Discouraged Americans leave labor force

[Nova78]

Dropouts: Discouraged Americans leave labor force | General Headlines | Comcast

Older Americans have retired early. Younger ones have enrolled in school. Others have suspended their job hunt until the employment landscape brightens. Some, like Baebler, are collecting disability checks.

It isn't supposed to be this way. After a recession, an improving economy is supposed to bring people back into the job market.

Instead, the number of Americans in the labor force — those who have a job or are looking for one — fell by nearly half a million people from February to March, the government said Friday. And the percentage of working-age adults in the labor force — what's called the participation rate — fell to 63.3 percent last month. It's the lowest such figure since May 1979.

The falling participation rate tarnished the only apparent good news in the jobs report the Labor Department released Friday: The unemployment rate dropped to a four-year low of 7.6 percent in March from 7.7 in February.

People without a job who stop looking for one are no longer counted as unemployed. That's why the U.S. unemployment rate dropped in March despite weak hiring. If the 496,000 who left the labor force last month had still been looking for jobs, the unemployment rate would have risen to 7.9 percent in March.

"Unemployment dropped for all the wrong reasons," says Craig Alexander, chief economist with TD Bank Financial Group. "It dropped because more workers stopped looking for jobs. It signaled less confidence and optimism that there are jobs out there."

This Country is in deep trouble ,right is wrong- wrong is right .

 

[iamwhatiseem]

The unemployment level is closer to 11%, even when using the gracious way of measuring they do today - if job drop outs were apart of the equation.

 

[Avorysuds]

Thank you Obama!

 

[Freemason9]

This is not a surprise--I remember back in 2008, economists were already predicting that it could take a decade or longer to recover from that economic calamity. Did you fuckers forget that already? It was a seriously bad event, arguably on a par with the Great Depression; by some measures, it was worse in terms of lost aggregate wealth and international scope.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Are you referring to the "economists" that had no idea that the federal reserve/legislative policies were creating a massive bubble that wuld burst? Those economists?

Yeah. Well, the fact remains that we're headed for another "recession" as they pumped the bubble right back up AND created a market that is signaled almost exclusively on what helicopter Ben will do next.

There will be no recovery. Only more slide down as we race to the bottom.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

This is not a surprise--I remember back in 2008, economists were already predicting that it could take a decade or longer to recover from that economic calamity. Did you fuckers forget that already? It was a seriously bad event, arguably on a par with the Great Depression; by some measures, it was worse in terms of lost aggregate wealth and international scope.

Ahh...the same economist that found no problem with Bear Stearns having an AAA+ rating...the same economist that somehow miraculously missed the largest collapse in 70+ years...the same economist that saw no problem with Fannie and Freddie losing $billions PER MONTH of taxpayer money to prop up a system where the central banks MADE $billions per month. The same economist that today think it is just swell for the government to give $85,000,000,000 per month to the central banks and Wall Street buying toxic assets with taxpayer funds to desperately try and prevent another inevitable collapse.

Those guys?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

This is not a surprise--I remember back in 2008, economists were already predicting that it could take a decade or longer to recover from that economic calamity.

Why on earth would it take a decade when the free market would put most things back in place in a year or much less!!

It doesn't take a year to evict someone and move someone new in??
Wealth was not destroyed it just changed hands. Knowledge was not destroyed, underlying assets were not destroyed What on earth would take a decade?????? Why not say or admit you have no idea??

We are waiting for the free market to work, but with massive and on going government interference it might take a decade and only then if the market can go faster than the liberal interference. If liberal interference wins we will have a soviet experience with continued decline.

 

[Freemason9]

This is not a surprise--I remember back in 2008, economists were already predicting that it could take a decade or longer to recover from that economic calamity. Did you fuckers forget that already? It was a seriously bad event, arguably on a par with the Great Depression; by some measures, it was worse in terms of lost aggregate wealth and international scope.

Ahh...the same economist that found no problem with Bear Stearns having an AAA+ rating...the same economist that somehow miraculously missed the largest collapse in 70+ years...the same economist that saw no problem with Fannie and Freddie losing $billions PER MONTH of taxpayer money to prop up a system where the central banks MADE $billions per month. The same economist that today think it is just swell for the government to give $85,000,000,000 per month to the central banks and Wall Street buying toxic assets with taxpayer funds to desperately try and prevent another inevitable collapse.

Those guys?

No, different guys.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

This is not a surprise--I remember back in 2008, economists were already predicting that it could take a decade or longer to recover from that economic calamity. Did you fuckers forget that already? It was a seriously bad event, arguably on a par with the Great Depression; by some measures, it was worse in terms of lost aggregate wealth and international scope.

Ahh...the same economist that found no problem with Bear Stearns having an AAA+ rating...the same economist that somehow miraculously missed the largest collapse in 70+ years...the same economist that saw no problem with Fannie and Freddie losing $billions PER MONTH of taxpayer money to prop up a system where the central banks MADE $billions per month. The same economist that today think it is just swell for the government to give $85,000,000,000 per month to the central banks and Wall Street buying toxic assets with taxpayer funds to desperately try and prevent another inevitable collapse.

Those guys?

No, different guys.

of course the libturd is afraid to identify the different guys. What does that tell us about his IQ and character.

 

[mascale]

So anyone noting that in 2008--then the Ivy League was predicting that it would take a decade to recover from the job losses--also has to note that Labor Force Participation rates were already in decline due to the failed reasoning and war-making of "Old WMD's, Bush & Cheney!"

Drop in labor participation rate is distress signal

The increase of women in the labor force was reversing, and the boomers were again about to turn on--then to eventually drop out. . . .again(?). . . .or something(?)! "Share-cropping" in Napa-Sonoma-Mendocino may even now not be regarded, "the labor force doing participation!"

So the non-thinking posters, like EdwardBaiamonte-poster, claim that nothing dramatic had happened. In fact, the decline before the Great Recession had been under way for years. That last gasp outcome of "Old WMD's, Bush & Cheney!" didn't help.

Mainly we are back to "Some "em if you've got 'em!" and the rest of the lore and fiction surrounding Punahou School.

The arithmetic of an actual, normal free market is found in Matthew 20:1-16. All labor force participants get an equal amount increase at the end of the day. All would therein become equally purchasing-power enabled. The on-going actual free-choice-making of the market place would be enabled. Even Dick Cheney would not go on to remart that, "Ronald Reagan prooved that Human Beings prefer nuclear weapons over everything else(?)!" The now-dead Thatcher was in complete agreement. Supporting that contention, the foreclosure crisis came about due to the-lack-of-a-free-market as is usual. The rich got richer, the poor did not have enough to participate in the market. The rich could no longer stay that way. The rich houses all came tumbling on down. In further support, then Obama-Biden followed Matthew 20:1-16, in the equal amount "Make-Work-Pay-Refundable-Income-Tax-Credit." The Republicans made taking that away, priority Number One! They already had history, of course, in doing just that sort of thang(?)!

Clearly, that Method of Matthew 25:14-30, goes back before there were conquering Greeks and Romans, showing up the sheeney little deity(?) that habitually harassed all the Jews(?)! Hebrews-In-Psychosis had somehow managed to write the "voices" all down, we now know! The rest is history. Jesus would rant against "The Law of Moses," and its penchant for imposing the penalty of death on harmless little things, like setting up idols in heaven, or cursing mom & dad, regardless of actual sexual orientations! Jesus went along with the psychosis in the Trial before the Elders led by Caiphas. A deity of likeness found on earth was set up, for everyone to see. . . .and admire. . . .or something. A kind of "Guy Thing!" Poor Pontius Pilate could only rant back, "Hey! Yo! He's only really as crazy as we are: And Look! We Won! You Lost!"

History is more like what is shown above, in this post(?)! Anyone would say that it should be.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Founding Framers created rights to Militia Of All White Eyes--To set about genocide of all indigenous tribes! Mainly Great Leaders of German Third Republic, followed that along with respect to other tribes and and against many lodges. Those lodges maybe not really based in well-working medicine, given the apparent pychosis problem(?)! Many had been victimes of the heathen custom of "Holier Than Thou:" Little marks on paper! Funny-looking Quakers, they likely may have been(?)!)

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

Great thread.

Obama got off to a bad start aping Bush's bailout and hiring a scum like Geithner to perpetuate fraud and malfeasance in the financial services sector. But Obama is not to blame for today's mess. To the contrary, Obama is the RESULT of the election of 2004. The America that re elected the most completely failed first term president in US history deserves the fucking that resulted from their mistake in 2004.

A little background...

By the time voodoo economics - aka, the debt-fueled canned-heat young lions Paul Krugman, Robert Rubin and David Stockman called the "new economy" while sages like Greenspan and Levitt smiled from inside the machine - by the time voodoo economics flew into a wall at warp speed in 2008 the US had been in a debt-fueled series of bubbles for the best part of 28 years.

Recall that The Bush League sent out several checks to lower income Americans solely for the purpose of getting money to Main Street to avert official recessions. Those checks were the only thing Junebug Bush got right as policy, and the only things the ratty little fuck ever did that benefited someone outside his circle even a little; to be sure the greater benefit - postponing disgrace - went to them.

Fortunately, the crash came while the filthy lowlife cocksucker could still be photographed by the broken cookie jar. The people who set the stage were Reagan, Bush I, and Clinton; but there can be no doubt which war mongering remf chickenhawk scumbag was at the controls when the machine hit the wall wings on fire.

The fact is a lot of people knew for a fact that unless Obama worked with congress to eliminate income taxes on incomes below around $50,000 the crash would last until 2017-2020. Instead Obama did the fake-liberal version of supply side bogusness, pumping around a trillion into the stupidest employers in western civilization - US state and local governments. That level of incompetence is almost down to the level of starting two separate off-budget land wars in Asia at the same time. Almost.

This is a long ways from over, folks. That was obvious the instant Obama's Wall Street bailout was announced.

Look for a "correction" this summer or fall. And look for the same 20% to 30% of Americans who benefited from the crash to sail through this as well. As they should. These are the people who take care of number one instead of meddling in other people's business taking away individual rights fighting against abortion and for group rights to take precedence over individual rights.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

And look for the same 20% to 30% of Americans who benefited from the crash to sail through this as well.

can the conspiracy nut job liberal tell us who the 20-30% are or must he admit he has no idea on earth what he is talking about????

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

> can [Mr. Dugdale Jukes] tell us who the 20-30% are ... ???

Why, yes, Edmund; I can. Glad you asked.

That would be the minor professional classes ~10% (salaried), skilled labor (hourly) ~10%, and government workers including contractors ~5% (pigs at the trough).

Was there anything else?

PS: did you ever look into buying the equipment for the science experiment? Recall the items were a cheap rubber hose and a golf ball.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

> can [Mr. Dugdale Jukes] tell us who the 20-30% are ... ???

Why, yes, Edmund; I can. Glad you asked.

That would be the minor professional classes ~10% (salaried), skilled labor (hourly) ~10%, and government workers including contractors ~5% (pigs at the trough).

Was there anything else?

can the libturd conspiracy loon tell us how he knows these people profited from the housing crisis or must he admit he is full of BS????

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

Why, yes, Eduoard. Glad you asked.

They kept their jobs, their houses, their pensions.

Here is how it works, Edmund: "Acceptable losses" are acceptable to whom?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

That would be the minor professional classes ~10% (salaried)

Can the loon liberal conspiracy nut job document this or must he admit its a total lie???????????????

 

[pinqy]

Dropouts: Discouraged Americans leave labor force | General Headlines | Comcast

Older Americans have retired early. Younger ones have enrolled in school. Others have suspended their job hunt until the employment landscape brightens. Some, like Baebler, are collecting disability checks.

It isn't supposed to be this way. After a recession, an improving economy is supposed to bring people back into the job market.

Instead, the number of Americans in the labor force — those who have a job or are looking for one — fell by nearly half a million people from February to March, the government said Friday. And the percentage of working-age adults in the labor force — what's called the participation rate — fell to 63.3 percent last month. It's the lowest such figure since May 1979.

The falling participation rate tarnished the only apparent good news in the jobs report the Labor Department released Friday: The unemployment rate dropped to a four-year low of 7.6 percent in March from 7.7 in February.

People without a job who stop looking for one are no longer counted as unemployed. That's why the U.S. unemployment rate dropped in March despite weak hiring. If the 496,000 who left the labor force last month had still been looking for jobs, the unemployment rate would have risen to 7.9 percent in March.

"Unemployment dropped for all the wrong reasons," says Craig Alexander, chief economist with TD Bank Financial Group. "It dropped because more workers stopped looking for jobs. It signaled less confidence and optimism that there are jobs out there."

This Country is in deep trouble ,right is wrong- wrong is right .

Except the number of people who said their reason for no longer working was Discouragement dropped by 82,000 (not seasonally adjusted).

The Labor Force dropped 496,00 (-206,000 from employed and -296,000 from unemployed) but the number of people Not in the Labor Force who don't want a job increased 762,000 and those Not in the Labor Force who do want a job dropped 99,000

 

[edthecynic]

Discouraged Americans leave labor force

Not this bullshit again!

First of all, the number of discouraged workers FELL by 82,000 in March and more importantly in the 50 months since Obama took office the number of discouraged workers has increased by only 69,000!!! Hardly enough to change the UE rate .1%

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Discouraged Americans leave labor force

Not this bullshit again!

First of all, the number of discouraged workers FELL by 82,000 in March and more importantly in the 50 months since Obama took office the number of discouraged workers has increased by only 69,000!!! Hardly enough to change the UE rate .1%

too perfectly stupid!! U6 is 15% under Obama, that's twice
the normal level or 23 million people!!!

 

[edthecynic]

Discouraged Americans leave labor force

Not this bullshit again!

First of all, the number of discouraged workers FELL by 82,000 in March and more importantly in the 50 months since Obama took office the number of discouraged workers has increased by only 69,000!!! Hardly enough to change the UE rate .1%

too perfectly stupid!! U6 is 15% under Obama, that's twice
the normal level or 23 million people!!!

Too perfectly dishonest! U-6 is presently 13.8%, down from 14.2% when Bush left. The only time it was half that was during the Clinton years.