Started By
Message

re: Forbes Mag - Obama outperforms Reagan on jobs growth and investing

Posted on 9/18/14 at 9:16 am to
Posted by mmcgrath
Indianapolis
Member since Feb 2010
35471 posts
Posted on 9/18/14 at 9:16 am to
quote:

Empirical evidence that is DEVASTATING to this very strong claim has been presented ITT.
Can you please highlight the "devastating" evidence please. Because half of what I see is discussing retirement rates which is just beginning for Baby Boomers and drives participation rates back up.

Edit: I see that you added a link under ITT.

As you can see in the graph, the participation rates for 25-54 and 55+ are relatively level over the last 6 years. However the participation rate for the older group is about 40% while it is 80% for the younger group.

Riddle me this: If the percentage of the workforce above 55 increase to 20%+ from 16%, while the highest participating group drops percentage wise at the same time, do you think that participation rates go up or down?

The OBVIOUS answer is that participation rates are down because we have a lot more older Americans who haven't reached retirement age now vs 6-10 years ago.
This post was edited on 9/18/14 at 9:24 am
Posted by 90proofprofessional
Member since Mar 2004
24445 posts
Posted on 9/18/14 at 9:32 am to
Unless I have fundamentally misunderstood the definition of participation rate as it applies to retirees, I do not see how your last two paragraphs in the edit follow.
Posted by the808bass
The Lou
Member since Oct 2012
111609 posts
Posted on 9/18/14 at 9:50 am to
quote:

The OBVIOUS answer is that participation rates are down because we have a lot more older Americans who haven't reached retirement age now vs 6-10 years ago.

Gotdamn you dumb.
first pageprev pagePage 1 of 1Next pagelast page
refresh

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