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.
I've made this point before (or tried to) in other venues and other forum posts too.
Maybe it'll get more traction here.
My Observation: The unemployment problem is less about not having enough jobs for all that may need one
than it is about having more people available to work than there are jobs that actually need doing.
Industry and commerce are chugging along OK enough without these people being employed making for a lot of "surplus" people... perhaps the entirety of the 20-40 Million now not working.
Over the last 30-40 years in the US... at the same time we have shuttered our older industrial base, off-shored other jobs and then through technology and process changes streamlined the remaining jobs down to the point that we're phenomenally efficient at what we do get done even if those who are working are putting in more hours than the past generation did.
But during this same time... we have significantly, dangerously, one could say "boomed" the raw number of our population.
This raw number of people is also impacting all sorts of infrastructure limits and resource reserves.
(151M in 1950 to 203M in 1970 to 308M in 2010) We have gone too far.
As to a solution for the immediate problem? I don't know.
That's above my pay grade.
What's interesting is Spain, the country mentioned has one of the lowest fertility rates in the world (1.47 children / woman, but in the 90's it was about 1.2 - 1.3 children / woman compared with 2.1 children / woman for the U.S.) and an unemployment rate that makes the U.S. look the land of opportunity in comparison. The same with Italy and Greece, and both countries have had an unemployment problem for a long time, though it may have worsened in recent years. (Though Italy's unemployment rate is actually a percent point or so lower than the U.S., but traditionally it was higher).
I don't think you will find any correlation among unemployment and fertility rates in developed countries. It's more an issue of employers being wary of what the future might bring. This especially affects workers just beginning their career, as they have not proven their skills and abilities as much as somebody with 5 or 10 years of experience. Remember that the U.S. unemployment rate was under 5% as recently as April 2008; it shot up to a record high of 10.1% in October of 2009 and has slightly reduced to 9.1% currently. Spain's, by the way, is 20.9%; Greece has around 15% unemployed.
Well for starters, the government could eliminate the child tax credits. This might make people think twice about having children if they know they will have to feed, clothe and put a roof over their head without any help from the government.
I know this alone will not reduce the population, but it might just help slow down the growth. At the very least, it will save the government some much needed money.
I feel that you’re out of touch with human nature. In the past, when there was no governmental assistance and times were very hard, that’s when people had the most kids.
Ireland 1800s/1900s Not much work, big families, and there’s a term called “Irish twins.” Irish twins are two siblings born exactly nine months apart.
Depression era America saw many families that were out of work, with no income having 8 – 18 children per family.
This list goes on and on…
When people are poor and have nothing to do, copulating is a favorite past time despite the risk of pregnancy and not enough resources to care for the children…
As far as this topic’s concerned: It’s been happening in the United States for twenty years now. In the past ten, it’s become even more prevalent, and I predict that in the next five to ten years it will be mainstream.
It’s a fact that we’ve been bleeding gainful employment for working class since the 1950s. By the late 80s through the early 90s, it was significant enough that I began noticing some of my friends that couldn’t find real gainful employment would just stay at home and live with mom and dad.
We’ve chopped so many jobs that only a few people with real skills or educations can find employment that pays enough for them to live. If most households wouldn’t have two incomes, they wouldn’t make it. Most of the working class is grossly under-employed.
Buy more foreign junk and services, champion the government and it’s restrictive taxes, regulations, and environmental laws, regal as the government grows bigger, military’s phenomenal, and cheer as our military might pummels yet another third world nation, as they print more money to cover their costs, and then sit around wondering why inflation is through the roof and you can’t find gainful employment to support yourself.
Yea, I’m quite sure we’re not only going to see 35 year olds living with mom and dad as being the norm, but also thee and four-generation families under the same roof.
Last edited by bolillo_loco; 08-18-2011 at 03:48 AM..
If you are gainfully employed and can live at home with your parents at any age, and still have a girlfriend/boyfriend and get laid,
then why not...
Because it's time to grow the hell up and take care of yourself?
Quote:
Originally Posted by chacho_keva
God! You kids are so freekin' paranoid about taking on life on your own without mommy's and daddy's lifeline.
Probably more like mommy and daddy's cable TV, mommy and daddy's cooking and cleaning, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by highlife2
I am selling my condo now because it is costing me a fortune and I cant do the big things in life while financing it
It's called a budget. Try doing fewer of the big things and more of the little things in order to afford a place to live. You might just be happier for it.
It is not always a case of the children sponging off the parents. Many elderly Parents benefit from having a physically able child around to take care of them.
My father past away 10 years ago leaving my mom with the 30 year old house. She cannot sell it right now, is in declining health, is unable to do the maintenance, nor afford the associated costs. I live with her and do all the maintenance like cutting the grass, shoveling the snow, fixing whatever happens to break each week, grocery shopping, and contribute $700 a month + the food.
As a result, we both have better living arrangements than either would alone and I can save up a ton of money. I will have close to $100k by the end of the year.
Because it's time to grow the hell up and take care of yourself?
Probably more like mommy and daddy's cable TV, mommy and daddy's cooking and cleaning, etc.
It's called a budget. Try doing fewer of the big things and more of the little things in order to afford a place to live. You might just be happier for it.
Monthly expenditures
400 dollars rent in the ghetto
300 dollars food
50 – 100 dollars a month for utilities
25 dollars a month school tax
775 minimum 825 maximum for basic bare minimum expenditures
This figure excludes transportation, so it will involve lengthy walks to work because a car, car insurance, maintenance, parking fees, tags, inspection registration, and insurance are absolutely out of your budget. There is no entertainment because even a simple subscription to Net Flix is out of reach, so it means hanging out on the corner in the ghetto talking to the other poor people society’s forgotten. It doesn’t include a clothing allowance either, and even when shopping in thrift stores, after a few months to a year or two, you’re going to be out of clothing, and you’ll have to accept donations from the local church, if they have any at all much less in your size.
If one moves into a better neighborhood, the rent will go from 400 a month to 600 a month. If you care to live in a decent neighborhood, that rent just increased to 800+ a month.
The bottom line for all you privileged people out there with myopia is that for much of working class America with no skills, we cannot make it on minimum wage, so we’re either forced to live with roommates that we cannot stand, or we have to shack up with a domestic partner that neither we nor they are happy with, so for many of us, it makes more sense to move home with family. While our family is usually our last choice and we may not like them, the bottom line is that they’re still family, and therefore familiar. English note* Notice how family and familiar have the same stems... There's a reason for that. It's the same in Spanish as well.
The last time I checked, the cooked books unemployment figure was 10%, which is completely bogus. The real figure is probably around 20%. Look around you, if you still do not see an economic crisis in America, I do hope that your life doesn’t crash and you lose everything too. Those of us that are less fortunate, but used to have well above average incomes, know just how hard it is to go to the bottom of the social status scale quick, fast, and in a hurry. It’s very painful, I took it personally, and the humiliation is indescribable.
What I find most amusing is that no matter what the unfortunate try, there’s always some haudy tawdy I got to where I am by myself and through hard work member of society that’s there to bash them for trying. It’s really a slap in the face to people that are living at home, working, and trying to find gainful employment. I suppose that they should just give up and go on the dole. Yea, let the nanny state take care of them, at least then they’re not bothering good old mom and dad.
The bottom line for all you privileged people out there with myopia is that for much of working class America with no skills, we cannot make it on minimum wage
While your verbose argument has some validity to it, none of the examples I quoted had anything to do with minimum wage.
Because it's time to grow the hell up and take care of yourself?
Probably more like mommy and daddy's cable TV, mommy and daddy's cooking and cleaning, etc.
It's called a budget. Try doing fewer of the big things and more of the little things in order to afford a place to live. You might just be happier for it.
Negitory, condo has got to go and has had 2 viewings, our realitor has never let a place sit longer than 3 months so thats exciting then we can get a small place to rent and live life, I can get my pitts S2B and start working on my sportsman acrobatic routine. Cant just budget myself into old age and eventually my grave having never even attempted to live out my dream, how lame would that be.
While your verbose argument has some validity to it, none of the examples I quoted had anything to do with minimum wage.
Ah, my mistake, I reread what jobaba just wrote, so I’m sorry for misquoting you, and by the way, you’re right, I have a very difficult time keeping things short. Why use twenty words when 200 will do?
It is not always a case of the children sponging off the parents. Many elderly Parents benefit from having a physically able child around to take care of them.
My father past away 10 years ago leaving my mom with the 30 year old house. She cannot sell it right now, is in declining health, is unable to do the maintenance, nor afford the associated costs. I live with her and do all the maintenance like cutting the grass, shoveling the snow, fixing whatever happens to break each week, grocery shopping, and contribute $700 a month + the food.
As a result, we both have better living arrangements than either would alone and I can save up a ton of money. I will have close to $100k by the end of the year.
I've lived away from home for a long time, but if my parents ever needed me, I would be there in a heartbeat. Generations ago, you did not send mom and dad into a nursing home. I don't know what has happened in our society, but parents made great sacrifices for us, and I think it's awesome that people like you are doing what it takes to help them stay at home. Nursing homes are death sentences, and I would never send a loved on to one.
I feel that you’re out of touch with human nature. In the past, when there was no governmental assistance and times were very hard, that’s when people had the most kids.
Depression era America saw many families that were out of work, with no income having 8 – 18 children per family.
This list goes on and on…
When people are poor and have nothing to do, copulating is a favorite past time despite the risk of pregnancy and not enough resources to care for the children…
It's no big surprise that a majority of people are stupid, is it ?
Even knowing that I would hope that people would be smart enough at least to consider birth control if they erased the child tax credits. At the very least. Sheesh.
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.
