http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/04/news/economy/august-jobs-report-2/ Cue Obama bashing, because reasons. You're welcome.
Not coincidentally, the work force participation rate is the lowest it's been since the 1970's when women entered the workforce in large numbers.
Yeah, yeah, it is Obama's fault that the baby boomers got old and are retiring. The hard truth is this has been going on for decades, we all knew it was coming, and only Republicans are big enough liars to try to make it a partisan issue. People are having fewer kids, old people are living longer than ever, and there is a big bulge of people hitting retirement age. It is happening all over the 1st world.
I've pointed to the demographic tables at the census bureau many times. You never seem to look at the links that show that as many people should be entering the workforce as leaving it. The bulge hitting retirement age is now smaller than the bulge that should be entering the workforce.
Yep, reason number one why we need to import labor. It's the only way to keep an economy capable of supporting the massively growing retirement class.
No. Because you've proven to be a liar over and over again thst unless at least two other WFer vouch for your links, I don't bother. Case in point. We have a shit ton more baby boomers collecting on social security than we do new workers to fill that gap.
He is indeed delusional, but he wants to know the U6 number rather than the standard U3 that has been used for decades. Because it's Obama, for the first time ever, unemployment should also count part time workers and people not happy with their jobs as unemployed. Yes, he is that fucking stupid.
Let's put aside for the moment the absurdity of insisting that people who aren't looking for work should count as unemployed -- should we count every college student and stay-at-home parent as unemployed, too? Let's also put aside the absurdity of the Right's standard stance toward someone saying "gee, I sure want to work, but I'm so discouraged, I'm not even looking!" turning from "yeah right, you lazy bum" to complete credulity as soon as it allows them to blame Obama for something. Putting aside both of those things, the U6 rate has also been falling steadily throughout most of the Obama administration. http://www.macrotrends.net/1377/u6-unemployment-rate Sorry, guys. You'll have to try your desperate flailing on something else.
Both measurements have their purpose, but definitely the most important use for either involves direction and velocity. Tafkats nails it by pointing out that both are headed strongly in the right direction. Thanks a lot Obama! #Beghazi #IRS #Kenyan
Reading the article itself left me with the impression that the gains are steadily moving upward, but nothing so great as to think the President or any other politician deserves any credit. Seems to me that this is just a natural force of the market. Where's the correlation between the economic gains and the President? What policies did he enact that led to these moderate gains?
That's a reasonable enough position, but if you consider that positive results stem from market forces, then you can't really criticize the President's policies, since it's all just natural market results regardless.
Either positive or negative results can come from policies enacted by a President. I'm simply asking "What were they?" All I've heard so far is Unemployment down = Thanks Obama. Where's the correlation?
I think a lot of that is just reaction to all the sky is falling because Obama talk. I am of the opinion that government policy can push and nudge, but fundamentally, the economy is like a giant ship, gliding on strong inertia. The stimulus and bailouts probably prevented a 1930s style depression, but since then, much of what has happened is due to the normal business cycle. But when people moan about the poor economy and point the finger at Obama, it's probably worth pointing out that the economy is actually looking pretty decent.
A couple of viable options would be to provide free day care so more mothers can enter the work force or to change the retirement rules so that folks on social security can still work part time without risking their benefits. The reality is alot of those folks in their 60's have great skills and as people are staying healthy longer are still capable of working if the rules would let them. We will still need immigrants but we should focus on educated and skilled workers who bring something to the table rather than poor people without even an elementary level education. Remember that free public school in Mexico stops at 6th grade and is even worse in central America. Higher quality immigrants are what we need and should want.
Educated and skilled workers are certainly important. But we are also going to need a massive number of low and semi-skilled folks to service senior living and health care needs.
We already have those in the form of 11 million illegal aliens. I am talking about how we need skilled folks who actually pay their taxes and aren't signed up for every welfare program on the books. Those are the sorts of immigrants we should be making it easy to get in while the low skilled get told thanks but no thanks. In short, an immigration policy which actually works to improve the nation as a whole instead of one which makes it worse and worse off.
I remember when W was president and unemployment went down...there were a thousand and one reasons why the decrease wasn't "real".
Really? I don't remember that. I do remember talk about the jobs being created being lower pay or that most of them were based upon a credit bubble and how that wasn't a good idea.
The most popular one was "oh that number doesn't count long term unemployed or people who have given up looking for work"
Wow. I see a lot of Sanders voters here. He claims the percentage is higher. Join the party, Hillary Haters. Trump ain't gonna help you with that. Let's remember his tag-line, shall we?
Look at the data in Tafkat's link, and you'll see that employment really didn't move that much in the Bush years.
