Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
Nov 11, 2015 - 12:42pm PT
|
Anders, I've sure missed your posts here. Welocme back!
John
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
Nov 11, 2015 - 12:55pm PT
|
Welcome back, MH. It's really good to see you here.
|
|
crankster
Trad climber
No. Tahoe
|
|
Nov 11, 2015 - 01:19pm PT
|
Conservatives ignore 5% unemployment rates because it doesn't serve their purpose; that is, conjecturing that it would be better under a McCain/Palin or Romney/Ryan administration.
They can't, and don't, know that. All we know is that this president was faced with the total collapse of the US and world economy and has helped to bring us back to where we are today.
Is anyone on the GOP side presenting an economic policy that isn't paper thin? Or a return to the policies that got us into the Great Recession?
No.
|
|
Sierra Ledge Rat
Mountain climber
Old and Broken Down in Appalachia
|
|
Nov 11, 2015 - 02:58pm PT
|
I know a lot of folks who had their FT job cut back to PT, and are now without benefits. Seems to be the growing trend.
They're still considered "employed." Are they really?
|
|
Larry Nelson
Social climber
|
|
Nov 11, 2015 - 03:17pm PT
|
SLR,
Another thing going on is the financial crises in almost all states. I'll leave out the reasons, but many states are steering unemployed toward Social Security Disability because the state budgets are overburdened, and carrying debt during historically low interest rates.
What happens when interest rates go up?
Will they stay low forever?
Some would say that the states are running out of other people's money.
|
|
John M
climber
|
|
Nov 11, 2015 - 03:25pm PT
|
This is interesting to read. How the unemployment figures are obtained. Its not what I thought, or many here think, it is not based on who applies for unemployment insurance.
http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm
http://www.bls.gov/cps/cps_htgm.htm#where
Where do the statistics come from?
Early each month, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) of the U.S. Department of Labor announces the total number of employed and unemployed people in the United States for the previous month, along with many characteristics about them. These figures, particularly the unemployment rate—which tells you the percentage of the labor force that is unemployed—receive wide coverage in the media.
Some people think that to get these figures on unemployment, the government uses the number of people collecting unemployment insurance (UI) benefits under state or federal government programs. But some people are still jobless when their benefits run out, and many more are not eligible at all or delay or never apply for benefits. So, quite clearly, UI information cannot be used as a source for complete information on the number of unemployed.
Other people think that the government counts every unemployed person each month. To do this, every home in the country would have to be contacted—just as in the population census every 10 years. This procedure would cost way too much and take far too long to produce the data. In addition, people would soon grow tired of having a census taker contact them every month, year after year, to ask about job-related activities.
Because unemployment insurance records relate only to people who have applied for such benefits, and since it is impractical to count every unemployed person each month, the government conducts a monthly survey called the Current Population Survey (CPS) to measure the extent of unemployment in the country. The CPS has been conducted in the United States every month since 1940, when it began as a Work Projects Administration program. In 1942, the U.S. Census Bureau took over responsibility for the CPS. The survey has been expanded and modified several times since then. In 1994, for instance, the CPS underwent a major redesign in order to computerize the interview process as well as to obtain more comprehensive and relevant information.
There are about 60,000 eligible households in the sample for this survey. This translates into approximately 110,000 individuals each month, a large sample compared to public opinion surveys, which usually cover fewer than 2,000 people. The CPS sample is selected so as to be representative of the entire population of the United States. In order to select the sample, all of the counties and independent cities in the country first are grouped into approximately 2,000 geographic areas (sampling units). The Census Bureau then designs and selects a sample of about 800 of these geographic areas to represent each state and the District of Columbia. The sample is a state-based design and reflects urban and rural areas, different types of industrial and farming areas, and the major geographic divisions of each state.
Every month, one-fourth of the households in the sample are changed, so that no household is interviewed for more than 4 consecutive months. After a household is interviewed for 4 consecutive months, it leaves the sample for 8 months, and then is again interviewed for the same 4 calendar months a year later, before leaving the sample for good. As a result, approximately 75 percent of the sample remains the same from month to month and 50 percent remains the same from year to year. This procedure strengthens the reliability of estimates of month-to-month and year-to-year change in the data.
|
|
Bushman
Social climber
Elk Grove, California
|
|
Nov 12, 2015 - 06:21am PT
|
I was reading about heuristics and theorized psychological heuristics when I came across this;
Escalation of commitment – Describes the phenomenon where people justify increased investment in a decision, based on the cumulative prior investment, despite new evidence suggesting that the cost, starting today, of continuing the decision outweighs the expected benefit.
It occurred to me that this might be the reason why so many politicians and military planners have decided to stay in such prolonged wars in places such as Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan with little or no positive end result.
I know I'm not the first person to realize this but I thought it was relevant to a political discussion because the subject of entering new wars and exiting old wars hasn't been discussed at any length by most of the presidential candidates of either party during the debates except for Bernie Sanders and possibly a few others.
https://berniesanders.com/issues/war-and-peace/
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 12, 2015 - 06:54am PT
|
John posted The one constant through this time has been this administration's hostility to business.
Then why is business doing so well? And which policies exactly are you speaking of? You make a lot of vague statements and anecdotal arguments.
John continued While the administration's defenders stubbornly cling to their fantasy that the regulations and actions of this administration have had only a positive effect on employment, the statistics say otherwise.
Which statistics exactly? And negative effects on whom? And who is arguing that they have only had positive effects? The conversation is completely polarized because Republicans insist on having a conversation that exists solely of "Obama: Literally Satan? Or Literally Hitler?" Straw man arguments like "the administration's defenders stubbornly cling to their fantasy that the regulations and actions of this administration have had only a positive effect on employment" only encourage these destructive, rooting for "my side" conversations and all of it assumes that Presidents have profound, short-term effects on employment. Economists have made quite clear that Presidents do not have the kind of effect on economic growth and employment that the media and political classes like to portray.
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 12, 2015 - 07:18am PT
|
Just for shits n giggles I hopped on the BLS website (which has a great labor report search tool you can play with here) and excluded the worst bits of job loss from Bush's terms (June 2003-January 2008) and Obama's terms (March 2010 to Present).
Bush jobs excluding the worst parts of the beginning and end of his terms: 8,208,000
Obama jobs excluding the worst part of the beginning of his term: 13,005,000
If you include all the job losses that one could easily blame on their predecessors, the gap stays consistent:
Bush total net jobs: 2,050,000
Obama total net jobs: 7,881,000
John, can you explain to me how Bush policies, sold as "pro-growth, pro-business and pro-employment" by the political right result in more than 5 million fewer jobs than the "anti-business" policies of Obama? You said the statistics bore out the opposite. I'm just not seeing it.
|
|
Bushman
Social climber
Elk Grove, California
|
|
Nov 12, 2015 - 07:18am PT
|
Cowboy,
Read the article on legal pot in Mexico.
No mention of banana jam that I could see.
Urban dictionary described it as a sexual practice though.
how was that wench you shagged last nite?" -"wor very good mate..great Bananajam though!".
Care to elucidate?
|
|
pyro
Big Wall climber
Calabasas
|
|
Nov 12, 2015 - 07:32am PT
|
High desert I think john was eluding to GM bailout..
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 12, 2015 - 07:35am PT
|
Remember all those people who lost their jobs when GM didn't go out of business?
|
|
The Chief
climber
Down the hill & across the Valley from......
|
|
Nov 12, 2015 - 07:35am PT
|
Obama total net jobs: 7,881,000
Yet not one mention of all them folks in this country that are no longer counted in the Labor Dept's monthly Jobs report as UE'd all because they just plain gave up looking for a job and are not recorded as such over the past six or so years.
Or all them in the 18-22 y/o age group that have yet to even find Full-Time employment. Especially in the Latino and Black inner city communities.
Oh how the "Numbers" propaganda game is played.
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
Nov 12, 2015 - 07:39am PT
|
Oh well Chief, soon you will have to say "hail to the chief" to a woman and a democrat at that.......should be fun!
|
|
The Chief
climber
Down the hill & across the Valley from......
|
|
Nov 12, 2015 - 07:46am PT
|
you will have to say "hail to the chief" to a woman and a democrat
Says who... YOU!
I thought this was a Republic and NOT a Autocracy. Guess I thought wrong. That is of course according to you and your croanie LOONS, Jim.
should be fun!
YUP! It sure will be when the DOJ Indicts your hero and off into the wind she goes. Bye Bye....
PS: Even if she beats the charges, she is toast. Burnt to a crisp toast to say the least. Oh the ironee in that.
|
|
pyro
Big Wall climber
Calabasas
|
|
Nov 12, 2015 - 07:49am PT
|
High desert u got me..
what did happen to those banks that got bail out.. !
Edit: the it's bush Cheney fault rhetoric is Zzzzz!
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 12, 2015 - 07:54am PT
|
Chief posted Yet not one mention of all them folks in this country that are no longer counted in the Labor Dept's monthly Jobs report as UE'd all because they just plain gave up looking for a job and are not recorded as such over the past six or so years.
The labor force participation rate is down but that doesn't effect the raw numbers it effects percentages. No matter how you want to cut it Bush presided over about 5+ million fewer job gains which does not support the hypothesis that John keeps pushing. There is a much more nuanced and interesting conversation to be had here, but continuing to quote the various economic statistics that have been cherry picked to support anti-Obama talking points definitely isn't one of them.
|
|
Larry Nelson
Social climber
|
|
Nov 12, 2015 - 08:11am PT
|
Bushman wrote:
It occurred to me that this might be the reason why so many politicians and military planners have decided to stay in such prolonged wars in places such as Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan with little or no positive end result.
Yeah, look at the 40 year wars on drugs and poverty.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|