Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    4:44 AM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: How many people are actually unemployed in this country? Back to Topics
101Speedster

Champion Author
Ventura

Posts:31,572
Points:2,841,855
Joined:May 2005
Message Posted: Feb 28, 2013 11:06:29 AM

How many people are actually unemployed in this country?

Look off to the far right side of the chart to see the hopefully not ever-increasing numbers of unemployed in this country.

Official Unemployed: 12,299,707

Actual Unemployed: 22,344,803

If the "State of the Union is stronger (and getting stronger)" it will show up in these numbers. Use this topic to post links and opinions regarding Obama's (and Congress') handling of the economy as it relates to employment in this country.
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
Troller_Diesel
All-Star Author Denver

Posts:720
Points:8,010
Joined:Jun 2014
Message Posted: Jun 30, 2014 9:52:42 AM

Wow. I think it would be simple to understand.

The Left loves to tout the "unemployment" rate. However, that isn't the number they like to pretend it to be.

The number that needs to be looked at is the Labor Participation Rate: In other words, how many people are actually working.

So, in Jan 2009, there were 142,187,000 employed.

Then, in October 1012, there were 143,384,000 employed.

A net gain of 1.1 million people participating in the labor force.

What's wrong with that? Why would that be a bad thing?

Again. It's simple. The population of the US increased by 9.2 million people.

To keep pace, the labor market need to add 6 million jobs, yet the "unemployment rate" declined.

And that's really not the entire problem. We reached "peak employment" - the largest number of people in the labor force in March 2007.

In order for the Labor Participation Rate to remain constant, we would have had to add 8.6 million jobs by Oct '12, but the number of jobs decreased by 3 million from March of 2007 until October of 2012.

So, more people, less jobs does not equal a "lower unemployment rate" unless you fudge the numbers.

So, suppose a person gets laid off and can't find a job within 12 months. So, they stop looking. The Government simply drops them from the official Unemployment Rate, and they simply disappear.

So, to summarize:

There are less jobs.

There are more people.

The Labor Participation Rate - the number of people working - has declined.

We are at least 9 million to 10 million jobs behind where we were in '07.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,802
Points:506,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Jun 30, 2014 9:39:50 AM

"While I think it is getting a little bit better than it was 2 years ago, it's still not what I would call "great" or even "mediocre"."

You're about 2 years behind. 4 years ago it was better than 2 years previous, but not yet mediocre. It is definitely mediocre now, and trending positive.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,802
Points:506,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Jun 30, 2014 9:37:17 AM

"Yep, they do except it's not a pretty picture ...."

How is a consistently declining unemployment rate "not a pretty picture"?

While not perfect, it certainly isn't ugly...
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:30,092
Points:3,322,395
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Jun 28, 2014 11:05:09 PM

I understand that "real" unemployment rates are somewhere between 8 and 14% right now, not the 6% Obama want's to tout. The problem is that those who have been unemployed over 6 months have not been dropped from the unemployment rolls and no longer are counted. And it is not that they're necessarily lazy or "not trying", it's still a very tough labor market. While I think it is getting a little bit better than it was 2 years ago, it's still not what I would call "great" or even "mediocre".
Profile Pic
reb4
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:23,257
Points:2,282,475
Joined:Sep 2004
Message Posted: Jun 27, 2014 10:38:46 PM

All Employment Growth Since 2000 Went to Immigrants - Number of U.S.-born not working grew by 17 million




" Actual or Offcial , they both paint the same picture kiddo."

Yep, they do except it's not a pretty picture ....



[Edited by: reb4 at 6/27/2014 10:41:56 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,802
Points:506,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Jun 27, 2014 2:50:11 PM

"I made the point, months ago in this thread, that the "actual" unemployment number is ten million above the "official" unemployment number, and that gap has not gotten any smaller. Since the "actual" number is fully twice the "official" number, and you posted the numbers, you should be able to deduce that the "official" numbers are highly erroneous."

'Actual' or 'Offcial', they both paint the same picture kiddo.

"Perhaps if you looked at what is actually happening in this country you could get past your obvious love of 0bama and your obvious partisan views."

Like when I voted for W? Feel free to wipe that egg off of your face ;)

And for the hundredth time, no, I do not agree with everything that Obama has done. Clearly he is fallible, but not the anti-Christ you and those of your ilk like to make him out to be. Neither was W....
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:72,712
Points:2,893,745
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Jun 27, 2014 2:08:00 PM

I made the point, months ago in this thread, that the "actual" unemployment number is ten million above the "official" unemployment number, and that gap has not gotten any smaller. Since the "actual" number is fully twice the "official" number, and you posted the numbers, you should be able to deduce that the "official" numbers are highly erroneous.

Perhaps if you looked at what is actually happening in this country you could get past your obvious love of 0bama and your obvious partisan views. That's why no one takes your posts seriously.

[Edited by: I75at7AM at 6/27/2014 2:08:41 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,802
Points:506,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Jun 27, 2014 1:48:30 PM

"No, you posted the unemployment data on June 10 at 1:15PM. I "analyzed" it at 1:37PM."

Exactly. Thank-you. Your analysis showed positive results from 'my' data. Perfect.

"You claim that the data show the economy is getting better."

Most rational people without a political axe to grind would agree that 3+ million jobs added in just over a year would be a positive sign.

"I say "not much better" and "the data from the BLS is highly suspect" (and contains the letters BLS plus a few more)."

Of course you do - that is the only thing you could possibly say without agreeing that your hated Obama is not making a negative impact... Which is why none of your posts are taken seriously. You can't get past your own partisan views.
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:72,712
Points:2,893,745
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Jun 27, 2014 1:39:03 PM

No, you posted the unemployment data on June 10 at 1:15PM. I "analyzed" it at 1:37PM.

You claim that the data show the economy is getting better.

I say "not much better" and "the data from the BLS is highly suspect" (and contains the letters BLS plus a few more).
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,802
Points:506,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Jun 27, 2014 1:27:09 PM

"The economy is still fairly stagnant, most of the "new" jobs are getting outsourced out of the country or sucked up by immigrants (did you see the new post or not?)."

3.2 million net jobs gained since 2/28/13 is stagnant? Do you even know the meaning of outsourced?

"So don't try to put words in my mouth..."

You posted the positive data, not me...
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:72,712
Points:2,893,745
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Jun 27, 2014 1:18:25 PM

No, I don't support 0bama or anything he has done to this country. The economy is still fairly stagnant, most of the "new" jobs are getting outsourced out of the country or sucked up by immigrants (did you see the new post or not?).
The Department of Labor Statistics continues to lie with statistics, nothing they report can be taken with any accuracy. There are millions of people who want to work full-time but can't find suitable employment. Many of them remain on welfare programs (hey, it beats starving) when they would really rather not be.

So don't try to put words in my mouth, you have enough trouble choosing your own.

[Edited by: I75at7AM at 6/27/2014 1:18:44 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,802
Points:506,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Jun 27, 2014 11:37:31 AM

"Oh, and everyone know that unemployment will never reach "zero" and that at about 5% most economists consider to be "full employment"."

Outstanding - finally, some realistic info from you.

"I put up a red herring and you failed to spot it."

I saw '0 percent unemployment' - why would I need to dig further into your erroneous, fictional calculations?

"The decline in unemployment from the date in 2013 to the date in 2014 should be calculated as 22,344,803 - 19,057,431 = 3,287,372 a substantial decrease..."

So then you now approve of Obama on this subject, given the substantial decrease. Understood.
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:72,712
Points:2,893,745
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Jun 27, 2014 11:30:02 AM

Oh, and everyone know that unemployment will never reach "zero" and that at about 5% most economists consider to be "full employment".

I don't agree with them at that number. Currently North Dakota is at about 2.5% and I'm surprised it's listed as that high.
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:72,712
Points:2,893,745
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Jun 27, 2014 11:28:32 AM

I have given up responding to your "debates"? I put up a red herring and you failed to spot it.

The decline in unemployment from the date in 2013 to the date in 2014 should be calculated as
22,344,803 - 19,057,431 = 3,287,372
a substantial decrease, at a rate which if continued would eliminate unemployment in 6.79 years, not 43.48 years. I posted the fact that I had posted a red herring on my whiteboard that day, June 10, it's still there, and you failed to take the ball and run with it.

Don't accuse me of not responding to the debate, you get a great big FAIL in this one.

:)
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,802
Points:506,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Jun 27, 2014 11:17:01 AM

"You can draw your own conclusions."

I have concluded that you once again have given up responding to our debates, since you couldn't answer when unemployment was last at zero...

The status-quo remains intact. Time to initiate the next smoke screen.
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:72,712
Points:2,893,745
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Jun 27, 2014 10:44:41 AM

The Center for Immigration Studies has done an exhaustive scholarly report on how immigration affects employment of natives. The title describes the results:
Study: All Employment Growth Since 2000 Went to Immigrants
"According to a major new report from the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS), net employment growth in the United States since 2000 has gone entirely to immigrants, legal and illegal. Using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, CIS scholars Steven A. Camarota and Karen Zeigler found that there were 127,000 fewer working-age natives holding a job in the first quarter of 2014 than in 2000, while the number of immigrants with a job was 5.7 million above the 2000 level."

"The supply of potential workers is enormous: 8.7 million native college graduates are not working, as are 17 million with some college, and 25.3 million with no more than a high school education.
According to the study, 58 million working-age natives are not employed."

The study reaches three conclusions. See link.

You can draw your own conclusions.

Some here will draw erroneous conclusions, such as "immigrants will do jobs Americans won't do" and "they're here, it's a reality, might as well let them work and become citizens" and "we're a nation if immigrants, how can you be against it now"

Profile Pic
Tru2psu2
Champion Author Winston-Salem

Posts:17,247
Points:1,993,915
Joined:Feb 2004
Message Posted: Jun 25, 2014 9:10:06 PM

Put me in this group
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,802
Points:506,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Jun 25, 2014 2:39:26 PM

"At that rate, it will take 43.48 years (each year being 16 months) to reduce unemployment to zero."

When has it EVER been zero?

Gotta love hyperbole... too bad there is no Nobel for that category.
Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:72,712
Points:2,893,745
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Jun 10, 2014 1:37:56 PM

"Um, the Recession didn't just stop his first day in Office." Nope. It did end, by official statistics (the economy stopped shrinking and began to grow) in Summer 2009. Since then, it's all been good, right?

2/28/13:
Official Unemployed: 12,299,707
Actual Unemployed: 22,344,803 ----> difference of 10,045,096

6/10/14:
Official Unemployed: 9,533,290
Actual Unemployed: 19,057,431 ---> difference of 9,524,141

10,045,096- 9,524,141 = 520,955 fewer unemployed now than Feb.2013. Out of 22 million plus unemployed, an astounding reduction of 2.3%!

At that rate, it will take 43.48 years (each year being 16 months) to reduce unemployment to zero.

Wonderful! Barack 0bama is an economic Genius! He should win a Nobel Prize for Economics!

[Edited by: I75at7AM at 6/10/2014 1:38:48 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,802
Points:506,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Jun 10, 2014 1:15:36 PM

"That means that the number of working age Americans that are not working has grown by close to 10 million since Barack Obama first took office."

Um, the Recession didn't just stop his first day in Office. What is with this ridiculous propaganda?

"So why does the "official unemployment rate" keep going down?"

Simple - people are getting jobs. Stop making it a complicated conspiracy theory.

2/28/13:

Official Unemployed: 12,299,707

Actual Unemployed: 22,344,803

6/10/14:

Official Unemployed: 9,533,290

Actual Unemployed: 19,057,431

Bottom Line. Need me to do the math for you? I75 had a hard time figuring this one out too ;)
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,477
Points:41,860
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Jun 10, 2014 11:12:24 AM

We've had somewhat of a jobless recovery in many regions driven by many with 2, 3 or more jobs and/or underground economy jobs and side businesses keeping the economy going.

A rising tide does not lift all boats. Many of those that were unemployable during the recession are still unemployable, or even more unemployable since they've been out of the labor force for so long.

Since many issues are structural not cyclical in nature, many businesses and job seekers will have to make some major changes to adapt to the changing economy.

Profile Pic
jeskibuff
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:10,214
Points:1,900,535
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Jun 10, 2014 10:55:58 AM

teacher_tim said: "Why don't they just get it over with and announce that they have decided that all workers immediately leave the labor force the moment that they lose their jobs? That way we could have an unemployment rate of "0.0 percent" and Obama could be hailed as a great economic savior."

That's totally unnecessary.

If the unemployment rate was 25%, Obozo's sycophants would STILL hail him as an economic savior.
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,477
Points:41,860
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Jun 10, 2014 10:21:07 AM

BLS: In 20% of American Families, No One Works

<<In 2013, there were 80,445,000 families in the United States and in 16,127,000—or 20 percent--no one had a job.>>
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,572
Points:807,165
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Jun 10, 2014 9:49:57 AM

"The number of working age Americans that do not have a job has increased by nearly 10 million since Barack Obama first entered the White House.

In January 2009, the number of "officially unemployed" workers plus the number of Americans "not in the labor force" was sitting at a grand total of 92.6 million. Today, that number has risen to 102.2 million. That means that the number of working age Americans that are not working has grown by close to 10 million since Barack Obama first took office. So why does the "official unemployment rate" keep going down? Well, it is because the federal government has been pretending that millions upon millions of unemployed workers have "left the labor force" over the past few years and do not want to work anymore. The government says that another 347,000 workers "left the labor force" in December. That is nearly five times larger than the 74,000 jobs that were "created" by the U.S. economy last month. And it is important to note that more than half of those jobs were temporary jobs, and it takes well over 100,000 new jobs just to keep up with population growth each month. So the unemployment rate should not have gone down. If anything, it should have gone up.

In fact, if the federal government was using an honest labor force participation rate, the official unemployment rate would be far higher than it is right now. Instead of 6.7 percent, it would be 11.5 percent, and it has stayed at about that level since the end of the last recession.

But "6.7 percent" makes Obama look so much better than "11.5 percent", don't you think?

The labor force participation rate is now at a 35 year low, and the only way that the federal government has been able to get the "unemployment rate" to go down is by removing hundreds of thousands of Americans out of the labor force every month.

Why don't they just get it over with and announce that they have decided that all workers immediately leave the labor force the moment that they lose their jobs? That way we could have an unemployment rate of "0.0 percent" and Obama could be hailed as a great economic savior.

Of course the truth is that the employment crisis in the United States is about as bad now as it was during the depths of the last recession.

If you want a much more accurate reading of the employment picture in America, just look at the employment-population ratio. The percentage of working age Americans that actually have a job continues to stagnate at an extremely low level. In fact, the percentage of working age Americans that are employed has stayed between 58.2 percent and 58.8 percent for 52 months in a row..."[L=http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-01-13/text deleted to source[/L]
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,802
Points:506,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Jun 10, 2014 9:38:27 AM

"Perhaps you could just answer the question instead of suggesting a search through four pages of posts to look for a missing link."

Or you can do your own search, since this information has already been provided? Simply Google "Nobel Laureate income inequality" to see what Robert Schiller, Joseph Stiglitz, Tyler Cowen, Erik Brynjolfsson and others have put out there for your edification. There is a lot of good reading material out there, I would hate to limit you to just one or two sources...

[Edited by: Weaslespit at 6/10/2014 9:38:54 AM EST]
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,477
Points:41,860
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Jun 10, 2014 8:16:44 AM

<<Too many people are willfully unemployed, that it, they took themselves out of the job market.>>

In our non immediate family alone we have dozens of able bodied working age relatives that are willfully unemployed or under-employed.>Like much of our local working age populations many have made themselves unemployable as well.Since the things that make them unemployable are preventable and/or can be changed, even the ones looking for work are effectively willfully unemployed or under-employed.

>More and more are only working part-time, temporary and seasonal jobs since they receive handouts with no time limits or work requirements - $X,000 tax credits, medicaid, paid daycare, subsidized housing, WIC, HEAP, Emergency HEAP, free breakfasts/lunches, free furnaces, boilers, water heaters, free cell phones minutes, local, private and family assistance.

>More and more that are officially unemployed, or under-employed working in the booming multi-trillion dollar underground economy.As more and more customers have less and less buying power, cash, savings, equity, credit etc, they're hiring more and more cash/barter workers.>These workers are undercutting the prices of legit businesses, hurting them and their employees.

Speaking of willful under-employment, last month alone my sister had to replace 7 workers since they turned down various hours, days, shifts, full time and over-time during her busy tourist season.

I should add that since so many are unemployable, not seriously looking for work, or unable/unwilling to work many hours, days and shifts that many jobs are filled by workers that already have 1, 2 or 3 jobs.

>We have more and more younger working age customers on disability and/or with 2 or more household members on disability.>Job quality was much better in many regions during the recession, so I don't blame many for doing what they're doing.

Many have so many strikes against them and/or they're so old and unhealthy that they'll never recover even part of what they've lost.


[Edited by: MarkJames at 6/10/2014 8:17:57 AM EST]
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:22,271
Points:3,626,065
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Jun 9, 2014 3:04:04 PM

"Check out my links in the 'Wealth Distribution' thread from noted economists and Nobel Laureates..."

Perhaps you could just answer the question instead of suggesting a search through four pages of posts to look for a missing link.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,802
Points:506,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Jun 9, 2014 1:00:16 PM

"Too many people are willfully unemployed, that it, they took themselves out of the job market."

Can you quantify this?
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,802
Points:506,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Jun 9, 2014 12:59:51 PM

"How are the 1% doing that?"

Check out my links in the 'Wealth Distribution' thread from noted economists and Nobel Laureates...
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,572
Points:807,165
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Jun 9, 2014 12:57:44 PM

Too many people are willfully unemployed, that it, they took themselves out of the job market.
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:22,271
Points:3,626,065
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Jun 9, 2014 12:19:50 PM

"Why would the 1% keep a strangle-hold on the income of the 99%, thus limiting their customer base?"

How are the 1% doing that? Bad economic policy is what puts a stranglehold on the income of everyone.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,802
Points:506,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Jun 9, 2014 11:46:22 AM

"All are 40 somethings and tell me they're having a hard time finding well paying full-time jobs due to their age."

Even in good economic times, this is still the case...
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,802
Points:506,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Jun 9, 2014 11:45:31 AM

"Why would that nasty 1% want to destroy its customer base by putting the 99% out of work?"

Hence my question regarding income inequality... Why would the 1% keep a strangle-hold on the income of the 99%, thus limiting their customer base?
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:22,271
Points:3,626,065
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Jun 9, 2014 11:28:12 AM

"the share of Americans who are employed is stalled below 59 percent, well below the 63.3 percent peak in March 2007 and 64.7 percent of April 2000"

--William Spriggs, chief economist for the AFL-CIO.
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,477
Points:41,860
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Jun 9, 2014 11:08:58 AM

I'm currently performing commercial work for 2 businesses eliminating large percentages of their workers.

Volume is up, however margins are razor thin and operational costs have skyrocketed, hence the job cuts.

Due to the over-supply of qualified and over-qualified job seekers they attract and retain much better performing workers, so they need fewer workers overall.
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,477
Points:41,860
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Jun 9, 2014 10:59:00 AM

I'm currently in negotiations with 3 pre-tax seizure homeowner customers - all in a financial bind due to under-employment.

All were working more jobs, better jobs and more hours during the recession.

All are 40 somethings and tell me they're having a hard time finding well paying full-time jobs due to their age.

Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:22,271
Points:3,626,065
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Jun 9, 2014 9:13:10 AM

<<"btc1 said, "Problems are with what the 15 is doing to destroy jobs here."

What does that mean?"

Too difficult to figure out that "15" is "1%" in the context of his post? He just slipped on the 'Shift' key...>>

Yes, it was too difficult for me, too. After all he could have used the "edit" button to fix it.

Now that I understand his post, I will ask a question. Why would that nasty 1% want to destroy its customer base by putting the 99% out of work? The unemployed don't buy houses, cars, plasma TV, rent hotel rooms, etc.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,802
Points:506,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Jun 9, 2014 9:00:28 AM

"We had 3 laid off last week."

It is a good time to be laid-off, in comparison to 6 years ago...

Not every company gets it right, even in better economic conditions.
Profile Pic
Weaslespit
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,802
Points:506,765
Joined:Sep 2008
Message Posted: Jun 9, 2014 8:59:12 AM

"btc1 said, "Problems are with what the 15 is doing to destroy jobs here."

What does that mean?"

Too difficult to figure out that "15" is "1%" in the context of his post? He just slipped on the 'Shift' key...
Profile Pic
hero4hire
Champion Author Chicago

Posts:1,146
Points:342,640
Joined:Jul 2013
Message Posted: Jun 9, 2014 7:23:13 AM

We had 3 laid off last week.
Profile Pic
wbacon
Champion Author Philadelphia

Posts:15,607
Points:3,441,500
Joined:Jun 2004
Message Posted: Jun 9, 2014 5:32:07 AM

Much TOOO MANY
Profile Pic
EZExit
Champion Author Phoenix

Posts:15,277
Points:2,169,180
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jun 9, 2014 1:53:17 AM

Sneakers: <<<"I'm 59 and I have a brother that's 63. Both of us are drawing a pension. Are you going to count us as unemployed?">>>

--I for one would not, but on the other hand, I would count the unemployed person that has exhausted their unemployment benefits as "unemployed", unlike how the government does it.
Profile Pic
Sneakers55
Champion Author Houston

Posts:60,790
Points:2,548,485
Joined:Nov 2005
Message Posted: Jun 9, 2014 1:40:13 AM

On Mar 10, 2014 9:54:57 AM, teacher_tim wrote:

>Actual unemployed is a separate number from the contrived
>Unemployment rate.

The so-called "contrived unemployment rate" requires that you be seeking work. To be seeking work, you only have to make one application in the last four weeks.

>A truer picture can be found by looking at the number of working
>age Americans who are NOT working.

I'm 59 and I have a brother that's 63. Both of us are drawing a pension. Are you going to count us as unemployed?
Profile Pic
101Speedster
Champion Author Ventura

Posts:31,572
Points:2,841,855
Joined:May 2005
Message Posted: Jun 7, 2014 12:22:59 PM

btc1 said, "Problems are with what the 15 is doing to destroy jobs here."

What does that mean?
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,477
Points:41,860
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Jun 6, 2014 8:31:04 AM

I was talking to a landscaper that mows many of my rental properties yesterday.

They said so many are out of work that they're mowing their own lawns, or mowing less frequently. Many are only paying for mowing, not trimming, raking etc.

Since so many are unemployed, or under-employed more and more are mowing lawns as primary or supplemental income, so they're undercutting them on price and taking many of their customers.

They had to let two workers go, they cut the wages and hours of two other workers, plus they're making them work faster.

I hated to tell them that I hired 2 new guys that are working for substantially less money to mow 18 of my properties in their region.

Profile Pic
I75at7AM
Champion Author Dayton

Posts:72,712
Points:2,893,745
Joined:Feb 2006
Message Posted: Jun 5, 2014 12:44:30 PM

From a link btc posted in the Bergdahl thread, I saw this one on Salon:
GOP’s little-noticed unemployment sham: The quiet death of extended benefits

Oh, boo-hoo. Mean little Johnny Boehner let the extended unemployment benefits run out for those poor, poor, pitiful "long term unemployed" and the Senate's bill must be started over.

Pregnant question: If 99 weeks (almost 2 years) of unemployment benefits isn't enough, how much is enough? How long should we keep people on employment payments?
Profile Pic
MarkJames
Champion Author Albany

Posts:2,477
Points:41,860
Joined:Feb 2008
Message Posted: Jun 5, 2014 9:09:20 AM

I sold one of my heating fuels businesses about 2 years ago.

When I sold the territory something like 50 percent of my customers were HEAP and Emergency HEAP customers.

Since then the new owners tell me that over 80 percent of their customers are HEAP and Emergency HEAP customers.

Like me, they also own convenience stores and have also experienced year over year growth in food stamp revenue.

My numbers of customers receiving free furnace, boiler and hot water heater service, repairs and replacement have also increased year over year.

More and more of our employees need numerous welfare benefits to live well since we've cut hours drastically, cut perks, plus many have lost 2nd/3rd jobs.

Real inflation - rising rents, heating fuels, electric, professional services etc is hurting many of our low income relatives, customers and employees.

Many of our commercial customers are doing so poorly that we'll only work for them on a COD basis.

I just worked for two such businesses yesterday. I had cash in my pocket before I started and had the rest before I left. I doubt either will be in business in 6 months.
Profile Pic
101Speedster
Champion Author Ventura

Posts:31,572
Points:2,841,855
Joined:May 2005
Message Posted: Jun 4, 2014 11:17:51 PM

btc1: "It is just not nearly as bad as it was 6 years ago."

You are living in some kind of alternate universe. Debt is worse. Incomes are down. Number of people on public assistance is up. The real number of actual people working in this country is at record lows.

[Edited by: 101Speedster at 6/4/2014 11:20:06 PM EST]
Profile Pic
btc1
Champion Author Lexington

Posts:21,910
Points:867,870
Joined:Aug 2006
Message Posted: Jun 4, 2014 7:37:00 PM

Are we taking a head count? Hand held high!

(LOL! I am really doing well, sending resumes out over the internet for the first time and checking around for work. But, seriously, for now, I am fine and just having a bit of fun, here!)

Unfortunately, for many, others across the nation are having a hard time. It is just not nearly as bad as it was 6 years ago. Problems are with what the 15 is doing to destroy jobs here.
Profile Pic
teacher_tim
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:18,572
Points:807,165
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Jun 4, 2014 10:08:05 AM

The interns are paid where my son goes to school, as the demand for computer engineers far outstrips supply. Some are making the equivalent of 80k a year while still juniors in college, in hopes that they will transition to working for the company when they graduate.

When I interned with "Dutch" Ruppersberger while in college, I was paid nothing, but got some great experience. Also decided NOT to be a lawyer, even with a LSAT score of 43, lol.

[Edited by: teacher_tim at 6/4/2014 10:08:45 AM EST]
Post a reply Back to Topics