Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You assume all those people can work and aren't disabled or in school, or don't need to work like a stay at home parent or wealthy. How do you determine who is truly a marginally attached/discouraged worker?
I found an estimate of total unemployed Americans that includes discouraged workers in prime working age - you know, the subject that's been argued about for the entire thread.
The real unemployment rate is still over 10 percent.
Then where does the 92 million Americans come from because 15 million doesn't equal 92 million?
In February 1994, the WSJ ran a front page story warning that a historic shift was occurring in the service sector, with growing numbers of workers being permanently replaced by the new information technologies.. According to the WSJ."Much of the huge US service sector seems to be on the verge of an upheaval similar to that which hit farming and manuafcturing, where employment plunged for years while production increased steadily... Technological advances are now so rapid that companies can shed far more workers than they need to hire to implement the technology or support expanding sales."
15% of manufacturing jobs were permanently eliminated between 2000-2010 due to technology. There is no reason to think the number for the subsequent decade will not be even greater.
Someone who has put in 25 years of hard work on an assembly line is qualified to do what in absence of an assembly line? If he or she had an aptitude for STEM, he or she probably would not have been working an assembly line in the first place.
Retail and food services has been the largest employment sectors in the U.S. since the 80's.
The retail sector had long acted as an unemployment sponge, absorbing countless numbers of displaced workers let go by automation. Retail now embraces the internet and many brick and mortar stores struggle. Economists looked to the food industry to rescue the workers cast adrift by technology. Even here, food is increasingly cooked by computer and food orders relayed to the kitchen via technology.
Global unemployment has been at its highest level since the great depression. The number grows each year as tens of millions of new entrants into the workforce find themselves without jobs.
Here in the U.S., we blame the workers, the schools, illegal workers, the greedy corporations, the other political party and government. We blame because there is no solution to what has and will remain a painful transition.
And we have a lot of wealthy people in the US. I believe that number has grown in the past 5 years as well. I am just pointing out that there isn't any wealth flight out of the country going on.
People look desperate, I wonder how many of them represent the new poor, under Obama.
Our employment situation is in dire straits. So many people are leaving the work force, these U3 numbers a real freaking joke, but you watch, Obama will proudly take credit for 6.7% unemployment.
In February 1994, the WSJ ran a front page story warning that a historic shift was occurring in the service sector, with growing numbers of workers being permanently replaced by the new information technologies.. According to the WSJ."Much of the huge US service sector seems to be on the verge of an upheaval similar to that which hit farming and manuafcturing, where employment plunged for years while production increased steadily... Technological advances are now so rapid that companies can shed far more workers than they need to hire to implement the technology or support expanding sales."
15% of manufacturing jobs were permanently eliminated between 2000-2010 due to technology. There is no reason to think the number for the subsequent decade will not be even greater.
...and yet, under Bush during those years we had year after year of statistical full employment.
Under Obama things are reversed. Exactly like Al Gore said "Everything that should be down is up. Everything that should be up is down."
Oh my God...I don't know how else to put this to make you understand. About four million people are reaching that age every year from when they started hitting that age (2011) and younger people aren't replacing them at the same rate. Those are the actual people retiring.
Wrong, and I've explained to you numerous reasons already, and even provided links showing there are MORE younger people than people retiring. If you want to keep repeating the same old talking points rather than discussing the issue, then you are just wasting everyones time.
Then where does the 92 million Americans come from because 15 million doesn't equal 92 million?
? Maybe you should ask the poster who made that claim.
Is it that hard for you to be logical?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
