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.
Millennials are a larger generation than boomers.Their youngest members will be 18 in 3 years. The eldest millennials are in their early 30's now.
The issue is not "how the Millennials compare to the Babyboomers". The issue is "how the Babyboomers" compare to the "Silent Generation" (the generation before the Babyboomers). The Millennials total about 80 million, the Babyboomers 76 million so it's more or less a wash with one generation aging into the workforce while the ages out of the workforce (a difference of about 5%). That's not where the difference lies.
The difference lies in the relative sizes of the currently retired generation vs the retiring generation. As mentioned, the Babyboomer generation (the incoming retirees) is about 76 million, but the Silent generation (the current retirees) is only about 50 million. The result is that the Babyboomer generation is 50% bigger than the generation that preceded it (TEN TIMES the difference between the Babyboomers and Millennials). That's a HUGE swelling in the number of older folks.
And yes, I know that more older folks are working longer than they used to, but that doesn't come close to offsetting the fact that 76 million people who used to work with a LFPR of close to 80% are now entering the ages when they will instead be working at a rate where they have a LFPR of 30% or so.
So 76 million people who USED to work with a LFPR of nearly 80% are now entering their years where they are having a LFPR of 30% or so - and you don't think that will drive down the LFPR for the country as a whole?
You need to go back to school and retake basic math.
Any town with a lot of government spending, such as Tuscon, is doing great.
Greece was a booming country once too.
The USA was booming right along until 2007, then the Dubya Recession put the economy right into the dumpster. In all fairness, Clinton deserves some small portion of the blame. He didn't veto the Gramm Leach Bliley Act in 2000, which was the major contributor to tanking the economy. He should have. Think how much better off we'd all be today if he'd vetoed that GOP legislation. The GLBA removed most of the Glass-Steagall safeguards that kept investment houses from running off the rails. Once those restrictions were removed, the banks did exactly that.
Exactly. Do you people seriously not understand this or is it just another excuse for Obama haters to spew?
The people you speak of, are foot soldiers who are injected with talking points to go run around with it. If they could think, only then they would understand. And it is obvious they don't. They live in a world of manufactured hatred, towards the President.
Simply bitter idiots who wished for a national disaster only so they could further push their ideologies.
If the economy is so great, as some people here are claiming, how come 44% of college grads in their 20s are stuck in low-wage, dead-end jobs, the highest rate in decades, and the number of young people making less than $25,000 has also spiked to the highest level since the 1990s?
If the economy is so great, how come 44% of college grads in their 20s are stuck in low-wage, dead-end jobs, the highest rate in decades, and the number of young people making less than $25,000 has also spiked to the highest level since the 1990s?
We're struggling to find candidates and struggling to fill positions (Health care industry). If you know someone who is qualified, have them contact me for positions here in Texas (two positions to be hired by me), New Mexico (six positions) or Ohio (four). At least 3x the pay you quoted.
I would not have asked for this even in 2007 because were wary of being laid off at the time and the job growth was terrible, not to mention a disaster in 2008.
We're struggling to find candidates and struggling to fill positions (Health care industry). If you know someone who is qualified, have them contact me for positions here in Texas (two positions to be hired by me), New Mexico (six positions) or Ohio (four). At least 3x the pay you quoted.
I would not have asked for this even in 2007 because were wary of being laid off at the time and the job growth was terrible, not to mention a disaster in 2008.
I was quoting CNN stats. How about a Bloomberg article, too?
Any town with a lot of government spending, such as Tuscon, is doing great.
Greece was a booming country once too.
It's not just "Tucson". Tucson is actually the weakest of the 3 cities I mentioned (weaker than the nation overall). Phoenix is doing better than Tucson, while Seattle is REALLY strong. Seattle was already in pretty good shape when I left there 2 1/2 years ago - and it's even better now.
Aside from that, government spending in Tucson is DOWN over the last few years, so trying to claim that government spending is responsible for the improving economy in Tucson is dead wrong.
Ken
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.
