It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Record 94,610,000 Americans not in Labor Force

page: 4
15
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 02:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: marg6043
Ok, I am getting confused now, how does the government keep track of the working force? it is by the tax withholdings right? and employees providing information on their workers.


I'm not sure, but that's a good question to ask. I thought work force was available, and not current. Maybe this is incorrect?


So the government claim that only 51 percent of Americans pay taxes, so the rest gets on government assistance? even if they work but because they work on their own they do not claim? but still can get government help?

I don't get it.


There's a lot of things to take into consideration here. First off, how many US citizens there are is irrelevant to how many are paying taxes, as many are not expected to be working, such as children. Secondly, employment is not directly relevant to government assistance. People who are employed may be on a form of assistance, and those who are unexpected to work (children, for instance) may or may not be on assistance from a head of house filing for it.

So is your "51%" related to people who are expected to pay taxes, or is that stat propaganda? I see a lot of muck with people throwing around stats without knowing exactly what they mean, and putting them in their proper context. At least you're trying!




posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 02:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
Isn't this almost 1/3 of the entire U.S. labor force that's unemployed? Wow!

it worse than that. the figures dont take into account those under 16. uber WOW.
edit on 2-10-2015 by Soloprotocol because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 02:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

You would wish children to be included in the workforce?



posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 02:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: Soloprotocol

You would wish children to be included in the workforce?

No....read again.



posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 02:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

I did. You're not making sense.



posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 02:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: Soloprotocol

I did. You're not making sense.


73 million children under the age of 17. 300 million population. 95 million not on the labour roll.


lets do some maths. 95+73= 168 million.....300-168 = 132 miilion people in the US ARE working. 168 million are NOT...Dont know about you, but whatever way you look at it. 168 million is nowhere near 1/3 of the population of the US...hence my original reply to Carewemust



posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 02:46 PM
link   
a reply to: pl3bscheese

I am really trying to make sense of those numbers, too.



posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 02:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

So you are including them in the work force with those figures. We're in agreement on that.

The question is why would you?

Seems really bizarre to me, but if you want to doom and gloom just cause, by all means include the dead for the last 3 generations, a unicorn, and maybe bigfoot?
edit on 2-10-2015 by pl3bscheese because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 02:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: pl3bscheese

I am really trying to make sense of those numbers, too.


Seriously?.. you cannot work out the percentage from the figures i provided.?



posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 02:53 PM
link   
a reply to: marg6043

if your nephew had what you would consider an average paying job, would they would be able to have their needs filled on his paycheck, what is she also got a job, but needed child care to hold, would it be workable?
I've know quite a few people doing the same thing.
I'm pretty sure you know my background so maybe you will understand what I am going to say.
People are going to do what they have to to stay alive. And, I don't think it was just some gov't screw op or fate that has made it so that the only way they can stay alive is to lie and cheat the gov't programs. In NY we actually has social service people advising couples to separate so their kids could get the medical care that they needed.



posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 03:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: Soloprotocol

So you are including them in the work force with those figures. We're in agreement on that.

The question is why would you?

Seems really bizarre to me, but if you want to doom and gloom just cause, by all means include the dead for the last 3 generations, a unicorn, and maybe bigfoot?

No , what i'm saying is....95 million are unemployed. 132 million are working....does 132 million sound like 1/3 of a possible workforce of 237 million to you...



posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 03:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

Whoops! Looks like I misread you, let me get my head on straight just a sec.
edit on 2-10-2015 by pl3bscheese because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 03:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

It's actually 56% of the available workforce.



posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 03:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: 0zzymand0s
a reply to: Soloprotocol

It's actually 56% of the available workforce.

so it's not and never has been 33.3% as stated by Carewemust...the figure is actually higher...much higher.?



posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 03:11 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

In my nephews case he is a felon, meaning he was caught on charges of drug possession and illegal guns, while he was slapped in the hand for it, been his first arrest his record will stay with him, his wife doesn't work.

My neighbor also have a record due to a few DUIs he can no drive and his wife doesn't work either.

I live in southern Ga big on welfare and very low on jobs, those that have them will hold to them for dear life.



posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 03:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

is not that I don't believe the numbers, but when the government takes upon itself to throw numbers out there is hard to find what is real and what is not.



posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 03:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Soloprotocol

Okay I tried and you're still not making any sense. The labor force should not include anyone under 16. It makes no sense any which way you look at it. He clearly stated it's the labor force regarding the roughly 1/3 figure. You're trying to work with numbers that are irrelevant. I don't know why you think this makes sense or is an equal comparison, but it IS comparing apples to oranges.

The numbers should be closer to 94 / (325-73 - elderly)

which would be unemployed compared to (total minus children and elderly)

I'm getting a number of 44.7m for 2013. Let's say :

94 / (322-73-45) which would be 94 / 204 or 46%

I'm still iffy about these stats, I think there's some overlap in one way or another, but that's clearly over 33%.
edit on 2-10-2015 by pl3bscheese because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 03:18 PM
link   
Not sure if this has been mentioned but the Baby Boomer generation, the largest demographic cohort, is at retirement age. A lot of those folks have been dropping out of the work force.



posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 03:36 PM
link   
the economy can be fixed overnight. I would tell you how but its more fun to figure it out yourself using your imagination. Ah yes, imagination......an equal opportunity quality anyone can have if they really want it.



posted on Oct, 2 2015 @ 03:39 PM
link   
a reply to: ratsinacage

Perspective shift towards a more valuable meaning of the term "economy" and reassess the social contract and corporate law. Too easy we would prefer run with assumptions no longer evidenced.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join