U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Retirement
 [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)
 
Old 03-16-2016, 06:18 AM
 
Location: Northern Maine
9,775 posts, read 14,942,038 times
Reputation: 9587

Advertisements

There are 95,000,000 Americans between the ages of 18 and 65. That is nearly three times the population of Canada. The hard truth, regardless of who is elected, is that those of us who work can no longer afford to support Lyndon Johnson's grand society. New England used to have poor farms where the residents grew their own food and cut their own wood for fuel. Those times will come again. We had them during my lifetime.

 
Old 03-16-2016, 07:13 AM
 
Location: Retired
648 posts, read 496,711 times
Reputation: 1057
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henry10 View Post
4 years (2003-2006) we grew at over 5% GDP.

1992-2000: every year (except 1995) we grew over 5%.

1971-1989 every year (except 1982 and 1986) we grew over 5%.

These are pure GDP growth, with no inflation adjustment. Here is my link -- US GDP Growth Rate by Year.

Give a link for your numbers.




You must use inflation adjusted growth. To be fair, GDP should also be adjusted for population growth. Then one can see how low our economic growth really is, rather than looking at the hyped propaganda our politicians spew.
 
Old 03-16-2016, 07:13 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,093 posts, read 72,460,873 times
Reputation: 27565
What I've read so far:

Hillary: Will expand ss/medicare to caregivers who couldn't work and raise the payroll cap.
Trump: Nothing specific but commented that he wants to save SS because people have been paying in for years.

It looks like these two will be among the ones we choose.
 
Old 03-16-2016, 08:17 AM
 
6,211 posts, read 4,715,040 times
Reputation: 12697
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northern Maine Land Man View Post
There are 95,000,000 Americans between the ages of 18 and 65. That is nearly three times the population of Canada. The hard truth, regardless of who is elected, is that those of us who work can no longer afford to support Lyndon Johnson's grand society. New England used to have poor farms where the residents grew their own food and cut their own wood for fuel. Those times will come again. We had them during my lifetime.
I have no doubt that the economy looks pretty bleak in northern Maine. There are plenty of reasons for that and large areas of the country have experienced changes. Lumbering, ranching and agriculture are being done on a larger scale with greater efficiency, lower costs and with fewer workers needed. There are still plenty of "family" farms but most are now multimillion dollar operations along way from being barely above subsistence level. Sure there has been some renewed interest in "boutique" farms but even that will change and those organic and specialized operations will become larger and more efficient.


Retailing is going through efficiency changes to large scale distribution. There are fewer and fewer sales in medium and small stores and there are fewer and fewer jobs. It is just not efficient to have clerks standing around waiting for some customers. And of course much of retailing is going to be through the internet.


Manufacturing has received a lot of attention. The politicians blame government policies, greedy corporations and cheap foreign labor. Well, at one time, maybe low labor costs was the biggest factor. Now there are other issues. Japan, China and other countries have efficient manufacturing facilities. The factories are highly automated, robotic and huge often employing thousands or tens of thousands of trained workers. Regardless of labor costs, to compete we need to be able to build efficient large scale facilities. In spite of the promises of the politicians that is not at all likely. We don't have the workers and we are bogged down with permits, regulations and even worse the NIMBY attitude.


All of the trends I have mentioned have hit hard on the bottom half of the middle class and especially for those with limited education and skills. The politicians promise to fix these trends but that will not happen. And the $10-15 minimum wage is only going to push companies to be more efficient and eliminate even more jobs.


There is another side to the economic story. We now have about 60 million Americans living in households making $100,000/year or more. That number is growing rapidly. It still seems fashionable to complain about the economy, but for most jobs requiring a college degree, unemployment is extremely low. Sure some people will not move and cannot find a decent job in their area. Some people take jobs paying less than they want. Overall, THE CURRENT JOB PROSPECTS FOR THOSE WITH COLLEGE DEGREES IS THE BEST I HAVE SEEN IN MY LIFETIME. By comparison when I graduated and was living in Cleveland, national unemployment was high. Local unemployment, with or without a degree, was over 20%. Inflation was skyrocketing and if you had the downpayment, car or mortgage loan rates were in the range of 10-20%.
 
Old 03-16-2016, 09:51 AM
 
Location: Baltimore, MD
3,745 posts, read 4,213,572 times
Reputation: 6866
Sander's base is the relatively young college educated voter. I don't believe that more than a few Sanders voters will vote for Trump. Not so long ago I threatened to vote for Trump if Sanders won the votes but lost the nomination because of Clinton's super delegates. In truth, I could NEVER vote for a racist misogynist.

Trump reminds me of George Wallace, probably because I was an adult living in Maryland at the time he was shot. I figure if he is elected President the odds are good he'd eventually be impeached. But as of last night, it appears we are going to be referring to the new President as Madam President. Works for me.
 
Old 03-16-2016, 10:21 AM
 
Location: Tennessee
23,541 posts, read 17,525,434 times
Reputation: 27573
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrkliny View Post
I have no doubt that the economy looks pretty bleak in northern Maine. There are plenty of reasons for that and large areas of the country have experienced changes. Lumbering, ranching and agriculture are being done on a larger scale with greater efficiency, lower costs and with fewer workers needed. There are still plenty of "family" farms but most are now multimillion dollar operations along way from being barely above subsistence level. Sure there has been some renewed interest in "boutique" farms but even that will change and those organic and specialized operations will become larger and more efficient.


Retailing is going through efficiency changes to large scale distribution. There are fewer and fewer sales in medium and small stores and there are fewer and fewer jobs. It is just not efficient to have clerks standing around waiting for some customers. And of course much of retailing is going to be through the internet.


Manufacturing has received a lot of attention. The politicians blame government policies, greedy corporations and cheap foreign labor. Well, at one time, maybe low labor costs was the biggest factor. Now there are other issues. Japan, China and other countries have efficient manufacturing facilities. The factories are highly automated, robotic and huge often employing thousands or tens of thousands of trained workers. Regardless of labor costs, to compete we need to be able to build efficient large scale facilities. In spite of the promises of the politicians that is not at all likely. We don't have the workers and we are bogged down with permits, regulations and even worse the NIMBY attitude.


All of the trends I have mentioned have hit hard on the bottom half of the middle class and especially for those with limited education and skills. The politicians promise to fix these trends but that will not happen. And the $10-15 minimum wage is only going to push companies to be more efficient and eliminate even more jobs.


There is another side to the economic story. We now have about 60 million Americans living in households making $100,000/year or more. That number is growing rapidly. It still seems fashionable to complain about the economy, but for most jobs requiring a college degree, unemployment is extremely low. Sure some people will not move and cannot find a decent job in their area. Some people take jobs paying less than they want. Overall, THE CURRENT JOB PROSPECTS FOR THOSE WITH COLLEGE DEGREES IS THE BEST I HAVE SEEN IN MY LIFETIME. By comparison when I graduated and was living in Cleveland, national unemployment was high. Local unemployment, with or without a degree, was over 20%. Inflation was skyrocketing and if you had the downpayment, car or mortgage loan rates were in the range of 10-20%.
I agree with all but your last point. I'm not sure precisely what you mean by saying "that for jobs requiring a degree, unemployment is low." I'm assuming you're inferring the reverse direction "for college degree holders, unemployment is low." Unemployment may be low among college degree holders, but many employers are requiring four year degrees for jobs they previously didn't in healthier labor markets, and for many of those jobs, the knowledge gained in a traditional college is not even that useful. Requiring a degree makes a convenient initial cull of applicants.

A lot of recent graduates are working low paying work for which a degree is not required or useful, or are involuntarily out of field. I have a cousin with a BS in accounting working in debt collections at a call center. Being from Tennessee, most of my peers with non-education/health care majors had to leave the state to find professional employment, if they could find decent work at all.

The labor market is better than it was several years back, but it's not robust in many fields.
 
Old 03-16-2016, 10:42 AM
 
Location: New Jersey
12,764 posts, read 7,817,945 times
Reputation: 13083
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrkliny View Post


By comparison when I graduated and was living in Cleveland, national unemployment was high. Local unemployment, with or without a degree, was over 20%.
That must have been around the early 80s. I was looking for work at the time. Reading the classified ads, I came across one for 'envelope stuffer'.

The company wanted prospective employees to send in a resume.

A RESUME FOR STUFFING ENVELOPES!

Yeah, they were tough times.
 
Old 03-16-2016, 10:53 AM
 
6,211 posts, read 4,715,040 times
Reputation: 12697
Quote:
Originally Posted by Serious Conversation View Post
...


I'm not sure precisely what you mean by saying "that for jobs requiring a degree, unemployment is low." .....


A lot of recent graduates are working low paying work for which a degree is not required or useful, or are involuntarily out of field. ....

The labor market is better than it was several years back, but it's not robust in many fields.
As I remember the BLS uses the term professional/managerial to cover a huge number of different jobs that require a college degree. This could be anything from a grade school teacher to an engineer to a cardiac surgeon. For this category and most jobs included, unemployment has been extremely low, about 3%, for many months. Sure that does not mean everyone with a college degree has the job they want. There are geographical mismatches between jobs and candidates. There are jobs that are not well paid. There are jobs that require a degree when it might not be needed. There are also qualified people who don't want to work or can't work. None of these situations are new. The fact is that based on historical data employment for college grads has never been better.
 
Old 03-16-2016, 10:56 AM
 
6,211 posts, read 4,715,040 times
Reputation: 12697
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fox Terrier View Post
That must have been around the early 80s. I was looking for work at the time. Reading the classified ads, I came across one for 'envelope stuffer'.

The company wanted prospective employees to send in a resume.

A RESUME FOR STUFFING ENVELOPES!

Yeah, they were tough times.
Actually my experience in Cleveland was from the early 70's. I was still there in the late 70's and the situation was still not good.
 
Old 03-16-2016, 11:39 AM
 
Location: Ubique
4,148 posts, read 3,156,683 times
Reputation: 2634
Quote:
Originally Posted by Graywhiskers View Post
You must use inflation adjusted growth. To be fair, GDP should also be adjusted for population growth. Then one can see how low our economic growth really is, rather than looking at the hyped propaganda our politicians spew.
I don't disagree with you, but I was talking about "straight-up", nominal GDP, and said so.

If you look at the numbers, GDP growth needs to return to the numbers pre-2007. Right now GDP growth is about half where it should be.

A good economy may not be the magic bullet, but it is close to it. A good economy solves a lot of ills.
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.


Closed Thread

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 > Retirement
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

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