- Joined
- Sep 23, 2011
- Messages
- 11,273
- Reaction score
- 5,733
- Location
- On a Gravy Train with Biscuit Wheels
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Liberal
If they have a job, they aren't going to go anywhere while they can still get paid.
The IT department here is dominated by people in their 60s and 70s, mainly because you can't find a good mainframe programmer these days.
The misery index is a combination of inflation and unemployment. Obama inherited a recession that was ending and a misery index under 8. The 81-81 recession had a misery index of over 19 so which one affected the American people the most?
The unemployment rate is not a measurement of how one is affected, it's a measurement of of employment. When you look at unemployment rates now is comparable to the 1980s. We're not seeing people squeezed by inflation and high unemployment I'm not arguing that. I'm arguing that when you have long term unemployment you'll see the numbers skewed which has nothing to do with purchasing power of individuals.
Are discouraged workers unemployed? Prior to 1994 they were counted in the official unemployment number, why not now? The unemployment rate in the 81-82 recession were worse than this recession.
Well....if you count discouraged workers then no, it's not worse than now right?
Yes, it was worse than right now as the misery index is how the economy affects individuals. High inflation, high unemployment were a bigger drag on the economy than low almost no inflation and high unemployment. People were paying 17.5% interest rates on their home mortgages on 1981 and losing their jobs left and right. How does that compare to today?
his age is relevant to the discussion at handSorry but how old were you in 1981-82 when there was a 20 misery index? How is this economy worse than that one?
You're right...under Reagan's first term the economy was worse than it is under Obama's first term...happy?
From Bloomberg.com:
U.S. Unemployment Falls to 8.5% as Jobs Gain - Bloomberg
The complete report can be found at: http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/empsit_01062012.pdf
This report is the latest evidence that the economy is gaining a little strength. Should these trends persist, they will have implications for the 2012 Presidential election, increasing prospects for the President's re-election.
Real Jobless Rate Is 11.4% With Realistic Labor Force Participation Rate | ZeroHedge
The real issue is the moving of the goal posts. We should be shooting for 5-6%, not 8%. This filling of an Obama campaign promise is total horse****, since he promised to maintain it at that rate or lower. Achieving it on Election Day is not maintaining anything, except a scam.
The decrease in LFPR has been decreasing for awhile now. It's no suprise. Boomers are nearing retirement age and it's been something discussed for a long time.
Notice: Data not available: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
Those that are are nearing retirement age are making the decision to get out of a bad labor market. It's just accelerating long term trends.
You're right...under Reagan's first term the economy was worse than it is under Obama's first term...happy?
For what it is worth, I am one Conservative who feels that Obama inherited a worse mess than Reagan. They were different messes, to be sure, and not the same thing happening twice, 30 years apart. Trust folks that I know all about interest rates, inflation, etc. I voted for Reagan in 1980. I have argued this inside and out on many occasions.
However, the biggest difference is that Reagan pursued an effective solution to the problem that he faced. Obama has only made his situation worse. Obama needs to be thrown out of office, and as far as possible, before this year is out.
So, 500K people retired or enrolled in collage in the last two months? Bull!
j-mac
Obama doesn't have the tools available to him that Reagan had, even if he mistakenly thought that this was a supply-side recession. Reagan instituted large tax cuts, and in fact taxes were too high at the time. Taxes aren't too high now. They are lower than they were under Reagan. Reagan's cut-taxes-but-not-spending policies created huge deficits, and debt, as those policies were followed up by both Bushes. That has also hamstrung Obama's response. He's done more or less what he should have done under the circumstances and as a result things are starting to turn around. There's very little he can do about the depressed real estate market and the economy won't be completely healthy until that sector recovers. Unfortunately that will probably take at least three or four years.
I had already noted that Obama inherited a different set of problems. However, you are quite wrong about the effects of Reagan's tax cuts. Revenues to the government increased by about 70% during Reagan's two terms. The dirty secret is that while Reagan lowered some rates, he closed more loopholes, such that he increased revenues not only by improving the economy, but by actually changing the tax codes to produce more revenue. 1980 revenues were 517 B. 1988 revenues were 909 B. They only dipped in 1983, and that was his Recession year. Further, until the dot-com bubble kicked in, Clinton was doing no better with his budgets than anyone else.
All here: Historical Federal Receipt and Outlay Summary
Reagan essentially raised taxes.
Yes, since 1994, but discouraged workers have never been at this level since being dropped from the labor force
Please answer the following questions
We have a growing population and a declining labor force, how is that positive?
We have people dropping off the unemployment roles because theya re discouraged, how is that positive?
We have almost 24 million unemployed/under employed Americans, how is that positive?
We have more unemployed today than when Obama took office by over a million, how is that positive when the debt has increased by 4.5 trillion dollars?
A simplified tax code would increase the tax base, which is the easiest way to increase revenues without the shock of rate increases.
A simplified tax code would increase the tax base, which is the easiest way to increase revenues without the shock of rate increases.
Sorry but how old were you in 1981-82 when there was a 20 misery index? How is this economy worse than that one?
The real issue is there is no "real" unemployment rate. There are just a number of ways of looking at the problem, and they are all legitimate in their own way. But it's convenient if we generally use a single metric, which makes it easier to track and to compare to other periods. As it happens, we've settled on the U-3 number as that benchmark.
Agreed. And I would submit Reagan's performance as an example, although he certainly left more simplification to be done. Worth noting that Obama's own Simpson-Bowles Commission recommended same. And Obama ignored them.
What Reagan did to increase revenues was increase SSI payments leading to the 2 trillion SS surplus which his GOP sucessors promptly spent. That act alone caused the economy to languish until Clinton. Taking money from those that would spend it in th economy is self defeating. Taxing money not spent boost the economy when the Govt. spends what the individual cannot. In a consumer economy spending=growth.
ADP today reported that employment in the U.S. nonfarm private business sector increased by
325,000 from November to December on a seasonally adjusted basis. The estimated advance in
employment from October to November was revised down slightly to 204,000 from the initially
reported 206,000.
The increase in December was the largest monthly gain since last December 2010 and nearly
twice the average monthly gain since May when employment decelerated sharply.
Employment in the private, service-providing sector rose 273,000 in December, which is up from
an increase of 176,000 in November. Employment in the private, goods-producing sector
increased 52,000 in December, while manufacturing employment increased 22,000.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?