Discouraged Americans leave labor force

[pinqy]

Discouraged Americans leave labor force

Not this bullshit again!

First of all, the number of discouraged workers FELL by 82,000 in March and more importantly in the 50 months since Obama took office the number of discouraged workers has increased by only 69,000!!! Hardly enough to change the UE rate .1%

too perfectly stupid!! U6 is 15% under Obama, that's twice
the normal level or 23 million people!!!

Amazingly stupid!

Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization
The U6 has not been 15% in over a year. It's currently 13.8%, down from 14.3% in Feb

 

[mascale]

In Matthew 20:1-16, at the end of the day, the laborers all get equal increase of pay and benefits--of that era--regardless if they had been sun-bathing all day long, or had mostly been asleep for only one hour. The sun-bathers then muttered apparent obscenties--Like Bible readers know about--claiming that sun-bathing all day long was worth a whole lot more than just one hour's sleep(?), on the sand. It could be said that something odd was being noticed about the relative values of labor. Jewish Females worked from sun to sun, or so they claimed(?)! Jewish males just mainly slept through it, instead(?)! NOW happens, even NOW(?)!

So mascale started off as follows, in this thread:

"So anyone noting that in 2008--then the Ivy League was predicting that it would take a decade to recover from the job losses--also has to note that Labor Force Participation rates were already in decline due to the failed reasoning and war-making of 'Old WMD's, Bush & Cheney!'"

Anyone can suspend usual reasoning and conclude that Bush-Cheney had noted the Labor Force Participation Rate decline. They found that abomination to their socialist ways of life. Real Labor was a paradise, 24/7, without stopping(?), A war would be necessary, therefore, to halt the decline.

That didn't work. Golf in fact happened. A President Obama would actually meet with Tiger Woods!

Neither the Republican War agenda halted the decline nor the Obama-Biden Lubrication, post the Bush-Cheney attempts at Stimulations--maybe even out there on the Golf Course--except maybe when Cheney was doing his best to understand his lawyer(?). The lawyer was seen suddenly frequently on Television News, a new labor participant, apparently! Anyone would have expected him to say more lawyer-like things--like they were doing at the hour of the pay, in the Bible.

Different ways of thinking and planning happen.

"Crow, James Crow: Shaken, Not Stirred!"
(Anyone has to imagine Spanish police asking Pablo Picasso to draw a likeness of the woman that he saw at the crime scene! Beauty tends to be in the mind of the beholder. Probably the Spaniards knew just who she was, and could all point her out in Court.)

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Not this bullshit again!

First of all, the number of discouraged workers FELL by 82,000 in March and more importantly in the 50 months since Obama took office the number of discouraged workers has increased by only 69,000!!! Hardly enough to change the UE rate .1%

too perfectly stupid!! U6 is 15% under Obama, that's twice
the normal level or 23 million people!!!

Amazingly stupid!

Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization
The U6 has not been 15% in over a year. It's currently 13.8%, down from 14.3% in Feb

dear, whether its 15 or 13% it is millions and millions higher than 69,000!!!

 

[Avorysuds]

I love it... People still defending Obama's crap economy. If it was doing so well, why are more people unemployed than when Obama took office, why do we still run massive deficits... why are the FEDs dumping 40 billion a month on the markets?

If the economy was doing as well as the Obama-bots here claim, then why are we not in a booming economy? Many have been saying the same things for years now.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

85 billion a month.

 

[mascale]

Money is actually legal, in the United States--where so much of everything worth having is not(?). Anyone may want to come back to that, later on. It is criminal, in the United States, to toke on certain weeds. It is perfectly legal to keep the money, spend the money, payout money, bet with money, win the money, flaunt the money: Anything but burn the money, tends to be OK!

And anyone wonders why there is a federal deficit, or why there was foreclosure crisis, or even why there was a Holocaust in the Third German Republic.

It's all legal, and everyone supports the law!

Mostly, there is paper denominated with the numbers--manipulated in a completely logical system, (arithmetic): Such that everything affected has clearly to be said an outcome of an intent--with widspread support. It's really not only about the White People.

Mostly Republicans do not understand the concept, "Widspread Support!" "Widespread Support," is actually the civilized thing to have happen. There is no denying some thing in history(?)!

"Crow, Jame Crow: Shaken Not Stirred!"
(And anyone still wonders whether or not humans are a far more loaded form of life on the planet(?)!)

 

[pinqy]

too perfectly stupid!! U6 is 15% under Obama, that's twice
the normal level or 23 million people!!!

Amazingly stupid!

Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization
The U6 has not been 15% in over a year. It's currently 13.8%, down from 14.3% in Feb

dear, whether its 15 or 13% it is millions and millions higher than 69,000!!!

Well, yeah. But since no one claimed it was 69,000 your post, as usual is irrelevant.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Amazingly stupid!

Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization
The U6 has not been 15% in over a year. It's currently 13.8%, down from 14.3% in Feb

dear, whether its 15 or 13% it is millions and millions higher than 69,000!!!

Well, yeah. But since no one claimed it was 69,000 your post, as usual is irrelevant.

"First of all, the number of discouraged workers FELL by 82,000 in March and more importantly in the 50 months since Obama took office the number of discouraged workers has increased by only 69,000!!! Hardly enough to change the UE rate .1%"


See why we are positve a liberal will be slow??

 

[pinqy]

dear, whether its 15 or 13% it is millions and millions higher than 69,000!!!

Well, yeah. But since no one claimed it was 69,000 your post, as usual is irrelevant.

"First of all, the number of discouraged workers FELL by 82,000 in March and more importantly in the 50 months since Obama took office the number of discouraged workers has increased by only 69,000!!! Hardly enough to change the UE rate .1%"

I don't think you understand grammar very well.
"Whether it is 15 or 13%" The "it" clearly refers to the U-6. Then came "it is millions and millions higher" Must still refer to the U6 level. But no one claims the U6 was 69,000. So saying the U6 is much higher than 69,000 makes no sense because no one was claiming it wasn't . . The 69,000 was the net change of discouraged, and the full discouraged level is only a small part of the U6.

 

[edthecynic]

I love it... People still defending Obama's crap economy. If it was doing so well, why are more people unemployed than when Obama took office, why do we still run massive deficits... why are the FEDs dumping 40 billion a month on the markets?

If the economy was doing as well as the Obama-bots here claim, then why are we not in a booming economy? Many have been saying the same things for years now.

If the economy was so bad why would you have to lie about the number of unemployed? When Bush left there were 12,079,000 unemployed, now there are 11,742.000 as opposed to unemployment doubling under Bush from 6,023,000 to 12,079,000 and the Right has been telling us that the Bush economy was great. So to the Right, Bush increasing the number of unemployed by over 6 million is good and Obama reducing the number of unemployed by over 300,000 is bad.

 

[editec]

Using just the economic indicators that support your POV you can either make the case that the economy is either recovering or its faltering.

TAKEASTEPBACK however keeps posting an amount that OUGHT to be of interest to all you armchair economists.

Credit for telling me WHAT that amount he's posted means

EXTRA-CREDIT for telling me how it related to the issue of our macroeconomy.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

I love it... People still defending Obama's crap economy. If it was doing so well, why are more people unemployed than when Obama took office, why do we still run massive deficits... why are the FEDs dumping 40 billion a month on the markets?

If the economy was doing as well as the Obama-bots here claim, then why are we not in a booming economy? Many have been saying the same things for years now.

If the economy was so bad why would you have to lie about the number of unemployed? When Bush left there were 12,079,000 unemployed, now there are 11,742.000 as opposed to unemployment doubling under Bush from 6,023,000 to 12,079,000 and the Right has been telling us that the Bush economy was great. So to the Right, Bush increasing the number of unemployed by over 6 million is good and Obama reducing the number of unemployed by over 300,000 is bad.

dear, historical U6 before recession was 8% now to is hanging around 15% thanks to years and years of Obama's liberal anti- business policies!! And this is despite the Fed still dumping $85 billion a month into the economy!!

Liberals are simply too stupid to know you cant be anti-business and pro-employment!!

You see, it is businesses that employ people, and the idiotic soviet Solyndria fantasy was ,well, liberal and idiotic.

Unfortunately liberals are too slow to be ashamed.

 

[Meister]

Call it whatever you want, but the lowest percent of labor force participation since 1979 is not a good thing. You can debate U6 or whatever....bottom line is 63.3% participation rate is not good for the economy.
One more thing, just 88,000 newly hired is dismal and yet somehow the unemployment rate dropped.

 

[Publius1787]

This is not a surprise--I remember back in 2008, economists were already predicting that it could take a decade or longer to recover from that economic calamity. Did you fuckers forget that already? It was a seriously bad event, arguably on a par with the Great Depression; by some measures, it was worse in terms of lost aggregate wealth and international scope.

Reagan had a worse recession with a worse unemployment rate. How many years did that one last?

 

[Publius1787]

This is not a surprise--I remember back in 2008, economists were already predicting that it could take a decade or longer to recover from that economic calamity. Did you fuckers forget that already? It was a seriously bad event, arguably on a par with the Great Depression; by some measures, it was worse in terms of lost aggregate wealth and international scope.

Reagan had a worse recession with a worse unemployment rate. How many years did that one last?

Can you say...."Thank you Jimmy Carter"?
Honesty goes a long way

Honesty? In what way was I dishonest? I was simply indicating that Reagan pulled us out of a recession faster than Obama did. Of course, we havent come anywhere near being pulled out of this recession under Obama, and thus, ignore the last part of the previous sentence.

 

[edthecynic]

Call it whatever you want, but the lowest percent of labor force participation since 1979 is not a good thing. You can debate U6 or whatever....bottom line is 63.3% participation rate is not good for the economy.
One more thing, just 88,000 newly hired is dismal and yet somehow the unemployment rate dropped.

The LFP rate is a completely meaningless economic statistic which indicates more about the American population than the American economy. Again the LFP has been declining since the 1990s which includes the GOP control of Congress during the Clinton terms and the Bush boom years that were claimed to be better than now. Never once did you hear the Right make a peep that the UE rate was lower than it should be because people were leaving the labor force.

Something about this president is different from all other presidents requiring new ways of evaluating UE. Something is different, but I can't quite put my finger on it. Can you help me?

 

[freedombecki]

Call it whatever you want, but the lowest percent of labor force participation since 1979 is not a good thing. You can debate U6 or whatever....bottom line is 63.3% participation rate is not good for the economy.
One more thing, just 88,000 newly hired is dismal and yet somehow the unemployment rate dropped.

The LFP rate is a completely meaningless economic statistic which indicates more about the American population than the American economy. Again the LFP has been declining since the 1990s which includes the GOP control of Congress during the Clinton terms and the Bush boom years that were claimed to be better than now. Never once did you hear the Right make a peep that the UE rate was lower than it should be because people were leaving the labor force.

Something about this president is different from all other presidents requiring new ways of evaluating UE. Something is different, but I can't quite put my finger on it. Can you help me?

Imho, this President concealed all his vital information, communist ties, foreign student applications, birth certificate, brochures claiming he was a Kenyan, a Senate voting record far to the left of anyone else in Congress, ties to cop killers Bill Ayers and Bernadette Doehrn who are now saying they did indeed launch Obama in his political life with a well-connected leftist radical party. Why does a press that labels anybody who speaks of these egregious obfuscations as racists--because they can?

I likely couldn't help you, but as for myself, I don't even have to think that one over.

Meister's unemployment information is in accordance with good sources, imho.

 

[Sunshine]

Dropouts: Discouraged Americans leave labor force | General Headlines | Comcast

Older Americans have retired early. Younger ones have enrolled in school. Others have suspended their job hunt until the employment landscape brightens. Some, like Baebler, are collecting disability checks.

It isn't supposed to be this way. After a recession, an improving economy is supposed to bring people back into the job market.

Instead, the number of Americans in the labor force — those who have a job or are looking for one — fell by nearly half a million people from February to March, the government said Friday. And the percentage of working-age adults in the labor force — what's called the participation rate — fell to 63.3 percent last month. It's the lowest such figure since May 1979.

The falling participation rate tarnished the only apparent good news in the jobs report the Labor Department released Friday: The unemployment rate dropped to a four-year low of 7.6 percent in March from 7.7 in February.

People without a job who stop looking for one are no longer counted as unemployed. That's why the U.S. unemployment rate dropped in March despite weak hiring. If the 496,000 who left the labor force last month had still been looking for jobs, the unemployment rate would have risen to 7.9 percent in March.

"Unemployment dropped for all the wrong reasons," says Craig Alexander, chief economist with TD Bank Financial Group. "It dropped because more workers stopped looking for jobs. It signaled less confidence and optimism that there are jobs out there."

This Country is in deep trouble ,right is wrong- wrong is right .

I am retiring. I wouldn't call it early, but it is a few months before my full retirement age. I am retiring mainly because I have an illness that is killing me and I want to wind things up the way I want to wind them up. Replacing me will be difficult because no one really wants to come here and no one from here wants to put into education what I did. It is a cushy job that pays 6 figures to the person with a good background. But it will still be hard to fill. My employer knows that, my patients know that, the other staff where I work know that. I wish that were not the case. I wish there was someone waiting in the wings. And I got a good laugh when I got a call from the locum tenens company about the very job I am retiring from.

That being said, no one should be grousing because people who can retire are retiring. My generatoin was exceedingly large. We are top heavy as a group. The nation's younger people need the jobs. If we move out of the way and can afford to move out of the way, perhaps it will help to some small extent.

 

[pinqy]

Call it whatever you want, but the lowest percent of labor force participation since 1979 is not a good thing.
You can debate U6 or whatever....bottom line is 63.3% participation rate is not good for the economy.

Why? Are you saying the event was terrible all before 1979?

One more thing, just 88,000 newly hired is dismal and yet somehow the unemployment rate dropped.

Ummm there were millions newly hired, the 88,000 is the net change.

 

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Something is different, but I can't quite put my finger on it. Can you help me?

sure,

1) this is the only president who had 2 communist parents and voted to the left of Bernie Sanders, an open socialist

2) before the recession U6 had settled in at around 8% whereas now after years years of Obama's socialist soviet lunacy it is about double that or 22 million people!!!!!!

Is it really too complicated for a liberal to grasp??