PDA

View Full Version : This Is Why We Are Angry




DamianTV
03-28-2016, 07:10 AM
http://www.businessinsider.com/harry-dent-civil-unrest-coming-to-america-2016-3


...

The ability to live as you want, to retire longer term, and to have power in society comes more from wealth — and that is way more skewed toward the upper class. And that's where the middle class in America has lost the most ground.

Look at this chart from a recent study by Credit Suisse of the share of wealth held by the middle class. Look at how we compare to the rest of the top countries.

http://static5.businessinsider.com/image/56f52d1452bcd05c658b8a2f-800-603/screen-shot-2016-03-25-at-8.18.56-am.png

...

Full article on link.

---

Edit: And... THIS

Americans In Their Prime Working Years Not Working
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/23-percent-of-americans-in-their-prime-working-years-are-unemployed/americans-in-their-prime-working-years-not-working

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Americans-In-Their-Prime-Working-Years-Not-Working.jpg

otherone
03-28-2016, 07:27 AM
CLIMATE CHANGE!
ABORTION!
MEXICANS!
ISIS!
GAY MARRIAGE!
MARCH MADNESS!
ZIKA VIRUS!
GENDER WAGE DISPARITY!
https://sp.yimg.com/xj/th?id=OIP.Me2ff3a6b2316c24957561f1a99bbb286H0&pid=15.1&P=0&w=300&h=300

Zippyjuan
03-28-2016, 01:09 PM
http://www.businessinsider.com/harry-dent-civil-unrest-coming-to-america-2016-3



Full article on link.

---

Edit: And... THIS

Americans In Their Prime Working Years Not Working
http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/23-percent-of-americans-in-their-prime-working-years-are-unemployed/americans-in-their-prime-working-years-not-working

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/Americans-In-Their-Prime-Working-Years-Not-Working.jpg

Labor Force Participation Rate for 25- 54 years is currently 81.2%. https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/LNU01300060

Of course if we had fewer people in that group in school, it could be higher. Ditto if those stay at home parents got off their butts and got a job along with those eligible to enjoy early retirement. There will be those who simply don't want to (or are unable to) work too. Can't do anything about them.

http://macroblog.typepad.com/macroblog/2014/04/reasons-for-the-decline-in-prime-age-labor-force-participation-.html


We look at the various reasons people cite for not participating in the labor force from the monthly Current Population Survey. These reasons give us some insight into the impact of changes in employment conditions since 2007 on labor force participation. The data on those not in the official labor force can be broken into two broad categories: those who say they don't currently want a job and those who say they do want a job but don't satisfy the active search criteria for being in the official labor force. Of the prime-age population not in the labor force, most say they don't currently want a job. At the end of 2007, about 15 percent of 25- to 54-year-olds said they didn't want a job, and slightly fewer than 2 percent said they did want a job. By the end of 2013, the don't-want-a-job share had reached nearly 17 percent, and the want-a-job share had risen to slightly above 2 percent (see chart 2).

As for the "income distribution" chart- we have a small amount of people who have extremely large sums of money. Maybe we need more socialist programs like the other countries above us to re-distribute some of that down to the rest of us. Is that the claim?

https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2015/05/OECD-wealth.png&w=1484

https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2015/05/OECD-wealth2.png&w=1484

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/05/21/the-top-10-of-americans-own-76-of-the-stuff-and-its-dragging-our-economy-down/

heavenlyboy34
03-28-2016, 01:18 PM
Woods and Murphy did a recent Contra Krugman that touches on this:
http://contrakrugman.com/ep-28-income-mobility-really-does-exist-paul-krugman/

DamianTV
03-29-2016, 01:56 AM
Labor Force Participation Rate for 25- 54 years is currently 81.2%. https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/LNU01300060

Of course if we had fewer people in that group in school, it could be higher. Ditto if those stay at home parents got off their butts and got a job along with those eligible to enjoy early retirement. There will be those who simply don't want to (or are unable to) work too. Can't do anything about them.

http://macroblog.typepad.com/macroblog/2014/04/reasons-for-the-decline-in-prime-age-labor-force-participation-.html



As for the "income distribution" chart- we have a small amount of people who have extremely large sums of money. Maybe we need more socialist programs like the other countries above us to re-distribute some of that down to the rest of us. Is that the claim?

https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2015/05/OECD-wealth.png&w=1484

https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://img.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2015/05/OECD-wealth2.png&w=1484

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/05/21/the-top-10-of-americans-own-76-of-the-stuff-and-its-dragging-our-economy-down/

Tell me, does this look like an Upward Trend, or a Downward Trend?

http://cepr.net/images/stories/bytes/jobs-2015-02-ge.png

Zippyjuan
03-29-2016, 01:02 PM
Yes, it is a downward trend- a small downward trend. Since 2007- men down from 90% to 88%. Women- 75% to 74%. Not a big change. And note trend started long before recession. Why? More students. More single parents. People CHOOSING not to work.

http://a1.files.psmag.com/image/upload/c_fit,cs_srgb,dpr_1.0,q_80,w_620/MTI3NTgyNDEzNjk3MDY3NjUx.jpg

https://www.census.gov/hhes/socdemo/education/data/cps/historical/fig4.jpg

Not in the labor force but DO want a job now (noting that this is total numbers and not a percent of the population which has risen):

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-KmmF3ulSvns/VdXRyiLXwkI/AAAAAAAAC-8/mnwF2vSoTNA/s640/blogger-image--1797027387.jpg
http://bonddad.blogspot.com/2015_08_16_archive.html

acptulsa
03-29-2016, 01:07 PM
Yes, it is a downward trend- a small downward trend. Since 2007- men down from 90% to 88%. Women- 75% to 74%. Not a big change. And note trend started long before recession. Why? More students. More single parents. People CHOOSING not to work.

That's cute.

So, there are fewer jobs because more people are CHOOSING not to work. Couldn't possibly be that more people are CHOOSING to do things other than work because there are fewer jobs.

And, of course, you have a study to back up your assertion that the number of jobs is determined by the number of people who CHOOSE to work, and that the number of jobs never falls below the number of people who CHOOSE to apply for them. So, let's see that study!

Zippyjuan
03-29-2016, 01:11 PM
Fewer jobs? Actually there are more jobs. The number of jobs is determined by surveying employers- not by surveying those in or not in the labor force. In 2007 there were about 135 million jobs. By 2010 it dipped below 130 million. Today there are 143 million- a gain of 13 million since the worst point in the recession.

http://data.bls.gov/generated_files/graphics/CES0000000001_275654_1459278689219.gif

Longer term chart:

http://www.washburn.edu/sobu/apm/page2/files/02-total-nonfarm-payrolls.png

acptulsa
03-29-2016, 01:29 PM
Fewer jobs? Actually there are more jobs. The number of jobs is determined by surveying employers- not by surveying those in or not in the labor force.

Ducking the question by pointing out that the number of minimum wage burger-flipping positions has risen--not as much as the population is up, but up a little anyway.

The question was, how do you prove that those people CHOOSE not to work? Can you answer it?

Zippyjuan
03-29-2016, 01:32 PM
My third chart shows those who are not in the labor force but say they still want a job. These are the ones who did not choose to leave the labor market.

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-KmmF3ulSvns/VdXRyiLXwkI/AAAAAAAAC-8/mnwF2vSoTNA/s640/blogger-image--1797027387.jpg

silverhandorder
03-29-2016, 01:40 PM
Inequality is a good thing. There should be more of it. One way I am going to know that we are in socialist hell is when we get closer to European standards on wealth inequality.

acptulsa
03-29-2016, 01:46 PM
My third chart shows those who are not in the labor force but say they still want a job. These are the ones who did not choose to leave the labor market.

https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-KmmF3ulSvns/VdXRyiLXwkI/AAAAAAAAC-8/mnwF2vSoTNA/s640/blogger-image--1797027387.jpg

Oh, well. A Google chart, based on God-knows-what, which excludes 18-24 year olds and 55-actual retirement age folks, which still confirms that millions of those out of the labor force aren't out by choice.

Well. That proves... Um... That proves what, exactly?

Zippyjuan
03-29-2016, 01:49 PM
That there hasn't been a massive "involuntary mass exodus" from the labor market. About two percent of those not in the labor force are in that category.

acptulsa
03-29-2016, 02:04 PM
That there hasn't been a massive "involuntary mass exodus" from the labor market. About two percent of those not in the labor force are in that category.

I believe what you are trying to say is, only two percent of the unemployed are between 25 and 54, respond to surveys, and want work they can't get. Give or take an unspecified margin of error.

Those numbers are certainly cooked to a turn.

Voluntarist
03-29-2016, 04:00 PM
xxxxx