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.
1) - 3): Sure, the economy IS still hurting, no one has said otherwise - but that DOESN'T mean things aren't slowing improving.
4): Sure, more people turn 25 than 65 every day - but people aged 25 are:
A) Having babies - so they are not necessarily working (some become stay at home parents).
B) In the military - which are not counted in the employment numbers or labor participation rate.
C) Still in college - so they are not necessarily working at all.
NONE of those things are usually true of folks age 65. The upshot of all that is that you can't simply assume that folks turn 25 simply replace those turning 65 in regards to the Labor Participation Rate because different things are going on in the lives of 25 year-olds than are going on in the lives of 65 year-olds, so they don't simply "replace" 65 year-olds in the labor force numbers in a one-for-one manner.
Ken
The baby making rate has dropped and the age is now 25 for first-time pregnancies in 2008 (up from 21 in 1970.) More and more people are putting off having kids because of the economics in it. If you cannot afford to have kids, why have kids? (source)
As for the military, unless you are a career military, you could be out by 25 (unless it is an ROTC program.)
College, the average student is graduated anywhere from 23 to 25 (I am thinking it is closer to 23/4.)
How is Growing Poverty, Growing Food Stamps, Shrinking Household Income, Shrinking Employment Participation and basically stagnant business revenue while pumping the economy full of QE 4 improving?
All those first 3 are a direct result of the UE rate still being elevated (and in the case of the growth in food stamp usage, the fact that requirements for food stamps were loosened) - as I said, once the UE rate drops to the point where it's no longer in that elevated state, much of those problems will go away. By the vast majority of indicators, the economy is DEFINITELY improving. Look at those indicators for yourself:
People age 25 to 54 have had a worse time since the recovery started...this can not be blamed on the bay boomers as you say.
Again, that's because you are looking at the EMPLOYMENT-related numbers and the UE rate is (as I've already stated) STILL ELEVATED. Employment-related statistics will remain high until the UE rate drops down to around 6% or so - which (at the rate it's generally been dropping at) will probably happen around the end of next year. Once the labor market has tightened to that level, there will be more competition for labor and wages etc will rise. You yourself mentioned earlier that many of the numbers you quote were the worst since 1984 - well that really should be no surprise since this is the worst recession since at least then, so why are you expressing surprise that workers financial conditions and the Labor Participation Rate type numbers are the worst since then?
The low Labor Participation Rate is NOT "entirely" the result of babyboomers retiring. The economic crash of 2008 was the primary cause of the LPR crash to begin with and the fact that UE rate is still elevated clearly plays a role in keeping the LPR low - but so too does the fact that there is HUGE group of people moving into their retirement years. Even IF the economy was booming, the LPR would STILL be under downward pressure. If the economy were booming that boom would probably be enough to raise the LPR rate somewhat, but no matter WHAT the economy does, the days of seeing those sky-high LPR numbers are over for while because the masses of babyboomers aging their way out of the workforce are going to take a lot of the steam out of any upward movement of the LPR number. It's simple demographics.
Sure, but the people here blame Obama as if he's the only person in the government and ignoring the fact that government has little power in terms of producing jobs.
Stop bringing up Reagan or any other president - he just happened to be in the White House during a growth business cycle. That's all.
Outsourcing and automation killed your jobs, not Obama.
The baby making rate has dropped and the age is now 25 for first-time pregnancies in 2008 (up from 21 in 1970.) More and more people are putting off having kids because of the economics in it. If you cannot afford to have kids, why have kids? (source)
As for the military, unless you are a career military, you could be out by 25 (unless it is an ROTC program.)
College, the average student is graduated anywhere from 23 to 25 (I am thinking it is closer to 23/4.)
Sure, the birth rate is at an all-time low, but there were STILL close to 4 MILLION live births in the US last year. That's still a LOT of women who are (for a time at least) NOT in the labor force.
In regards to the military, yes SOME people WILL be out by age 25, but those who AREN'T are not counted in the labor force. There are roughly 1.3 million people in the US military. Average age of each branch is listed below (as you see the average age is AT LEAST 25 for every branch):
Army - 29
Navy - 29
Marine Corps - 25
Air Force - 30
Coast Guard - 30
According to what I've seen there are in excess of 20 million people in college, and between 2000 and 2010 the percentage of students 25 and older increased by 42% so there's a LOT of 25+ year-old students still in school (way more than you think)
Sure, but the people here blame Obama as if he's the only person in the government and ignoring the fact that government has little power in terms of producing jobs.
Stop bringing up Reagan or any other president - he just happened to be in the White House during a growth business cycle. That's all.
Outsourcing and automation killed your jobs, not Obama.
Sure, the birth rate is at an all-time low, but there were STILL close to 4 MILLION live births in the US last year. That's still a LOT of women who are (for a time at least) NOT in the labor force.
In regards to the military, yes SOME people WILL be out by age 25, but those who AREN'T are not counted in the labor force. There are roughly 1.3 million people in the US military. Average age of each branch is listed below (as you see the average age is AT LEAST 25 for every branch):
Army - 29
Navy - 29
Marine Corps - 25
Air Force - 30
Coast Guard - 30
According to what I've seen there are in excess of 20 million people in college, and between 2000 and 2010 the percentage of students 25 and older increased by 42% so there's a LOT of 25+ year-old students still in school (way more than you think)
I think part of the issue with military is because less people are fit enough to pass tests either psychological or physical, as well as the outlook on the wars. This is causing less people to enlisting so they need people to continue tours of duties continuing their time. Also look into how many people are career military vs. doing ROTC and doing it for school down the road. 60% come from ROTC (so if you graduate college, you'd be out by 22/23 so you would be 26 the earliest before you could leave honorably.) (source) I cannot find information as to if anyone takes G.I. Bill benefits and use that for college.
FYI the military is a small percentage of the population. The New York Times lists that only 1% of the population have spent time in the military. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/25/us...ans-serve.html Compare that to the 40's when 9% of Americans went into Europe and the Pacific.
I know there are over 25's in college however it is only more than a third of the college students (38%.) (Source) I am not sure where MBA programs tie in.
I think part of the issue with military is because less people are fit enough to pass tests either psychological or physical, as well as the outlook on the wars. This is causing less people to enlisting so they need people to continue tours of duties continuing their time. Also look into how many people are career military vs. doing ROTC and doing it for school down the road. 60% come from ROTC (so if you graduate college, you'd be out by 22/23 so you would be 26 the earliest before you could leave honorably.) (source) I cannot find information as to if anyone takes G.I. Bill benefits and use that for college.
FYI the military is a small percentage of the population. The New York Times lists that only 1% of the population have spent time in the military. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/25/us...ans-serve.html Compare that to the 40's when 9% of Americans went into Europe and the Pacific.
I know there are over 25's in college however it is only more than a third of the college students (38%.) (Source) I am not sure where MBA programs tie in.
And all those folks add up:
1) The young women having babies (some becoming stay-at-home moms - or sometimes today it's stay-at-home dads) and others just taking a couple of months off from work around the time of delivery (but then them rejoining the workforce is offset by ANOTHER young woman leaving the workforce temporarily to have a baby).
2) Young men and woman in the military
3) Young men and woman in college (the 38% of (20+million students) that you mention)
When you combine all those folks it MORE than offsets the slightly larger numbers of people turning 25 than those turning 65 - thus providing a downward pressure on the Labor Participation Rate. As I said, the changing demographics are not the only thing pressuring the LPR downwards, but it's a definite (and built-in right now) factor.
Sure, but the people here blame Obama as if he's the only person in the government and ignoring the fact that government has little power in terms of producing jobs.
Stop bringing up Reagan or any other president - he just happened to be in the White House during a growth business cycle. That's all.
Outsourcing and automation killed your jobs, not Obama.
Yea sure, blame it all on ATM's. Lame excuse. Your next shot will be "besides all that, it's all George Bushes fault" right ?
-artificially propped up the stock market
-made homes more affordable
-made the national debt more servicable
GDP is rising at a rate below QE money creation.
Meanwhile record government assistance has propped up consumer spending so that many businesses have stagnant revenue...but we mask that by talking profits as they cut back on employees or their real compensation.
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.
