The 86 million invisible unemployed

Yep we swapped over to a debtor nation with a consumer spending driven economy under Reagan and it has been slowly downhill for the middle class ever since.
Be satisfied with retail sales jobs or else starve.

Except that it has not been downhill for the middle class. Also, the debtor nation phase began during the oil crisis of 73/74. It continues in large part because we import so much oil when we could be producing our own energy.
 
Impose tariffs, cancel Nafta/Gatt and start protecting American workers for starters. The only way to rebuild the middle class and have a strong economy is to have more money at the bottom, we've learned over the past 30 yrs that conservative trickle-down is a failure. It actually worked just the opposite, which was the Republicon plan all along.

You are an economic illiterate. Protectionism would dramatically increase the cost of goods for millions of middle and working class families, in addition to sparking a trade war.
 
Like I said, if you want to discredit the Treasury, have at it. To me, it's comical to talk about a stock price when the market is still recovering, and discount the ripple effect that GM failing would have had on these taxpayers you seem so concerned about. The bailout was basically chump change (and you ridiculed a recent similar amount that was presented in a separate argument as "paltry", so no double-standards for you today).

As for apologizing for Obama...have I even mentioned Obama on the thread?

Must apologize for Obama. TARP did what it was intended to do. But it is absurd to proclaim it is going to be a profitable endeavor for taxpayers. You seem so very keen to avoid answering where the TARP 'repayments' went. Instead you continue chanting 'they told me it was so and I am going to believe them, I will not discuss anything unless they give me permission'.

I ridiculed a trillion dollar amount as 'paltry'??? Do link us up to that.

I understand it is 'comical' to you to talk about the stock price. The point was that they are struggling, yet Obama wants to champion their 'success'. Even you jumped on that bandwagon to highlight their 'better than expected quarterly profit'. Thus, it is relevant to discuss what is actually occurring. You keep wanting to shift to the 'well it could have been worse' line. I know it could have been worse than it is. Which is why I stated it was a necessary evil. That said, my point is that it hasn't been as good as the Obama admin and its lemmings (like you) are proclaiming.
 
You are an economic illiterate. Protectionism would dramatically increase the cost of goods for millions of middle and working class families, in addition to sparking a trade war.

The cost of goods is increasing anyway, it is a failure for the poor and middle class under the current system of things and the solutions seem just as bad.
 
The cost of goods is increasing anyway, it is a failure for the poor and middle class under the current system of things and the solutions seem just as bad.

Costs of goods increases in the past two decades are nothing compared to what would happen if we got into a tariff war and tried to be protectionists.
 
The cost of goods is increasing anyway, it is a failure for the poor and middle class under the current system of things and the solutions seem just as bad.

So how would increasing the cost even more help the poor and middle class?

I would argue that the solution is less, not more, government. When has the government ever made able to truly reduce the cost of anything?
 
So how would increasing the cost even more help the poor and middle class?

I would argue that the solution is less, not more, government. When has the government ever made able to truly reduce the cost of anything?

They haven't. When they try to 'control' pricing (typically by setting artificial caps) the prices tend to skyrocket as supply diminishes while demand increases.
 
Has anybody figured out where they came up with this 86 Million figure? I understand the reality, but exaggeration isn't going to help the situation.
 
Except that it has not been downhill for the middle class. Also, the debtor nation phase began during the oil crisis of 73/74. It continues in large part because we import so much oil when we could be producing our own energy.

It has been downhill for wages for the middle class since 2000 once inflation is figured in.
 
Crashk and/or Rana:

Name one mainstream economist who believes protectionism is a good thing.

Name more than a handful of mainstream economists who predicted the severity and length of this recession before it even started.
The signs were all there and it was inevitable.
 
The 86 million invisible unemployed

EW YORK (CNNMoney) -- There are far more jobless people in the United States than you might think.

While it's true that the unemployment rate is falling, that doesn't include the millions of nonworking adults who aren't even looking for a job anymore. And hiring isn't strong enough to keep up with population growth.

As a result, the labor force is now at its smallest size since the 1980s when compared to the broader working age population.

http://money.cnn.com/2012/05/03/news/economy/unemployment-rate/index.htm?hpt=hp_t2

forward!

please note that 38% of the 86m are age 65+ - that includes me and my wife and neither of us are looking for work because we are retired

while i have no doubt that there are many shadow unemployed, i wonder how many are being employed off the books
 
Last edited:
give a company 50 billion dollars and i would hope they turn a "profit" in the years immediately following such a large sum.
 
Here's the chart:

chart-invisible-unemployed.top.gif


Last year, 86 million Americans were not counted in the labor force because they didn't keep up a regular job search. Most of them were either under age 25 or over age 65.

Here is what the story says about it:

Last year there were 86 million people who didn't have a job and weren't consistently looking for one, according to Labor Department data.

Older people, ages 65 and over, account for more than a third. Young people between 16 and 24 make up another fifth. More than half don't have a college degree and more than two thirds are white.

Many of the teens and 20-somethings may be enrolled in either high school or college full-time. And many of the over 65 crowd are probably retired.

But what about the other 36 million folks who fall in between?

The truth is, the Labor Department simply doesn't know why they're not in the labor force. Many may be staying home with children or other relatives. Some may have gone back to school or retraining programs. Others could be disabled and unable to work, and some may have retired early.

"Even in the best of times, there are millions of people who don't want to work for a variety for reasons," Hall said.

But he suspects the number of "disengaged" Americans, like Everett, is higher than usual as a direct result of the recession.

More at the link in the OP..
 
So, they are using the data reported by the Department of Labor. Do Dung and Onceler both distrust the Department of Labor to report accurate figures?

Personally, it seems more logical for them to report a much lower number and exaggerate in the opposite direction than these two have implicated in this thread.
 
Crashk and/or Rana:

Name one mainstream economist who believes protectionism is a good thing.

I can't answer, I only read a few economist, i just read a lot here, but from what I have surmised from reading conservatives all these years is that when it comes to our own, relying on others is not a good thing, but when it comes to the economy it is alright to rely on other countries and hope we all remain friendly so things don't get tilted.

I think we need to bring manufacturing back to the USA because it is a very common sense thing to do and the only way that will work is if we start equalizing things, making costs fair. Tariffs. We are at eonomic war in that we are being weakened as a nation to get cheap stuff.
 
I can't answer, I only read a few economist, i just read a lot here, but from what I have surmised from reading conservatives all these years is that when it comes to our own, relying on others is not a good thing, but when it comes to the economy it is alright to rely on other countries and hope we all remain friendly so things don't get tilted.

I think we need to bring manufacturing back to the USA because it is a very common sense thing to do and the only way that will work is if we start equalizing things, making costs fair. Tariffs. We are at eonomic war in that we are being weakened as a nation to get cheap stuff.

The problem with that idea is they too set "equalizing" Tariffs, which makes our stuff uncompetitive in their markets. It becomes a battle, one which history shows us the consumer (you and I) always ends up losing.
 
Has anybody figured out where they came up with this 86 Million figure? I understand the reality, but exaggeration isn't going to help the situation.

i rather wonder that myself since i am lumped in with the 65+ age group looking for work, but my wife and i are not looking
 
Back
Top