- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Short and sweet perspective on the labor market
Posted on 4/9/14 at 8:22 am
Posted on 4/9/14 at 8:22 am
We're back to where we were before the recession, but still some 5.9M jobs short of where we would be had the recession not occurred. While it may be unreasonable to assume we will get back to that prior growth trajectory, given we did have a recession, we still have a lot of making up to do to get to a level normalized for net population growth.
LINK
LINK
1
Posted on 4/9/14 at 8:51 am to RedStickBR
But how many have been added to the able working population?
Posted on 4/9/14 at 9:16 am to ironsides
I think it is pretty unreasonable to assume growth would or could have continued at that pace. It's just not realistic. I believe that at some point inflation would have kicked in and the Fed would have started doing something to cool down the economy.
Posted on 4/9/14 at 10:24 am to Eurocat
Part of me agrees with you.
On the one hand, if there have been no structural changes to the economy, we should be able to fill that slack eventually as the economy continues to heal. In other words, the growth trajectory should remain the same, despite the fact the economy will tend to oscillate around it from time to time over various stages of the economic cycle.
On the other hand, if the economy is now structurally worse off, which the high rate of long-term unemployment and missed opportunities for capital investment might suggest, then we might not be expected to return to the rate of prior job growth.
It sounds like your view is more in line with the latter. As such, we must ask ourselves why this structural degradation has occurred and what, if anything, can be done about it. Further, we must put politics aside and ask questions like:
(1) Did the extension of unemployment benefits to record long levels play a part?
(2) Did misallocating the stimulus funds play a part?
(3) Did increased automation play a part?
The correct answer is probably the one that assigns varying degress of responsibility to each of the above.
On the one hand, if there have been no structural changes to the economy, we should be able to fill that slack eventually as the economy continues to heal. In other words, the growth trajectory should remain the same, despite the fact the economy will tend to oscillate around it from time to time over various stages of the economic cycle.
On the other hand, if the economy is now structurally worse off, which the high rate of long-term unemployment and missed opportunities for capital investment might suggest, then we might not be expected to return to the rate of prior job growth.
It sounds like your view is more in line with the latter. As such, we must ask ourselves why this structural degradation has occurred and what, if anything, can be done about it. Further, we must put politics aside and ask questions like:
(1) Did the extension of unemployment benefits to record long levels play a part?
(2) Did misallocating the stimulus funds play a part?
(3) Did increased automation play a part?
The correct answer is probably the one that assigns varying degress of responsibility to each of the above.
This post was edited on 4/9/14 at 10:25 am
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News