Labor Participation At 36 Year Low!! GoObama!!!

Political discussions
Post Reply
User avatar
travelinman67
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 9884
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 9:51 pm
I am a fan of: Portland State Vikings
A.K.A.: Modern Man
Location: Where the 1st Amendment still exists: CS.com

Labor Participation At 36 Year Low!! GoObama!!!

Post by travelinman67 »

http://m.cnsnews.com/news/article/ali-m ... year-low-0

11 million have left workforce since Obama took office!
"That is how government works - we tell you what you can do today."
- EPA Kommissar Gina McCarthy
User avatar
CitadelGrad
Level4
Level4
Posts: 5210
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 5:19 pm
I am a fan of: Jack Kerouac
A.K.A.: El Cid
Location: St. Louis

Re: Labor Participation At 36 Year Low!! GoObama!!!

Post by CitadelGrad »

CNBC has a more realistic view of the BLS numbers.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/102243878
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

- Thomas Jefferson, in letter to William S. Smith, 1787

Image
User avatar
dbackjon
Moderator Team
Moderator Team
Posts: 45627
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 9:20 am
I am a fan of: Northern Arizona
A.K.A.: He/Him
Location: Scottsdale

Re: Labor Participation At 36 Year Low!! GoObama!!!

Post by dbackjon »

This canard again?


Nearly a quarter of Americans were born between 1946 and 1964, the typical definition of the baby boom generation. That’s more than 75 million people. In their heyday, the boomers were an unprecedented economic force, pushing up rates of homeownership, consumer spending and, most important of all, employment. It’s no coincidence that the U.S. labor force participation rate — the share of the adult population that has a job or is trying to find one — hit a record high in the late 1990s, when the boomers were at the peak of their working lives.

It’s been downhill ever since. The participation rate hit a 36-year low last month, and while there are multiple reasons for the decline, the aging of the baby boom generation is a dominant factor. In 2003, 82 percent of boomers were part of the labor force; a decade later, that number has declined to 66 percent, and it will only continue to fall.


The Baby Boom generation began hitting retirement age in 2009. Lead elements hit 65 in 2011.

Duh.
:thumb:
CAA Flagship
4th&29
4th&29
Posts: 38529
Joined: Mon Aug 24, 2009 5:01 pm
I am a fan of: Old Dominion
A.K.A.: He/His/Him/Himself
Location: Pizza Hell

Re: Labor Participation At 36 Year Low!! GoObama!!!

Post by CAA Flagship »

dbackjon wrote:This canard again?


Nearly a quarter of Americans were born between 1946 and 1964, the typical definition of the baby boom generation. That’s more than 75 million people. In their heyday, the boomers were an unprecedented economic force, pushing up rates of homeownership, consumer spending and, most important of all, employment. It’s no coincidence that the U.S. labor force participation rate — the share of the adult population that has a job or is trying to find one — hit a record high in the late 1990s, when the boomers were at the peak of their working lives.

It’s been downhill ever since. The participation rate hit a 36-year low last month, and while there are multiple reasons for the decline, the aging of the baby boom generation is a dominant factor. In 2003, 82 percent of boomers were part of the labor force; a decade later, that number has declined to 66 percent, and it will only continue to fall.


The Baby Boom generation began hitting retirement age in 2009. Lead elements hit 65 in 2011.

Duh.
Soooooo, you agree that Obama sucks?







:kisswink:
User avatar
DSUrocks07
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 5339
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 7:32 pm
I am a fan of: Delaware State
A.K.A.: phillywild305
Location: The 9th Circle of Hellaware

Re: Labor Participation At 36 Year Low!! GoObama!!!

Post by DSUrocks07 »

CAA Flagship wrote:
dbackjon wrote:This canard again?


Nearly a quarter of Americans were born between 1946 and 1964, the typical definition of the baby boom generation. That’s more than 75 million people. In their heyday, the boomers were an unprecedented economic force, pushing up rates of homeownership, consumer spending and, most important of all, employment. It’s no coincidence that the U.S. labor force participation rate — the share of the adult population that has a job or is trying to find one — hit a record high in the late 1990s, when the boomers were at the peak of their working lives.

It’s been downhill ever since. The participation rate hit a 36-year low last month, and while there are multiple reasons for the decline, the aging of the baby boom generation is a dominant factor. In 2003, 82 percent of boomers were part of the labor force; a decade later, that number has declined to 66 percent, and it will only continue to fall.


The Baby Boom generation began hitting retirement age in 2009. Lead elements hit 65 in 2011.

Duh.
Soooooo, you agree that Obama sucks?







:kisswink:
Breaking News:

"Obama confirmed to be sole source of Baby Boomers aging and retiring"

Thanks Obama.
MEAC, last one out turn off the lights.

@phillywild305 FB
User avatar
CitadelGrad
Level4
Level4
Posts: 5210
Joined: Sun Jul 15, 2007 5:19 pm
I am a fan of: Jack Kerouac
A.K.A.: El Cid
Location: St. Louis

Re: Labor Participation At 36 Year Low!! GoObama!!!

Post by CitadelGrad »

dbackjon wrote:This canard again?


Nearly a quarter of Americans were born between 1946 and 1964, the typical definition of the baby boom generation. That’s more than 75 million people. In their heyday, the boomers were an unprecedented economic force, pushing up rates of homeownership, consumer spending and, most important of all, employment. It’s no coincidence that the U.S. labor force participation rate — the share of the adult population that has a job or is trying to find one — hit a record high in the late 1990s, when the boomers were at the peak of their working lives.

It’s been downhill ever since. The participation rate hit a 36-year low last month, and while there are multiple reasons for the decline, the aging of the baby boom generation is a dominant factor. In 2003, 82 percent of boomers were part of the labor force; a decade later, that number has declined to 66 percent, and it will only continue to fall.


The Baby Boom generation began hitting retirement age in 2009. Lead elements hit 65 in 2011.

Duh.
This has been explained to you before but apparently you didn't understand.

The only segment of the labor force that is increasing its participation is the 54+ segment. That means that they aren't retiring. Every other segment of labor force participation is declining.
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

- Thomas Jefferson, in letter to William S. Smith, 1787

Image
User avatar
DSUrocks07
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 5339
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 7:32 pm
I am a fan of: Delaware State
A.K.A.: phillywild305
Location: The 9th Circle of Hellaware

Re: Labor Participation At 36 Year Low!! GoObama!!!

Post by DSUrocks07 »

CitadelGrad wrote:
dbackjon wrote:This canard again?


Nearly a quarter of Americans were born between 1946 and 1964, the typical definition of the baby boom generation. That’s more than 75 million people. In their heyday, the boomers were an unprecedented economic force, pushing up rates of homeownership, consumer spending and, most important of all, employment. It’s no coincidence that the U.S. labor force participation rate — the share of the adult population that has a job or is trying to find one — hit a record high in the late 1990s, when the boomers were at the peak of their working lives.

It’s been downhill ever since. The participation rate hit a 36-year low last month, and while there are multiple reasons for the decline, the aging of the baby boom generation is a dominant factor. In 2003, 82 percent of boomers were part of the labor force; a decade later, that number has declined to 66 percent, and it will only continue to fall.


The Baby Boom generation began hitting retirement age in 2009. Lead elements hit 65 in 2011.

Duh.
This has been explained to you before but apparently you didn't understand.

The only segment of the labor force that is increasing its participation is the 54+ segment. That means that they aren't retiring. Every other segment of labor force participation is declining.
Sounds like we need those death panels every was talking about. Problem solved.
MEAC, last one out turn off the lights.

@phillywild305 FB
User avatar
DSUrocks07
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 5339
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 7:32 pm
I am a fan of: Delaware State
A.K.A.: phillywild305
Location: The 9th Circle of Hellaware

Re: Labor Participation At 36 Year Low!! GoObama!!!

Post by DSUrocks07 »

Image
MEAC, last one out turn off the lights.

@phillywild305 FB
kalm
Supporter
Supporter
Posts: 69143
Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 3:36 pm
I am a fan of: Eastern
A.K.A.: Humus The Proud
Location: Northern Palouse

Re: Labor Participation At 36 Year Low!! GoObama!!!

Post by kalm »

DSU…ripping some tits... :lol:
Image
Image
Image
Post Reply