Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-05-2014, 01:45 PM
 
1,728 posts, read 1,778,165 times
Reputation: 893

Advertisements

George Will says if the labor participation rate was the same today as it was in 2009 the unemployment rate would be 11.5%.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-05-2014, 01:48 PM
 
Location: Pasadena, CA
9,828 posts, read 9,419,527 times
Reputation: 6288
Quote:
Originally Posted by boner View Post
George Will says if the labor participation rate was the same today as it was in 2009 the unemployment rate would be 11.5%.
Absolutely shocking coming from a right-wing shill.

Retiring boomers play a major role in the declining rate--a decline that began well before the Great Recession.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2014, 01:51 PM
 
Location: Sacramento, Ca.
2,440 posts, read 3,431,950 times
Reputation: 2629
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphamale View Post
I'm no mathematician, but I think that an improving economy means more jobs, therefore ending the need for extended unemployment benefits. Unless the left are lying about it all....which seems to be the case.
Better was never equal to perfect. Just because your car runs well does not rule out auto insurance.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2014, 02:11 PM
Status: "everybody getting reported now.." (set 24 days ago)
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,558 posts, read 16,548,014 times
Reputation: 6041
Quote:
Originally Posted by alphamale View Post
I'm no mathematician, but I think that an improving economy means more jobs, therefore ending the need for extended unemployment benefits.

Unless the left are lying about it all....which seems to be the case.
your lack of understanding is sad.

Just because the economy is improving doesnt mean everyone has a job. You seem to be an absolutist, Which i never understand. You realize that when the economy is bad that only some people become unemployed, but you seem to believe that when it is improving that everyone should be able to get a job.

its selective absolutism.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2014, 02:14 PM
 
Location: On the Group W bench
5,563 posts, read 4,263,400 times
Reputation: 2127
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrapperJohn View Post
It's not always about you specifically in an open discussion.
Didn't say it was about me. I'm one of the lucky employed ones. Lucky that a former boss who is my age and was familiar with my skills needed those skills when the hot shot 20-something he had working for him jumped ship.

And anyway, it's all about momonkey who says he has a great job, so clearly all older folks can get jobs except for all the lazy drunks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2014, 02:15 PM
Status: "everybody getting reported now.." (set 24 days ago)
 
Location: Pine Grove,AL
29,558 posts, read 16,548,014 times
Reputation: 6041
Quote:
Originally Posted by boner View Post
George Will says if the labor participation rate was the same today as it was in 2009 the unemployment rate would be 11.5%.
And if we counted participation rate the way George Will wanted us to on both ends, it would still mean the unemployment rate dropped by 3% since 2009.

What Will is doing is changing the goal post on one end, but not the other and hoping no one notices.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2014, 02:28 PM
 
3,617 posts, read 3,884,771 times
Reputation: 2295
For all the partisan sniping, I think this is an area where it would be possible to get a deal done -- the Republican congressional leadership has expressed willingness to extend benefits as long as the cost is offset with other spending cuts, while the Democratic leadership has so far been unwilling to do that. I don't really see the Republicans moving from their stance that any extension needs to be paid for and not added to the debt, but I think it is possible that the Democrats decide that there is some current spending that matters less to them than this does.......granted I don't think it will happen due to the polarized political environment but it's not completely unfeasible and if the two parties weren't at such a low point in terms of cooperation and trust then it likely would have happened already.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2014, 03:58 PM
 
9,470 posts, read 6,971,219 times
Reputation: 2177
Quote:
Originally Posted by urbanlife78 View Post
Probably because the article misreads the chart for you.
How about... The number is meaningless BS?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2014, 04:00 PM
 
9,470 posts, read 6,971,219 times
Reputation: 2177
Quote:
Originally Posted by mohawkx View Post
Ah a Brietbart numbers shell game.........snort!

The one set of numbers that stood out in that hit piece was out of a workforce of 147 million adults, 116 million had full time jobs. Not a bad figure for these times.

Look.....get real. There will never be a time in America where every adult has a full time job. those days are over. All the European economies have been rebuilt since WWII by now so we'll never be the pre-eminent world producer any more. Plus there are 3rd world countries coming on line that can make things better and cheaper.

But of course to you, all our national challenges were non existant until the Kenyan got into the White House.

You demand he fix everything right now while you do everything in your power to hamstring every effort made.
I didn't ask if you could make up partisan crapola. I asked you to explain how you use the published 7% as a reliable indicator of economic health.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-05-2014, 04:01 PM
 
9,470 posts, read 6,971,219 times
Reputation: 2177
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay F View Post
It depends if they are seeking work or not. A stay at home mom shouldn't be counted as unemployed even if she isn't working.
Why not?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:21 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top