We are in a structural Economic Recession that will be almost impossible to dig out of

[TheOverdog]

steady decline as the principal demographic vector switched from women entering the workforce to baby-boomers leaving it.

The largest generation, millenials, is entering the workforce so bzzzt! wrong answer. Those 2 demographics posted, 20-39 (19 years) and 40-64 (24) are not the same # of years calculation. if you add 16-20, it's an extra 20+ million people. They are roughly the same size. So an aging of the population is not the answer for why the total employment number is falling.

[Major Barbara]

Originally Posted by TheOverdog

So an aging of the population is not the answer for why the total employment number is falling.

Get some sort of clue. Total employment has been rising. It's' LFPR -- the Labor Force Participation Rate -- that has been falling and will continue to unless we get some sort of serious immigration reform.

http://data.bls.gov/generated_files/...5595902403.gif

[texdav]

Basically in world many traditional US labor jobs became over priced ;plain and simple. Western world subsidized many things including compensation. Overtime just like Greece the growing compensation has been in government jobs but once it got to point its was borrowing and even delaying paying for what was promised it has to come to a bad end also. Economy has always been about producing something of value at competitive prices. That is where the breakdown came. Still many can do it and are compensated as few before them. As always produce a skill or product in demand and shortage of those that can and you can demand a price. Many see a future of more and more subsidized income but liability means its cheaper to have them do nothing than something not needed. The ACA is huge increase for those getting subsidized in it but like all is very target with government being the middleman. Figures show government is on average paying 75% of cost to cover those in ACA exchanges. Wealth sharing is in fact a very targeted thing and is limited as always. The bottom will always be the bottom in real income.Increasing pay for jobs not value will have same effect as automakers unless compensated for by automation and fewer positions. Planned economies have real limits often ending in poor competitiveness overall as rewards limited and pay is same for doing less than more.

[lieqiang]

Originally Posted by talentlost

do you compare the growth of jobs against the population growth within the same period? Computer jobs increased by 1 million plus what was the growth in labor. If potential computer labor grew by 10 million but jobs only 1 million there would be unemployment. While there is growth it did not keep up with the number of workers looking for work.

Unemployment rate by occupation May 2015 = A-30. Unemployed persons by occupation and sex

From above link unemployment rate for computer, math, and engineering is extremely low right now so all your hand wringing about labor force versus jobs is easily dismissed.

Originally Posted by talentlost

the 40-64 age group make up around 46% of the working population. Jobs may have increased in the country but not for this group, it has decreased.

Unemployment rate by age group 2014 = Employment status of the civilian noninstitutional population by age, sex, and race

Ages 40-64 enjoy much lower unemployment rates than most other age groups.

Originally Posted by talentlost

the government does not promote the real unemployment figures because of the methods they use to count unemployment

They don't "promote" anything, they provide various measures of unemployment that are all useful for different things. U-3 is most commonly identified as the unemployment rate. In my experience most people who disagree with U-3 being the best measure have an ax to grind be it political, bitter that they lost their job, or have a tin hat on where regardless of what measure the government uses it would be something nefarious.