U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-20-2015, 07:12 PM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
14,746 posts, read 13,256,936 times
Reputation: 4474

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rakin View Post
Most Red states are booming....... How's your Blue state doing ?

Volvo Car to Build First U.S. Car Plant in South Carolina - WSJ
One of my favorite blue states, Colorado is booming.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-20-2015, 08:52 PM
 
Location: Alameda, CA
7,465 posts, read 3,945,113 times
Reputation: 1369
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest View Post
Wrong.. Just like the rest of your posting.. I seen no need to simply go wrong wrong wrong wrong..
So if I produce the studies that predicted the LFPR would be declining and would continue to decline for the next 20 to 30 years would it make any difference to you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2015, 10:42 PM
 
3,436 posts, read 2,481,353 times
Reputation: 6627
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamSmyth View Post
Sorry if I burst your little theory on why the unemployment rate is falling. All I had to do is present the facts.

Both the U3 rate and the broader measures like U6 have been falling pretty steadily for some time now. Yet the LFPR rate has remained within a narrow range for approaching 2 years now, that is in spite of the downward demographic pressures on the LFPR.
First of all, I never gave a theory on why the unemployment rate is FALLING. I just informed you that the real unemployment rate is astronomically and unacceptably high.

And you still aren't getting it. And I have a feeling you won't because you don't want to. But putting you fingers in your ears making noise and repeating an argument against something that I never said does not negate the reality. Workforce participation is the worst it has been in almost 40 years.

It is not a matter of a trajectory- shaving a point off here and there is of no consequence. In real terms, It is catastrophically bad. Going from terrible to awful is not acceptable.

This president has destroyed the economy probably for generations.

Last edited by cachibatches; 05-20-2015 at 11:08 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2015, 10:54 PM
 
Location: Metro Detroit, Michigan
12,663 posts, read 13,959,392 times
Reputation: 13464
Quote:
Originally Posted by cachibatches View Post
This president has destroyed the economy probably for generations.
Correction... Presidents. And members of the senate. And congressmen. The list is actually quite extensive.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-20-2015, 11:20 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
9,832 posts, read 7,647,746 times
Reputation: 6288
Quote:
Originally Posted by cachibatches View Post
First of all, I never gave a theory on why the unemployment rate is FALLING. I just informed you that the real unemployment rate is astronomically and unacceptably high.

And you still aren't getting it. And I have a feeling you won't because you don't want to. But putting you fingers in your ears making noise and repeating an argument against something that I never said does not negate the reality. Workforce participation is the worst it has been in almost 40 years.

It is not a matter of a trajectory- shaving a point off here and there is of no consequence. In real terms, It is catastrophically bad. Going from terrible to awful is not acceptable.

This president has destroyed the economy probably for generations.
You're still not getting it. The LFPR was projected to decline LONG before Obama supposedly destroyed the economy.

This excerpt is from 2004. Keep in mind that this was before the Great Recession wrecked the economy and played with the numbers. Everything they predicted has come to pass.

Quote:
During the 2004–14 period, the growth of the labor force will be
due entirely to population growth, as the overall
labor force participation rate is expected to decrease
slightly from the 2004 level. The labor force in the next 10 years will be affected by the aging of the baby-boom cohort,
those born between 1946 and 1964. This age
group will be between 50 and 68 years old in 2014
and is expected to show significant growth over
the 2004–14 period, as it did from 2002 to 2012.
The labor force will continue to age, with the
annual growth rate of the 55-and-older group
projected to be 4.1 percent, 4 times the rate of
growth of the overall labor force. By contrast,
the annual growth rate of the 25-to-54-year age
group will be 0.3 percent, and that of the young
age group consisting of 16-to-24-year-olds will
be essentially flat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2015, 01:22 AM
 
Location: Alameda, CA
7,465 posts, read 3,945,113 times
Reputation: 1369
Quote:
Originally Posted by cachibatches View Post
First of all, I never gave a theory on why the unemployment rate is FALLING. I just informed you that the real unemployment rate is astronomically and unacceptably high.

And you still aren't getting it. And I have a feeling you won't because you don't want to. But putting you fingers in your ears making noise and repeating an argument against something that I never said does not negate the reality. Workforce participation is the worst it has been in almost 40 years.

It is not a matter of a trajectory- shaving a point off here and there is of no consequence. In real terms, It is catastrophically bad. Going from terrible to awful is not acceptable.

This president has destroyed the economy probably for generations.
Was this not you?

Originally Posted by cachibatches
How many times do we have to explain this same thing to the Democratic party apparatchiks?

THE UNEMPLYMENT RATE LOOKS DECENT BECAUSE THE WORKFORCE PARTICIAPATION RATE IS AT THE WORST IT HAS BEEN SINCE 1978!!!!

So explain how the unemployment rate could continue to fall when the LFPR has been relatively static for the last year and half.

All the unemployment indicators are now better than when Obama took office.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2015, 04:20 AM
 
69,372 posts, read 55,346,365 times
Reputation: 9358
Quote:
Originally Posted by WilliamSmyth View Post
So if I produce the studies that predicted the LFPR would be declining and would continue to decline for the next 20 to 30 years would it make any difference to you.
Would these be the same studies which show the GDP lower than it would be had government not done anything like the stimulus bill?

I can produce a study which shows that car damage increases take place when you drive a vehicle into telephone poles, the question is, why did the car drive into the telephone pole to begin with.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2015, 04:23 AM
 
69,372 posts, read 55,346,365 times
Reputation: 9358
Quote:
Originally Posted by andywire View Post
Correction... Presidents. And members of the senate. And congressmen. The list is actually quite extensive.
This President, and this President alone is responsible for an estimated .2% drop in the GDP rate due to the massive stimulus spending. This figure comes from the CBO, because the stimulus spending much be reversed from the economy plus interest.

Thats ONE bill alone, and doesnt even take into effect things like ACA
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2015, 04:25 AM
 
69,372 posts, read 55,346,365 times
Reputation: 9358
Quote:
Originally Posted by RaymondChandlerLives View Post
You're still not getting it. The LFPR was projected to decline LONG before Obama supposedly destroyed the economy.

This excerpt is from 2004. Keep in mind that this was before the Great Recession wrecked the economy and played with the numbers. Everything they predicted has come to pass.
So if the LFPR was projected to decline, simply due to an increase in population, why do the Demcorats run around telling us that we should allow more illegals to enter the country in order to boost the economy?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2015, 04:30 AM
 
16,687 posts, read 9,063,254 times
Reputation: 6742
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddlehead View Post
FiveThirtyEight is Nate Silver's blog. He is one of the best statisticians on the planet. I would tend to take his views seriously.
Nate Silver, Obama supporter, ignored some facts in the link.

#1 If we add 150,000 jobs in a month it is not keeping up with population growth.

#2 If we measure unemployment the same way we did in the early 1990s we would still be in the double digits.

#3 The employment participation rate for prime working age Americans (25 to 54) is down since the "recovery" began and has been flat lining at best recently.

Graph: Civilian Labor Force Participation Rate - 25 to 54 years - FRED - St. Louis Fed
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:46 PM.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top