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.
"Despite steady gains in hiring, a falling unemployment rate and other signs of an improving economy, take-home pay for many American workers has effectively fallen since the economic recovery began in 2009, according to a new study.."
This does not validate your claim that all new jobs created are low paying service jobs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Kevin
Most workers actually making LESS than 5 years ago
Neither does this.
So I'm guessing you don't have much interest in supporting what you actually posted?
It isn't misleading, it is false. Complete bull****. There is no other description for the claim that all new jobs are low paying and in the service sector.
The data does not show that all new jobs are low paying and in the service sector, so my calling it BS isn't worse and your claim the data supports it is equally idiotic.
Go look at your data. Sheesh. See those service jobs? What do you think, that those mcdonalds workers are making 6 figures? "service providing" is the largest gain in that group by a massive amount.
So yeah, you're wrong. The data indicates it clearly. And your response?
"The data does not show that all new jobs are low paying and in the service sector, so my calling it BS isn't worse and your claim the data supports it is equally idiotic."
Uh huh.
When Obama and others go on about how all these jobs are being created, the TYPE of jobs matter a lot. And this is the problem. "service providing" jobs have sucky pay. You provided data backing this up, when called on it, you simply deny the facts you provided.
We will never solve the poverty issue until we significantly reduce our out of wedlock birth rate. Even liberal researchers from think tanks like the Brookings Institution are admitting it:
In later research, Ron Haskins and I learned that if individuals do just three things — finish high school, work full time and marry before they have children — their chances of being poor drop from 15 percent to 2 percent.........no government program is likely to reduce child poverty as much as bringing back marriage as the preferable way of raising children.
We will never solve the poverty issue until we significantly reduce our out of wedlock birth rate. Even liberal researchers from think tanks like the Brookings Institution are admitting it:
In later research, Ron Haskins and I learned that if individuals do just three things — finish high school, work full time and marry before they have children — their chances of being poor drop from 15 percent to 2 percent.........no government program is likely to reduce child poverty as much as bringing back marriage as the preferable way of raising children.
All newly created jobs are low paying jobs in service sector, waiters and bartenders.
Then stop demanding services.
It is the demand for services that creates service sector jobs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Kevin
Those jobs don't come with so great benefits, if any.
That's because you want cheap services, and aren't willing to pay anything reasonable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Kevin
Wall Street has moved long time ago all good paying jobs overseas to the Third World.
Wall Street didn't do anything.
1 Billion Indians along with 1 Billion other non-1st World People were demanding goods and the only goods they could afford were goods made in China.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Kevin
Entire so called "recovery" since 2008 is an illusion and one big fat lie. Real Propaganda!!!!!!
GDP has increased and that's all that has to happen.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Kevin
For a REAL RECOVERY to happen there are certain elements that need to be in place for a real expansion of the economy. First, and foremost, there need to be expanding employment, expanding wages, and manageable debt levels so that consumers can take on debt to make the economic machine move forward.
There's nothing in the Laws of Economics to support your claims.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Kevin
Real wages stopped growing in 1970.
The US ceased to be a developing-State ~1964....what a coincidence.
The Laws of Economics show wages doubling about every 10 years while an economy is developing, but once development has ended there is no Law of Economics that says wages must continue to rise.
Real Wages are irrelevant, since the Laws of Economics use Demand-pull Inflation to halt the destruction of resources, goods and services.
Go look at your data. Sheesh. See those service jobs? What do you think, that those mcdonalds workers are making 6 figures? "service providing" is the largest gain in that group by a massive amount.
This is the claim I am disputing, which apparently you're trying your best to agree with:
"All newly created jobs are low paying jobs in service sector, waiters and bartenders. "
So looking at the data we see over the last year:
+219k jobs in construction
+141k jobs in manufacturing
+151k jobs in finance
+641k jobs in professional and business services
+457 jobs in healthcare
Clearly the claim I'm disputing is false, and I'm baffled as to how you can look at the table and argue with it unless you consider above jobs low paying service sector jobs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar
So yeah, you're wrong. The data indicates it clearly.
Nonsense, and I just proved it above since apparently some people are too dense to read a chart.
Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar
"service providing" jobs have sucky pay.
This isn't true either. Service providing includes banking, telecom, IT, healthcare, lawyers, accounting, transportation, consulting, architects, engineers, etc.
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.