Jobs Report GREAT NEWS (unless you're a republican)

[Joepublic2]

This is good news, even for republicans (most republicans need jobs, too). Anecdotally, I'm seeing a lot of hiring signs around here. The economy is definitely doing better IMO than it did under bush (800k jobs lost per month as HomerJS mentioned is terrible any way you slice it), but how much better I can't really say. I've only superficially researched it.

Baby boomers retiring.

I interpreted it to mean that there's fewer job openings for younger workers, probably due in part to older people being unable to afford retirement and continuing to work.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Double post.

 

[SlowSpyder]

People of retirement age will comprise a larger percentage of our population than before. Are you saying people shouldn't retire? If not, why shouldn't it trend down?

In post 18 I quite clearly said that is not what I'm saying. Such (partisan?) defense. Why? Do you really think that the current labor participation rate (and its trend) is not an issue? The first step to fixing a problem is admitting the problem exists.


I know you like graphs. Labor participation rate:

Just one example of participation in SNAP, just one of a number government benefits:

Yet our population growth has been fairly consistent:

Bottom line, we have less people working supporting more people not working. And the trend is getting worse. It shouldn't be happening, I don't see anything that makes me think this is normal because of baby boomers retiring.

 

[interchange]

I will not engage in a discussion of policies and political parties here as they relate to numbers relevant to this discussion. Such conclusions cannot reliably be drawn merely looking at data, and the time for discussion of my beliefs on this matter is not now.

All of that said, the notion that unemployment rate is an accurate representation of our economic status is terrifying. I am all for building faith in a machine which is making progress. However, what we are doing is building faith in a machine which is making regress.

The reasons are simple. More people are receiving welfare, fewer people are looking for work because they do not feel they will find it, and more people are underemployed.

What I care about is economic mobility, which is fair to age adjust. We need to understand the ratio of people's improvement in their economic positions (absent welfare) to people's detriment, both in terms of numbers (wage gap) and magnitude (total economy).

The gotcha about that age adjustment is in the demands of our nation. Our aging populous is growing faster, thus we under enhanced pressure for our potential labor force to produce.

 

[piasabird]

That chart runs out in 2013 and this is 2016. How about some actual real data relating to today?

 

[fskimospy]

In post 18 I quite clearly said that is not what I'm saying. Such (partisan?) defense. Why? Do you really think that the current labor participation rate (and its trend) is not an issue? The first step to fixing a problem is admitting the problem exists.

It's exactly the opposite of a partisan defense, it's just based on the facts at hand. As I said in a previous post, all things being equal we should expect the labor force participation rate to decline in the coming years. It is likely lower now than it should be, but it has been basically stable since 2013. Considering demographic trends that actually indicates improvement.

Bottom line, we have less people working supporting more people not working. And the trend is getting worse. It shouldn't be happening, I don't see anything that makes me think this is normal because of baby boomers retiring.

I think this is because you're looking at the data incorrectly. The population of the US is indeed growing at similar NUMBERS, but the RATE of change is dramatically lower now than it was in the past.

When you have a lower population growth rate than in the past you end up with a bubble of workers at retirement age and therefore fewer people working supporting more people not working.

Now do you see why this is normal because of baby boomers retiring?

 

[piasabird]

So you are actually going to trust a government report?

 

[umbrella39]

Are we still having folks come in here that don't get the labor participation numbers?

There are actually 92+ million Americans who are not in the work force,

Only 6.1 million of them want a job, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The vast majority are students, stay-at-home parents, retired seniors and others who do not want to work. In fact, 37.3 million of the 93.8 million, or 40 percent, are 65 years old or older.

As baby boomers are reaching retirement age this has inflated this number. It does not mean there are 92 million people out of work and looking for jobs...

 

[piasabird]

I dont see enough useful information. How much of the assistance goes to Illegal immigration and All the refugees from central America That Obama settled all over the country?

 

[Jaskalas]

Labor is going to continue to lose value until the vast majority of people can no longer "work for a living".

Anyone celebrating today is ignoring two things. The enormous bubble in the room. Go ahead and return interest rates to normal. You cannot, because the economy is trash.

Why is it trash? Because the global economy and automation means fewer people are employable. Labor and wages are tanking, and this is a trend that will continue indefinitely. One way or another we are transitioning to a managed economy where the majority are unemployed with welfare, aka a basic income.

The "free market economy" based on human labor is dead and dying. You're just hiding from the fact.

 

[DrPizza]

the baby boomers are retiring. Thats the reality.

There are a quarter of a million more jobs than the month before, because baby boomers are retiring? Please... explain that logic. Wait, I understand - the baby boomers work so much harder than everyone else that whenever one retires, two have to be hired to take his or her place.

 

[hal2kilo]

nm

 

[fskimospy]

Labor is going to continue to lose value until the vast majority of people can no longer "work for a living".

Anyone celebrating today is ignoring two things. The enormous bubble in the room. Go ahead and return interest rates to normal. You cannot, because the economy is trash.

Why is it trash? Because the global economy and automation means fewer people are employable. Labor and wages are tanking, and this is a trend that will continue indefinitely. One way or another we are transitioning to a managed economy where the majority are unemployed with welfare, aka a basic income.

The "free market economy" based on human labor is dead and dying. You're just hiding from the fact.

I never understand why people say certain interest rates are 'normal'. There is nothing 'normal' about any interest rate, there are simply interest rates compatible with maximum employment and price stability, or basically the wicksellian equilibrium rate. If rates were abnormally low we would see high inflation and we do not.

 

[Mai72]

I normally vote Democrat and I'll say that those job reports are full of shit*t.

Wages are still not keeping up with inflation. What's the average salary for a middle class worker. I use "middle class" loosely because there is no middle. You're either rich or poor. Anyway, the median was about $54k. The low is about $42k to $125k for upper.

How anyone with a family can live on $54k is beyond me. With a mortgage, car notes, food, electric, clothes, taxes, retirement, etc. It's no money. I would even say that $125k a year isn't much better. When you make more, you're getting taxed much more. .35-40 cents on every dollar. Then you look at the high spending rate with people who make $125k and they have nothing saved! Nothing invested.

I taught the ESY program at my school. I did very well. But, its not enough. I make triple than many of my friends and it's still not enough. That's why I'm trying to get 2-3 flows of income.

Many of those jobs are $10 an hour retail positions. And, they're seasonal.

It's all bullsh*t to convince the American public that everything is fine. Big budonesse

 

[Mai72]

**You Can't Edit Your Post Anymore?

I normally vote Democrat, but I'll say that those job reports are full of shit*t.

Wages are still not keeping up with inflation. What's the average salary for a "middle class" worker. I use "middle class" loosely because there is no middle. You're either rich or poor. Anyway, the median was about $54k. The low is about $42k to $125k for upper.

How anyone with a family can live on $54k is beyond me. With a mortgage, car note(s), food, electric, clothes, taxes, retirement, etc. It's no money. I would even say that $125k a year isn't much better either. When you make more, you're getting taxed much more. About .35-40 cents on every dollar. Then you look at the high spending rates with people who make a large income and they have nothing saved and invested.

I taught the ESY program at my school. I did very well. But, its not enough. I make triple than many of my friends and it's still not enough. That's why I'm working on 2-3 flows of income.

Many of those jobs are $10 an hour retail positions. And, they're seasonal.

It's all bullsh*t to convince the American public that everything is fine. Big business wants you to spend your money, and you're not going to do it unless you feel that the economy is fine.

Wait until we have another economic downturn. One that's worse than 2008. Many people just getting by are going to get crushed.

 

[ivwshane]

**You Can't Edit Your Post Anymore?

I normally vote Democrat, but I'll say that those job reports are full of shit*t.

Wages are still not keeping up with inflation. What's the average salary for a "middle class" worker. I use "middle class" loosely because there is no middle. You're either rich or poor. Anyway, the median was about $54k. The low is about $42k to $125k for upper.

How anyone with a family can live on $54k is beyond me. With a mortgage, car note(s), food, electric, clothes, taxes, retirement, etc. It's no money. I would even say that $125k a year isn't much better either. When you make more, you're getting taxed much more. About .35-40 cents on every dollar. Then you look at the high spending rates with people who make a large income and they have nothing saved and invested.

I taught the ESY program at my school. I did very well. But, its not enough. I make triple than many of my friends and it's still not enough. That's why I'm working on 2-3 flows of income.

Many of those jobs are $10 an hour retail positions. And, they're seasonal.

It's all bullsh*t to convince the American public that everything is fine. Big business wants you to spend your money, and you're not going to do it unless you feel that the economy is fine.

Wait until we have another economic downturn. One that's worse than 2008. Many people just getting by are going to get crushed.

Very convincing... Not.

 

[Mai72]

Very convincing... Not.

I care... NOT!

 

[SlowSpyder]

That doesn't make sense mathematically. Think of it this way:

We have ten people in the country and they are all working. 10/10 employed: 100% participation rate.

Two people retire and two extra people join the population to take their old jobs. 10/12 people employed: 83% participation rate.

This has been bugging me a bit, I don't think your example makes actual sense. Those two people looking to fill the retirees' positions didn't appear out of thing air, they were looking for a job. That means originally there had to be 12 workers for only 10 positions. When two people retired, they left the potential workforce and joined those not looking for work. The two who took the jobs now found work, meaning only after the other two retired did your example climb to 100% employment. Before that, 2/12 people did not have jobs, but all 12 wanted a job. Only after retirement did we get to everyone in the workforce having a job. This seems to be the opposite of what is happening in our country today.

 

[Zaap]

That doesn't make sense mathematically. Think of it this way:

We have ten people in the country and they are all working. 10/10 employed: 100% participation rate.

Two people retire and two extra people join the population to take their old jobs. 10/12 people employed: 83% participation rate.

Those 2 people were just born and then took the two jobs? Or how else did they "join the population"? Only new immigrants take job openings?

It would have always been 10/12. (or 12/12 if the two newborns were working before taking the retired people's jobs.)

 

[Thump553]

I was wondering why this news wasn't in my morning paper and not featured prominently on the news last night, while Trump's half-hearted "endorsement" of Ryan (along with just about any other Repub in a contested primary) was. So much for the MSM's liberal bias.

BTY, I'm a baby boomer. The ONLY baby boomers I know that are retired are (a) those that got laid off at age 55+ and gave up or (b) state employees-as my generation is the last under this state government that has a real pension. Pretty much every other boomer I know (including myself) intends to work until at least age 70.

 

[ivwshane]

I was wondering why this news wasn't in my morning paper and not featured prominently on the news last night, while Trump's half-hearted "endorsement" of Ryan (along with just about any other Repub in a contested primary) was. So much for the MSM's liberal bias.

BTY, I'm a baby boomer. The ONLY baby boomers I know that are retired are (a) those that got laid off at age 55+ and gave up or (b) state employees-as my generation is the last under this state government that has a real pension. Pretty much every other boomer I know (including myself) intends to work until at least age 70.

Yep, they fucked themselves over by not saving properly for retirement and now they will be sucking from governments teat and fucking over newer generations all while voting for politicians who won't address this countries real issues.

I can't wait till the "me generation" no longer burdens this country.

 

[dank69]

This has been bugging me a bit, I don't think your example makes actual sense. Those two people looking to fill the retirees' positions didn't appear out of thing air, they were looking for a job. That means originally there had to be 12 workers for only 10 positions. When two people retired, they left the potential workforce and joined those not looking for work. The two who took the jobs now found work, meaning only after the other two retired did your example climb to 100% employment. Before that, 2/12 people did not have jobs, but all 12 wanted a job. Only after retirement did we get to everyone in the workforce having a job. This seems to be the opposite of what is happening in our country today.

People graduate high school or college every year you know. That's just 2 ways people join the work force...

 

[First]

And to think, it was just under 4 years ago that the promised monthly jobs number of the Romney-Ryan campaign was 250K. Repubs don't know when to call it a day, quibbling over literally a 0.9% GDP difference for this administration versus the long-run 3%+ GDP average, as if any working class American should give a shit about a number so disconnected from their daily lives and well being.

 

[Jhhnn]

Labor is going to continue to lose value until the vast majority of people can no longer "work for a living".

Anyone celebrating today is ignoring two things. The enormous bubble in the room. Go ahead and return interest rates to normal. You cannot, because the economy is trash.

Why is it trash? Because the global economy and automation means fewer people are employable. Labor and wages are tanking, and this is a trend that will continue indefinitely. One way or another we are transitioning to a managed economy where the majority are unemployed with welfare, aka a basic income.

The "free market economy" based on human labor is dead and dying. You're just hiding from the fact.

Well, the promise of automation & offshoring was that we'd have more leisure time & greater wealth. We just have to better figure out how to share that at a societal level. We can't

Our old conceptualizations obviously can't do that.

 

[Jhhnn]

The forum mangled the above post a bit, somehow. Finishing the sentence- We can't have a society where having a job is both a necessity & a privilege.