Biden’s economy

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I look at labor force participation rate, currently 61.9% which remains at levels well below pre-pandemic levels. I know several people who can't find a job and living off of savings. This is never counted in the bls numbers.

Anyone who cannot find a job right now isn't looking. There hasn't been a better time to look for a job in the last 40 years.

+100 A lot of boomers have retired, I've seen tons of great upper management opportunities open up. Anyone who says there aren't any jobs isn't looking.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I look at labor force participation rate, currently 61.9% which remains at levels well below pre-pandemic levels. I know several people who can't find a job and living off of savings. This is never counted in the bls numbers.

Anyone who cannot find a job right now isn't looking. There hasn't been a better time to look for a job in the last 40 years.

It is also the best time to change careers into one in which you may not have the traditional qualifications for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I look at labor force participation rate, currently 61.9% which remains at levels well below pre-pandemic levels. I know several people who can't find a job and living off of savings. This is never counted in the bls numbers.

Nope. Got anything else?

The BLS participation rate does not account for the ever-growing numbers of people not conventionally employed. With the advent of the internet, more and more people have been making their living via Etsy, AirBNB, Uber, and other ways that the original BLS methodology never accounted for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I look at labor force participation rate, currently 61.9% which remains at levels well below pre-pandemic levels. I know several people who can't find a job and living off of savings. This is never counted in the bls numbers.

Nope. Got anything else?

You’re kinda ignoring a massive break in the trend under Trump.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I look at labor force participation rate, currently 61.9% which remains at levels well below pre-pandemic levels. I know several people who can't find a job and living off of savings. This is never counted in the bls numbers.

Nope. Got anything else?

You’re kinda ignoring a massive break in the trend under Trump.

Yes, both of them. But you’re ignoring the 20-year trend over multiple administrations. It’s demographics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I look at labor force participation rate, currently 61.9% which remains at levels well below pre-pandemic levels. I know several people who can't find a job and living off of savings. This is never counted in the bls numbers.

Nope. Got anything else?

You’re kinda ignoring a massive break in the trend under Trump.

Yes, both of them. But you’re ignoring the 20-year trend over multiple administrations. It’s demographics.

If you want to take out the demographic effects you need to look at the prime age labor participation rate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I look at labor force participation rate, currently 61.9% which remains at levels well below pre-pandemic levels. I know several people who can't find a job and living off of savings. This is never counted in the bls numbers.

Nope. Got anything else?

You’re kinda ignoring a massive break in the trend under Trump.

Yes, both of them. But you’re ignoring the 20-year trend over multiple administrations. It’s demographics.

If you want to take out the demographic effects you need to look at the prime age labor participation rate.

It peaked around 84% in 1997-2000 and then trended down for years with a low of 81% in 2014-15. Then up to 83% pre Covid, now we are at 82.0 and trending up. Basically if you want a job, able bodied, and not in prison or with a significant drug issue there have always been jobs available. Now how good those jobs are is a different story….

[Anonymous]

How is BLS getting this so wrong every month? Could it be the Trump appointee Heritage Foundation guy who in charge?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How is BLS getting this so wrong every month? Could it be the Trump appointee Heritage Foundation guy who in charge?

+1 how can they be so wrong yet leadership keeps their jobs? The constant revisions increasing jobs should be an embarrassment to those working there. There job is to give an accuracy figure, yes revision will happen and sometimes even large ones, but the revisions this last year show pure incompetence or maybe they are intentional because the headline gets more press then the constant upward revisions.

[Anonymous]

Pay a living wage, offer benefits, and allow workers to organize and those numbers will skyrocket. The current system is an anachronism.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Goes to show that a big chunk of this inflation is being artificially created by the private sector.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Goes to show that a big chunk of this inflation is being artificially created by the private sector.

+1
Corporations hate Democrats. Democrats want the economy to work for all, not the few.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Pay a living wage, offer benefits, and allow workers to organize and those numbers will skyrocket. The current system is an anachronism.

Offer all those things and you will find a ton of small to medium businesses will close. All those Mom & Pop stores, family owned businesses and small time restaurants, shops and local color will disappear. You'll be left with the ubiquitous chain stores, restaurants and outlets and every community in America will become virtually identical.

And as those small businesses close, you will also see that the number of available jobs will decrease. Family owned businesses will close and 50-100 people will lose their job and Amazon will add 30 people to the workforce in their warehouses or drivers. You'll find more and more people will be making a living doing Uber, DoorDash, Instacart, TaskRabbit...for no benefits and under living wages.

Those of you who advocate for all of those programs work for the government or big business or professional firms. You have no idea how the majority of small to medium businesses are holding on by their fingernails. Many of them were okay, until the pandemic hit. Thousands of businesses have already closed in the last two years and there are more on the brink. If you think that businesses that are operating within 5% of the break-even margin can tolerate those policies, you are really drinking the Progressive Kool-Aid, because any hope of an economic recovery post-pandemic will come crashing down if you try to implement those policies. The only progress that will be made is that the truly wealthy will get wealthier and you'll be feeding the billionaire club and increasing the wealth gap exponentially.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pay a living wage, offer benefits, and allow workers to organize and those numbers will skyrocket. The current system is an anachronism.

Offer all those things and you will find a ton of small to medium businesses will close. All those Mom & Pop stores, family owned businesses and small time restaurants, shops and local color will disappear. You'll be left with the ubiquitous chain stores, restaurants and outlets and every community in America will become virtually identical.

And as those small businesses close, you will also see that the number of available jobs will decrease. Family owned businesses will close and 50-100 people will lose their job and Amazon will add 30 people to the workforce in their warehouses or drivers. You'll find more and more people will be making a living doing Uber, DoorDash, Instacart, TaskRabbit...for no benefits and under living wages.

Those of you who advocate for all of those programs work for the government or big business or professional firms. You have no idea how the majority of small to medium businesses are holding on by their fingernails. Many of them were okay, until the pandemic hit. Thousands of businesses have already closed in the last two years and there are more on the brink. If you think that businesses that are operating within 5% of the break-even margin can tolerate those policies, you are really drinking the Progressive Kool-Aid, because any hope of an economic recovery post-pandemic will come crashing down if you try to implement those policies. The only progress that will be made is that the truly wealthy will get wealthier and you'll be feeding the billionaire club and increasing the wealth gap exponentially.

Benefits? That's another argument for universal healthcare. Why should things like that be tied to the employer?

Also, if a business's model is dependent on exploiting its workers for less than a living wage then frankly it's a bad business model. It wasn't always like that. In the '60s and '70s there were still a significant percentage of households that got by with only one breadwinner in the household - and yet could still afford the house and the car and the amenities of life. A living wage. That's steadily declined to the point where most families have both parents working and barely scraping by, more and more living paycheck to paycheck. And to add insult to injury this has happened even as the average American worker has become more and more productive and profitable to their employers. Many American workers are being exploited and that has to change.