Started By
Message

re: Labor force participation drops to 62.8%, lowest since Carter administration

Posted on 9/5/14 at 4:54 pm to
Posted by SirWinston
PNW
Member since Jul 2014
82436 posts
Posted on 9/5/14 at 4:54 pm to
quote:


Why stop at $15, why not $50 or $100?


This is the most annoying trick ever. "Why only raise taxes to 35%? Why not 80%? Why not 100%?" My right wing friend does that shite and I want to clock him in the face.
Posted by BuckyBadger
Member since Aug 2014
740 posts
Posted on 9/5/14 at 5:01 pm to
quote:

More people would have jobs if they raised their pay. Well that's what the Dems would tell you.
There are people like myself that would work if they raises the minimum wage.

I have my retirement set and I'm approaching 50. When the economy tanked I left full time employment and worked part time. For the past couple of years I've made money working for myself flipping homes and cars.

I'd go to work tomorrow in fast food for 15. Not a chance I suffer that shite job for minimum wage.

I know plenty of folks like myself. We aren't going to work a crapoy job for peanuts.
Posted by SirWinston
PNW
Member since Jul 2014
82436 posts
Posted on 9/5/14 at 5:05 pm to
Honest question: if you're intelligent enough to flip cars and houses and humble/fit enough to consider working fast food for a decent wage, couldn't you just right now get a waiting job at an upscale restaurant which pays way more than $15 after tips?
Posted by CptBengal
BR Baby
Member since Dec 2007
71661 posts
Posted on 9/5/14 at 5:05 pm to
quote:

This is the most annoying trick ever.


It's not a trick, it's a fact. If under your their raising the minimum wage is only good, then why not twist it much much higher?

The fact it destroys your idiotic economic theory doesn't make it a trick.
Posted by SirWinston
PNW
Member since Jul 2014
82436 posts
Posted on 9/5/14 at 5:08 pm to
There's an equilibrium that is innate and rather obvious - freshmen level Econ stuff.

Look at that idiot Hollande instituting a 75% tax rate in France - that's absurd and it quickly backfired to the extent that the government saw diminished tax revenue b/c people just left for England.
This post was edited on 9/5/14 at 5:09 pm
Posted by CptBengal
BR Baby
Member since Dec 2007
71661 posts
Posted on 9/5/14 at 5:13 pm to
quote:

an equilibrium that is innate and rather obvious


And the arguments about a living wage and 15 dollars for fast food workers is based on this rigorous mathematical analysis....
Posted by the808bass
The Lou
Member since Oct 2012
111661 posts
Posted on 9/5/14 at 5:14 pm to
quote:

There's an equilibrium that is innate and rather obvious - freshmen level Econ stuff.

So when minimum wage was $3.75 it would've been ridiculous to raise it to $15. Now it's not because it seems so to you? Or to some people? Or something?
Posted by BuckyBadger
Member since Aug 2014
740 posts
Posted on 9/5/14 at 5:21 pm to
quote:

Honest question: if you're intelligent enough to flip cars and houses and humble/fit enough to consider working fast food for a decent wage, couldn't you just right now get a waiting job at an upscale restaurant which pays way more than $15 after tips?
Superb question.

First, I live in scottsdale. The fine dining scene has been severely limited. One of my passions is wine and I am a certified sommelier. Unfortunately, a city that once had around 25 is now around four. Also, Arizona is tourism dependent, like New Orleans. I don't know if you guys have a season, but we do and for five months it is really slow and hours are dramatically cut. We actually have some nice, small upscale dining joints that close for 2/3 months.

There are way too many long standing service professionals to compete for the few good jobs. As you know, it is about connections, especially in my age range. Plus, many places tend to skew a bit younger. This isn't 1984 and people aren't doing table side prep anymore.

Lastly, unless you are working hotel/resort you aren't getting bennies. And, working at Mickey Ds or a Barnes &Noble allows a life. I really don't want to have to work a Friday or Saturday nite.

I like making money and being able to live. I would be happy to make 30k and put the cash I use for houses into a turn key business (laundromat, etc.)that requires little of me. I don't know if I'm really cut out to be boss and to risk money finding that out.
Posted by Hawkeye95
Member since Dec 2013
20293 posts
Posted on 9/5/14 at 5:32 pm to
quote:

Are we sure that this data isn't lagging behind reality? It's totally anecdotal but I know of 4 well-compensated executives or middle managers who have retired in the past 3 months. All in their mid to late 60's. They fit the mold of what I was talking about. Again, anecdotal so obviously a grain of salt here.


the only thing is anecdotal data is just that, anecdotal. I also know 2 people that are in process of retiring. But I am upper middle class, if I was poor maybe I could talk about my mother having to go work at wal-mart to make ends meat.
Posted by Tiger n Miami AU83
Miami
Member since Oct 2007
45656 posts
Posted on 9/5/14 at 5:35 pm to
This has been predicted for about 20 years now. I remember back in high school this was known.

Automation and shifting towards an older demographic.

Sorta a duh, no shite stat imo.
Posted by Arksulli
Fayetteville
Member since Aug 2014
25233 posts
Posted on 9/5/14 at 8:21 pm to
Well we are looking at a shift in employment; new industries haven't quite managed to take up the slack from old ones. That would be enough to vex most Presidents we've had. I do think Obama is particularly vulnerable to this problem because he hasn't displayed a good grasp of economic policy throughout his career.

Which is something he shares in common with Carter. Even Carter's closest aides freely admitted Carter had zero ability to understand economic matters. He had the opposite of the Midas Touch, everything he touched economically tended to turn to garbage.

Oddly enough, that is about the only thing the two have in common as far as their economic policies during their terms as President. Carter was, I kid you not, a pro business budget hawk, particularly when compared to the existing liberal power structure. He was just the drizzling poo when it came to enacting those policies. The born again Super Liberal Jimmy Carter is something he's drifted into over the last few decades.
Posted by Wild Thang
YAW YAW Fooball Nation
Member since Jun 2009
44181 posts
Posted on 9/5/14 at 8:27 pm to
quote:

Tiger n Miami AU83


Posted by JoeMoTiger
KC Area
Member since Nov 2013
2677 posts
Posted on 9/5/14 at 10:34 pm to
quote:

Is there any consideration given to the fact that a lot of people in their 60's and 70's who had planned to retire over the past 8 years but held off b/c of the down economy have now decided that their assets are "adequate" for retirement, so that's why we're seeing a partial acceleration of the decline? The market is at an all time high and real estate is now firing well in most areas of the country, so the net worth of these retiring Boomers is probably healthier than it's ever been, helping expedite their exit. I'm not arguing your overall point, I'm just wondering if my theory softens the blow a tad...


Yeah, that's it. Must be why when I go to Home Depot/Lowes/any other big box store I see a lot of seniors working, hell even fast food joints.
This post was edited on 9/5/14 at 10:38 pm
Posted by JoeMoTiger
KC Area
Member since Nov 2013
2677 posts
Posted on 9/5/14 at 10:40 pm to
quote:

I feel bad for the progs, the data just doesn't support their fantasy world.


Absolutely, which is why we need to grant amnesty to 10-20 million illegals, that should fix the problem.
Posted by JoeMoTiger
KC Area
Member since Nov 2013
2677 posts
Posted on 9/5/14 at 10:48 pm to
quote:

Are we sure that this data isn't lagging behind reality? It's totally anecdotal but I know of 4 well-compensated executives or middle managers who have retired in the past 3 months. All in their mid to late 60's. They fit the mold of what I was talking about. Again, anecdotal so obviously a grain of salt here


I think you're describing the haves, it's the have nots that are still working, many more have nots, when this next bubble bursts created by the Fed and their quantitative easing to the tune of several trillion dollars into the equities market finally hits........... 2007/2008 is gonna be chump change.
Posted by GallatinTiger
KY
Member since Apr 2004
2232 posts
Posted on 9/6/14 at 6:46 am to
quote:

Absolutely, which is why we need to grant amnesty to 10-20 million illegals, that should fix the problem.


I'm afraid that we're only a stroke of a pen away from this (give or take a few months... (
Posted by gthog61
Irving, TX
Member since Nov 2009
71001 posts
Posted on 9/6/14 at 8:57 am to
SO let's raise the minimum wage to $15 and while we are at it legalize 10 million illegals, which will only attract more of them, because they will know that all they have to do is come and overwhelme the system and they will eventually get legalized. This we will do while part time and contract employment is a bigger slice of those actually working than ever and the perentage of people working is lower than ever.

Where is the fricking money going to come from to pay burger flippers $15? There's nowhere for it to come from but most will be from the flippers themselves because everything they buy will rise in price to pay the $15.
Posted by Holden Caulfield
Hanging with J.D.
Member since May 2008
8308 posts
Posted on 9/6/14 at 9:03 am to
On the positive side, less draconian employment requirements could result in increased participation in this year's Harry Reid Cowboy Poetry Bash.
Posted by EthanL
Auburn,AL
Member since Oct 2011
6963 posts
Posted on 9/6/14 at 11:16 am to
quote:

I feel bad for the progs, the data just doesn't support their fantasy world.


You really have to take this in and chew on it to understand arguing with some conservatives is like grasping at the wind.

The OVERWHELMING data points to a stable-to-good economy. Every sector is hiring. Positive growth for several months. Stock Market reaching new levels every week. The UE number falling.

All the key indices continue to improve.

And yet. Every time a conservative tries to find a negative point, they point to the true blue, tried-and-tested, the one, the ONLY...

Labor-mutha-fricking Participation Rate.
Wow. Less people working AS A PERCENTAGE, than ever before.

Wouldn't that be like LSU winning a football game 55-0, but pointing out we had 3 turnovers (that doesn't amount to SHITE?)

Take your labor participation rate, and suck on it.
Posted by Homesick Tiger
Greenbrier, AR
Member since Nov 2006
54235 posts
Posted on 9/6/14 at 11:32 am to
quote:

Wouldn't that be like LSU winning a football game 55-0, but pointing out we had 3 turnovers


No, it's like saying we won 55-0 with only 10 ten men on the field. However, considering the participation rate thingy, if we keep putting less men on the field each game guess what finally happens?
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram