Skip to comments.
US loses most jobs since 1945
FinancialTimes.com ^
| 1/09/09
| Krishna Guha, Andrew Ward and Edward Luce
Posted on 01/09/2009 9:49:30 AM PST by NormsRevenge
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-45 next last
To: NormsRevenge
Now you know this is actually a crisis caused by too little government spending, right? After all, the answer is massively more government spending according to congress and the president elect. It’s not a credit crisis, it’s a spending crisis and Obama is the man to solve it! His checks are all blank and the numbers on his credit cards are worn down from overuse! Well, I mean our credit cards and our checks, but that’s just details.
21
posted on
01/09/2009 10:49:40 AM PST
by
pepsi_junkie
(Often wrong, but never in doubt!)
To: NormsRevenge
What is the ratio of jobs lost per number of jobs for 1945 and now?
22
posted on
01/09/2009 10:51:15 AM PST
by
SoldierDad
(Proud Dad of a U.S. Army Infantry Soldier presently instructing at Ft. Benning.)
To: griswold3
Non-profit usually means only those who administrate them are rich. Course in a socialist world every man but the bureaucrats are guaranteed a low paying job and a hovel.
23
posted on
01/09/2009 10:58:03 AM PST
by
Maelstorm
(This country was not founded with the battle cry "Give me liberty or give me a government check!")
To: NormsRevenge
Hmmm... that chart makes job gains and losses look kind of....cyclical. Is that possible?/s
24
posted on
01/09/2009 11:03:27 AM PST
by
keepitreal
(Obama brings change: an international crisis (terrorism) within 6 months)
To: NC28203
Ahhh, I see. I’m not a financial guy so I don’t read that inside info.
25
posted on
01/09/2009 11:17:32 AM PST
by
TigersEye
(This is the age of the death of reason.)
To: NormsRevenge
Still that’s a raw numbers chart not percentage of population. Someone upthread suggested it would look different if presented as a percentage.
26
posted on
01/09/2009 11:20:22 AM PST
by
TigersEye
(This is the age of the death of reason.)
To: NormsRevenge
And Obama’s “global warming” taxes will kill still more jobs.
To: TigersEye
"Still thats a raw numbers chart not percentage of population. Someone upthread suggested it would look different if presented as a percentage." Well sure it does, there were 2.8 million jobs lost in 1945 when the US population was about 140 million.
This year 2.6 million jobs lost, population about 300 million.
So as a percentage of total population (not work force) 2% of the population lost jobs in 1945 --- .9% of the population lost jobs in 2008.
28
posted on
01/09/2009 11:42:01 AM PST
by
Positive
(Nothing is sadder than to see a beautiful theory murdered by a gang of brutal facts.)
To: Positive
So if the whole graph were adjusted that way it would have a continuous upward trend throughout wouldn’t it?
29
posted on
01/09/2009 11:56:49 AM PST
by
TigersEye
(This is the age of the death of reason.)
To: Positive
Correction: I should have said a continuous upward trend averaged and you bring up another adjustment that should be included as well. It should reflect percentage of workforce not total population. Of course increased percentage of government jobs would skew it too. I don't know if those are counted in unemployment figures ... or whether they should be since they don't really reflect economic conditions the same way jobs in the open market do. Do they?
30
posted on
01/09/2009 12:04:07 PM PST
by
TigersEye
(This is the age of the death of reason.)
To: NormsRevenge
President-elect Barack Obama seized on the report which he said showed the situation in the jobs market was dire and deteriorating to urge swift passage of his proposed near-$800bn fiscal stimulus by Congress. This morning we received a stark reminder of how urgently action is needed, he said. For the sake of our economy and our people, this is the time to act without delay. Obama will soon have the power to start a war, draft 3 million people and solve the nation's unemployment problem!
Maybe we could invade and conquer Mexico! That would keep us busy for a while and employ lots of people! Plus, they like the new statist, socialist model!
31
posted on
01/09/2009 12:15:06 PM PST
by
April Lexington
(Study the constitution so you know what they are taking away!)
To: April Lexington
Don’t give the Manchurian affirmative action candidate any ideas!
32
posted on
01/09/2009 12:17:12 PM PST
by
MHGinTN
(Believing they cannot be deceived, they cannot be convinced when they are deceived.)
To: NC28203
And didnt the credit crisis really begin well after September? It is stunning how the revanchist Establishment has managed to push the starting date of the recession back one year into the Bush administration to protect the Clueless One.
Goebbels Media. "The bigger the lie, the more people who will believe it!"
33
posted on
01/09/2009 12:18:31 PM PST
by
April Lexington
(Study the constitution so you know what they are taking away!)
To: MHGinTN
34
posted on
01/09/2009 12:19:47 PM PST
by
April Lexington
(Study the constitution so you know what they are taking away!)
To: NormsRevenge
35
posted on
01/09/2009 12:24:50 PM PST
by
malia
To: TigersEye
"It should reflect percentage of workforce not total population." you are correct, I'm just too busy to do the research to find out what the "workforce" represents as a percentage of the population.
My guess is that the workforce was a smaller percentage of the population in 1945 than it is now because of more single income families then.
36
posted on
01/09/2009 12:24:57 PM PST
by
Positive
(Nothing is sadder than to see a beautiful theory murdered by a gang of brutal facts.)
To: econjack
The whole idea is to stimulate enthusiasm for the stimulus package, not to stimulate the economy. More money to skim, imho, more theft.
In the early '80s, the Feds just extended unemployment benefits an additional six months, they didn't send out checks to the whole country.
37
posted on
01/09/2009 12:25:46 PM PST
by
Smokin' Joe
(How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
To: Positive
I wasn't suggesting you do that work, just so you know. I appreciate your input as it is.
You bring up yet another factor that needs to be considered to make a fair comparison. The demographics of the work force. That made me think about how much bigger the agricultural sector used to be and I don't think self-employed farmers and ranchers were counted in employment figures then. I have seen the point made that the self-employed are not counted today which is a much larger part of the white collar sector today.
Making comparisons to sixty years ago is a rather complicated project.
38
posted on
01/09/2009 1:15:01 PM PST
by
TigersEye
(This is the age of the death of reason.)
To: NormsRevenge
Good time for the government to go after the illegals and free up some jobs for american citizens.
39
posted on
01/09/2009 1:19:13 PM PST
by
linn37
To: NormsRevenge
BUY AMERICAN.
The job you save, may be your own.
40
posted on
01/09/2009 1:20:23 PM PST
by
Cringing Negativism Network
(During any "D" Administration: USA's MSM, become indistinguishable from the USSR's Pravda.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-45 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson