[zthatzmanz28]

Originally Posted by Driller1

In my area we do not want jobs. As soon as a plant is going to be built, we protest.

And a little bit of theMichigan ECONOMY whithers up and DIES...

THANK YOU for your pestilence

[magellan]

Originally Posted by zthatzmanz28

And a little bit of theMichigan ECONOMY whithers up and DIES...

THANK YOU for your pestilence

I think Driller1 is being sarcastic, in regards to Nestle's attempts to pump billions of gallons of water out of Michigan's aquifer.

[Driller1]

Originally Posted by magellan

I think Driller1 is being sarcastic, in regards to Nestle's attempts to pump billions of gallons of water out of Michigan's aquifer.

No, that is over. We just get a special use permit for anything over 70 GPM. I meant the coal plants along with a few other things.

[Bhaalspawn]

Originally Posted by actinic

Michigan is turning out to be a big urban experiment ... the state needs to shed 10% - 20% of its current population til some type of equilibrium is found. Obviously there's way too many people for the jobs available, something that's been going on for some time now.

Some would say fewer people is just fine as long as taxes don't get out of hand and unemployment benefits don't last to perpetuity to turn it into one big welfare state.

If jobs are available people will come. Til then they'll need to move and find employment elsewhere.

I agree. The state no longer has enough business activity to support its population. Can you imagine what the unemployment rate would be if everyone who had become unemployed remained in the state?

So what should Michigan end up looking like? A state with a population of about 5 million with about 3 million in the metro Detroit area? More areas in the Lower Peninsula that feel as deserted as the UP?

[topshop]

The link below gives a pretty good idea on what is going on (scroll down to see all of the stats). Change the month and year to see the stats for different months. The latest available today is March 2009. Keep in mind the numbers here are the the U3 unemployment rate. To get the whole picture (U6), one needs to multiply the numbers by 1.8 giving a number of counties a rate in the 40% neighborhood with one over 50%

Map: LA

[Indentured Servant]

@Actinic
In order for this “shedding” to manifest, the remaining portion of the US, outside of Michigan, must offer economic growth that is the reverse of Michigan’s. At this point in time, nearly all the states have NET JOB LOSSES. Hence, nearly all the states currently have too many people relative to jobs, and this is why the unemployment rate is increasing in the nation and around the country as a whole. Last month unemployment report showed that Initial jobless claimed had decreased well under 600,000 for the month. This was heralded as a sigh that the economy was on the rebound. However, what was left out is the fact that the Federal government hired 77,000 workers last month, mostly for the upcoming census count. Minus that, the number of initial claims would be back above 600,000. Moreover, the continuing claims keep rising to nearly 6.5 million people. Another thing to watch out for is inflation (Inflation manifest in a rise in prices, year over year and month over month). The governments reports rise in retain sales also as a sign of economic rebound. However, they don’t adjust these figures for inflation. Obviously if prices are higher and the volume of units sold remain the same……….that it will reflect a dollar increase. If inflation is high enough, then it can even mask a decrease in unit sales. Therefore, one should take such statistics with a grain of salt.

People better start paying attention to Michigan in regards to a predictor for the nation. If Michigan is hurting……our nation is hurting. Government spending is only postponing and intensifying the collapse of the US economy. People were on here bashing Michigan, and its future, back when Michigan unemployment rate was 8.9 percet (and even lower). Its interesting that few people are now making the argument that THE NATION, is doomed and needs to shed 10% of its population. Why was it true for Michigan at 8.9% unemployment but not true for the Nation at 8.9%? All US job losses did not come from the state of Michigan. Its not as if Michigan is dragging the nation down....but rather that the Nation is going down and Michigan is at the front of the fall.

[magellan]

Originally Posted by Indentured Servant

@Actinic
In order for this “shedding” to manifest, the remaining portion of the US, outside of Michigan, must offer economic growth that is the reverse of Michigan’s. At this point in time, nearly all the states have NET JOB LOSSES. Hence, nearly all the states currently have too many people relative to jobs, and this is why the unemployment rate is increasing in the nation and around the country as a whole. Last month unemployment report showed that Initial jobless claimed had decreased well under 600,000 for the month. This was heralded as a sigh that the economy was on the rebound. However, what was left out is the fact that the Federal government hired 77,000 workers last month, mostly for the upcoming census count. Minus that, the number of initial claims would be back above 600,000. Moreover, the continuing claims keep rising to nearly 6.5 million people. Another thing to watch out for is inflation (Inflation manifest in a rise in prices, year over year and month over month). The governments reports rise in retain sales also as a sign of economic rebound. However, they don’t adjust these figures for inflation. Obviously if prices are higher and the volume of units sold remain the same……….that it will reflect a dollar increase. If inflation is high enough, then it can even mask a decrease in unit sales. Therefore, one should take such statistics with a grain of salt.

People better start paying attention to Michigan in regards to a predictor for the nation. If Michigan is hurting……our nation is hurting. Government spending is only postponing and intensifying the collapse of the US economy. People were on here bashing Michigan, and its future, back when Michigan unemployment rate was 8.9 percet (and even lower). Its interesting that few people are now making the argument that THE NATION, is doomed and needs to shed 10% of its population. Why was it true for Michigan at 8.9% unemployment but not true for the Nation at 8.9%? All US job losses did not come from the state of Michigan. Its not as if Michigan is dragging the nation down....but rather that the Nation is going down and Michigan is at the front of the fall.

I remember reading a few years ago that 2/3's of the jobs that had been created in the U.S. since 2001 were construction related, or "growth" related (or housing bubble related). Economists claim that we are becoming a "service economy" in the U.S., but how many of those service jobs are due to people just shuffling around the U.S. (ie mortgages, appraisals, inspectors, real estate, school teachers, civil engineers, new strip mall jobs, attorneys, accountants), and how many are really services that are being exported on a global scale? Most people probably already know the answer.

China's and India's economies are growing leaps and bounds. Why? Not because of a few call centers, or some architecture offices opening up, but because they are building things in factories at breakneck speed, to feed an ever growing middle class around the globe. You can trace the economic rise and fall of countries based on their manufacturing base.

So maybe as a country we need to gear down to a smaller population, like many parts of Western Europe. Reign in the exurbs. Stop building new roads and infrastructure that no one will need in 20 years.

[actinic]

@Indentured. It's all a matter of degree. If there's 1 job available for every 2 workers in Michigan the chances of finding employment elsewhere are much better in states like Texas where the ratio might be 3:4 even with nationwide job losses.

This is a phenomena we're already seeing as local job seekers are finding better luck elsewhere. Sure, they might not be having as much success as before but there's still a net outflow.

At the next up cycle the outflow might *increase*, and considerably, if Michigan doesn't create jobs to the same degree elsewhere. Ironic to think that a GOOD economy might actually HURT Michigan under this scenario.

[Indentured Servant]

Originally Posted by magellan

I remember reading a few years ago that 2/3's of the jobs that had been created in the U.S. since 2001 were construction related, or "growth" related (or housing bubble related). Economists claim that we are becoming a "service economy" in the U.S., but how many of those service jobs are due to people just shuffling around the U.S. (ie mortgages, appraisals, inspectors, real estate, school teachers, civil engineers, new strip mall jobs, attorneys, accountants), and how many are really services that are being exported on a global scale? Most people probably already know the answer.

China's and India's economies are growing leaps and bounds. Why? Not because of a few call centers, or some architecture offices opening up, but because they are building things in factories at breakneck speed, to feed an ever growing middle class around the globe. You can trace the economic rise and fall of countries based on their manufacturing base.

So maybe as a country we need to gear down to a smaller population, like many parts of Western Europe. Reign in the exurbs. Stop building new roads and infrastructure that no one will need in 20 years.

This is so true. You hit the nail on the head. Population growth, and the construction that goes along with it, is a major factor in many of the “boom” economies of last several decades. Low interest rates provided courtesy of the FED, relaxed leading standards and the like helped to promote this artificial growth. I strongly believe that we are seeing the dismantling of the artificial economy, because the debt created from it is long past being unsustainable.

[Indentured Servant]

Originally Posted by actinic

@Indentured. It's all a matter of degree. If there's 1 job available for every 2 workers in Michigan the chances of finding employment elsewhere are much better in states like Texas where the ratio might be 3:4 even with nationwide job losses.

This is a phenomena we're already seeing as local job seekers are finding better luck elsewhere. Sure, they might not be having as much success as before but there's still a net outflow.

At the next up cycle the outflow might *increase*, and considerably, if Michigan doesn't create jobs to the same degree elsewhere. Ironic to think that a GOOD economy might actually HURT Michigan under this scenario.

That would be true but there are some very large states, like California, Florida, North Carolina....whose unemployment rate is not too far from that of Michigans. If all these people move to Texas, and Texas has net job loss, pretty soon the probability of finding a job in Texas will be a grim as finding a job in Michigan.

There is not going be an UP cycle for a VERY long time. National Unemployment will stabalize at around 9%, after rising to around 10%, when all the stimulus spending kicks in. When the stimulus impact gets into full swing, expect crazy high inflation, then high interest rates to attempt to control it....which will kick in the next round of inflationary decline that will be worse than the deflationary decline. Expect unemployment to reach at least 15% by 2012 nationally. Unless something happens in the world that is a game changer.