The unemployment rate has fallen a full percentage point over the last 4 mo

[rwh11385]

So are you denying the manipulation that takes place with the unemployment numbers, or ignoring them because you don't like who pointed it out? Once people stop looking for a job, they are no longer counted, and the administration uses that as a way to lower unemployment.

That is a widely known, easily verifiable fact.

From Decemeber to January RAW JOBS, or the actual number of jobs in the US dropped by more than 2 million, population increased, yet the unemployment rate went down..............and you buy that?

It IS a widely known fact, which is why I don't regard it as amazing. But Rush, who panders to uninformed people who are shocked by basic information they did not know already, seems to focus on that. There's no real meat there, besides pointing out what is already understood by those who have ever cared to educate themselves on the subject.

I think a great limiting factor of only reading pundits or fear mongers (who cater to the uninformed) is that they point to data and use their opinions of that it means, but do not care to look any deeper to plausible explanations.

Besides the family who decided to stop paying for childcare and live on one income... or kids who gave up and living in their parents... or those who went for early retirement... what could possibly explain a lot of 16+ year olds not in the labor force...??

http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d10/tables/dt10_212.asp?referrer=list

http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=98

Enrollment as a percent of all 18- to 24-year-old high school completers:
1979 - 31.2%
2009 - 48.8%

In recent years, the percentage increase in the number of students age 25 and over has been larger than the percentage increase in the number of younger students, and this pattern is expected to continue. Between 2000 and 2009, the enrollment of students under age 25 increased by 27 percent. Enrollment of students 25 and over rose 43 percent during the same period. From 2010 to 2019, NCES projects a 9 percent rise in enrollments of students under 25, and a 23 percent rise in enrollments of students 25 and over.

"Undergraduate enrollment generally increased during the 1970s, but dipped from 10.8 million to 10.6 million between 1983 and 1985. "

"Enrollment in degree-granting postsecondary institutions increased by 9 percent between 1989 and 1999. Between 1999 and 2009, enrollment increased 38 percent, from 14.8 million to 20.4 million."

"Between 1999 and 2009, the number of male full-time postbaccalaureate students increased by 36 percent, compared with a 63 percent increase in the number of females."

But I guess that makes sense, because of this: http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/20...s-losing-them/

I know many people who went back to school for other degrees, masters, MBAs, law, nursing licenses, etc. They are removed from the labor force participation pool, but will eventually emerge more qualified for a skilled labor force. As long as they aren't the 10% in history and social science or nearly 6% in visuals arts who result in no job.

[rwh11385]

btw, if you take the time to analyze the available data yourself and draw your own conclusions rather than trust someone else's "logic"... you can understand more about the issues.

Comparing those Jan 2012 numbers to 1984 (had the number of post-secondary students readily available):

College students made up 8.26% of the civilian population over 16 in 2012, while they were only 6.07% in 1984, a difference of 2.19%.

The difference from peak of participation rate in 1997 to now is 3.2%...

I'll repeat:

"Enrollment in degree-granting postsecondary institutions increased by 9 percent between 1989 and 1999. Between 1999 and 2009, enrollment increased 38 percent, from 14.8 million to 20.4 million."

"Between 1999 and 2009, the number of male full-time postbaccalaureate students increased by 36 percent, compared with a 63 percent increase in the number of females."

To look at it another way, 20 million college students in 2009 and 81 million not in labor force in 2009. (Yes, some college kids work but like high school students, their working % has dropped greatly recently, much to their demise in student loan debt).

In 1984, 10 million students and 62 million not in the labor force.


A good chunk of the bad/horrid/awful change in labor force participation rate is more people going to college, or some going back to college. This is truly not an evil/doomsday implication for the future of the American economy.

[tjts1]

Grab the tin foil hats boys. When all else fails

[smooth]

So are you denying the manipulation that takes place with the unemployment numbers, or ignoring them because you don't like who pointed it out? Once people stop looking for a job, they are no longer counted, and the administration uses that as a way to lower unemployment.

That is a widely known, easily verifiable fact.

From Decemeber to January RAW JOBS, or the actual number of jobs in the US dropped by more than 2 million, population increased, yet the unemployment rate went down..............and you buy that?

just to let you know, that's how unemployment has always been calculated in this country. gwb's post that this started with the Obama administration was nonsense that he either heard or made-up. Actually, given what he said about his age in another thread, that he'd been voting since '72, I find it extremely difficult to believe that he isn't well aware of this fact and was just intentionally misleading the younger members of this forum.

talk about manipulation... :\

[scabzzzz]

FYI, Ive been doing job interviews and so have my roommates. Also, just about every one of my close friends has recently bought a house (already built houses, not new).
Economy seems to be doing better here. Just got a raise at work too, and we're swamped and so are our clients. I work at the largest accounting firm in metro Nashville and majority of our clients are local.....

Just sayin.. Im with stupid on this (Heeter) :)

[rwh11385]

just to let you know, that's how unemployment has always been calculated in this country. gwb's post that this started with the Obama administration was nonsense that he either heard or made-up. Actually, given what he said about his age in another thread, that he'd been voting since '72, I find it extremely difficult to believe that he isn't well aware of this fact and was just intentionally misleading the younger members of this forum.

talk about manipulation... :\

Yeah, pretty much. Your post about all the factors was good, but a properly educated person would have understood that already. Like Rush or these fear monger websites, people play on the presumed ignorance of others in order to mislead or manipulate.

I think it's important for the voting population to be informed, and pundits like Rush or Beck who focus on ramming down biased information and focusing on opinion is bad for overall political intelligence IMO. They also miss out on better educated expert analysis when wallowing in the mud slinging.

3 sets of senior/chief economist's analysis into the labor force participation rate which drew similar conclusions to my independent analysis of the matter:

http://www.esa.doc.gov/Blog/2011/03/02/youth-labor-force-participation-and-school-enrollment

"Last July, fewer than half of young people had a job, the lowest level since records were first kept in 1948. The flip side is that in October 2009, 70.1 percent of 2009 high school graduates were enrolled in colleges or universities, the highest level on record for the series, which began in 1959. So, while youth employment is hitting record lows, school enrollment is climbing. These are long-standing trends; nevertheless, the Great Recession likely accentuated them.

Many people choose to stay out of the labor force precisely because they are enrolled in school and wish to focus on gaining skills and preparing for future careers."

"Human capital investment among people of all ages is a fundamental source of growth for our economy."

"Reaching this objective means some youths will remain out of the labor force for a few additional years as they invest in developing the skills that will make them, and our country, more productive in the long-run."

http://www.chicagofed.org/digital_assets/publications/chicago_fed_letter/2012/cflmarch2012_296.pdf

"The authors conclude that just under half of the post-1999 decline in the U.S. labor force participation rate, or LFPR (the proportion of the working-age population that is employed or unemployed and seeking work), can be explained by long-running demographic patterns"

http://www.td.com/document/PDF/economics/special/jm0112_participation_rate.pdf

"Young people have seen the biggest change in participation rates over the last several years. Since the start of the recession, the percentage of people aged 16-24 participating in the workforce has declined from 61% to just over 55%. While a sour job market accelerated the fall, young people’s participation rates had been declining well before the recession. In fact, the overall participation rate of 16-24 year olds peaked in 1989"

"Two main factors explain the secular decline in young people’s participation rates: increased school enrollment and declining labor force participation rates among students in high school and college. Since 1985 (the first year data is available), the share of young people enrolled in school has risen by 18 percentage points. Enrollment in school does not exclude a person from participating in the labor market, but the enrolled have a much lower participation rate. In fact, from 1985 to 2000, the fall in the participation rate of 16-24 year olds was due entirely to rising enrollment."

Sheep Political Information Process:
1) Be angry about something
2) Read or listen to pundit who use facts out of context or shares biased information
3) Be more angry, and less prone to research on own

Informed Process:
1) Become aware of an issue in society
2) Look at the data itself and analyze it on your own
3) Read independent sources and research reports from universities or experts, taking anything from a think-tank with a heavy grain of salt
4) Confirm logic makes sense and then point out huge flaws in sheep's arguments

[HarryPotter]

Seriously dude? You gunna sit here and say all this is due to fucking college kids? Ok... Sorry buddy but the raw numbers are out there and the raw numbers call bullshit. I just read all your posts and they pretty much add up to jack shit. Your acting like the typical liberal, loook at da pretty numbers pumped out by universities. You act like there's no possible way maybe statistics from them are flawed and are tampered with for certain views. Universities are wildly know for being extremely left wing.

[tjts1]

Seriously dude? You gunna sit here and say all this is due to fucking college kids? Ok... Sorry buddy but the raw numbers are out there and the raw numbers call bullshit.

What raw numbers are you talking about? The 243,000 new jobs?

I just read all your posts and they pretty much add up to jack shit. Your acting like the typical liberal, loook at da pretty numbers pumped out by universities. You act like there's no possible way maybe statistics from them are flawed and are tampered with for certain views. Universities are wildly know for being extremely left wing.

Butt hurt much?

[rwh11385]

Seriously dude? You gunna sit here and say all this is due to fucking college kids? Ok... Sorry buddy but the raw numbers are out there and the raw numbers call bullshit. I just read all your posts and they pretty much add up to jack shit. Your acting like the typical liberal, loook at da pretty numbers pumped out by universities. You act like there's no possible way maybe statistics from them are flawed and are tampered with for certain views. Universities are wildly know for being extremely left wing.

Seriously dude? Can you not read?

The first link is from the US Dept of Commerce's Economics & Statistics Administration [not a university]
The second link is from The Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago [not a university]
The third link is from TD Bank (as in TD Ameritrade) [not a university]

I actually analyzed the raw numbers from the bls myself first, drew my own conclusions, and then found that my thoughts were confirmed by other analysis by chief or senior economists.

And they don't say all of the change in labor force participation rate is kids in college or aging baby boomers, but they say almost half can be attributed to it. Read the reports and educate yourself before making wild accusations like Rush would. They say the recession and lackluster recovery has brought attention to the LFPR, but the underlying trend has been moving that way for a while.

I'm actually strongly conservative, but I don't accept ignorance of economics and propagation of misleading rhetoric, from either side.

Maybe you should learn some basic economics, then come back. Being slanted as you are means you are useless in a discussion.

[smooth]

Just want to clarify that the college composition is not about "kids" but rather adults who are continuing education because they don't think the labor market is ready for them or adults coming back to school to augment their careers or shift skills.

The median age for junior colleges is 30's. There's a lot of r3v'ers that attend college so just ask around and they can confirm who they're seeing on campuses are not "kids" but predominantly people in their age bracket (I suspect a lot of active posters are in their early/mid twenties but I could be wrong on that) and older.

[mrsleeve]

yes lots of people going back to retrain for jobs that will be filled by the time they are ready to do them in many cases.

[rwh11385]

yes lots of people going back to retrain for jobs that will be filled by the time they are ready to do them in many cases.

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/...-jobs-by-2018/

[mrsleeve]

yeah we have been being told that for a while now that the boomers will be retiring soon. Well many were hit really hard with the shenanigans of 08. Many are now in a position where they are going to have to work till they are dead.

I know most in my Inlaws extended families along with them selves are going to be in that situation. Friends parents that have retired are going back to work where they can, even my mother cant retire until shes pushing 71 and shes got one of those "cushy great union teacher pensions"

Not to say that things wont get better on the job front, but just I think that writer is a bit on the optimistic side of things,


Edit: Full disclosure. most of you know this, but I have not seen much of a slow down other than 08, then things picked back up and I have been turning work down the last 3 years. There are jobs out there for anyone with a heart beat, you just have be willing to do what you have to do to make something of your self

[z31maniac]

http://www.economicpopulist.org/content/unemployment-83-january-2012-243000-jobs-really

[gwb72tii]

Seriously dude? Can you not read?

The first link is from the US Dept of Commerce's Economics & Statistics Administration [not a university]
The second link is from The Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago [not a university]
The third link is from TD Bank (as in TD Ameritrade) [not a university]

I actually analyzed the raw numbers from the bls myself first, drew my own conclusions, and then found that my thoughts were confirmed by other analysis by chief or senior economists.

And they don't say all of the change in labor force participation rate is kids in college or aging baby boomers, but they say almost half can be attributed to it. Read the reports and educate yourself before making wild accusations like Rush would. They say the recession and lackluster recovery has brought attention to the LFPR, but the underlying trend has been moving that way for a while.

I'm actually strongly conservative, but I don't accept ignorance of economics and propagation of misleading rhetoric, from either side.

PS. did you know 83.7% of useless statistics are made up?

Maybe you should learn some basic economics, then come back. Being slanted as you are means you are useless in a discussion.

so, per your independent analysis of the raw data, do we or do we not have over 5 million fewer jobs in the US? and wage depreciation?