EdwardBaiamonte
Platinum Member
- Nov 23, 2011
- 34,612
- 2,153
- 1,100
That doesn't answer my question. Where did you get the idea that "jobs are adjusted for population growth"?No they are not, where on earth did you get that idea?dear, jobs are adjusted for population growth which was around 20 million as I recall. See why we say slow?
Since mid-2007 the U.S. population has grown by 17.2 million, according to the Census Bureau, but we have 374,000 fewer jobs since a November 2007 peak and are 10 million jobs shy of where we should be. It is particularly upsetting that our current high unemployment is concentrated in the oldest and youngest workers. Older workers have been phased out as new technologies improve productivity, and young adults who lack skills are struggling to find entry-level jobs with advancement opportunities. In the process, they are losing critical time to develop workplace habits, contacts and new skills.
http://online.wsj.com/articles/mort...-time-scandal-of-part-time-america-1405291652
for unemployment to stay at 5% you have to have enough new jobs to compensate for population growth. Econ 101. See what happens when a liberal tries to think?