Blickers
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Feb, 2016 07:59 pm
@georgeob1,
Quote georgeob1:
Quote:
The statistic counts the number of people who are either employed or unemployed, but still seeking work.

So? I did get right. I said, "Your chart shows the percentage of people who are either employed or unemployed is dropping". You have to be actively seeking work to qualify as unemployed.

From the Bureau of Labor Statistics:
[quote]Unemployed persons (Current Population Survey)
Persons aged 16 years and older who had no employment during the reference week, were available for work, except for temporary illness, and had made specific efforts to find employment sometime during the 4-week period ending with the reference week.[/quote]


So if the combined number for employed and unemployed is dropping, and the number of employed is staying the same or rising, then the people who are crying over the Labor Force Participation Rate dropping are upset that there are fewer and fewer unemployed people every month.

In other words,
Vote For Unemployment-Vote GOP!!
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Wed 10 Feb, 2016 08:01 pm
@cicerone imposter,
it tells you right on the chart
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  3  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2016 10:33 am
@georgeob1,
I guess you failed to mention that the percentage of the population 65 and over has increased from 12.1% to over 14.3% of the total population in that same time period. At the same time going from about 16% of the over 16 population to over 18%.

You continue to argue that the percent of people over 16 not working is an issue of employment while ignoring the reality that the largest growth is in person of retirement age who would likely be not seeking work because they are retired. This has been pointed out to you repeatedly and you simply ignore it.
revelette2
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2016 10:43 am
@parados,
Quote:
This has been pointed out to you repeatedly and you simply ignore it.


Bit of a habit.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  2  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2016 11:32 am
@parados,
Perhaps it's your style and manner. I find it very easy to ignore you. Undoubtedly this is my own fault, but you affect me that way.

By the way the 2% rise in the over 65 segment of the population you cited does not explain much more than half of the fall in workforce participation.

Life expectancy is rising and the demographics of our population and economy are such that soon enough we will need folks to stay in the workforce 'till about 70 - if we are to sustain social security. Indeed therte are significant incentives built into the system now to induce folks to delay retirement until at least 67.
parados
 
  3  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2016 11:40 am
@georgeob1,
Now that you have accepted that the largest growth in not being in the labor force is the over 65 population let's look at the second largest reason for drop in labor force participation. That would be the 16-24 year old group that is spending more time in school than it used to. Preparing for an economy that requires an educated work force.
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2016 11:45 am
@parados,
Don't try to put words in my mouth. It's impolite. To borrow a favorite phrase of yours, you haven't offered any proof of your assertions with respect to either specific number.

I'm involved a great deal in the recruiting of new scientists, geologists and engineers for our company and know both that part of the job market and the behaviors of the entry level folks involved. Many simply stay in school because they can't find a job.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2016 11:47 am
@georgeob1,
I think it's true for much more than scientists, geologists and engineers.
Blickers
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2016 12:34 pm
@georgeob1,
Quote georgeob1:
Quote:
Many simply stay in school because they can't find a job.

So George, should young Americans get as much education as they can to prepare themselves for the future, or should they quit at 16 and get jobs as fast food workers and hod carriers so that the Labor Force Participation Rate will rise and Republicans can feel better?
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2016 12:37 pm
@Blickers,
Fact is, more high school grads are attending college.
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2016 04:30 pm
@Blickers,
Are they the only alternatives yuou can come up with or are you simply trying to manipulate the conversdation to create a straw man?

Vapid generalities such as that don't mean much.
georgeob1
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2016 04:31 pm
@cicerone imposter,
cicerone imposter wrote:

I think it's true for much more than scientists, geologists and engineers.


Could be. I just stuck with the part for which I have some direct knowledge.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2016 04:49 pm
@georgeob1,
theres probably an app for that. LAst year (before the gas prices tanked ) I was in the presence of anew piece of machinery which will ,reportedly, replace the oil field logging PE and the geologist. Its a great big logging interface that collects, records, graphs, and then interprets all downhole data in real time (As if real time for a drill hole really mattered).

Like the "pilotless aircraft" I can report that the gizmo may be a few years premature. Someone forgot that drill holes dont deliver "clean" samples along the sidewall.
0 Replies
 
Blickers
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2016 04:50 pm
@georgeob1,
It's not a straw man at all, george. Republicans have been bringing up this obscure stat, Labor Force Participation Rate, to try to show the economy is not doing well and as a rejoinder to the falling unemployment rate under this Adminstration. It is clear that you regard high Labor Force Participation Levels as a good thing and lower levels as a bad thing. But the Labor Force Participation Rate regards anyone over 16 in high school or college as just someone not interested in joining the workforce-and more people are graduating high school and more high school graduates are going to college under the Obama Administration.

So the question is: Would you feel better if those over 16 high school students and college students dropped out and hit the labor marketplace so the Labor Force Participation Rate improves, or would you prefer they stay in school to improve their skills and credentials for a better paying job?
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2016 05:07 pm
@georgeob1,
Quote:
Don't try to put words in my mouth. It's impolite. To borrow a favorite phrase of yours, you haven't offered any proof of your assertions with respect to either specific number.

If you had bothered to follow links earlier in the thread there was a piece from the BLS in 2006 predicting the drop off in labor participation for the 2 reasons of more older people retired and more younger people staying in school longer. The drop off was more than they predicted as a result of the recession but it was predicted prior to it happening. I didn't make up the phenomena.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 11 Feb, 2016 05:09 pm
@parados,
Yup. They were the baby boomers that reached retirement age. Makes sense.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » IOWA!
  3. » Page 11
Copyright © 2022 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 06/27/2022 at 10:05:39