Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How Bad is Unemployment in your County?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • RollingWave
    replied
    Taiwan is in the lower 4s at the moment and trending downwards, though some company are adopting "unpaid vacation" that doesn't technically count as unemployement, though even with those folks added it shouldn't change the number that much.

    Still, there's a fair deal of imbalanced in the unemployment system, the main problem being that we're sort of the anti-Germany, having largely gutted our trade school in the last decade, we end up with skilled workers seeing massive shortage (despite relatively higher pay) while a considerable excessive supply / under employment for the Service sector.

    Leave a comment:


  • dalem
    replied
    Awwww. :(

    -dale

    Leave a comment:


  • astralis
    replied
    alrighty then.

    Leave a comment:


  • dalem
    replied
    You know me so well. :)

    -dale

    Leave a comment:


  • zraver
    replied
    Originally posted by kikbus
    USA Capitalist not only exploit the US worker, they are exploit the workers in China,too.
    Because these shameless USA capitalist use the advantage of no Worker union in CCP China,
    these rubblish USA caiitalists that can abused and exploit Chinese worker as they want.
    And many jobs of manufacture loss from America . Many american worker loss their jobs.
    Then the pigheads of USA capitials lie to American workers, claim Chinese wokrers robbed their jobs. Let they hate Chinese.

    FVck these liar.
    I totally agree, lets just stop trading with China, we will have to provide the stuff our selves (jobs) and Chinese wont be exploited by Americans. Ever wonder who controls labor and environmental laws in China, it isn't the US its your own government.

    Leave a comment:


  • astralis
    replied
    kikbus,

    #1: go to the intro thread and introduce yourself.

    http://www.worldaffairsboard.com/wab...-new-post.html

    #2: more of these type of posts and you won't need to introduce yourself.

    Leave a comment:


  • dalem
    replied
    Originally posted by kikbus
    Refer racism? Ha,ha,ha, The white guys forgot their dirty jobs how they masscre and slaved the black people and American Indians in past hundreds years.

    The European think they can continue rule the Earth for hundreds of years.
    To know bath color? Ha aH! You ride the primrose conch daddy.

    And to get it straight, us Yanks enslaved blacks and fought the Indians. We never enslaved the Indians; although what we did do was kind of worse in a way. What the Spaniards did in South America was a little different.

    -dale

    Leave a comment:


  • dalem
    replied
    I think perhaps we should consider a no-China policy. That's like a billion or so shamelessly Chinese humans off the books right there, and no one would care.

    -dale

    Leave a comment:


  • DOR
    replied
    Seems like as good as any place to put this---


    The Fed recently added US labor force participation rate data by age group to their FRED website, here (18 Series from the Current Population Survey Added to FRED | St. Louis Fed Economic Research ).

    Monthly data back to 1948 for participation by 20-24, 25-54 and 55+ age groups.

    First, the obvious. Participation rates among younger (63.3% active in 1950-59) and middle aged (67.4%) workers were lower in the 1950s than at any other time, probably due to fewer women and minorities being counted. Conversely, older workers (42.1%) hit their peak in that decade, probably because of the financial difficulty of retiring. There was also a shortage of healthy males born in 1915-27, because of WWII.

    Next, the oddities. Older workers’ participation rate fell sharply in 1984-97, to an average of 30.1%. These are workers born in 1929-42 or so, and one explanation might be rising competition with baby boomers entering middle- and upper-management positions. They were also the beneficiaries of the post-war boom and pensions, and so better able to retire. Certainly their homes rose in value while they were working!

    Curiously, after the early 1990s, participation by the over 55s rose again, to more than 40% in recent years.

    Today, the participation rate for younger workers (aged 20-24) is just under 70%, the same as in 1972 but down from mid-1980s peaks of more than 78%. For middle-aged workers, 81.5% today is equal to the mid-1980s rate, and down only gently from 84% in 1997-2000.

    What conclusions can we draw? First, people are working longer than at any time since Eisenhower was president. That adds to the labor force (useful), but also increases the unemployment denominator, which makes it appear we have fewer jobs. Second, either younger people are having a harder time getting jobs, or they are staying in / returning to school in larger numbers. The first suggests a decline from expected life-long earnings, while the latter would bode well for increased earnings.

    Finally, the pace of economic growth doesn’t seem to play a large role over the past six decades. When growth slowed from an average 4.3% p.a. in 1950-69 to 2.5% p.a. in 1970-82, participation followed demographic lines: more younger and middle aged workers, and fewer over 55. But, as the economy picked up again in the 1990s, the reverse occurred: slightly fewer younger people working and a sharp upswing in gray hairs. That trend has continued through the last five years.

    Leave a comment:


  • highsea
    replied
    Originally posted by JAD_333 View Post
    HS: You misunderstood. Buying stuff when times are good is routine generation to generation. That's not going to change short of a miracle. Tastes & choices do, however, change. Is that what you meant?
    No, it's not what I meant.

    What I am saying is that demographically and economically, America can't return to the consumerism of the past. At least not in a timeframe I would call "the forseeable future".

    It just can't happen. There aren't 70 million Gen-Xer's following up the boomers.

    They're saddled with a mountain of debt left over from my generation. They will have to shoulder a higher tax burden to pay for the boomers' SSI/Medicare. 3-1 today, 2-1 in another 20 years or so. (workers to retirees)

    Oh, they will still buy their I-pods. But they won't lease a new car every 2 years. Hell, the guy building the Volt batteries won't be able to buy the car at his $14/hour wage.

    They won't buy first houses that cost more than their parent's houses. Shit I've bought cars that cost more than the house my parent's owned when I graduated high school.

    That American consumerism was largely funded by a middle class manufacturing base. When that went away, it was funded by credit cards. Then second mortgages. That's all gone now.

    The boomers can't continue to be the free-spenders, they have to rebuild their nest-eggs. There aren't enough Gen-X'ers and Millenials to make up for the retiring boomers, and they won't have the money anyway.

    That's what I meant.

    Leave a comment:


  • Blue
    replied
    Purple.....well on our way to black though.

    Leave a comment:


  • JAD_333
    replied
    Originally posted by zraver View Post
    Honestly my biggest fear is that if inflation hits, the banks will get Congress to pass laws letting them modify my mortgage with its low interest to save themselves.
    Ain't gonna happen.

    History with minors in Poli Sci and Honors.
    Nice. We need more liberal arts students. I majored in Poli Sci, minored in Philosophy.

    Leave a comment:


  • JAD_333
    replied
    Originally posted by highsea View Post
    I don't think we'll return to the old habits. I'll tell you why.
    HS: You misunderstood. Buying stuff when times are good is routine generation to generation. That's not going to change short of a miracle. Tastes & choices do, however, change. Is that what you meant?

    We will have 35 million boomers retiring in the next decade, and another 35 million the decade after. These are the highly productive workers that fueled the consumerism of the 70's and 80's. But they've had their life savings taken, or at least a very large piece of it. They have to try to replace as much of this as they can, which means less spending on consumer crap between now and retirement. And it was largely manufacturing jobs that paid for that consumerism- those jobs are gone, not to return.
    That is all true. Still, as folks age their consumerism cools both in good times and bad. They tend to invest more as time moves along---house, stocks, etc.

    The US savings rate is something like 6.1% right now. Sure it will go down, but probably never to the way-too-low levels of the past. The upcoming generation isn't like us boomers, they have a little more sense when it comes to saving and planning for their futures, and this economy scares the hell out of them. So college enrollments are up, no jobs for these kids anyway. But I don't think they will ever be the profligate spenders that my generation was.
    Never say never. In 1960, mortgage interest rates were around 4% and had been down around 3.5% for a long time. They went to 5 and then 6% around 1962 and people gasped. As if that was terrible, look at the early 1980s when they went to 12-15%, and people were longing for them to go down to 8%. I told friends they would see 4-5% again, and those who were too young to have been a through a couple of economic cycles said I was crazy.
    Well, it happened.

    If the past is any indication, when the upcoming generation moves into its 20s and comes on good economic times, they will spend on stuff like every generation before them. People do not change, only their choices do.

    Storage lockers are booming because people are losing their homes in record numbers, not buying lots of crap.
    Before the economy went south, storage locker construction was booming. It wasn't because people were losing their houses, but because people were accumulating too many possessions to store in their houses, and they couldn't part with them. Now, of course, storage lockers also serve those who have lost their homes.


    I just negotiated a 2-1/2 year lease on a 320K house, my rent is 1K a month. The house was just sitting empty, no interested buyers out there. So I can rent it for less than 1/2 the mortgage payment, and the owner was willing to lock that in for an extended period, which doesn't show that they have much confidence in housing recovering any time soon.
    Good deal. We rented one of our houses at $50 over the mortgage pmt, but it's not a big house and in N. Virginia the rental market is fairly strong because a lot of people who would normally buy can't get financing.



    Traditionally construction has led us in and led us out of our recessions. That's not happening this time around, and construction won't return until house prices come back, which won't happen until unemployment goes back down.
    IMO, housing prices will make somewhat of a comeback, but not to pre-bust levels (barring high inflation). There is no scarcity of new and existing homes now to drive up prices to former levels later, and equally important there is no longer any easy money available to entice amateur speculators to buy & flip. True; an unemployment drop from 9.5% to, say 6-5% nationwide, will stimulate housing sales because of pent-up demand, but existing homes will do better than new. Three houses in my neighborhood sold at "below replacement" cost. What builder wants to build in a market that offers him a negative margin? We will, however, see new construction in lower cost housing--townhouses, etc. New homes in the 3,000 sq/ft and up will go begging
    a long time. I agree with you that we need to get the construction industry working. It could be accomplished if government would get more serious about infrastructure rehab, but it seems to me efforts along those lines have been spotty and directed too much toward high profile projects.


    What's happening today is an adjustment to a new reality. The King is Dead. Long live the King.

    And the new King's name isn't consumerism.
    I'm afraid there in no new reality; there is only a wheel of reality, and it happens to be where it is now, and it will be back here again one day after a period of sweet prosperity. The king lives in quiet recuperation. He will be back.

    Leave a comment:


  • zraver
    replied
    Originally posted by highsea View Post
    So college enrollments are up, no jobs for these kids anyway. But I don't think they will ever be the profligate spenders that my generation was.
    I made a mid course correction and am now taking Spanish as my foreign language. I want to teach at risk high school kids social studies (history, civis, etc) so Spanish along with building vita is important. However, I fully expect that I may not be able to land such a job except in severely depressed areas like the Mississippi Delta or in Texas with its growing Hispanic population. This year 1 in 4 head start kids is Hispanic as millions of catholic Hispanic women are now entering prime child bearing years.

    Plan 2 is graduate school and pursuit of a masters then if the job market has not recovered a Ph.D. I am sure I am not the only one with that plan and we could be in for a massive influx of Ph.D's over the next several years as people like me use school to avoid the recession.

    Leave a comment:


  • zraver
    replied
    Originally posted by JAD_333 View Post
    Z:

    I'm glad for you guys. It would be good if your stability and growth spread wide to the east and west, although I doubt it will.
    Well if East and West of Texas would adopt fiscally conservative positions I am sure it would.

    The situation in my area, 70 miles west of DC, is better than most, but less than yours. Few new homes are being built, which affects me personally, but there is still a good deal of remodeling work to be had in that military officers and gov't civilians hereabouts are going along as if the economy is just dandy.
    You don't see as many McMansions being built anymore, but actual home (vs investment) providers, rental home builders and manufactured homes are staying busy enough to survive. Had a few contract or go under but nothing major.

    My feeling about the whole economic situation is somewhat philosophical, bad weather follows good, and all that kind of thing. I judge all the fingernail chewing to be a sign that the majority of adults believe a good economy is a birthright. I think they're just worn out by years of consumerism and have lost their appetite for more stuff (no wonder storage locker facilities are booming). But consumerism is organic, not static. When older consumers lose the novelty of their accumulated stuff, as they always do, there will be newer ones to step into their place looking for happiness in stuff... The longer the economic downturn, the greater the resurgence to follow. You can see it today in the stock market, which always discounts the future. It is clearly overvalued, but not to investors who believe the signs of economic resurgence are just a year away.
    I think high interest rates are the future, unless we can get a hold of our entitlements and debt fueled spending we have to inflate out of the debt sink. while high inflation is not all bad for homeowners, if would wreck everything and everyone else. bank balance sheets would collapse, credit would dry up and capitol would flee or risk insolvency. Honestly my biggest fear is that if inflation hits, the banks will get Congress to pass laws letting them modify my mortgage with its low interest to save themselves.

    What are you studying at Conway?
    History with minors in Poli Sci and Honors.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X