ChiefsPlanet

ChiefsPlanet (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   D.C. (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=30)
-   -   Economics The Opposite of a Direckshun Thread (http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=265177)

patteeu 10-15-2012 01:54 PM

The Opposite of a Direckshun Thread
 
Consider this chart from powerlineblog.com. The left bar is what has been described by Obama's supporters as a "huge recovery". They generally don't talk about the right bar.

(Brevity brought to you by the Stop Direckshun Before He Uses Up All The Internet's Ink Committee).

http://4-ps.googleusercontent.com/h/...eTO1uanGYv.png

vailpass 10-15-2012 03:45 PM

Does the "Not In labor Force" column include those who have run out of unemployment benefits and are no longer measurable in that way?

I wonder if there is any way to quantify those who are now working a job that pays much lower than a job they had earlier within the measured period, or those that must now work two jobs where they used to work one?

J Diddy 10-15-2012 03:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vailpass (Post 9017007)
Does the "Not In labor Force" column include those who have run out of unemployment benefits and are no longer measurable in that way?

I wonder if there is any way to quantify those who are now working a job that pays much lower than a job they had earlier within the measured period, or those that must now work two jobs where they used to work one?

Not in labor force includes retired, discouraged, in school, etc workers.

Underemployed workers represent those who are part time but desire full time employment.

vailpass 10-15-2012 03:54 PM

Thanks. What's a 'discouraged' and how do they measure that?

HonestChieffan 10-15-2012 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vailpass (Post 9017039)
Thanks. What's a 'discouraged' and how do they measure that?


unemployed and no longer actively looking for employment

A Salt Weapon 10-15-2012 04:05 PM

I love this committee, great name.
Posted via Mobile Device

J Diddy 10-15-2012 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vailpass (Post 9017039)
Thanks. What's a 'discouraged' and how do they measure that?

typically after a year. However there are some statistics involved there in the demographics.

http://money.cnn.com/2012/05/03/news....htm?iid=HP_LN

For instance, 38% not in labor force are over the age of 65. 15% were 55-64, and 20% were 16-24.

**edit**
2011 breakdown

qabbaan 10-15-2012 05:27 PM

Anytime you hear Obama or his sycophants talking about "new jobs" or "created jobs" they are intentionally only giving you half of a meaningful figure, and they aren't even broaching this.

I hope that Romney is ready to hammer this nail down in one swing anytime Obama tries to claim he has made progress on jobs.

WoodDraw 10-15-2012 05:38 PM

Is 2009 really a fair baseline?

patteeu 10-15-2012 05:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WoodDraw (Post 9017388)
Is 2009 really a fair baseline?

If we gave him a year grace period, and I'm not sure we should, the left bar probably would be the same and the right bar would probably be somewhere between 1/2 and 2/3rds as high.

J Diddy 10-15-2012 05:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patteeu (Post 9017436)
If we gave him a year grace period, and I'm not sure we should, the left bar probably would be the same and the right bar would probably be somewhere between 1/2 and 2/3rds as high.

Wouldn't want that would we?

KC native 10-15-2012 06:08 PM

We are going to see declining labor force participation rates for the foreseeable future due to the increasing amount of boomers (worst generation ever) actually retiring.

This is a demographic trend that no president can stop. Carry on with thinking you've made a salient point though.

J Diddy 10-15-2012 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KC native (Post 9017500)
We are going to see declining labor force participation rates for the foreseeable future due to the increasing amount of boomers (worst generation ever) actually retiring.

This is a demographic trend that no president can stop. Carry on with thinking you've made a salient point though.

I've tried (half heartedly ) to find the numbers of non labor force participation in 1999 and the demographics on that. The thing being , the only relative numbers in the non labor force participation are from the demographics of 25-55. 55-65 includes a retirement age, as well as 65+, and 16-24 is very volatile, with so many more going to college, not having to work at 16, etc.

HonestChieffan 10-15-2012 06:35 PM

Many "retired boomers" are finding new jobs or other ways that keep them in the workforce. The traditional retirement is a thing of the past. Demographers are struggling to deal with this within the statistics as we cannot really compare "retired" in 1965 to retired today.

People are living longer, are far more active at 60 to 70 than we used to be. Second careers are not uncommon at all. Add to that that we have regulations that eliminated forced retirements and an economy that sucks. Many employers have learned that with the big chunk of retirements they see in this time period they are losing a great deal of knowledge and experience that they hire back through part time, reduced time or consulting agreements. You cannot replace a 30 year worker who retires with a new grad who has no experience.

J Diddy 10-15-2012 06:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HonestChieffan (Post 9017610)
Many "retired boomers" are finding new jobs or other ways that keep them in the workforce. The traditional retirement is a thing of the past. Demographers are struggling to deal with this within the statistics as we cannot really compare "retired" in 1965 to retired today.

People are living longer, are far more active at 60 to 70 than we used to be. Second careers are not uncommon at all. Add to that that we have regulations that eliminated forced retirements and an economy that sucks. Many employers have learned that with the big chunk of retirements they see in this time period they are losing a great deal of knowledge and experience that they hire back through part time, reduced time or consulting agreements. You cannot replace a 30 year worker who retires with a new grad who has no experience.

That's a nice theory except it's just speculation. I have found nothing that backs your claim.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:48 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.