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.
The real unemployment rate is at least 20% and pushing the depression era.
There are almost 100 million Americans not in the labor force. About 1/3 and no they're not all retirees and children.
Retirees make up the largest segment. Only 6 million of those not in the labor force have indicated that they want a job. When the LFPR was at the highest is was ever measured those who where not in the labor force who indicated they wanted a job was in the 4 million range. Add 2 million to the unemployment numbers and you get a number that is not close to 20%.
Whether or not they are simply saying they are looking for work but really aren't, I'm not sure, but I know several people personally on SSDI and SNAP.
Social Security disability income (not to be confused with SSI) requires one to be disabled with limited abilities to work. Under SNAP, an able-bodied adult with no dependents has 90 days in which to find work. Welfare-to-workfare wasn't just a saying.
Well, it's not Republican or Libertarian or any-other-ian slop; it's my slop These are ideas I've been kicking around for years.
You and tens of millions before you. There is nothing new here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blisterpeanuts
Would you like to elaborate on your claim that such zones have already been tried, and have failed? An example, perhaps?
No, I would rather that you you took enough initiative to lift a finger and go google it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blisterpeanuts
My understanding is that it's been quite successful in places like Shenzhen and parts of Latin America.
LOL! Snowmobiles work great in Alaska as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blisterpeanuts
I've been to countries where the tax and regulatory burden is much lower and the work ethic is enormous, much better than ours in recent years...
Sure, sure. How did you go about measuring "work ethic" in these countries while you were in them? Go ahead, tell us. I promise not to laugh.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blisterpeanuts
...and while they do have pollution, exploitation of workers, dangerous work sites, etc....
So these were god-awful hell-holes for the most part?
Quote:
Originally Posted by blisterpeanuts
...they also enjoy much faster economic growth, more like 8-10% per annum compared to our anemic jobless growth of 1-2% (when not in recession).
Math Quiz: Which is greater: 2% of a lot or 8% of a little?
Quote:
Originally Posted by blisterpeanuts
I'm convinced by what I've seen that we need to strike a better balance between growth and fairness. We can't have a perfectly safe, perfectly fair society and have fast growth and broad prosperity. The two notions are apparently incompatible.
Hmmm. Profits over people. Like nobody saw THAT coming...
The real unemployment rate is at least 20% and pushing the depression era.
No, not at all. U-3 has been the standard unemployment rate for many decades. All the other measures (U-1, U-2, U-4, U-5, and U-6) are much more recently developed alternative measures of labor under-utilization. It says so right in the tables.
Quote:
Originally Posted by CK78
There are almost 100 million Americans not in the labor force. About 1/3 and no they're not all retirees and children.
The labor force is equal to the employed plus the unemployed. If you are not in one or the other of those two groups, you are not in the labor force and have never been considered to be. For the most part, you have to CHOOSE not to be in the labor force by failing to look for work.
- The notion of an Urban Enterprise Zone, chiefly implemented in New Jersey at this time.
Of course, no one solution is going to solve the systemic problems the United States has. For example, we have $18 trillion in debt, probably rising to $20 trillion by the time Obama leaves office, and we haven't even begun to think about balancing the budget, much less paying down the debt.
But pay it down we must, or else we will be owned by foreign (mostly Chinese) creditors. The interest on the loans is already the second highest line item in the federal budget, behind defense. It's likely that in a few years, the interest will exceed $1 trillion and then balancing the budget will probably be completely unattainable.
I think the best approach is to encourage economic development while restraining government spending (and avoiding foreign wars). This is the only proven way to put the country back to solvency.
Of course, no one solution is going to solve the systemic problems the United States has. For example, we have $18 trillion in debt, probably rising to $20 trillion by the time Obama leaves office, and we haven't even begun to think about balancing the budget, much less paying down the debt.
But pay it down we must, or else we will be owned by foreign (mostly Chinese) creditors.
Wow... you really don't understand the economy.
The fiscal debt is the least of our problems. If a Rep is elected next, I guarantee they will forget about it like they always do.
Sure the Chinese own our paper. That makes them dependent on the US rather than the other way around. It's the deal they made so they could experience those double digit growth rates you mentioned.
Don't fool yourself into thinking that the economy is so great with these fake numbers the media/government pushes out.
I sometimes think this fixation on participation rate is to have something for some to cling to as evidence they were right all along that the system would implode if the guy they didn't vote for got elected.
Unemployment's been measured the same way for decades and they have multiple measurements for everyone 16 years and older. The U-6 rate is probably the most accurate for long-term unemployment, down to 10.5% from a high of 17.1% in 2009 (it's only been measured since 1994), and it is always several percentage points higher than the famous U-3 rate.
Throwing out or supporting wild numbers without any foundation because that's how you "feel" isn't helpful to anybody. One need only look at the boom of construction nationwide to see that this recovery is not fake, it's just not perfect.
Barclay's claims that the reason for 2 out of 3 people not participating in the labor market is that they are aging out. Being able to get healthcare without being beholden to a job liberated many Americans to make a choice to finally quit the job as they'd wanted, opening job opportunities for others in the process.
In 2000, baby boomers, our largest population, were in their prime working years with a participation rate of 84%. Those 55 and older dropped dramatically to a rate of 32%, a 52 point difference. So, it has long been predicted that we would see a drop in the labor force when baby boomers reached retirement age and their participation rate dropped as well.
The Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco also notes that young people, our other large population called Millennials, are staying in school longer, which has led to an increase in older folks getting hired for part-time jobs and a delayed intake of young adults into the labor force.
The ACA accounts for about 33% of the part-time jobs being created due to companies avoiding paying insurance for workers who clock in over 30 hours a week.
Much of the competition for jobs and turmoil on this front are at the lower-wage end, so as Americans take personal responsibility to improve themselves - get those college or graduate degrees they're spending time in school pursuing, get trade certificates, get experience - many should rise above that issue with time.
For those interested in reading about special economic zones:
Nice work with the google. As earlier, these zones are not at all new or particulalry successful.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blisterpeanuts
Of course, no one solution is going to solve the systemic problems the United States has. For example, we have $18 trillion in debt, probably rising to $20 trillion by the time Obama leaves office, and we haven't even begun to think about balancing the budget, much less paying down the debt. But pay it down we must, or else we will be owned by foreign (mostly Chinese) creditors.
The last time we paid the debt down to (almost) zero was 1836. That was all tied up in a mission of national pride to repay every cent of the huge borrowings that had financed the Revolutionary War. Great, but we will never make the mistake of doing that again. Neither will any of the other major economies currently carrying debt, which is all of them. We will of course service the debt, making all scheduled payments of principal and interest, but we will not pay it off. There is in fact no annual appropriation for the payment of principal due on maturing securities. It is assumed that Treasury will simply issue new securities in order to raise funds to pay off the old ones. This is how it works if you are a national government. Different rules from those that operate in the household sector. You don't have taxing or currency-issuing authority, and everyone knows that you will die one day.
We did however have balanced budgets as recently as FY 1998-2001. They were in fact in surplus, meaning that over that time, some $363 billion of debt held by the public was repurchased, first at Treasury's discretion, later via reverse-auctions as bond markets complained of a destabilizing lack of product. So that was actually quite a healthy situation for us, but within months of his appointment, Bush-43 blew it all up. Shock & Awe of a different sort, but just as destructive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blisterpeanuts
The interest on the loans is already the second highest line item in the federal budget, behind defense.
Both Social Security and Medicare are also larger than interest on the debt.
The interest that the government pays is of course fixed at the rate set when a particular security was issued. There are no effects from secondary market fluctuations. Public debt maturities vary, but a 10-year security would be a common one. The ones issued in 2005 have been paying 2005 interest ever since. So long as rates now are lower than ten years ago, rollover of a ten-year security will reduce interest on the debt. The average rate of interest on interest-bearing debt last month was 2.34%. A year earlier it had been 2.40%.
Last edited by Major Barbara; 07-08-2015 at 07:57 AM..
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.
These are ideas I've been kicking around for years.
