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.
Whites have lower unemployment rates than blacks or Hispanics. To suggest white kids are the laziest doesn’t jibe with those rates.
Unemployment rate is more a reflection of a lack of relevant job skills than laziness. If you're unemployed it means you're looking for work which isn't really a sign of being lazy if you're earnestly looking for work. There will always be some amount of unemployment but those with relatively in-demand skills tend to have lower unemployment since, well, there's a lot of jobs available.
Education isn't a great example of that per say as there are a lot of useless degrees which really don't confer any useful job skills in and of themselves but nonethless it's a fairly good one in that on the aggregate those with at least a bachelor's degree tend to have more employable job skills than those without.
The college cohort consistently has lower unemployment than the high school dropouts. That really has nothing to do with laziness though. College graduates are some of the laziest people you'll meet which has a lot to do with why they went to college. Work hard? Oh hell, no. I'd much rather work smart.
Back when I was still in school I worked construction in the summers with a guy who I went to high school with. He was finishing up his apprenticeship and wasn't really pushing me to but both him and my boss several times let me know if I wanted to I they'd get me in the next for the next apprenticeship. It's good money, not much less than I make now, and even as an apprentice you were making slightly more than a laborer did. But well, you see I'm lazy. Construction paid twice what retail did which is why I did it in the summers. That didn't mean I wanted to work construction for the rest of my life. It's hard work. Riding a desk is where lazy folks belong.
Unemployment rate is more a reflection of a lack of relevant job skills than laziness. If you're unemployed it means you're looking for work which isn't really a sign of being lazy if you're earnestly looking for work. There will always be some amount of unemployment but those with relatively in-demand skills tend to have lower unemployment since, well, there's a lot of jobs available.
Education isn't a great example of that per say as there are a lot of useless degrees which really don't confer any useful job skills in and of themselves but nonethless it's a fairly good one in that on the aggregate those with at least a bachelor's degree tend to have more employable job skills than those without.
The college cohort consistently has lower unemployment than the high school dropouts. That really has nothing to do with laziness though. College graduates are some of the laziest people you'll meet which has a lot to do with why they went to college. Work hard? Oh hell, no. I'd much rather work smart.
Back when I was still in school I worked construction in the summers with a guy who I went to high school with. He was finishing up his apprenticeship and wasn't really pushing me to but both him and my boss several times let me know if I wanted to I they'd get me in the next for the next apprenticeship. It's good money, not much less than I make now, and even as an apprentice you were making slightly more than a laborer did. But well, you see I'm lazy. Construction paid twice what retail did which is why I did it in the summers. That didn't mean I wanted to work construction for the rest of my life. It's hard work. Riding a desk is where lazy folks belong.
Your response has nothing to do with my comment and the comment I was responding to. For a proper response you need to go back and read those comments again.
Go to #17.
Last edited by Leona Valley; 05-06-2022 at 08:34 PM..
Retired people are no longer in the labor force, and thus are excluded from calculations of LFPR.
You are clueless. You are in such a rush to push your misleading racial propaganda that you don't even comprehend the simple basics of what you are talking about.
You even posted a link that proved you wrong, but it wasn't written simply enough for you to comprehend.
If there are more white college students, more white retirees, more white homemakers, then the white labor force participation rate will be lower.
If the white labor force participation rate is 61.9% - do you really think that means ~38.1% are on welfare or something? This didn't trigger suspicion in your mind? You don't have a grip on reality to see that as obviously wrong?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Malloric
Jesus, you'd think it was rocket science or something. Kudos for attempting to explain it though.
Ummm, Actually the poster James Bond 077, doesn't understand the numbers that he is using to push his misleading racial propaganda and is getting owned.
A common theme heard on these boards and elsewhere in conservative-land is that it is minorities who are disproportionately on welfare, on government assistance, or otherwise not working, and so on.
However, since the pandemic, that is no longer true. As of last month, the racial/ethnic group with the lowest labor force participation rate are ... Whites.
In the article is a table and 2 charts. The 2nd chart is the one of most interest, called "U.S. labor force participation rates."
As of last month, the group with the highest LFPR was Hispanics at 66.1%.
Next were Asians at 64.4%.
Below that were Blacks at 62.3%.
And last were Whites at 61.9%.
In fact, the White and Black LFPR's have been dancing around each other for almost a year.
And the group that seems most maligned on these boards - Hispanics - are actually the hardest working.
How many of those are retired white baby boomers?
Or maybe this proves that white people are financially stable enough to take an extended leave from workforce until this COVID craze is in the rear view mirror?
In just the last two threads I've started on the monthly jobs reports, there have been at least one, two, three people trying to dismiss the monthly jobs numbers because of a LFPR they think is still too low. I could find many more in other jobs reports threads, too.
But now, in this thread we are being told that a low LFPR (here, among white people) is merely because people are retiring in large numbers! And thus, it isn't actually a big deal.
So, which is it? If a low LFPR isn't a big deal because it's only due to a lot of people retiring, why are so many people complaining about the low LFPR in those other threads?
I'll tell you why: It's because people complain about a low LFPR only when they can't find anything else to complain about, but want to find something to complain about.
You are clueless. You are in such a rush to push your misleading racial propaganda that you don't even comprehend the simple basics of what you are talking about.
You even posted a link that proved you wrong, but it wasn't written simply enough for you to comprehend.
If there are more white college students, more white retirees, more white homemakers, then the white labor force participation rate will be lower.
If the white labor force participation rate is 61.9% - do you really think that means ~38.1% are on welfare or something? This didn't trigger suspicion in your mind? You don't have a grip on reality to see that as obviously wrong?
Ummm, Actually the poster James Bond 077, doesn't understand the numbers that he is using to push his misleading racial propaganda and is getting owned.
.0007 says this participation rate includes illegal aliens. :-)
How can you not admire someone that knows precisely how many illegal aliens are in the country?
In just the last two threads I've started on the monthly jobs reports, there have been at least one, two, three people trying to dismiss the monthly jobs numbers because of a LFPR they think is still too low. I could find many more in other jobs reports threads, too.
But now, in this thread we are being told that a low LFPR (here, among white people) is merely because people are retiring in large numbers! And thus, it isn't actually a big deal.
So, which is it? If a low LFPR isn't a big deal because it's only due to a lot of people retiring, why are so many people complaining about the low LFPR in those other threads?
I'll tell you why: It's because people complain about a low LFPR only when they can't find anything else to complain about, but want to find something to complain about.
#1 You literally didn't know what the LFPR was when you started a thread on it.
#2 You then argued against what the LFPR actually is (how retirees impact the LFPR) to push racial propaganda.
#3 You then literally posted a link that proved your argument wrong and somehow didn't comprehend that you were doing that. Total clown thread at this point for you to post a link proving your own argument wrong and not realize it. LOL
Sean Connery, George Lazenby, Roger Moore, Timothy Dalton, Pierce Brosnan & Daniel Craig NEVER got caught with their pants down in such an egregious manner as 007 has in this thread.
It has been entertaining.
Kudos to the intelligent posters for educating me on LFPR. Although threads like this are often farcical, there still remains opportunities for me to educate myself. One of the main reasons I enjoy reading and participating here.
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.
