Posted on 04/25/2018 2:18:51 PM PDT by logi_cal869
I heard a portion of Rush Limbaugh attacking Bernie Sanders' "solution" for jobs and heard Rush cite jobless stats as an indicator of "full employment."
I recall Rush "citing" statistics before, not not using them to attack a lib. He knows better.
WTH? My jaw was on the floorboards by the time he was done. I couldn't believe that I heard him cite unemployment figures as a measure of "full employment."
I know better. Many people I know are simply working poor; I fail to grasp the reason for his equivalency just to denounce Sanders...
Because you wrong and he is right.
Full Employment is an economic term. It does not mean “everyone employed in the job of their dreams” as you apparently think it means.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/fullemployment.asp
Full employment is considered to be any acceptable level of unemployment above 0%. Full employment exists without any cyclical or deficient-demand unemployment, but does exists with some level of frictional, structural and voluntary unemployment. Full employment is seen as the ideal employment rate within an economy and is normally represented by a range of rates that are specific to regions, time periods and political climates.
A government or economy often defines full employment as any rate of unemployment below a defined number. If, for example, a country sets full employment at a 5% unemployment rate, any level of unemployment below 5% is considered acceptable. Full employment, once attained, often results in an inflationary period. The inflation is a result of workers having more disposable income, which would drive prices upward.
Read more: Full Employment https://www.investopedia.com/terms/f/fullemployment.asp#ixzz5DioHos6m
Follow us: Investopedia on Facebook
And, IIRC, full employment means a national unemployment rate of 5% or less. We’re below that, so the US is considered to be at full employment.
I understand a ton of jobs have been created since President Trump took office, but I refuse to believe that the Labor Participation Rate has increased dramatically.
In Feb 2018 Labor participation rate was .01 off matching the all time high of 63
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/labor-force-participation-rate
But I agree, Trump should come out and say “We ending the farace of using cooked books on Unemployment to hide the problem of Underemployement. The figure my administation will be using is the U6 numbers. This number show we as a country still have much to do to make sure every US citizen has every chance to achieve greatness in the job of their choice. “
That's true when the Democrats control the government.
When Republicans run things, anything less than 100% employment is a scandal.
And the word "employment" in that case means something more along the lines of MNJohnnie's “everyone employed in the job of their dreams” concept.
Anything less represents a total failure of America, of Capitalism, and of Western Culture in general.
An that is the problem. The agreed upon standard is the “Unemployment” rate. I personally favor the U-6 numbers but we cannot have 1 standard when a Democrat is President and a different one for Non Democrat Presidents
You’re missing my point. Badly.
See comment #5.
He gets it, you do not.
Throwing statistics is a liberal thing to do. Rush knows better. He can attack Bernie on a number of levels and stooping to malleable statistics is beneath him. I just don’t understand his rationale, Mr. Wiki.
I was taught in College that 4% is “Full Employment”.
Below that percentage 1/2 are the “Chronic Unemployable”, ie: Drug Users, shifty folks, disabled, etc., and the other half are “the Criminal Element”.
And if you really work and care, what happens when they keep bring in the guarantee job employees? Are the good workers going to be motivated to be the only one actually working?
Bernie’s plan is to provide government jobs by hiring people to dig ditches, pick all crops by hand, weed fields by hand instead of using chemicals, and similar high intensive people required jobs and low use of machinery. And if folks don’t want them, then he can create the American version of his beloved Stalin’s gulags.
Good.points. There are so many other ways Rush could.have destroyed Bernie.
Anyone else put in mind of Milton Friedman’s spoon story...? :-)
Why don’t you go to his website and read the entire segment?
Send your resume's to Trump, maybe he'll acknowledge your vast wisdom in domestic employment issues and hire you as his speech writer...........You're good bro!
If all of the unemployed just formed a DUES PAYING UNION, all problems solved. (/S)
As a post script, maybe you should be watching and listening to CNN, you’ll get a better evaluation on how terrible our job market really is since they have professionals analyzing the job market.......................
I’m not familiar with Milton Friedman’s spoon story.
I was taught in College that 4% is “Full Employment”.
Below that percentage 1/2 are the “Chronic Unemployable”, ie: Drug Users, shifty folks, disabled, etc., and the other half are “the Criminal Element”.
You were taught correctly for the first part. The folks after your ie are not a part of the employment stats. You have to be able and willing to work.
2 to 3% of the unemployed number is churn of the market. People who quit one job and are looking for another that they will soon be hired for.
Every economic principle has a certain amount of churn. For example there will never be a zero number of foreclosures. Even in the best real estate market, there will always be some.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.