etc) 639,000
Wanted to work, looked in last year but not last 4 weeks, available to work, stopped looking due to discouragement: 324,000

Source: A-38. Persons not in the labor force by desire and availability for work age and sex

Did Not Want a Job: 20,899,000 Hello?!?

Maybe a few month out on the streets will cure some of them.

Many of those could be housewives/husbands.

Some could be people with unusual circumstances who don't need a job that counts in the statistics (I fall into this category. I have a job, but I would not show up as a member of the workforce in any stats).

The definition of employed for these numbers is own a business or farm; or worked one or more hours for pay during the reference week; or worked 15 or more hours unpaid in a family business or farm.

So I'm at a loss as to what job you could have that wouldn't meet one of those conditions.

I'm a live-in nanny. My 'pay' is room and board.

 

[pinqy]

There is a lie in that chart...that ALL those not in the labor force are so discouraged they left the labor force.
As of August the breakdown of those age 25-54 Not in the Labor Force was:
Total: 23,624,000
Did Not Want a Job: 20,899,000
Wanted to work, did not look for work in over a year: 1,461,000
Wanted to work, looked in last year but not last 4 weeks, not available to start now: 301,000
Wanted to work, looked in last year but not last 4 weeks, available to work, stopped looking for personal reasons (family issues, school, transportation etc) 639,000
Wanted to work, looked in last year but not last 4 weeks, available to work, stopped looking due to discouragement: 324,000

Source: A-38. Persons not in the labor force by desire and availability for work age and sex

Did Not Want a Job: 20,899,000 Hello?!?

Maybe a few month out on the streets will cure some of them.

Many of those could be housewives/husbands.

Some could be people with unusual circumstances who don't need a job that counts in the statistics (I fall into this category. I have a job, but I would not show up as a member of the workforce in any stats).

The definition of employed for these numbers is own a business or farm; or worked one or more hours for pay during the reference week; or worked 15 or more hours unpaid in a family business or farm.

So I'm at a loss as to what job you could have that wouldn't meet one of those conditions.

I'm a live-in nanny. My 'pay' is room and board.

That counts as pay....payment in kind. If your household was in the survey, you'd be classified as employed.