Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 10/13/2014 1:25:39 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: SeekAndFind

Well, what is the ‘correct’ labor participation rate? Should everyone between ages 16 and 65 have a job? How many housewives, students, and bon vivants should there be?


2 posted on 10/13/2014 1:35:46 PM PDT by proxy_user
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

bkmk


3 posted on 10/13/2014 1:36:35 PM PDT by Sergio (An object at rest cannot be stopped! - The Evil Midnight Bomber What Bombs at Midnight)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

How much you want to bet the “solution” is more laws/regulations/taxes rather than pursuing justice and eliminating the unjust regulations/laws/taxes we currently have?


4 posted on 10/13/2014 1:36:43 PM PDT by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind
Everyone who isn't an Obamabot (Paul Krugman) or above the age of 5 knows that the current "official" unemployment rate of 5.9% is bogus. The real number that counts is the labor participation rate which has been shrinking for more than 5 years.

It is important for us to understand what has taken place. In the interest of that I want to point out that the first Bush II term in office, saw the first negative numbers in job growth since 1940. It wasn't just that fewer jobs were created. It wasn't just that no jobs were created. We actually lost jobs. There were 0.03% fewer people working at the end of Bush II's first term than there were when he started. In his two terms job growth was 0.82%. Folks, the average from 1961 to 2001, was 9.52% job grown every four years. In two terms that would work out to 19.04%.

By comparison, and believe me I don't like doing this, during the Clinton administration jobs grew by 20.72%. During the Reagan years they grew by 17.69%. Hey, it is what it is.

Obama has been another cluster "screwup" on the issue of jobs. During his first term jobs only grew by 0.9%.

Combining the two Bush terms and the first term of Obama, jobs only grew 1.73% over the three terms. The three terms before them ending in January 2001, jobs had grown by 23.72%. As an aside, Bush I had the lowest jobs growth rate since the term ending in 1961. And that includes the years up until his son took over. That resulted in the 23.72% number being considerable lower than the general average three term growth of 28.79%.

We have just short of 25% of our workforce out of work.

5.9%? That is one of the most blatant lies I've seen government tell. It's so easily to disprove that it makes it all the more clear what a bunch of lying bastards we have in Washington, D. C. these days.

6 posted on 10/13/2014 1:58:49 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Obama and the Left are maggots feeding off the flesh of the United States.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SeekAndFind

-Population has gone up (over 300 million)
-Productivity has gone up or been maintained
-Work force participation has gone down (same as mid 70’s)
-Food stamp participation has gone up (over 50 million, 1 in 6)
-Current new jobs pay less and tend to be capped on hours (Obamacare 30 hour requirement changing workplace)
-Total number of people not working or temp working now exceeds those with permanent jobs
-Unemployment rate is meaningless statistic, we are entering a new period for labor
-Capital is cheap, FED policies since 2008 have accelerated the age of automation which is here to stay, robots don’t require Obamacare

Welcome to the future!


7 posted on 10/13/2014 2:29:28 PM PDT by Gen-X-Dad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson