Economy Adds 288,000 Jobs In June

[BlueStreak]

The guy across the street was bitching yesterday that his son, Joey, has as yet to find a job since coming home.............






...from prison, where he did 10 years for home invasion, robbery, assault and battery.
The victim involved in the attack was a 78 year old man.

Of course Obama is to blame for his lack of gainful employment.

Dave

[BlueStreak]

Originally Posted by whell

We're still reducing the denominator:

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/ali-...bor-force-june

This means that there were 92,120,000 Americans 16 and older who not only did not have a job, but did not actively seek one in the last four weeks.

That is up 111,000 from the 92,009,000 Americans who were not participating in the labor force in April.

In June, according to BLS, the labor force participation rate for Americans was 62.8 percent, matching a 36-year low. The participation rate is the percentage of the population that either has a job or actively sought one in the last four weeks.

So, the Republicans have been taking names off of tombstones and counting the permanently disabled and prison population as unemployed? Wouldn't surprise me at all.

Actually, I would say the underemployment issue is a more pressing issue. A whole lot of people working and not making any money in this country. Must mean we need to give another round of tax cuts to the Plutocracy and buy more defective, but horrendously expensive military junk we don't need that doesn't work right anyways?

Dave

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by whell

We're still reducing the denominator:

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/ali-...bor-force-june

This means that there were 92,120,000 Americans 16 and older who not only did not have a job, but did not actively seek one in the last four weeks.

That is up 111,000 from the 92,009,000 Americans who were not participating in the labor force in April.

In June, according to BLS, the labor force participation rate for Americans was 62.8 percent, matching a 36-year low. The participation rate is the percentage of the population that either has a job or actively sought one in the last four weeks.

Note that your participation rate figure starts at age 16, but has no cap on age. ALL persons 65 and over are included. That number is increasing fast, and has to be a drag on the participation rate.

From 2012 to 2013, the number of people age 65 and older in this country went from 43.1 million to 44.7 million. http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/...xhtml?src=bkmk

The change was + 1.6 million. Divide that by 12 and you have a rate of 133,000 per month. Not all are retired, of course, but I think I just found the vast majority of the 111,000 increase your article identifies over a two-month period.

[whell]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

Note that your participation rate figure starts at age 16, but has no cap on age. ALL persons 65 and over are included. That number is increasing fast, and has to be a drag on the participation rate.

From 2012 to 2013, the number of people age 65 and older in this country went from 43.1 million to 44.7 million. http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/...xhtml?src=bkmk

The change was + 1.6 million. Divide that by 12 and you have a rate of 133,000 per month. Not all are retired, of course, but I think I just found the vast majority of the 111,000 increase your article identifies over a two-month period.

Are you asserting that individuals age 65 and over are not seeking employment? In fact, the trend is that more and more older Americans are working longer as life expectancy increases.

http://www.apnorc.org/projects/Pages...etirement.aspx

http://www.carseyinstitute.unh.edu/p...er_Workers.pdf

[donquixote99]

To repeat myself, not all are retired, of course. But I say many fewer of them are seeking employment than in the younger age cohorts.

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by whell

Are you asserting that individuals age 65 and over are not seeking employment? In fact, the trend is that more and more older Americans are working longer as life expectancy increases.

Or are working longer because the defined benefit pension is a thing of the past here.

[Tom Joad]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

To repeat myself, not all are retired, of course. But I say many fewer of them are seeking employment than in the younger age cohorts.

You're damned right.

I sure as Hell ain't lookin for no Goddamned job.

I wouldn't last long if I did get one either.

Not the way employers are treating workers these days.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ANj4Klx3v-4

[bobabode]

Originally Posted by whell

He's reversing a trend.

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2014/...LEFTTopStories

Yes, he is. He's shrinking the government. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...da239&hpid=z16

[piece-itpete]

Originally Posted by Tom Joad

What complete control?

They had 60 Senators with a "D" behind their name, which doesn't mean shit if a half dozen of them are voting with the far right.

It takes 60 votes to pass anything meaningful.

If there are only 60 Democrats then all the billionaires have to do is buy one of them.

In the case of Obamacare they went ahead and bought 5 or 6 just so they would have a cushion.

Tom, I'm not detecting a whiff of excuse am I?

Pete

[merrylander]

Originally Posted by piece-itpete

Tom, I'm not detecting a whiff of excuse am I?

Pete

No excuse you are forgetting the DINO Blue Dogs.