What's wrong with our economy?

[boedicca]

What's wrong with our economy: We're running out of Other People's Money.

 

[william the wie]

Arguing one party is the champion of small govt compared to the other party is at best naïve stupidity

Total Government Employment Since 1962

total afreement

 

[cultsmasher]

US is the largest economy in the world. It is approximately 18% of global GDP. At the same time the United States is also the world's largest importer. Import constantly exceed exports, creating a trade deficit. Inefficient allocation of the budget led to the fact that the United States federal budget is also constantly in deficit. The problem is that the United States is spending budget money on completely ineffective programs: military operations and engineering research of the Pentagon, social programs and health programs
In fact, today the economy of the United States is, as they say, "soap bubble", which will soon really should burst, the only question is when and after what event, whether it will be another war, economic reform or the new president of pointless project "stabilization of the economy "

Figaro,
You ask a pretty big question. But I can tell you what one of the problems is. We sent a lot of service jobs to India. We also sent a lot of manufacturing jobs to places like China, India, Mexico, the Philippines, etc. But obviously we can't tax their workers like we can ours. I guess when it comes right down to it, there is one main reason why our economy is doing so bad. A reason that many Americans share in. Treason.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Arguing one party is the champion of small govt compared to the other party is at best naïve stupidity

Total Government Employment Since 1962

total afreement

too stupid of course given the Republicans sign the pledge and Democrats don't!

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Arguing one party is the champion of small govt compared to the other party is at best naïve stupidity

Total Government Employment Since 1962

total afreement

too stupid of course given that Republicans sign the pledge and Democrats don't and that Republicans have sought to make debt illegal in American 30 times and each effort has been killed by Democrats

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

, there is one main reason why our economy is doing so bad. A reason that many Americans share in. Treason.

of course thats idiotic and liberal. We could make trade illegal if it was a bad thing but we dont because trade makes us rich. Imagine if each person or country had to make everything it consumed. Everyone would be poor.

 

[OnePercenter]

dear, obviously they are more competitive with the lower wages from offshore labor!! Do you think they went to China or wherever for fun?

See why we say slow?

Whats wrong with you?

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

dear, obviously they are more competitive with the lower wages from offshore labor!! Do you think they went to China or wherever for fun?

See why we say slow?

Whats wrong with you?

dear, answer the question or admit as a typical liberal you lack the IQ to be here.

 

[Cav Scout]

Stupid people and leeches.

That is what is wrong.

 

[Politico]

Too many people as well as the media believe that only Job Growth and Unemployment Rates define how our economy is doing.
What gets ignored is the Labor Force Participation Rate.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics the most recent rate is 62.9.

Workforce Participation at 36-Year Low as Jobs Climb - Bloomberg

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

And why do you think the LFPR is more significant? It does not accurately reflect the labor market because it is affected by many non-economic factors. And while it is currently near the lowest point since 1978, it is still higher than any time before that. I don't think you'd say the labor market situation now is better off than anytime before '78.

Because when people stop participating for lack of jobs they are counted as employed.

 

[Cav Scout]

Too many people as well as the media believe that only Job Growth and Unemployment Rates define how our economy is doing.
What gets ignored is the Labor Force Participation Rate.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics the most recent rate is 62.9.

Workforce Participation at 36-Year Low as Jobs Climb - Bloomberg

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

And why do you think the LFPR is more significant? It does not accurately reflect the labor market because it is affected by many non-economic factors. And while it is currently near the lowest point since 1978, it is still higher than any time before that. I don't think you'd say the labor market situation now is better off than anytime before '78.

Because when people stop participating for lack of jobs they are counted as employed.

Too many people as well as the media believe that only Job Growth and Unemployment Rates define how our economy is doing.
What gets ignored is the Labor Force Participation Rate.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics the most recent rate is 62.9.

Workforce Participation at 36-Year Low as Jobs Climb - Bloomberg

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

And why do you think the LFPR is more significant? It does not accurately reflect the labor market because it is affected by many non-economic factors. And while it is currently near the lowest point since 1978, it is still higher than any time before that. I don't think you'd say the labor market situation now is better off than anytime before '78.

Because when people stop participating for lack of jobs they are counted as employed.

There is not a lack of jobs, there is an abundance of people who feel that the jobs that there are, are too menial for their sorry asses to perform.

 

[Politico]

That's not the topic.

 

[pinqy]

Too many people as well as the media believe that only Job Growth and Unemployment Rates define how our economy is doing.
What gets ignored is the Labor Force Participation Rate.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics the most recent rate is 62.9.

Workforce Participation at 36-Year Low as Jobs Climb - Bloomberg

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

And why do you think the LFPR is more significant? It does not accurately reflect the labor market because it is affected by many non-economic factors. And while it is currently near the lowest point since 1978, it is still higher than any time before that. I don't think you'd say the labor market situation now is better off than anytime before '78.

Because when people stop participating for lack of jobs they are counted as employed.

No they're not. That's idiotic. Where on earth did you get that idea?

 

[Rikurzhen]

Too many people as well as the media believe that only Job Growth and Unemployment Rates define how our economy is doing.
What gets ignored is the Labor Force Participation Rate.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics the most recent rate is 62.9.

Workforce Participation at 36-Year Low as Jobs Climb - Bloomberg

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

And why do you think the LFPR is more significant? It does not accurately reflect the labor market because it is affected by many non-economic factors. And while it is currently near the lowest point since 1978, it is still higher than any time before that. I don't think you'd say the labor market situation now is better off than anytime before '78.

Think about the theme of the Mary Tyler Moore show. That was in the 1970s wasn't it? What was so special about her that is common place today? How might that relate to labor force participation rate differences between the present and the pre-1978 era?

 

[hipeter924]

Well for starters:
1) The economists and politicians can't decide whether they are creating a mixed economy, a corporatist economy, or a free market one. Instead you have all factions fighting it out and creating economic instability.
2) The tax system is such a mess that trust in the IRS is at an all time low, and those in higher incomes as well as corporations can find a way out of paying tax. Also the level of tax avoidance shows that people and corporations don't trust where their tax money is going or that giving money to the US government is worthwhile.
3) Education and healthcare are unaffordable for most Americans, trapping them in poverty or keeping them out of the workforce.
4) The jobs being created are low-income jobs that are prone to being eliminated by mechanization and technological advancement.
5) US infrastructure like roads and bridges are being allowed to break down, and state governments seem to be the only ones spending money on repairing it. But due to Federal silliness they can't contribute to maintain roads and bridges that the Federal government is letting just erode to nothing or collapse.
6) Essential government programs are being underfunded, while others are being overfunded and mismanaged.

 

[pinqy]

Too many people as well as the media believe that only Job Growth and Unemployment Rates define how our economy is doing.
What gets ignored is the Labor Force Participation Rate.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics the most recent rate is 62.9.

Workforce Participation at 36-Year Low as Jobs Climb - Bloomberg

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

And why do you think the LFPR is more significant? It does not accurately reflect the labor market because it is affected by many non-economic factors. And while it is currently near the lowest point since 1978, it is still higher than any time before that. I don't think you'd say the labor market situation now is better off than anytime before '78.

Think about the theme of the Mary Tyler Moore show. That was in the 1970s wasn't it? What was so special about her that is common place today? How might that relate to labor force participation rate differences between the present and the pre-1978 era?

Exactly my point. Look at what I wrote just before the sentence you bolded: "It does not accurately reflect the labor market because it is affected by many non-economic factors."

 

[G.T.]

Ed biaimonte is clearly into dudes. Calls them all "dear," probably trying to schmooze them into a little private massage and some ass play.

 

[G.T.]

I think whats wrong with our economy is it lacks balance and a strong middle class.

 

[Rikurzhen]

Too many people as well as the media believe that only Job Growth and Unemployment Rates define how our economy is doing.
What gets ignored is the Labor Force Participation Rate.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics the most recent rate is 62.9.

Workforce Participation at 36-Year Low as Jobs Climb - Bloomberg

[TBODY] [/TBODY]

And why do you think the LFPR is more significant? It does not accurately reflect the labor market because it is affected by many non-economic factors. And while it is currently near the lowest point since 1978, it is still higher than any time before that. I don't think you'd say the labor market situation now is better off than anytime before '78.

Think about the theme of the Mary Tyler Moore show. That was in the 1970s wasn't it? What was so special about her that is common place today? How might that relate to labor force participation rate differences between the present and the pre-1978 era?

Exactly my point. Look at what I wrote just before the sentence you bolded: "It does not accurately reflect the labor market because it is affected by many non-economic factors."

I don't think you understood my point. To compare the rate of today to that of 1978 means that you're not capturing the same thing. Mary Tyler Moore portrayed a woman in the workforce back in the 70s. That was supposed to be some kind of groundbreaking TV.

Look at the rates for men and women today versus the 1970s.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Look at the rates for men and women today versus the 1970s.

-as more women work fewer men have to work, but that tells us nothing about the health of the economy.

-The question is how many want to work. That number is shown best in U6, not participation rate, the real measure of unemployment.

-high unemployment among HS grads and lower just shows their difficulty, not the difficulty of the entire economy.