For the first time in 11 years, 80 Percent of Americans in their prime are working

For the Fisrt Time in 11 Years 80% of Americans in Their Prime Are Working

For the first time in 11 years, four-fifths of all Americans in their prime working years have a job.

The percentage of people from the ages of 25 to 54 who were working in August climbed to 80% from 79.5% in July, touching the highest level since the start of 2008, the government said Friday.

The percentage of these people holding a job had fallen to a 26-year low of 74.8% after the 2007-2009 Great Recession. Soft growth in the early years of economic recovery was partly a result of slow rebound in the share of prime-age workers, as reflected by a surge at the time in the number of young adults still living with their parents.

“The growth is exciting because it shows that, rather than declining, participation [in the labor market] may still have room to grow,” said Julia Pollack, labor economist at ZipRecruiter, an online job-search site.

Yet matching the record would likely require the economy to grow for several more years and avoid recession. The share of primetime workers peaked at 81.9% in early 2000 at the height of the internet boom.

*This is great news. The magic wand is waving and Trump is making it happen. It's been nearly three years since his inauguration so there's no crediting Obama for this. He thought it was impossible. A businessman running this country like a business will never work they said, it'll only make things worse they told us. 130,000 more jobs were added last month. The Great Recession occurred with democrat controlled Congress and didn't really rebound until Republicans took back control.

Contrary to what we hear from the elite left, this is how you make America great again.




*As always, my apologies if this was already posted.

a reply to: LSU2018
It is great that your country is seeing better conditions now than in 2009.
And no new wars necessary, too.

The MIC must hate Trump.

a reply to: LSU2018

Where to start?

I think that a better measure of success would be to determine how many people are making a living wage, or how many families are able to support themselves without some form of welfare.

I don't mean to be offensive but if a person pulls double shifts in starbuck, and then picks people up in an uber, and they still can't make the rent on an apartment that they share with two other people, then they are not exactly living the American dream.

We should be looking for an economy were everybody can pay their own way. Not one where they struggle to make ends meet and the state picks up the difference.

A lot of people are caught in poverty traps, and no matter how hard they try they can't seem to escape. They aren't stupid or lazy, but their circumstances put them two steps behind all the time.

Where I grew up the difference between a store manager and the janitor was about 50 cents an hour. All of the middle class positions had gone to head offices, and there was little or no chance to get promoted as there were very few places to get promoted to.

a reply to: LSU2018

What kinds of jobs are they holding and what kind of money do they take home?

a reply to: AaarghZombies

I hear a lot of people talk about double jobs, but know of nobody working them. When the Parish I work in tried to increase property taxes by 40%, a bill proposed by the School Board, we saw tons of stories by teachers employed by the Parish that said they had to work two jobs to make ends meet. One door separates my office from the President/CEO where I work so I get a lot of the information he gets. According to the FOIA we got from the School Board, the same people working two jobs to make ends meet were people making anywhere between $60K and $150K per year and were also married, many to other teachers making nearly as much, or more than them. That's way more than enough for living wages here, as you could make it on $32K per year. My main point is that many people who complain about working two jobs are people who live outside their means.

You can't drink champagne on a beer budget.

originally posted by: InTheLight
a reply to: LSU2018

What kinds of jobs are they holding and what kind of money do they take home?

I don't know. At least they're not wasting tax payer dollars sitting at home collecting welfare like so many were.

I guess you don't think this is good news since it's growing under Trump?

originally posted by: Oleandra88
a reply to: LSU2018
It is great that your country is seeing better conditions now than in 2009.
And no new wars necessary, too.

The MIC must hate Trump.

Anyone who doesn't like to see Trump keep promises hate him.

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: InTheLight
a reply to: LSU2018

What kinds of jobs are they holding and what kind of money do they take home?

I don't know. At least they're not wasting tax payer dollars sitting at home collecting welfare like so many were.

I guess you don't think this is good news since it's growing under Trump?

I don't know if it is good news or not because my question cannot be answered.

a reply to: InTheLight
I would say, holding a job is always better than no income at all?

Internal political conflicts yet?

originally posted by: Oleandra88
a reply to: InTheLight
I would say, holding a job is always better than no income at all?

Internal political conflicts yet?

Being a working poor person is not my idea of better.

a reply to: InTheLight

well better than a starving even poorer person, right?

The left: “people can’t make ends meet”

The left: “increase taxes”

The left: “how did Trump get a second term?”

originally posted by: InTheLight
a reply to: LSU2018

What kinds of jobs are they holding and what kind of money do they take home?

americans jobs and dollars respectively

win/win

originally posted by: Oleandra88
a reply to: InTheLight

well better than a starving even poorer person, right?

Not necessarily, being an even poorer person gets you certain government subsidies, where being a working poor person may get your necessary subsidies denied.

So, nobody can answer my question. All righty then.

a reply to: InTheLight
So what you are saying is basically this:

Because poor people can get subsidies from the Government, there is a point where you personally say, "I rather stay at home/poor/jobless" before I go working to get just a bit more?

So basically you brush off everything, because it is not enough yet? Not good enough?

Good move, asking a question where you know/make believe that there is no answer to, then using it as a exit point out of the discussion

originally posted by: Oleandra88
a reply to: InTheLight
So what you are saying is basically this:

Because poor people can get subsidies from the Government, there is a point where you personally say, "I rather stay at home/poor/jobless" before I go working to get just a bit more?

So basically you brush off everything, because it is not enough yet? Not good enough?

Good move, asking a question where you know/make believe that there is no answer to, then using it as a exit point out of the discussion

The only move I made was asking the question "What types of jobs and how much take home pay"? Which nobody has answered yet.

So I sourced the Federal Poverty Level table - can someone tell me if these jobs exceed the poverty level?

www.thebalance.com...

a reply to: InTheLight

shooterbrody did an excellent two liner on this topic, you should revisit it

originally posted by: Oleandra88
a reply to: InTheLight

shooterbrody did an excellent two liner on this topic, you should revisit it

Still no answers.

a reply to: InTheLight

Still no answers.

did you actually read the op link?

Prime-age workers are big home buyers and consumers compared to younger Americans just starting out, those nearing retirement or people who’ve already retired. They play a huge role in how fast the economy grows.

people buying a home are no where near the poverty level

but that would take, you know, reading the link to find that out.......