Check out some similar questions!

tomder55 · May 20, 2014, 07:10 PM

Obamacare condensed into 4 simple sentences......
In order to insure the uninsured, we first have to un-insure the insured.
Next, we require the newly un-insured to be re-insured.
To re-insure the newly un-insured, they are required to pay extra charges to be re-insured.
The extra charges are required so that the original insured, who became
un-insured, and then became re-insured, can pay enough extra so that the original
un-insured can be insured, free of charge to them.

paraclete · May 21, 2014, 06:43 AM

now I know why you are in decline, it has become clear, you can no longer do anything simply

talaniman · May 21, 2014, 06:59 AM

We aren't in decline Clete, just at a war of words, and ideas.

paraclete · May 22, 2014, 03:07 PM

it's more than that Tal it is a war of inaction and when you do nothing long enough..............

talaniman · May 22, 2014, 03:09 PM

Relax Clete,the war is almost over. Just takes a few election cycles to flush down the BS!

Catsmine · May 22, 2014, 03:48 PM

Originally Posted by talaniman

We aren't in decline

When the SWAT team comes to knock in your door looking for a pressure cooker, say that again.

talaniman · May 22, 2014, 04:06 PM

You should do something about those brain farts, tin foil may help. :D

smoothy · May 22, 2014, 04:15 PM

I haven't seen anything IMPROVE in the last 6.5 years. And I actually live in one of if not the the least affected areas of the country.

talaniman · May 22, 2014, 04:50 PM

May I suggest glasses... and a tin foil hat? :D

paraclete · May 22, 2014, 05:28 PM

did you say you lived in a pressure cooker smoothy? No amount of tin foil is going to help, there is only one thing that will and you ain't goin to do that

smoothy · May 22, 2014, 06:55 PM

Washington DC area is the least affected area when it comes to economic downturns... due to the nature of most of the work around here. And there is a 25% REDUCTION in the last year on Federal related contracts... which are not directly tied to economy... which sucks in itself... record numbers of people not working still, 30+ year low point in the labor participation rate, record numbers of people on food stamps, welfare and disability...

Unemployment rates that have not been lower than they were 7 years ago...

THe people wearing the tin foil hats are those that believe its great out there... because nobody that actually have jobs think its all that good. Obama might actually believe it is... but then its also obvious he has been completely out of touch with reality for a lot of years.

paraclete · May 22, 2014, 07:20 PM

Originally Posted by smoothy

Washington DC area is the least affected area when it comes to economic downturns... due to the nature of most of the work around here. And there is a 25% REDUCTION in the last year on Federal related contracts... which are not directly tied to economy... which sucks in itself... record numbers of people not working still, 30+ year low point in the labor participation rate, record numbers of people on food stamps, welfare and disability...

Unemployment rates that have not been lower than they were 7 years ago...

THe people wearing the tin foil hats are those that believe its great out there... because nobody that actually have jobs think its all that good. Obama might actually believe it is... but then its also obvious he has been completely out of touch with reality for a lot of years.

If you take a look at those statistics you will find participation is around the long term average, it jumped when women entered the workforce in large numbers and has fallen back so you can't blame Obama. The participate rate is one of the lies of statistics, you need to look at how many jobs there actually are and vacancies to make sense of it. These statistics are difficult to find because the focus is on unemployment. The baby boomers are beginning to retire so it stands to reason the participation rate will fall over time

smoothy · May 22, 2014, 07:23 PM

Originally Posted by paraclete

If you take a look at those statistics you will find participation is around the long term average, it jumped when women entered the workforce in large numbers and has fallen back so you can't blame Obama. The participate rate is one of the lies of statistics, you need to look at how many jobs there actually are and vacancies to make sense of it. These statistics are difficult to find because the focus is on unemployment. The baby boomers are beginning to retire so it stands to reason the participation rate will fall over time

I've read the labor participation ratestatistics, They haven't been as low as they are since the Jimmy Carter Administration... when hyperinflation made two income households a neccessity, rather than the exception. THey have been anything BUT steady in the last 35 years.

paraclete · May 22, 2014, 08:27 PM

Such statistics are worthless without comparing them with other statistics, including productivity, imports, wages growth.

I didn't suggest they were steady I said they have fallen back to the long term average and there are a lot of factors as to why they have come off the all time high and job availability is a major one, all that exporting jobs has to have an impact sometime, you can't have it both ways and that is one you can't hang on Obama, you need to hang that one on NAFTA, Wasn't it George H. W. who signed that one and the greed that saw jobs exported to China and Korea.

recovery has been slow, not Obama's fault, but the fault of the greedy who won't invest

smoothy · May 23, 2014, 04:59 AM

These labor force participation rates are abolute numbers... X percent of something is still X percent of something irrespective of any other figures.

Quality of life statictics ARE something dependent on other factors.... but the labor force participation rate is what percentage of the adult population actually have jobs, vs those who don't. It doesn't factor in other variables.

paraclete · May 23, 2014, 05:28 AM

That's the problem with it, compare the participation rate with the available jobs or people employed and certainly with GDP. Absolute measures are only good for point scoring, they ignore underlying factors.

It's like the polls, which measure what, popularity?

smoothy · May 23, 2014, 05:40 AM

Originally Posted by paraclete

That's the problem with it, compare the participation rate with the available jobs or people employed and certainly with GDP. Absolute measures are only good for point scoring, they ignore underlying factors.

It's like the polls, which measure what, popularity?

No, polls are routinely skewed by the people that creat them. And absolute figure isn't open to interpretation... it is what it is. Problem is many statistics ARE dependent on other variables... and are crafted to skew reality to fit a narrative.

Like the unemployment figures tossed around by the media and the government (the ones that make them look better). Using those of the USA because I know them best... the U-6 is the only true unadaulterated Unemployment number but its rarely referred to... because it shows a much higher number.

THe one brandished around effectively only counts people who are eligible for unemployment benefits.. self employed, Contractors, business owners that go out of business... some people that are fire, and most of those who quit their jobs, and those whoes benefits run out before they find a job... are never counted, yet are still unemployed. They are excluded because they aren't elligible to collect unemployment benifits...so you can see from the numbers in the chart how significant a percentage they are that are being ignored.

Look at the wide range of numbers... for any given period....by the same compiling agency.

Table A-15. Alternative measures of labor underutilization

paraclete · May 23, 2014, 05:53 AM

I keep telling you statistics are lies the tools of those who want to decieve. long term trend is the only reliable indicator and then you must have a clear idea of what is going on. I don't believe anyone when they tell me the economy is up or scewed for this or that reason, what I know is over the long term things will improve and no amount of debate will make any difference so stop the BS

smoothy · May 23, 2014, 06:19 AM

Originally Posted by paraclete

I keep telling you statistics are lies the tools of those who want to decieve. long term trend is the only reliable indicator and then you must have a clear idea of what is going on. I don't believe anyone when they tell me the economy is up or scewed for this or that reason, what I know is over the long term things will improve and no amount of debate will make any difference so stop the BS

So I should just take your word that things have improved because you say so and because Obama says so or anyone else says so? Despite the fact there exisits NO evidence that there has been a trend of improvement over the last 6 years?

The U-6 number I reffer to is fact... because there are no filters used on that number. It is what it is... everyone is counted... nobody is ignored or discounted. Its totally objective, unlike all the others That makes it reliable. Far more reliable than someone's "feeling", or anyone's propaganda. And why polititions go out of their way to avoid it.

talaniman · May 23, 2014, 07:11 AM

Whether seasonally adjusted or not, your data shows a drop i unemployment. Small but a decrease none the less.

NOTE: Persons marginally attached to the labor force are those who currently are neither working nor looking for work but indicate that they want and are available for a job and have looked for work sometime in the past 12 months. Discouraged workers, a subset of the marginally attached, have given a job-market related reason for not currently looking for work. Persons employed part time for economic reasons are those who want and are available for full-time work but have had to settle for a part-time schedule. Updated population controls are introduced annually with the release of January data.

Too many variables not explained, for instance, what the hell are job market related reasons, and discouraged workers? Could this be a regional or location that is harder hit, rural or suburban? Household dynamics, age ranges are also excluded and the biggest question marks is the students at home not working, and the aged,or even retirees, or the newly disabled. In other words, its too road to paint a very clear picture, or an accurate one.

To be fair though, Smoothy, you used the same numbers I do, (BLS) but you have to look at the whole thing and see the slight uptick across the board that breaks the numbers down, positive but small to be sure.

Employment Situation

Helpful to look at individual states and how they are performing some great Minnesota, some NOT, Kansas. Locality, and governess is the whole key here, as well as industry.

Economic Outlooks by State, 2014-Kiplinger

Take it any way you want but slow growth is better than none, or worse shrinkage. You must be one of those glass half empty guys.