Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You know when the participation rate peaked?
2000.
You people obsessing with the participation rate and also trying to tie it to the president are making a great case for electing another Bill Clinton.
You know when the participation rate peaked?
2000.
You people obsessing with the participation rate and also trying to tie it to the president are making a great case for electing another Bill Clinton.
You know when the participation rate peaked?
2000.
You people obsessing with the participation rate and also trying to tie it to the president are making a great case for electing another Bill Clinton.
So...since it peaked under BJ Bubba, he is deserving of praise. Right?
Then logically it would follow that since it has dropped dramatically under your Messiah, he is deserving of much scorn. Right?
Funny...logic and the Left have little in common.
You know when the participation rate peaked?
2000.
You people obsessing with the participation rate and also trying to tie it to the president are making a great case for electing another Bill Clinton.
So...since it peaked under BJ Bubba, he is deserving of praise. Right?
Then logically it would follow that since it has dropped dramatically under your Messiah, he is deserving of much scorn. Right?
Funny...logic and the Left have little in common.
Boom! And gipper delivers a knockout blow to [MENTION=18701]NYcarbineer[/MENTION]! I can't wait to see how he attempts to answer this one (rest assured it will involve a lot of personal attacks and changing the subject).
So...since it peaked under BJ Bubba, he is deserving of praise. Right?
Then logically it would follow that since it has dropped dramatically under your Messiah, he is deserving of much scorn. Right?
Funny...logic and the Left have little in common.
Boom! And gipper delivers a knockout blow to [MENTION=18701]NYcarbineer[/MENTION]! I can't wait to see how he attempts to answer this one (rest assured it will involve a lot of personal attacks and changing the subject).
Apparently we will not receive a response from NYcarbineer. I suppose this indicates he/she/it has some understanding of logic, since there is no effective response.
I did expect an illogical response...something like..."it does not matter what the labor participation rate is, because Obama is great!!!" Of course that would be an illogical response, but one expected from Obama sycophants.
Is it any wonder the USA is a mess, when so many Americans are clueless?
Boom! And gipper delivers a knockout blow to [MENTION=18701]NYcarbineer[/MENTION]! I can't wait to see how he attempts to answer this one (rest assured it will involve a lot of personal attacks and changing the subject).
Apparently we will not receive a response from NYcarbineer. I suppose this indicates he/she/it has some understanding of logic, since there is no effective response.
I did expect an illogical response...something like..."it does not matter what the labor participation rate is, because Obama is great!!!" Of course that would be an illogical response, but one expected from Obama sycophants.
Is it any wonder the USA is a mess, when so many Americans are clueless?
Funny, that kind of response only comes from the Right!
The real reason the LPR is not a good economic indicator is because it is affected more by demographics like birth rate, retirees, and immigration than by economic conditions. Only the completely clueless consider it an important economic indicator.
260,000 jobs were created
800,000 Americans; most of a million; left the job market altogether
\
to the idiotic, self-deceiving losers on the Left; that IS an example of success
idiots and hypocrites
retiring baby boomers are not the reason for the mass exodus from the labor force.
this left-wing talking point has been debunked over and over
FACT: more Americans than EVER of retirement age are choosing NOT to retire and REMAIN IN THE LABOR MARKET
FACT: there is a record number of ABLE-BODIED, WORKING-AGE AMERICANS NOT PARTICIPATING IN THE LABOR MARKET
face it; libs are losers who lie to themselves
retiring baby boomers are not the reason for the mass exodus from the labor force.
this left-wing talking point has been debunked over and over
FACT: more Americans than EVER of retirement age are choosing NOT to retire and REMAIN IN THE LABOR MARKET
FACT: there is a record number of ABLE-BODIED, WORKING-AGE AMERICANS NOT PARTICIPATING IN THE LABOR MARKET
face it; libs are losers who lie to themselves
Since you didn't, or weren't able to, provide a source for your claim, here's one:
Nearly 300,000 baby boomers are retiring every month. That's 10k a day.
Is Baby Boomer Retirement Behind the Drop in July's Unemployment Rate? | Making Sen$e | PBS NewsHour
Why did thenemployment rate go down from 7.6 percent to 7.4 percent? Because the official workforce actually declined by about 40,000 people. What could explain the drop, given the rise in population? Ten thousand baby boomers turn 65 today has become a demographic cliché (or meme, if you prefer). Barring a mass and age-selective plague, that means that 10,000 or so are also turning 66, their official Social Security retirement age. Many, if not most, baby boomers are retiring. And since 10,000 a day equals 300,000 a month, if two-thirds of them are hanging up their rock n roll work shoes, Fridays numbers would make sense: 200,000 or so retirees offsetting the 200,000 or so new working-age Americans.
I have long warned against making too much of any one months unemployment numbers. But the story told above is plausible, if not provable.
Nobody is talking about birth rates after Obama took office!Apparently we will not receive a response from NYcarbineer. I suppose this indicates he/she/it has some understanding of logic, since there is no effective response.
I did expect an illogical response...something like..."it does not matter what the labor participation rate is, because Obama is great!!!" Of course that would be an illogical response, but one expected from Obama sycophants.
Is it any wonder the USA is a mess, when so many Americans are clueless?
Funny, that kind of response only comes from the Right!
The real reason the LPR is not a good economic indicator is because it is affected more by demographics like birth rate, retirees, and immigration than by economic conditions. Only the completely clueless consider it an important economic indicator.
Okay...so you are claiming that the LPR is meaningless because of demographics. Well then you have to prove that demographics HAVE influenced the decrease in labor participation and NOT the terribly ineffective economic policies of our government. I do not think you can make that case.
First, birth rates are down currently, but that could be caused by the recession. Birth rates historically go down when the job market is weak. Plus those born since Obummer took office, obviously are too young to be in the work force.
Second, more people are forced into retiring because the job market is weak. Could be many would rather work, if jobs existed.
Third, you cite immigration as a factor affecting the LPR. We have open borders allowing a huge influx of illegal aliens, which has increased our population. This would seem to contradict your point.
Birth rates were down after the Boomers, so there would be less young people entering the workforce then needed to offset the Boomers retiring at a rate of 3 million per year. The youngest Boomers today are 50 years old.
Nobody is talking about birth rates after Obama took office!Funny, that kind of response only comes from the Right!
The real reason the LPR is not a good economic indicator is because it is affected more by demographics like birth rate, retirees, and immigration than by economic conditions. Only the completely clueless consider it an important economic indicator.
Okay...so you are claiming that the LPR is meaningless because of demographics. Well then you have to prove that demographics HAVE influenced the decrease in labor participation and NOT the terribly ineffective economic policies of our government. I do not think you can make that case.
First, birth rates are down currently, but that could be caused by the recession. Birth rates historically go down when the job market is weak. Plus those born since Obummer took office, obviously are too young to be in the work force.
Second, more people are forced into retiring because the job market is weak. Could be many would rather work, if jobs existed.
Third, you cite immigration as a factor affecting the LPR. We have open borders allowing a huge influx of illegal aliens, which has increased our population. This would seem to contradict your point.
Not only are there more Boomers retiring then in past generations, more Boomers are continuing to stay in the workforce, so obviously there are jobs if the Boomers want them. There are just a lot of Boomers.
Nobody is talking about birth rates after Obama took office!Okay...so you are claiming that the LPR is meaningless because of demographics. Well then you have to prove that demographics HAVE influenced the decrease in labor participation and NOT the terribly ineffective economic policies of our government. I do not think you can make that case.
First, birth rates are down currently, but that could be caused by the recession. Birth rates historically go down when the job market is weak. Plus those born since Obummer took office, obviously are too young to be in the work force.
Second, more people are forced into retiring because the job market is weak. Could be many would rather work, if jobs existed.
Third, you cite immigration as a factor affecting the LPR. We have open borders allowing a huge influx of illegal aliens, which has increased our population. This would seem to contradict your point.
Not only are there more Boomers retiring then in past generations, more Boomers are continuing to stay in the workforce, so obviously there are jobs if the Boomers want them. There are just a lot of Boomers.
I do not think you understand the LPR. It is the percentage of people, of working age, working...right? So, birth rates have nothing to do with it.
The LPR is down, yet our population is growing resulting in more people of working age joining the labor force, yet they can't find jobs.
Regarding Boomers, they are retiring because jobs are scarce. Most Boomers have not saved enough to retire. And many who are retiring have not reached 65 years of age, which means they may not have healthcare.
Nobody is talking about birth rates after Obama took office!
Not only are there more Boomers retiring then in past generations, more Boomers are continuing to stay in the workforce, so obviously there are jobs if the Boomers want them. There are just a lot of Boomers.
I do not think you understand the LPR. It is the percentage of people, of working age, working...right? So, birth rates have nothing to do with it.
The LPR is down, yet our population is growing resulting in more people of working age joining the labor force, yet they can't find jobs.
Regarding Boomers, they are retiring because jobs are scarce. Most Boomers have not saved enough to retire. And many who are retiring have not reached 65 years of age, which means they may not have healthcare.
Birth rates and immigration rates of the workers following the birth of the Boomers have everything to do with how many new workers are entering the workforce as the Boomers leave.
Our workforce population is not growing fact enough to offset the number of Boomers leaving.
Boomers are retiring because they are getting old. 82% of Boomers are retired by age 65, down from 85% just before the Boomers.
The left is embarrassing htemselves with idiotic excuses for the lowest rate of participation in the Labor Market in 40 years!
they blame it on Baby Boomers; except that more older Americans than ever are STAYING IN THE LABOR MARKET; and postponing retirement.
and; as noted about; the LPR is a percentge of the whole
THE FACTS ARE we have RECORD numbers of ABLE-BODIED, WORKING AGE Americans not in the labor market
idiots and hypocrites
Where were you pussies when the civilian labor force increased 503,000 in March. Employment of working age population ratio is increasing at faster rates than any Bush president ever achieved.
Regarding Boomer retirements (those 65 are no longer counted in the LPR), these retirements should result in an IMPROVING labor market (rising LPR not lowering) as those jobs become available to younger workers.
