Can these numbers be true: According to Bureau of Labor Statistics there are 90 million people above age 16 who no longer take part in the labor market in the US. BLS considers anyone...

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

According to Bureau of Labor Statistics there are 90 million people above age 16 who no longer take part in the labor market in the US. BLS considers anyone above the minimum age who is not employed as not a part of the force if they haven't held a job or actively looked for one in the last 4 weeks. Is this number an embarrassing one? It sure is to me.

http://www.teaparty.org/record-90-million-americans-not-in-labor-force-28204/

oz89 Loc: California

oldroy wrote:

According to Bureau of Labor Statistics there are 90 million people above age 16 who no longer take part in the labor market in the US. BLS considers anyone above the minimum age who is not employed as not a part of the force if they haven't held a job or actively looked for one in the last 4 weeks. Is this number an embarrassing one? It sure is to me.

http://www.teaparty.org/record-90-million-americans-not-in-labor-force-28204/

I would have to know are they counting the new business owners as unemployed? are they counting the unable to work for wh**ever reason they have? Are they counting the have enough money and don't need to work crowd? There is not enough information about that number for me to decide one way or the other, especially since the report is political in nature.

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

oz89 wrote:

I would have to know are they counting the new business owners as unemployed? are they counting the unable to work for wh**ever reason they have? Are they counting the have enough money and don't need to work crowd? There is not enough information about that number for me to decide one way or the other, especially since the report is political in nature.

Don't strain your brain trying to figure this one out.

VladimirPee

Yes workforce participation is at record lows. That's how unemployment rate can go down without adding enough jobs to do so.

oldroy wrote:

According to Bureau of Labor Statistics there are 90 million people above age 16 who no longer take part in the labor market in the US. BLS considers anyone above the minimum age who is not employed as not a part of the force if they haven't held a job or actively looked for one in the last 4 weeks. Is this number an embarrassing one? It sure is to me.

http://www.teaparty.org/record-90-million-americans-not-in-labor-force-28204/

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

DennisDee wrote:

Yes workforce participation is at record lows. That's how unemployment rate can go down without adding enough jobs to do so.

So many people don't like to see references to work force since so many people just gave up and quit trying to find jobs. That surely did shrink the workforce, though.

emarine

oldroy wrote:

According to Bureau of Labor Statistics there are 90 million people above age 16 who no longer take part in the labor market in the US. BLS considers anyone above the minimum age who is not employed as not a part of the force if they haven't held a job or actively looked for one in the last 4 weeks. Is this number an embarrassing one? It sure is to me.

http://www.teaparty.org/record-90-million-americans-not-in-labor-force-28204/

Na.. try again,,, Thats half the total US labor force

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

emarine wrote:

Na.. try again,,, Thats half the total US labor force

Surely that h**eful Tea Party wouldn't be that far from the t***h. No Dems will accept your numbers.

emarine

oldroy wrote:

Surely that h**eful Tea Party wouldn't be that farfrom the t***h. No Dems will accept your numbers.

Ok Old roy.... unemployment is like 46% to 48% not 7.2%... I know the unemployment #s are always off a bit...

VladimirPee

Same story from the Washington Post and they try to cover for Obama whenever possible

The grinding pace of recovery has hollowed out the workforce. Government data showed that only 63.2 percent of working-age Americans have a job or are looking for one, the lowest proportion since 1978. Nearly 90 million people are now considered out of the labor force, up 1.7 million from August 2012.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/economy-added-169k-jobs-in-august-as-the-recovery-grinds-along/2013/09/06/696820dc-16ef-11e3-a2ec-b47e45e6f8ef_story.html

emarine wrote:

Na.. try again,,, Thats half the total US labor force

vernon

oldroy wrote:

Surely that h**eful Tea Party wouldn't be that far from the t***h. No Dems will accept your numbers.

hell demorats dont accept anything but lies and pipe dreams

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

vernon wrote:

hell demorats dont accept anything but lies and pipe dreams

That does seem to be the way Demoncraps think these days.

vernon

oldroy wrote:

Surely that h**eful Tea Party wouldn't be that far from the t***h. No Dems will accept your numbers.

the demorats need to understand that when they arnt looking or drawing unemployment they arnt counted.if you remember just before the e******n they dropped the rate a full 2.5% when a huge number quit looking.

BigMike Loc: yerington nv

emarine wrote:

Ok Old roy.... unemployment is like 46% to 48% not 7.2%... I know the unemployment #s are always off a bit...

I figure its probably double what they say it is. Probably 2 million in prison and jail alone.

oldroy Loc: Western Kansas (No longer in hiding)

BigMike wrote:

I figure its probably double what they say it is. Probably 2 million in prison and jail alone.

Surely they wouldn't consider prisoners as unemployed, would they? Not this bunch, anyway.

BigMike Loc: yerington nv

oldroy wrote:

Surely they wouldn't consider prisoners as unemployed, would they? Not this bunch, anyway.

I dunno. I'd count 'em. They're being housed and fed. We're paying for that and they cost a hell of a lot more per year than your average unemployment benefit.