unemployment under obama

[Tictac]

FUN FACT: More net jobs have been created under Obama than both Bushes combined

Bush On Jobs: The Worst Track Record On Record

Bush Jobs Record Still Worst Since President Hoover

Unemployment Down In Every State For First Time In 30 Years Under President Obama
Thank You President Obama!

With no help from any Republicans blocking every single jobs bill.

Has anybody else noticed that it's Republicans with the sh!tty job creation numbers? Republicans give you depressions and recessions, and it takes a Democrat to clean up the mess and get the country moving again!

Now these right wingers running for president want to embrace these same failed GOP economic policies going back to yesterday's depressions, recessions, and deficits that created this mess.

______

Polly wanna cracker?

Another proglib parrot drooling the line.

 

[Mike32ct]

Has anybody else noticed that it's Republicans with the sh!tty job creation numbers? Republicans give you depressions and recessions, and it takes a Democrat to clean up the mess and get the country moving again!

Now these right wingers running for president want to embrace these same failed GOP economic policies going back to yesterday's depressions, recessions, and deficits that created this mess.

We still currently have deficits. Does Hillary have a plan to balance the budget?

 

[Embers84]

As usual, the right wingers come out fast trying to discredit the good economic news. You right wingers don't like the economy getting better under Obama? Too bad, it's only going to get better. Shake your fists in anger.

Not really. Where are you getting the data that says unmarried chicks and non-whites (the lions share of dems) are creating the countries wealth? Remember you tried to pull that sh!t before when you put welfare by state figures showing they were majority republican but on closer inspection it turned out it was sh!tlibs living within those red states who were parasitizing the majority of the welfare. Woops.

Nice try with your right wing spin again. The poorest counties in Red States are rural white republican districts. Poor republicans in red states, get just as hungry as Democrats in red states looking for assistance. Hungry Republicans in Red States aren't going to starve when their state offers welfare and food assistance programs. Republicans are going to take advantage of it too.

I've already shown those stats that came from Government stats, but you and others used biased sources including a "Maxwell Poll", instead of a National Gold Standard Gallup Poll that refuted all your biased sources.

Again, if Red States and republicans were so fiscally conservative as they claim, they wouldn't lead the country as welfare queens, doling out the money and assistance programs to the people of their states. They are nothing but a bunch of hypocrites.

Polly wanna cracker?

Another proglib parrot drooling the line.

Obviously the old man here is too senile to see that right wing FOX and Wall Street Journal reported the articles. Bush's disastrous job record numbers have been documented into history and can be viewed in any National Archive along with every single President's job numbers since 1939. Do you actually think Bush's numbers were the best of all time old timer? It was worse than Hoover, it was the worst than any president in our country's history. President Obama has better numbers than both Bushes combined. Instead of writing your usual insulting comments with no substance, why don't you try to refute that? The problem is old man, is that you can't refute it. And that pisses you off with the rest of the right.

Old man doesn't have the intelligence to read historical archived numbers and believe them, but needs to hear his right wing propaganda to tell him how to think. You have been eating the crackers for years old man. In another year, you can live off of programs that Democrats gave you. How about that? :crackup:

We still currently have deficits. Does Hillary have a plan to balance the budget?

Of course we do. When Bush put us so far in the red it takes a while to climb out of it. Also, deficits came because of spending for The Recovery Act that Obama had to put forth to save this country from a major depression, but we can see now that it has worked and every economist has agreed on that. If republicans weren't so busy blocking every jobs bill that President Obama put forth in order to destroy him, then our country would have been so much better off than it is now.

It's amazing to me that Obama has the great economic numbers as he does with virtually no help from the republicans. Just think, if republicans decided to actually work with the President, the country would have lower deficits and have a bigger economic boom.

Why don't you listen to her speak to find out about her plans? Actually listen to what each candidate says about their plans and form your own opinion. Don't listen to biased spin on the TV and radio interpreting their words for you.

Why do republicans block bills to stop outsourcing of our jobs to India and China? Democrats had a bill to bring all those jobs back to stop outsourcing and the GOP killed it, including numerous Obama jobs bills.





DAMN YOU, OBAMA! UNEMPLOYMENT DOWN IN EVERY STATE FOR THE FIRST TIME IN 30 YEARS

http://www.ifyouonlynews.com/econom...n-every-state-for-the-first-time-in-30-years/



While the Republican party holds fast to its propaganda that President Obama has destroyed America, ruined the economy and taken away all of your rights, pesky facts keep surfacing to thwart them.

The latest is a report issued Wednesday by the Department of Labor, showing unemployment down in every state and the District of Columbia for the first time since 1984.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/srgune.nr0.htm

Thanks, Obama.



1984 was the end of Reagan’s first term, and as the country began its descent into the bowels of trickle-down economics, focus shifted from the American working class and concern for their prosperity to padding the bank accounts of the so-called job creators.

The ripple effect of deficits as the result of tax-cuts and catering to the wealthy has sent the country into an out of control spiral of income inequality and class warfare many feel we never recover from.

The unemployment rate dropping is very good news. It shows a spike in working class involvement in the job market, kicking the economy up a notch toward real recovery.

Leading the pack in unemployment decline was Illinois, down two full percentage points, followed by North Carolina, Colorado and Ohio at 1.8% drops each.

A quick scan of a few search engines shows media outlets Nationwide reporting on the BLS report, as well as dozens of positive outlook posts by liberal bloggers.

Absent from the conversation are conservative propaganda rags and right-wing bloggers.

Apparently its more important for them to report on the First Lady’s diplomatic trip to Japan, calling it a lush vacation, than it is to inform their readers of some truly good news.

Also absent from comment on the report is Fox News, whose screenwriters are most likely coming up with a reason why great news about the economy is bad for America since a black man occupies the White House.

 

[( . )( . )]

Nice try with your right wing spin again. The poorest counties in Red States are rural white republican districts. Poor republicans in red states, get just as hungry as Democrats in red states looking for assistance. Hungry Republicans in Red States aren't going to starve when their state offers welfare and food assistance programs. Republicans are going to take advantage of it too.

They don't though, but nice try.

Like I said the majority of those welfare parasites are overwhelmingly on the left.

http://rare.us/story/exploding-the-lefts-red-state-myths/

 

[Tictac]

Embers - empty pathetic whining and squealing, metaphorical, empty-headed noise.

No thought and no capability for it. Just a knee-jerk puppet.

You haven't a prayer.

 

[Embers84]

They don't though, but nice try.

Like I said the majority of those welfare parasites are overwhelmingly on the left.

Actually they do, but let's have it your way ok? Your intelligence really isn't at the top of it's game is it?

Even if every person in a red state was a Liberal Democrat on welfare, red states still lead the country at the top of welfare and blue states don't.

If Conservative Red States were so fiscally conservative as they claim, they would be at the bottom instead of leading at the top of welfare states. They wouldn't be giving out any welfare to anybody at all if they were so fiscally conservative would they? Republicans control everything in red states, yet they are the poorest and lead in welfare.

They are hypocrites and you fall for the bullsh!t like an idiot.

More right wing sources? Come on, use some real government stats.

It doesn't matter who is taking the welfare, the conservatives in red state are giving it to them. If the right wingers were so conservative, they wouldn't be doling it out to anybody liberal or conservative.

Republicans with no food get just as hungry as Democrats. Republicans will take assistance too when they are starving, and so would you, if you had no food to eat in weeks.

Embers - empty pathetic whining and squealing, metaphorical, empty-headed noise.

No thought and no capability for it. Just a knee-jerk puppet.

You haven't a prayer.

Gonna show me a source old man that disputes Bush's job numbers as the worst of all time in history? Have any sources that disputes President Obama with more jobs created than both Bushes combined? Have any sources that disputes Unemployment down in all 50 States since 1984 under President Obama?

You have no sources to refute it with old man, that's why we only see 3 small seperate sentences of insults with no substance. Sorry old man, you got nothing except your continued trolling.

 

[Tictac]

Gonna show me a source old man that disputes Bush's job numbers as the worst of all time in history? Have any sources that disputes President Obama with more jobs created than both Bushes combined? Have any sources that disputes Unemployment down in all 50 States since 1984 under President Obama? You have no sources to refute it with old man, that's why we only see 3 small seperate sentences of insults with no substance. Sorry old man, you got nothing.

-------

Hey baby boy! Gonna show some sources that show that the recovery is not the slowest since the Great Depression or that the Labor Force Participation Rate is not the lowest since World War II?

You have no sources to refute it boy, that's why we see only your nose blow pretending it's deep thought.

You're a simp lefty knee-jerk.

LOL

 

[Mike32ct]

Of course we do. When Bush put us so far in the red it takes a while to climb out of it. Also, deficits came because of spending for The Recovery Act that Obama had to put forth to save this country from a major depression, but we can see now that it has worked and every economist has agreed on that. If republicans weren't so busy blocking every jobs bill that President Obama put forth in order to destroy him, then our country would have been so much better off than it is now.

I'm not a big Bush fan. One of the only things I can give him credit for is that he had a better relationship with Putin than Obama. But I don't want to go there because the topic here is the economy, and I want to stay on topic.

It's amazing to me that Obama has the great economic numbers as he does with virtually no help from the republicans. Just think, if republicans decided to actually work with the President, the country would have lower deficits and have a bigger economic boom.

Why don't you listen to her speak to find out about her plans? Actually listen to what each candidate says about their plans and form your own opinion. Don't listen to biased spin on the TV and radio interpreting their words for you.

Why do republicans block bills to stop outsourcing of our jobs to India and China? Democrats had a bill to bring all those jobs back to stop outsourcing and the GOP killed it, including numerous Obama jobs bills.

I would fully support any efforts to stop further outsourcing. But my biggest concern is that the damage has already been done. We know Bill Clinton signed NAFTA and gave Most Favored Trade Nation Status to China. Yes, the Republicans were fully behind selling out our country at that time too and probably still are. Newt Gingrinch was another staunchly pro-NAFTA guy.

But fast forwarding to today, Obama's Comprehensive Immigration Reform (if it passed) would include a large increase in H1-B Visas. This means more in-sourcing so computer jobs would be taken by workers from India instead of Americans.

Even if we adjust for those that left the workforce, the QUALITY of the jobs has declined. These jobs numbers, while encouraging, include plenty of part-time and low paying retail or fast food type of jobs. On the whole, American's aren't making as much $ as they used to. Our standard of living is falling. Let me be clear, I actually don't even blame Obama for that. As I said, I think much of the damage was already done even BEFORE Bush due to NAFTA and other earlier trade policies. But obviously, it takes years for the effects to show up. That's why it's more critical than ever to protect the few good paying jobs we have left.

 

[Stagger Lee]

If the Obama admin and democrats in general are for American workers, then why has Obama went out of his way to try to give 5 million work permits to illegals? His State department continues to dump 10,000s of refugees in our cities. And out of his way to increase H1B and L-1 visas for foreign tech workers? And now he's trying to get fast track trade authority with the Trans-Pacific Partnership which is a job killer and NAFTA on steroids and will bring in even more foreign workers and more outsourcing?

Obama has went out of his way and went around Congress and even the immigration laws to replace American workers with foreigners and immigrants. Embers, you're not going to sell me that BS that Obama and democrats are for American workers or Americans period when he's done the above.

I don't believe the economy for the average person has improved, and if it did I wouldn't automatically give Obama the credit. I don't even care if the economy improves marginally. I'm concerned about being flooded with and replaced with "people of color" 3rd world, which Obama has been hell bent on doing.

 

[Mike32ct]

If the Obama admin and democrats in general are for American workers, then why has Obama went out of his way to try to give 5 million work permits to illegals? His State department continues to dump 10,000s of refugees in our cities. And out of his way to increase H1B and L-1 visas for foreign tech workers? And now he's trying to get fast track trade authority with the Trans-Pacific Partnership which is a job killer and NAFTA on steroids and will bring in even more foreign workers and more outsourcing?

Obama has went out of his way and went around Congress and even the immigration laws to replace American workers with foreigners and immigrants. Embers, you're not going to sell me that BS that Obama and democrats are for American workers or Americans period when he's done the above.

I don't believe the economy for the average person has improved, and if it did I wouldn't automatically give Obama the credit. I don't even care if the economy improves marginally. I'm concerned about being flooded with and replaced with "people of color" 3rd world, which Obama has been hell bent on doing.

The frustrating thing is we don't actually have a party that is staunchly protectionist when it comes to American jobs. I'm willing to bet that both parties would fast-track the Trans Pacific Partnership.

 

[Stagger Lee]

The frustrating thing is we don't actually have a party that is staunchly protectionist when it comes to American jobs. I'm willing to bet that both parties would fast-track the Trans Pacific Partnership.

True, you have a few individual democrats and a few Republicans that want to protect American jobs and the middle class, but certainly not a majority. And those individuals don't control the parties or have leadership positions. Obama has been about as bad as it gets in this area. He's done or attempted stuff worse than most any other Administration with going out of his way to bring in foreign-born workers. Democrats have been the greater of two evils overall when it comes to foreign workers and immigration.

 

[Mike32ct]

True, you have a few individual democrats and a few Republicans that want to protect American jobs and the middle class, but certainly not a majority. And those individuals don't control the parties or have leadership positions. Obama has been about as bad as it gets in this area. He's done or attempted stuff worse than most any other Administration with going out of his way to bring in foreign-born workers. Democrats have been the greater of two evils overall when it comes to foreign workers and immigration.

That's what is disingenuous about the "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" thing. On one hand, we get the, "The system is broken. It needs to be fixed. It's not fair to those from Latin America. Blah Blah Blah" sort of sales pitch. So the reform package is intended to "fix" those issues.

Then, WTF does increasing H1-Bs for tech workers from India or China have to do with "fixing" our border/immigration issues with Latin America?

 

[Stagger Lee]

That's what is disingenuous about the "Comprehensive Immigration Reform" thing. On one hand, we get the, "The system is broken. It needs to be fixed. It's not fair to those from Latin America. Blah Blah Blah" sort of sales pitch. So the reform package is intended to "fix" those issues.

The dishonest statement that "the immigration system is broken" is such an absurd lie. The executive branch Obama especially is the one breaking the system by refusing to enforce current immigration law. And the immigration reform they propose just draws more illegals and encourages them to stay making it more difficult to control illegal immigration even if they were to try. The only reforms should be stiffer illegal immigration laws discouraging illegals to stay in the US and for more to come in.
http://news.yahoo.com/federal-appeals-court-obamas-executive-action-immigration

Then, WTF does increasing H1-Bs for tech workers from India or China have to do with "fixing" our border/immigration issues with Latin America?

Only in the sense that "fixing" means to fix the number of immigrant and foreign born workers to an ever increasing higher level.

 

[Mike32ct]

The dishonest statement that "the immigration system is broken" is such an absurd lie. The executive branch Obama especially is the one breaking the system by refusing to enforce current immigration law. And the immigration reform they propose just draws more illegals and encourages them to stay making it more difficult to control illegal immigration even if they were to try.

Agreed. I don't think the "system is broken" at all. Seal the border and enforce the laws we already have.


Only in the sense that "fixing" means to fix the number of immigrant and foreign born workers to an ever increasing higher level.

It's another form of "open borders." It opens the virtual "borders" to countries in other continents.

 

[Embers84]

Hey baby boy! Gonna show some sources that show that the recovery is not the slowest since the Great Depression or that the Labor Force Participation Rate is not the lowest since World War II?

You have no sources to refute it boy, that's why we see only your nose blow pretending it's deep thought.

You're a simp lefty knee-jerk.

LOL

Old man can only insult and listen to his right wing propaganda for information he knows nothin about. Where are your sources at that disputes Bush as the worst job creating President ever? Your low on credible sources since you have none.




The U.S. Recovered From The Recession Faster Than Every Country But Germany

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/03/10/us-economic-recovery_n_4935182.html





Obama Outperforms Reagan On Jobs, Growth And Investing

http://www.forbes.com/sites/adamhar...performs-reagan-on-jobs-growth-and-investing/


This is the best private sector jobs creation performance in American history.

President Reagan has long been considered the best modern economic President. So we compared his performance dealing with the oil-induced recession of the 1980s with that of President Obama and his performance during this ‘Great Recession.’

As this unemployment chart shows, President Obama’s job creation kept unemployment from peaking at as high a level as President Reagan, and promoted people into the workforce faster than President Reagan.

President Obama has achieved a 6.1% unemployment rate in his sixth year, fully one year faster than President Reagan did. At this point in his presidency, President Reagan was still struggling with 7.1% unemployment, and he did not reach into the mid-low 6% range for another full year. So, despite today’s number, the Obama administration has still done considerably better at job creating and reducing unemployment than did the Reagan administration.

“We forecast unemployment will fall to around 5.4% by summer, 2015. A rate President Reagan was unable to achieve during his two terms.”

What’s now clear is that the Obama administration policies have outperformed the Reagan administration policies for job creation and unemployment reduction. Even though Reagan had the benefit of a growing Boomer class to ignite economic growth, while Obama has been forced to deal with a retiring workforce developing special needs. During the eight years preceding Obama there was a net reduction in jobs in America. We now are rapidly moving toward higher, sustainable jobs growth.

When President Obama took office America was gripped in an offshoring boom, started years earlier, pushing jobs to the developing world. Manufacturing was declining in America, and plants were closing across the nation.

This week the Institute for Supply Management(ISM) released its manufacturing report, and it surprised nearly everyone. The latest Purchasing Managers Index (PMI) scored 59, two points higher than July and about that much higher than prognosticators expected. This represents 63 straight months of economic expansion, and 25 consecutive months of manufacturing expansion.

Economically, President Obama’s administration has outperformed President Reagan’s in all commonly watched categories. Simultaneously the current administration has reduced the deficit, which skyrocketed under Reagan. Additionally, Obama has reduced federal employment, which grew under Reagan (especially when including military personnel,) and truly delivered a “smaller government.” Additionally, the current administration has kept inflation low, even during extreme international upheaval, failure of foreign economies (Greece) and a dramatic slowdown in the European economy.





Barack Obama says U.S. economy is creating jobs at fastest pace since 1999

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...-obama-says-us-economy-creating-jobs-fastest/

The economy is "creating jobs at the fastest pace since 1999."— Barack Obama on Tuesday, January 20th, 2015 in the State of the Union address

True



President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address was notable for its celebratory language about the state of the economy, following a recovery that was widely considered long and slow.

Here’s one of the claims Obama made: "Tonight, after a breakthrough year for America, our economy is growing and creating jobs at the fastest pace since 1999."

We initially read this to mean that both the economy and the number of jobs had been growing at the fastest pace since 1999. That would have been a problematic claim, since the final figures for growth in gross domestic product in 2014 aren’t in yet. However, when we asked the White House press office for clarification, they responded that the president was making two separate claims -- first, that the economy is growing, and second, that the United States is creating jobs at the fastest pace since 1999.

The first of those claims is clearly true -- except for one quarter of negative growth in the first quarter of 2014, the economy has been expanding -- but we weren’t sure about the second part. So we decided to take a closer look at Obama’s claim that the economy is "creating jobs at the fastest pace since 1999."

Looking at job growth over the course of the calendar year

We looked at total nonfarm employment from December of one year to December of the next, using official figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Here’s what we found:

Time period
Total job growth

Dec. 1998 to Dec. 1999
3,177,000

Dec. 1999 to Dec. 2000
1,946,000

Dec. 2000 to Dec. 2001
- 1,735,000

Dec. 2001 to Dec. 2002
- 508,000

Dec. 2002 to Dec. 2003
105,000

Dec. 2003 to Dec. 2004
2,033,000

Dec. 2004 to Dec. 2005
2,506,000

Dec. 2005 to Dec. 2006
2,085,000

Dec. 2006 to Dec. 2007
1,140,000

Dec. 2007 to Dec. 2008
- 3,576,000

Dec. 2008 to Dec. 2009
- 5,087,000

Dec. 2009 to Dec. 2010
1,058,000

Dec. 2010 to Dec. 2011
2,083,000

Dec. 2011 to Dec. 2012
2,236,000

Dec. 2012 to Dec. 2013
2,331,000

Dec. 2013 to Dec. 2014
2,952,000


So Obama’s on target: The job growth during calendar year 2014 was higher than any year going back to 1999.

 

[Tictac]

The slowest recovery since The Great Depression.

The lowest Labor Force Participation Rate since World War II.

Where are your sources to refute that (m)Embers?

Simple enough for you? Or are you going to type a post twice the length of a roll of toilet paper that tries to tap dance around this?

 

[Bible_Belt]

I think Obama counts being on food stamps as being employed. That would explain all the growth numbers.

 

[logicallefty]

Not anymore. New moderators believe political, racial, and religions discussions are allowed as long as it's posted in the Anything Else forum section. And some are active participant in such discussions. Maybe that's just a new direction Allen wants sosuave to move, but I highly doubt it.

I've been patrolling Mature Man Road too much lately and now realize that Anything Else Lane is a good spot to run radar these days.

For the record, we know for the fact that racial discussions are not going to be tolerated and all mods are in favor of cracking down harder than ever on those.

We know things have been lax with the religious and political discussions and are still in process of discussing how to proceed in the future with those. We may officially lax the rules on those, we may start enforcing the rules we already have, or we may make the rules more strict. We just don't know yet.

For now, let's try to be civil to each other as people, and focus discussions on issues. It's OK, and expected, to have varying opinions. But personal attacks just aren't necessary. Easier said than done sometimes, I realize.

Carry on fellas...

 

[Embers84]

-------

Hey baby boy! Gonna show some sources that show that the recovery is not the slowest since the Great Depression or that the Labor Force Participation Rate is not the lowest since World War II?

You have no sources to refute it boy, that's why we see only your nose blow pretending it's deep thought.

You're a simp lefty knee-jerk.

LOL

Why don't you get job and help with the partcipation rate instead of insulting people here all the time?

First of all, if Bush didn't lead us into a near Great Depression with his failed republican economics, there would be no need for a recovery of this nature.

You guys act like Bush handed Obama a pristine economy and he ruined it with his policies. It was Bush's sh1tty policies that destroyed our economy, and it was up to Obama to fix it with his. Our country is in better shape today, than when Obama came into office the day Bush left.

Second, the U.S. economy under President Obama, is creating the most jobs since 1999, when President Bill Clinton lead with the greatest job creation and recovery in history cleaning up Reagan's and Bush's debt and mess. So, that is saying something, not to mention, the U.S. has recovered faster than any country besides Germany.

Third, if the GOP didn't block Obama's jobs bills, including a bill to stop outsourcing jobs to countries like India and China, the recovery would even be better creating millions of more jobs.

So as usual, you don't know what you're talking about.

Embers,

The Labor Participation Rate is horrible, the worse in decades.

lowest labor participation rates since world War II.

So what? The Labor Participation Rate has nothing to do with a President, and it will continue to be low until the year 2030. This is just an useless right wing talking point trying to discredit the President that you right wingers parrot.

A President has no control over the participation rate, he can not force you to work if you decide not to work. A President has no control if a person leaves the work force to go back to school to get skills for a better job. A President has no control if a person decides to retire. All of those factors determine the numbers in the Labor Participation Rate.

The President's only job is to make jobs available to people who want them and are willing to work.

For years, every economist, politician, media reporter, anybody with half a brain knew that the Labor Participation Rate would be in decline from the years 2011- 2030, due to the largest segment of the population retiring which are the baby boomers. Every economist predicted that the rate would be at the lowest in our history during this time, dropping the normal participation rate. The participation rate was at the highest peak during the years all the boomers were working. Boomers have been retiring since 2011, and have been dropping the participation rate number ever since. For right wingers to use that as a stat to blame Obama is a joke, when no matter who is President, will have lower participation rate numbers until the year 2030.


Here is a look at it in detail.


Labor Force Participation Rate in the United States decreased to 62.70 percent in March of 2015 from 62.80 percent in February of 2015. Labor Force Participation Rate in the United States averaged 63.01 percent from 1950 until 2015, reaching an all time high of 67.30 percent in January of 2000 and a record low of 58.10 percent in December of 1954. Labor Force Participation Rate in the United States is reported by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/united-states/labor-force-participation-rate

63.01 percent from 1950 until 2015
62.70 percent in March of 2015
58.10 percent in December of 1954

You can clearly see the average rate was 63.01% and has dropped a little off to 62.70% in March of 2015. The decline in the rate is contributed to the start of the oldest baby boomers retiring which was expected to happen.

For right wingers to make this an issue is a complete joke.




http://www.businessinsider.com/baby-boomers-are-retiring-2014-2




Baby Boomers' Impact on Participation Rate Big, Expected

Retirements account for nearly half of the fall in the participation rate

Aging baby boomers, those Americans born between 1946 and 1964, account for approximately half of the drop in the labor force participation rate since 2007, according to a report released Thursday from the White House Council of Economic Advisers. The remaining decline stems from “cyclical factors” fairly typical of historic economic recessions and more difficult-to-explain “residual factors” from the crisis.

http://www.usnews.com/news/articles...-big-part-of-labor-participation-rate-decline



Baby Boomers Retire

Here's a look at what you need to know about the Baby Boomer generation, the generation of Americans born between 1946, the end of World War II, and 1964. They are the largest generation of Americans born in U.S. history.

Roughly 10,000 Baby Boomers will turn 65 today, and about 10,000 more will cross that threshold every day for the next 19 years.

On January 1, 2011, the oldest Baby Boomers will turn 65. Every day for the next 19 years, about 10,000 more will cross that threshold. By 2030, when all Baby Boomers will have turned 65, fully 18% of the nation’s population will be at least that age, according to Pew Research Center population projections.

Today, just 13% of Americans are ages 65 and older.

The 79 million member Baby Boomer generation accounts for 26% of the total U.S. population. By force of numbers alone, they almost certainly will redefine old age in America, just as they’ve made their mark on teen culture, young adult life and middle age.

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2010/12/20/baby-boomers-approach-65-glumly/




What Baby Boomers’ Retirement Means For the U.S. Economy

For decades, the retirement of the baby boom generation has been a looming economic threat. Now, it’s no longer looming — it’s here. Every month, more than a quarter-million Americans turn 65. That’s a trend with profound economic consequences. Simply put, retirees don’t contribute as much to the economy as workers do. They don’t produce anything, at least directly. They don’t spend as much on average. And they’re much more likely to depend on others — the government or their own children, most often — than to support themselves.

The recession may have delayed the inevitable for a time. The financial crisis wiped away billions in retirement savings, forcing many Americans to work longer than planned. But the stock market has since rebounded, and there are signs that more Americans are at last feeling confident enough to leave the workforce. The labor force participation rate for older Americans — the share of those 55 and older who are working or actively looking for work — has fallen over the past year after rising through the recession and early years of the recovery. Roughly 17 percent of baby boomers now report that they are retired, up from 10 percent in 2010.1

Now that the wave has begun, nothing is likely to stop it. The Census Bureau on Tuesday released a pair of reports that show just how dramatic an impact the graying of the population will have in coming decades.

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.

All else equal, fewer workers means less economic growth. One way to measure this is a figure known as the “dependency ratio,” or the number of people outside of working age (under 18 or over 64) per 100 adults between age 18 and 64.2 The higher the ratio, the worse the news: If more of the population is young or old that leaves fewer working-age people to support them and contribute to the economy.

The U.S. dependency ratio has been improving in recent decades, falling from 65 in 1980 to 61 in 2000 to 59 in 2010. But now the trend is set to reverse. By 2020, the Census Bureau estimates, the U.S. dependency ratio will be back to 65; in 2030, it will be 75, the worst since the 1960s and 1970s, when the baby boomers were children.

http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/what-baby-boomers-retirement-means-for-the-u-s-economy/

 

[( . )( . )]

Why don't you get job and help with the partcipation rate instead of insulting people here all the time?

Why would he need to? According to your bullsh!t "statistics" everyone's got a job anyway.