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.

 

Unemployment Rate falls to 4.4%

page: 3
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 12:12 AM
link   
In 1980 the average CEO pay was 97 times larger than the pay of a minimum wage worker. In 1998 the average CEO pay was 989 times larger. Today, the CEO only has to work two hours to earn as much as a minimum wage worker earns in an entire year. The spread is amazing.

Its F'ed up! We have to stop this..

[edit on 6-11-2006 by semperfoo]



DCP

posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 12:49 AM
link   
1) Does anyone know if there ever has been a study of how many people are off unemployment Vs how many people are working under the table?? Do they cancal eachother out???



posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 12:51 AM
link   
The number of people working under the table will probably never be known - it's one of the hardest statistics to compile, I think, for obvious reasons.

Even if you somehow managed to convince a huge group of people to spend their time going around the country and conducting interviews, you'd still get false answers more often than not, I'd think. It's not something most people would freely admit to, at least not to those outside their circle.



posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 01:04 AM
link   
People....

This is NOT Skunk Works....

Posting your "Facts???" on here without threads or other proof of where you derived them is a waste of space and everyones time. The rest of us have eyes and friends, can see how well they are all doing, and can see the facts for what they are.
Your crying about certain issues in certain areas, and then not giving substantiating evidence shows at the least a weak position and at most fabrication.

Just because you say it is this way or that way somewhere or anywhere, in no way supports your argument especially as this thread is dealing with SPECIFICALLY a NATIONAL STATISTIC!!! Your local woes are not relevant to this thread.

The author of the thread posted a nice link to USA today to support his side and all the rest of the nay-sayers have went on and on without a scrap of proof...

That is telling enough about the "other" side of the issue.

And for anyone whining about how much more the CEO makes... Well this is America and last I looked not a Socialist Society, so WAY TO GO CEO...

It's called Capitalism... Comrades...


Semper



posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 01:35 AM
link   
Well, google shall provide if links are needed. It would not benefit anyone to 'feed' links that I provide. Self-research is an important trait to confirm for one's self the "facts".

And SemperFortis, this is not a dig on you, please know this up front,..

But the area you live in and work in has 4 demographic types of populations. This you probably do not need links for yourself to verify. I know because I have been there a hundred times myself. You know these groups more likely because of your profession no doubt.

The Myrtle Beach area consists of this,..

1 - Young adults and younger spending tons of money and partying all night while away from home on spring break and summer vacation.

2 - In the Golf course rich community filled with rental condo's, the business crowds that cater to clients and employee's of distinction.

3 - Retiree's and families on vacations.

and 4 - the local population which has the primary vocation of catering to the first three groups I named, whether legal or otherwise.


Basically, an area that only represents a vacation and party wonderland for the east coast. Not even remotely representative of American economic demographics at large. People come there to spend money and have fun. Now does that mean that all of America is spending money and having fun? Of course not.

Now, as i said, this is not a personal dig, but only to demonstrate that regional representation of the economy, will never represent the facts of the whole country.

If "unemployment" is registered as 4.4%, it fails to take in many factors that will not "represent" the whole as stated, especially regionally.


And again, the facts I "suggested", even if viewed as unsupported, are extremely and very easily verify able using google. We all should be able to do this with ease.






[edit on 6-11-2006 by smirkley]



posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 01:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis
Just because you say it is this way or that way somewhere or anywhere, in no way supports your argument especially as this thread is dealing with SPECIFICALLY a NATIONAL STATISTIC!!! Your local woes are not relevant to this thread.

And for anyone whining about how much more the CEO makes... Well this is America and last I looked not a Socialist Society, so WAY TO GO CEO...


Actually Semper, eyes on the ground, is more relevant than made up national statistics.

And how would you like it if a general made 95% more than a captain and 99% more than a private?


[edit on 6-11-2006 by In nothing we trust]



posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 04:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis
People....

This is NOT Skunk Works....

Posting your "Facts???"


Semper, I'd suggest to begin with yourself, since your comment did neither contribute to the quality of this thread.

Unemployment

You must be very naive to believe the ''official'' unemployment figure. To name an example, the US automotive industry pretty well reflects the state of affairs when it comes to unemployment. Ford alone employs more people than the foreign automakers combined, and recently announced that it is going to close 16 US plants and cut 45,000 jobs a short period of time.

But how is the ''official rate'' manipulated?

The unemployment rate is the percentage of the labor force that is actively looking for work, but can't find a job. People who are in jail or in military service don't count for the calculation of this rate. However, the Labor Department, does include these people, and thus they are recored as being employed, while they actually should be accounted as unemployed.

Since the US has about 1.5 million imprisoned and a huge military of approximately 1.1 million employees, it's not hard to figure out that including these people reduces the unemployment rate pretty much.

In addition, the US unemployment rate does not include people who are categorized as being able to work but who have given up seeking a job, passive job seekers, and volunteers, while the EU figure does, and so a fair comparison cannot be made between the US and EU rate.

The actual unemployment rate - when calculated according to the official standard, and not US standards - would be above 13%.

Within the coming weeks I'll make a detailed post about the rate to further elaborate it, I'm currently too busy with other things to do it right now.



posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 05:41 AM
link   
Smirkley,

Now THAT!!!! Was an intellectual synopsis...

Not much to argue with the break down that you provided. Very accurate for this particular area of the Nation.

I'll post a return after work...

Though I am yet unconvinced at your findings, this you deserve...

You have voted smirkley for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month.


Semper



posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 07:08 AM
link   

They seem to have no problem getting people qualified, but then the lenders are equally ready to foreclose. There is definately something amiss here and it's going to hit all of us.

Once again, I have seen no tightening up on foreclosure criteria. Grace periods are the same, etc.

Originally posted by DontTreadOnMe
Unless you live in Michigan you can't even begin to know how bad the unemployment picture is.

I agree, that region has been hit hard. But the American car market has been warned for years about poor quality and fuel economy. Add to that the demands of the unions, and it was inevitable.


Originally posted by Mdv2
But how is the ''official rate'' manipulated?

The unemployment rate is the percentage of the labor force that is actively looking for work, but can't find a job. People who are in jail or in military service don't count for the calculation of this rate. However, the Labor Department, does include these people, and thus they are recored as being employed, while they actually should be accounted as unemployed.

I would say that the military certainly should be counted among the employed. The prison population is another question. They don't really have a choice, except if it's making license plates.


In addition, the US unemployment rate does not include people who are categorized as being able to work but who have given up seeking a job, passive job seekers, and volunteers, while the EU figure does, and so a fair comparison cannot be made between the US and EU rate.

The actual unemployment rate - when calculated according to the official standard, and not US standards - would be above 13%.

And it would still be one of the lowest unemployment rates among industrialized nations. Using an official standard would put many EU members in the 20-50% range.


Within the coming weeks I'll make a detailed post about the rate to further elaborate it, I'm currently too busy with other things to do it right now.

Looking forward to it.



posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 07:25 AM
link   
The unemployment numbers fail to take into consideration those who have stopped looking for work for whatever reason...could be no jobs in their region...south side Va. is one of those places...could be back in school...like I was for 3 years or have just given up. The economy is not just the numbers...its also a matter of how well people are doing...I have said it before they do their best to get the holipoli to identify with Joe millionare when what's really important is how well homer simpson is doing...and who wants to identify with homer?



posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 08:10 AM
link   
Here's a graph comparing the unemployment rates with recession periods:



Note: The graph is not adjusted for government programs that have bought off unemployed people (social security, employment disabilty, ect) and reclassified them as not in the labor force, or people serving in the military that were reclassified as employed. So current unemployement rates since the Reagan adminstration (1981+) are cooked and don't reflect previous accounting methods.

The most recent Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Employment Report

U-6 BLS: Total unemployed is 8.1%
Construction lost 26,000 jobs in October
Manufacturing lost 39,000 jobs in October


[edit on 6-11-2006 by Regenmacher]



posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 09:24 AM
link   

Construction lost 26,000 jobs in October

That is what I would call a seasonal adjustment.

The unemployment rate we use us a claimant based system. Some countries use the ILO system. Each has it's pluses and minuses. To rail about who it does not include is pointless.

Some people point out that much of the job growth is in the service sector. It seems to have a negative connotation to it. It shouldn't have.

I would suggest everyone re-read DYepes post. I'd like to also say, if you want to work for "The Man", then you'd better get a good education in an area he is willing to pay for. That includes engineering, medicine, finance, technology, etc.. Or, consider one of the trades that still pay well, such as electrician, auto repair, plumber, etc..

If you want to work for yourself, then there are more opportunities in the service sector than ever before. Find a need and fill it. Just ask yourself, what will people pay for? Cleaning? Nannies? Packing them a lunch to take to work or school? Prepare their taxes at tax time?

There are plenty of opportunities that will give you a paycheck and give others an opportunity to have a job. It seems overwhelming to contemplate starting your own business, and a high percentage of them fail, but you'll walk away from the experience in one year or thirty a better person for it. And there are a lot of resources out there. Many cities have retired citizens who offer services such as counseling and planning, for free.

I empathize with those who have a hard time finding a good job. But don't give up. We all rely on each other in this country.



posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 12:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
That is what I would call a seasonal adjustment. Some people point out that much of the job growth is in the service sector.


The markets already voted on the unemployment report and the Dow closed down 32 points that day. Winter is peak construction time and last February was the last peak in housing construction. The Labor dept. report already takes into account season adjustments.


Builders shed 26,000 jobs, the most since February 2003, after adding 5,000 jobs in the prior month. Falling home sales are prompting homebuilders to reduce projects and hire fewer workers. Bloomberg

Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Construction lost 26,000 jobs in October as employment declines in resi-
dential specialty trade contractors (-31,000) more than offset gains in nonresidential specialty trades. Since its most recent peak in February, employment in residential specialty trades has declined by 99,000. BLS report


A service sector that's based on facilitating consumption by increasing debt in order to show growth is a financial train wreck just waiting to happen.

Recession odds growing, Fed model shows Marketwatch



posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 12:40 PM
link   
Last time I checked, 50% of the jobs in the entire country were in the service sector.

That's insane, when you think about it.

Even if the world market can't support the price of goods manufactured in America, using expensive labor, we owe it to ourselves to maintain a healthy production economy, even if it requires price-fixing, tariffs, or subsidies to keep afloat.

It's money well-spent if it prevents economic collapse.

Certainly better to spend money creating living-wage jobs that might not otherwise exist, rather than just giving people a few hudred dollars as a handout. Am I wrong here?



posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 12:57 PM
link   
JS the jobs have been out sourced here in my neck of the woods, it was a big deal when Bob Candy that was a household name an a legacy in the city I live in decided to move to Mexico.

It was a big slap on the face of the people that worked for them since they opened their doors.

But what people was not aware was that they were surviving on bank loans to pay the employees salaries.

Merck is going out of the US also, now the jobs in those companies werehigh pay salaries many can afford to move along with them but now the ones left behind not just regular workers but people with college degrees are scrambling to get a shot in our local base that is ofering competitive salaries.

Cooper also left a lot of locals without anywhere to go.

Now the biggest job maker is our Super Wal-mart and that do not even compare with the salaries these companies used to pay.

Proctor and Gamble is the one that is still going strong but you have to pass three test before even be considered by them.

When my husband retired from the Marines he decided to try PG he took the three test pass them all but when the interview came he was found to be over qualified for their jobs.


Right now the market is been saturated with the people that are trying to sell their middle income homes, homes between 150,000 to 300,000 thousand ratio because they can not afford them after losing their jobs to Merck.

Is amess right now in my neck of the woods.

People

Is jobs been created, but the jobs been lost are the ones that makes the middle class American.

The jobs been created can not compete with what has been lost when it comes to salaries, because most of them are hourly rates base on minimum wages.

If my husband lose his job right now, we can not survive working in Wal-Mart even if both work together.

His retirement check will be enough to pay house one car and Utilities and perhaps some groceries.

But our quality of life will deteriorate and we will be lining up food stamps after a while.

What this mean? we will become from paying Taxes to be a burden to the social system.

That is the example I am giving you and that is what is happening with the dying middle class.

Now I see all this as a conspiracy to kill the hart and soul of the class that support this nation.

We will lose the balance that keeps our economy going.



posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by semperfoo
In 1980 the average CEO pay was 97 times larger than the pay of a minimum wage worker. In 1998 the average CEO pay was 989 times larger. Today, the CEO only has to work two hours to earn as much as a minimum wage worker earns in an entire year. The spread is amazing.



That sounds like the amount of money and time that or congress spend working for we the people.



posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 01:11 PM
link   
[" The Bush Economy
by Robert Freeman

Unemployment is low because millions of people have dropped out of the workforce. The jobs that have been created have been overwhelmingly in low-wage domestic services like retail cashiers, bartenders, in-home medical assistants, and waitresses.

The Dow is an index of just 30 stocks, hardly representative in a universe of more than 5,000 stocks. Indeed, the much broader NASDAQ is still 55% below its historic high.

Here is just some of the bad economic news the Bush team doesn’t want you to see.

* Real median hourly wages have declined almost 2% under Bush. And this, five years into what they call an economic “recovery”.

* GDP growth is falling rapidly, down from 5.6% in Q1 to 2.6% in Q2 to 1.6% in Q3. Q4 will almost certainly be negative, the onset of a new recession.

* The nation’s savings rate has fallen below zero, the first time since the Great Depression.

* Home prices have just taken their biggest plunge in 35 years.

* Two million more people are in poverty than when Bush took office.

* Forty-eight million people have no health insurance, four million more than when Bush took office.

* Three million high wage manufacturing jobs have been lost under Bush, sent to China so Bush’s wealthy backers can make more profits using Chinese slave labor.

* The trade deficit has exploded to over $800 billion a year, up from $377 billion in the last year of the Clinton administration.

* With his record budget deficits, Bush has added $3 trillion to the national debt, more than any president in history. By the time his administration leaves office, it will have created more debt than all previous presidents COMBINED.

* As a result of Bush’s record debts, the nation is forced to borrow almost $3 billion a day, most of it from foreigners. Not since before the Civil War has the U.S. been so dependent on foreign capital.

* A full 70% of Bush’s $1.6 trillion in tax cuts went to the top 20% of income earners, those making an average of $190,000 per year. The bottom 40% of income earners, those making $14,000 a year, got a total of 5%.

* A higher share of national income goes to corporate profits than at any time since 1948.

* A lower share of national income goes to wages than at any time since 1947.

* As a result of all of the above, income inequality—an inverse proxy for the vitality of democracy—is the greatest it’s been since the 1920s, just before the Great Depression.

The truth is that what vitality there is in the economy is due to the massive expansion of debt: $3 trillion in federal borrowing; a cumulative $3.5 trillion in trade deficits; and a staggering $11 trillion in home mortgage debt.

Any moron borrowing almost $18 trillion in five years can fake the illusion of prosperity. But even at that, Bush can still barely even muster the illusion. The façade is popping rivets like the Titanic just before it went down."]

Taken from Robert Freeman's article on www.commondreams.org entitled "The Bush Economy" dated 11/05/06


[edit on 6-11-2006 by grover]



posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 01:22 PM
link   
grover

That is exactly why our economy with the markets looking good and the so call employment rates been look at like a gain.

We are in crisis.

Then when the Democrats come into power and trying to fix the mess that obviously can only be fix with tax increases they become the bad people while the Republicans get to hold their tittle of tax cutters.

But if you look at how is played through the years in our political system of one party ruling and then the next one it seems to me that . . . perhaps that is their only differences between both parties one to be blamed while the only one gets to play hero.

AT the end is nothing than a scam to keep a two party system controlling our nation.

What a joke.



posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 02:08 PM
link   
I was going to respond - but WyrdeOne beat me to it. Good thing I checked. (Saved my fingertips.)



Originally posted by WyrdeOne
It's time for my spiel again.

The unemployment numbers are not a reflection of how many people in the country are unemployed. They do not count people who never applied for benefits after losing their job. They do not count people who have exhausted their benefits and are still out of work. They do not count people who are critically underemployed. They do not count people who are not eligible for benefits. They do not count people who are self-employed.

The unemployment numbers are a reflection of one thing, and one thing only - how many unemployed people are on the government tab at any one time.

Anyone who thinks that only 4.4% of the country is out of work needs a reality check.




Well said WyrdeOne, as per usual.

.



posted on Nov, 6 2006 @ 04:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
Last time I checked, 50% of the jobs in the entire country were in the service sector.

That's insane, when you think about it.

Even if the world market can't support the price of goods manufactured in America, using expensive labor, we owe it to ourselves to maintain a healthy production economy, even if it requires price-fixing, tariffs, or subsidies to keep afloat.

It's money well-spent if it prevents economic collapse.

First of all, does everyone realize what is included in the service sector?


The service-producing sector includes the divisions of (1) transportation, communications, and utilities; (2)wholesale trade; (3) retail trade; (4) finance, insurance, and real estate; (5) public administration; and (6) services. This sixth group—the services division—includes a number of industries (see Table 1).

Some agricultural services (including landscaping and horticulture)
Hotels and other places of lodging
Personal services (including dry cleaning, tax preparation, and hair cutting)
Business services (including temporary agencies and business software developers)
Automotive services
Miscellaneous repairs
Motion pictures
Amusements and recreation
Healthcare
Legal services
Private education
Social services
Museums, zoos, and botanical gardens
Membership organizations (including houses of worship and clubs)
Engineering and management services (including consulting)
Other miscellaneous services

www.referenceforbusiness.com...


So, it's not just flipping burgers.

Secondly, I doubt you'd get much support for price-fixing, isolationism, or other artificial methods of proppping up an economy. That was tried in many socialist countries, with the predicted disastrous results.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join