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.
Spain and Greece are the countries with those severe austerity measures in place.
Don't seem to be working all that well.
It worked in Estonia where austerity measures were enacted after the 2008 financial crisis:
"Among other measures, the Estonian government cut public-sector wages by 10 percent, raised the retirement age from 61 to 65 by 2026, reduced eligibility for health benefits, and makd it easier for businesses to hire and fire workers.
Estonia did increase its value-added tax, but it deliberately kept taxes low on businesses, investors, and entrepreneurs, refusing to make changes to its flat 21 percent income tax. In fact, the government has put in place plans to reduce the income tax to 20 percent by 2015.
Today, Estonia has the fastest growing economy in the EU,and is actually running a budget surplus. Its national debt is 6 percent of GDP. By comparison, Greece’s is 159 percent of GDP, and the U.S.'s is 102 percent."
One caveat: Estonia's unemployment rate is also 11 % down from 19 % at the worst of the recession.
Unemployment rate in the US isn't that much better
Really? 11.7% isn't "that much better" than 7.9%?
7.9% isn't good by any means but it is a hell of a lot better than 11.7%, the difference is millions of people working, producing, paying taxes, and spending their paychecks.
7.9% isn't good by any means but it is a hell of a lot better than 11.7%, the difference is millions of people working, producing, paying taxes, and spending their paychecks.
You think our unemployment rate is 7.9%!!!
Haaaaa, HAAAAA, HA, HA, Ha, Haaaaa, HAAAAA, HA, HA, Ha,Haaaaa, HAAAAA, HA, HA, Ha!!!!! LOL!!!
WOW!!!!!!
People like you are the governments' best friend.
Listen PM me. If you send me a check for $10,000.00 I'll send you a check for $20,000.00 next Friday. Cause I'm good like that!
There are various measure of unemployment and they all publish the criteria/formula. We can argue all day about which is more applicable to identify which problem but bottom line U3, as defined by the International Labor Organization, is currently our standard measure for stating unemployment rate.
The rate of the European Union, calculated by Eurostat, also uses the same ILO measure so if one is comparing apples to apples the US U-3 measure makes the most sense.
In other words if you believe the 7.9% is flawed then so is the 11.7% since they use the same measure. I'd also assume given the known inverse correlation between number of little smiley faces and level of actual understanding or intelligence that you have little interest in a direct comparison and are just regurgitating the standard skepticism on accuracy of unemployment rate.
7.9% isn't good by any means but it is a hell of a lot better than 11.7%, the difference is millions of people working, producing, paying taxes, and spending their paychecks.
Replace "millions" with "tens of thousands" and you might be close to the truth. Again, the way we got our UE rate down from it's high of over 10 pct. was by reducing the labor force participation rate.
We are still not generating much opportunity in the US. Job growth since the crash of 2008 has only been about half of population growth, so in reality the job market has gotten worse, not better. It's kind of like a guy trying to lose weight who credits himself with a 10 lb. loss because summer arrived, and he got rid of his heavy winter jacket and boots.
Replace "millions" with "tens of thousands" and you might be close to the truth. Again, the way we got our UE rate down from it's high of over 10 pct. was by reducing the labor force participation rate.
How do you figure? The US labor force is what about 150 million, if you made an additional 3.8% (11.7-7.9) unemployed you get well over five million workers.
Again, the labor force is calculated the same was as European union, which is relevant for direct comparison. There are many factors in the US labor force being reduced, it was falling before the recession hit because the biggest factor is simple demographics.
There are various measure of unemployment and they all publish the criteria/formula. We can argue all day about which is more applicable to identify which problem but bottom line U3, as defined by the International Labor Organization, is currently our standard measure for stating unemployment rate.
The "Standard Measure" is standard B.S. We have whole "villages" of people living in the woods of city outskirts in this country that are not counted and a lot more who are a small SSDI check or other of joining them.
The rate of the European Union, calculated by Eurostat, also uses the same ILO measure so if one is comparing apples to apples the US U-3 measure makes the most sense.
Well the Europeans are run by the same, criminal, corrupt banker oligarchs that we are so of this I have no doubt.
In other words if you believe the 7.9% is flawed then so is the 11.7% since they use the same measure.
I agree. The same criminals that run Europe run the U.S. They lie in both continents.
I'd also assume given the known inverse correlation between number of little smiley faces and level of actual understanding or intelligence that you have little interest in a direct comparison and are just regurgitating the standard skepticism on accuracy of unemployment rate.
Oh, I'm skeptical alright. You see when I catch the same people lying to me over and over again about many and a variety of things and they produce data that doesn't seem to correspond with what I see than I make a ridiculous jump in logic and assume they're lying again.
How do you figure? The US labor force is what about 150 million, if you made an additional 3.8% (11.7-7.9) unemployed you get well over five million workers.
Again, the labor force is calculated the same was as European union, which is relevant for direct comparison. There are many factors in the US labor force being reduced, it was falling before the recession hit because the biggest factor is simple demographics.
If you want to argue the arithmetic, I would concede. 1% of 100 million is one million.
But the point is, we are not generating opportunity and job growth in the US. Look at this quote from post 16:
Quote:
Originally Posted by CNNMoney
Hiring has barely been strong enough to keep up with population growth, and that's why the unemployment rate is still stuck at 8.1%.
A survey of households shows the U.S. population has grown 3.8% since Obama entered office, but jobs have only grown by 1.5% over that same time period.
You are no doubt right that some of the LFP rate decline is just demographics (baby boomers retiring,etc). All I'm saying is that the drop in UE rate does not necessarily reflect an improved job market. Again like the guy who takes off his heavy coat and boots to lose 10 lbs. That does not reflect improved fitness. (I know, a bizarre analogy but the best I can do at 5:00 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.
