![]() |
51 folks not getting it !
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Praise KEK . |
Quote:
The "Not-in-Labor-Force" is the highest it's been in nearly 40 years. As usual they just moved figures around to make the unemployment figures look good http://cdn.cnsnews.com/styles/conten...te-chart-1.jpg Notice that figures takes a huge dive during Obama's Presidency. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
0 taxes under 40k income will really add to the cheating That bad, Bad Trump . |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
http://i.imgur.com/KQuKYiS.png |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
1. often interest rates are subsidized by the government 2. can't be discharged in bankruptcy (for obvious reasons) and to put things in perspective, according to that chart someone posted earlier, average person graduates with $35k debt... which seems like a significant amount, but if you spread it out over your entire career, it works out to <$1000/year, which works out to <2% of one's income... |
Quote:
It's a racket that benefits the banks & loan servicers. The only loan that can't be forgiven, give me win for the banks & interest builds on interest year after year so $40k turns to $60k Real quick :thumbsup |
Why is it right for Trump, (all businesses actually,) to discharge his debts from his businesses and rip off lenders, creditors and shareholders but government debt obligations are forever?
Why is it right for an individual to discharge his private debts only? Why is it right to rip off the public but not the government? There should be something like a Chapter 16 bankruptcy for a citizen to have the courts reorganize his debt to the government. Not totally discharge his debt to the government but that his debt be made payable to some set percentage of his spendable income. Say this is reviewed annually ... If equity in debt is negotiable-- then it is negotiable for all debts -- public and private -- debt equality. Silly idea ... :1orglaugh Of course, the taxpayer could fund higher education, his children (or the children of the society,) to benefit and not start out a career in debt. But no! I want my leased Cadillac and complain while I make the payments ... the end |
Quote:
No thought or logic, just zombie regurgitation. |
Yep ...
"...the rank and file are usually much more primitive than we imagine. Propaganda must therefore always be essentially simple and repetitious." Joseph Goebbels |
Quote:
The labor participation isn't based only on the economy. If it was, why did the labor participation rate peak in 2000 and has been in steady decline since then? The large demographic of baby boomers are getting older and moving out of the labor pool. People are getting older, retiring, and moving out of the work force. But it sounds so much better when you try to blame it Obama. |
Nobody gets it but me
|
Quote:
We used to have an age pyramid like India - http://www.indexmundi.com/graphs/pop...ramid-2014.gif Then we had 7 workers for every retire. The baby boomers aged and we are heading for 2 workers per retire. https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/char...14/chart36.gif We are never going to have the participation rate we had. it is not possible. It is going to get worse. Obama made it worse due to the recession and early retirement or people pushed out who could not get back in etc. But this is a huge trend that is not really fixable by the President. Some countries are asking people to make more kids. Japan, South Korea and China have done this. Not working so well but it is doable. Here is our current age pyramid. - http://www.indexmundi.com/graphs/pop...ramid-2016.gif We can argue short term flucuations but long term this is a mess. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Those figures for the Labor participation rate are based on ELIGIBLE people. NOT people of retirement age. |
Quote:
So 2008-16 everyone retired? There must have been a lot of fucking going on after the war. While I somewhat agree with baby boomers you honestly can't say that was the cause for that decline or increase depending on how you look at it. " In addition, students, retirees, the disabled, homemakers, and the voluntarily idle are not counted in the labor force." http://www.econport.org/content/hand...nt/Define.html Retirees wouldn't be counted. I would imagine the same for Social Security. Basically anyone of retirement age most likely. |
Quote:
Bureau of Labor Statistics Data |
Quote:
16 milion soldiers from the US. Rosy the riveter ring a bell? Men of a certain age were rare. The baby boom is a real thing and yeah it was a lot of fucking. |
Quote:
The labor participation rate is based on the entire population. This is on a downward trend because our population is getting older. The labor participation rate will continue it's downward trend no matter who is in office or how the economy does. What you are talking about is the prime working-age population workforce participation rate, which is reveals a different picture. This was 65% in the 1950s, rose to 84% in 2000, dropped to 80% in 2005, and has since gone up slightly to 81%. All of this is really just common sense. The labor participation rate started to decline long before Obama took office, and long before the economy took a crap. This started in 2000. Read up: Declining Labor Participation Rates |
Quote:
Your link says the following: While studying employment, another important figure to determine is the labor force participation rate. Here, we compare the size of the labor force with the number of people that could potentially be a part of the labor force. It is important to note that we do not include people under the age of 16 in this figure. In addition, students, retirees, the disabled, homemakers, and the voluntarily idle are not counted in the labor force. This means students, retirees, the disabled, homemakers, and the voluntarily idle are not counted in the labor force - but are included in the general population. Your link then says: The labor force as the percentage of the total population over the minimum working age is called labor force participation rate. It does not say "total population over the age of 16 minus students, retirees, etc. |
Quote:
Quote:
Labor Force Participation Rate While studying employment, another important figure to determine is the labor force participation rate. Here, we compare the size of the labor force with the number of people that could potentially be a part of the labor force. It is important to note that we do not include people under the age of 16 in this figure. In addition, students, retirees, the disabled, homemakers, and the voluntarily idle are not counted in the labor force. The labor force as the percentage of the total population over the minimum working age is called labor force participation rate. [url=http://www.econport.org/content/handbook/Unemployment/Define.html[/url] |
Quote:
|
Quote:
They did change how participation rate was figured for sure during Obama's Admin. I haven't been able to find what they changed.... One thing is for sure, they didn't add retirees. Those people already did their time. No reason to include... |
Quote:
|
Quote:
AGAIN.... The labor force participation rate started to decline in 2000 when the economy was good, not when the economy went to shit or when Obama took office after the economy went to shit. You can try to blame the decline in the labor force participation rate on the economy or Obama, but this is just not correct. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Retired persons are not included in the labor force because they are not working. But they are included in the total population. From the link you gave us earlier: http://www.econport.org/content/hand...nt/Define.html Labor Force Participation Rate = (Labor Force / Total Population over Age 16) * 100 Retired, students, and disabled (etc) are included in the total population. They are not included in the labor force because they are not working. |
Quote:
HOLY SHIT ROCHARD.. Of course everybody is included in total population. That's what makes it the total population. They aren't included in the LABOR FORCE which is what they divide the total population by... Damn do I really have to teach you something so elementary? Or are you just playing dumb to try and make yourself look smart? Seriously. It's over, they aren't included. You were wrong. As usual. Oh and what else do we find? A fact checking site not telling the whole truth as usual as well. If you want to talk common sense.. Common sense would tell you those that have already participated or can't participate shouldn't be included in participation rate. |
Quote:
Here is the equation: Labor Force Participation Rate = (Labor Force / Total Population over Age 16) * 100 When they say "total population over age 16" they mean EVERYONE over the age of sixteen. It does not mean "everyone over the age of sixteen minus retired people, disabled, students, people who pick their nose, etc. Again.... This decline took place long before Obama took office which makes your entire point invalid. |
Quote:
BTW it appears GFY is having some DB issues tonight so posts are getting screwed. |
https://www.rt.com/news/367416-bolto...e-change-iran/
:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh :1orglaugh Quote:
|
Quote:
|
LOL at diversity advocate bladewire, attacking others because they live in europe. How dumb is that?
Then theres rochard, going for the GFY dumbass award. My this thread shows how public education has turned into a liberal shit show. :1orglaugh |
Quote:
Nice meltdown BTW |
Quote:
A tariff is a tax, it goes into the coffers of the USA. Where's the downside again, please? |
If trump builds the wall a lot of officers are with the mexican cartels, they receive a lots of money nothings change, the people wants build that wall....
https://media.giphy.com/media/9MFsKQ8A6HCN2/giphy.gif |
The reality is not so much changes with the wall...
|
Trump supporters don't get it! Trickle down economics doesn't work. The rich will get richer while middle class is taken off life support to die. Everything he does will be to help big business line their pockets. You can't expect him to reform something that will also hurt his bottom line!
His cabinet picks shows that he is pro establishment(old school republicans, former bankers), and you are no different than the libs when it comes to being sheep. |
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:57 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
©2000-, AI Media Network Inc123