• Please read the Announcement concerning missing posts from 10/8/25-10/15/25.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The Most Important Economic Issue Never Discussed

phattonez

Catholic
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 3, 2009
Messages
30,870
Reaction score
4,246
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
fredgraph.jpg


Whether or not this is the most important issue, clearly this is huge, and yet I never really hear anything about this. 11-12% of young males are not working, and presumably living off of welfare. This rate was tiny in the 1950's. So why does no one discuss this? How much of an impact does this have on our standard of living? And what can we do about it?
 
Until about 1990, I would guess it was due to women entering the work force.

After that, I would guess that it is the general demise of industry in America...which traditionally is done by men.

America is turning more and more into a services type economy...which I don't think is necessarily a good thing.

But, as I typed, I am just guessing off of the top of my head.


BTW, this link shows data for all ages for both men and women.

https://fredblog.stlouisfed.org/2014/09/the-demographics-of-the-activity-rate-decline/
 
Are we considering college education rates and/or labor rates for those active college students? Not to explain it all of course, but it might be foolish to blame the entire thing on social safety nets.
 
So why does no one discuss this?

I've been posting plenty about Income Disparity, particularly of those incarcerated below the Poverty Threshold, where the people you mention would be located by the Census Bureau.

BTW, what is meant by "Activity Rate" (it's not defined, and its definition is important) ...
 
If you notice a lot of the economic issues get narrowed into the immigration issues by the big candidates. Funny, since technically immigration is a social issue.
The economy is one of those hotbeds that none of the candidates really want to lay in because the answers are likely tough and not the campaign promises that people want to hear.
 
Are we considering college education rates and/or labor rates for those active college students?

One's degree of learning IS important. See here from the Bureau of Labor Statistics: Earnings and Unemployment Rates by Educational Attainment

A Bachelor's Degree is worth almost three times more in earnings with respect to "less than a high-school diploma", and an Associate's Degree is worth 60% more in earnings ...
 
fredgraph.jpg


Whether or not this is the most important issue, clearly this is huge, and yet I never really hear anything about this. 11-12% of young males are not working, and presumably living off of welfare. This rate was tiny in the 1950's. So why does no one discuss this? How much of an impact does this have on our standard of living? And what can we do about it?


silly post since we don't know what activity rate even means!!
 
Whether or not this is the most important issue, clearly this is huge, and yet I never really hear anything about this.

It's discussed frequently — by another name. It's the same thing as the labor force participation rate, the decline of which is so commonly misrepresented by the Right as a failure of the Obama administration.

The drop in LFPR is largely due to demographic and social factors that have been at play for decades. For males 25-54, it fell from around 97% in the 1950s to around 90% when Obummer first fooled us into voting for him. It's now around 88.5, having basically leveled off. It was 88.6 in January, the same as it was five years ago.
 
It's discussed frequently — by another name. It's the same thing as the labor force participation rate, the decline of which is so commonly misrepresented by the Right as a failure of the Obama administration.

The drop in LFPR is largely due to demographic and social factors that have been at play for decades. For males 25-54, it fell from around 97% in the 1950s to around 90% when Obummer first fooled us into voting for him. It's now around 88.5, having basically leveled off. It was 88.6 in January, the same as it was five years ago.

the Fed relies on it alot too!! Do you call them far right???
 
the Fed relies on it alot too!! Do you call them far right???

Relies on in what way? I'm not saying it shouldn't be taken into account, but it can't be understood as simply a measure of the strength of the labor market.
 
Phatz, why do you think that fewer young men are working today?

If they aren't working, what are they doing? Just chilling? Or maybe they are in college. Or maybe they aren't working because they can't find a job. I dunno.
 
Phatz, why do you think that fewer young men are working today?

If they aren't working, what are they doing? Just chilling? Or maybe they are in college. Or maybe they aren't working because they can't find a job. I dunno.

Probably some are in college, but I would imagine it is a low percentage for this age group. I think that it's mostly people living off of welfare benefits, honestly.
 
One's degree of learning IS important. See here from the Bureau of Labor Statistics: Earnings and Unemployment Rates by Educational Attainment

A Bachelor's Degree is worth almost three times more in earnings with respect to "less than a high-school diploma", and an Associate's Degree is worth 60% more in earnings ...

Not quite what I am talking about, but I do agree with you.

What I am talking about is people going to school, perhaps after the military, and not entering the workforce until 26, 28, etc. As I said, that does not explain everything for a 35 -54 year old chart but I was looking to explore here as I found it dubious to blame the whole thing on social safety nets.
 
Probably some are in college, but I would imagine it is a low percentage for this age group. I think that it's mostly people living off of welfare benefits, honestly.

I have a close friend who keeps telling me that, but I just find it hard to believe that our government hands out checks to just anyone who doesn't work and doesn't have kids and who isn't handicapped.

Is it that easy to get welfare? Can a 25 year old single non-handicapped male living at his 'rents house really qualify for welfare? Isn't it true that most forms of welfare require the receipent to work?
 
What "welfare benefits" are you referring to?

You know, the type that allow people to have brand new luxuary cars, and to eat steak and lobster every day.
 
One's degree of learning IS important. See here from the Bureau of Labor Statistics: Earnings and Unemployment Rates by Educational Attainment

A Bachelor's Degree is worth almost three times more in earnings with respect to "less than a high-school diploma", and an Associate's Degree is worth 60% more in earnings ...

IMO, college degrees are almost useless unless you have one in a field that actually hires people at good wages.

A degree with a major in Elizabethan Poetry ain't gonna get you a great job probably.

This idea that many seem to hold that ALL secondary education is good is flat out wrong to me.


Going to college to 'find yourself' is an incredibly expensive way to do it (which is exactly why many people attend colleges/universities).
If you want to 'find yourself', either travel or move out, get a job and live...you will experience far more then you would at college and you probably won't be massively in debt when you are done.
College should be for people who know what they want and a degree/diploma will significantly assist them in this quest...it should not be looked upon as an automatic next step after high school.

Me? I went to university (learned almost nothing) and I travelled.
For the travelling, I drove from city to city, got minimum wage jobs to make ends meet, got to know the place/the people and then moved on when I got bored/restless. I learned a TON about myself, people and the country.
There is plenty of time for college/a career. I say use the time after high school to have fun (without burning bridges)...that part of your life is brief and unique. Once it's gone...it ain't never coming back.
 
Last edited:
IMO, college degrees are almost useless unless you have one in a field that actually hires people at good wages.

Some people continue to believe that a liberal education has value beyond employment opportunities.
 
The LFPR for 55 and older has increased by about a third over the past twenty-five years, back to where it was in the 1960s.

LFPR_55_and_older_1948_2015.webp
 
Are we considering college education rates and/or labor rates for those active college students? Not to explain it all of course, but it might be foolish to blame the entire thing on social safety nets.

Tabulating some census data, males age 25-54 is a denominator of about 105 million people.

According to NCES, there are 8.2 million students over age 25. Let's assume we can discard students 55 and over for now. If 45% are male, makes about 3.7 million.

3.7 / 105 = 3.5%

Which is about 30% of the discrepancy shown in the OP graph.
 
IMO, college degrees are almost useless unless you have one in a field that actually hires people at good wages.

A degree with a major in Elizabethan Poetry ain't gonna get you a great job probably.

This idea that many seem to hold that ALL secondary education is good is flat out wrong to me.


Going to college to 'find yourself' is an incredibly expensive way to do it (which is exactly why many people attend colleges/universities).
If you want to 'find yourself', either travel or move out, get a job and live...you will experience far more then you would at college and you probably won't be massively in debt when you are done.
College should be for people who know what they want and a degree/diploma will significantly assist them in this quest...it should not be looked upon as an automatic next step after high school.

I don't totally disagree, but how many people actually get degrees in Elizabethan Poetry?

Psychology seems to be the default major for students who don't have a particular interest. While an undergrad degree in psychology doesn't have a direct career track, lot's of positions would be suitable, like jobs in entry level personnel management, or human resources, or marketing/sales. The second default major is Business, which would lead to a similar career track as psychology.

Most every organization could use someone who has studied psychology or sociology or business because most every organization has a need for managers and marketing people.
 
The LFPR for 55 and older has increased by about a third over the past twenty-five years, back to where it was in the 1960s.

View attachment 67199251
This is relevant. Older people are working longer, younger people are working less. If the problem is jobs, it certainly puts a different spin on things.
 
IMO, college degrees are almost useless unless you have one in a field that actually hires people at good wages..

I disagree strongly.

An education gives one the means to face the world with an inquisitive mind (know how to ask the right questions), and to not be afraid of the consequences. To undertake work in multiple variations - especially in the Services Industries that is very diverse - also mastering new techniques, write and express oneself competently and produce real added-value for an employer.

It prepares one to confront the market for employment, and not simply submit to its vagaries.

You cannot find those competencies in someone who has not had that "skill training", of which a 2-year gives one a good grounding, and 4-year education gives one a lot of training ...
 
... but I was looking to explore here as I found it dubious to blame the whole thing on social safety nets.

On a more human level, what individuals both need and want was considered in the early 1940s by an American psychologist called Maslow. He formulated his theory of "needs/desires/aspirations" in a pyramid with successively higher levels of sophistication.

It's called Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs ...
 
I think inactivity is due to our electronic world. When I was 25 the computer was just getting under way. I don't see the baseball field or vacant fields with kids playing after school and the fathers playing softball on the weekends. Nobody gets out and meets their neighbors. Today it is the manicured field with lights and electronic score boards or nothing. I was very active. Unfortunately too active. I was advised by my doctors in my late 30's and early 40's to slow down and start limiting the damage I was doing to my body. I wish now I had listened a little and at least limited the amount of damage I was doing. It seemed hardly a year went buy that I wasn't breaking something out having fun. Oh do all them broken bones and destroyed joints hurt now.

Maybe less physical activity is a good thing. I had a lot of friends were permanently disabled and died doing a lot of the stunts I was lucky enough to survive.
 
Back
Top Bottom