90,473,000: Record Number Not in Labor Force--Up Almost 10M Under Obama | CNS News

 

The number of Americans who are 16 years or older and who have decided not to participate in the nation's labor force has pushed past 90,000,000 for the first time, according to data released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

 

The BLS counts a person as participating in the labor force if they are 16 years or older and either have a job or have actively sought a job in the last four weeks. A person is not participating in the labor force if they are 16 or older and have not sought a job in the last four weeks.

 

In July, according to BLS, 89,957,000 Americans did not participate in the labor force. In August, that climbed to 90,473,000--a one month increase of 516,000.

 

In January 2009, when President Barack Obama took office, there were 80,507,000 Americans not in the labor force. Thus, the number of Americans not in the labor force has increased by 9,966,000 during Obama's presidency.

 

Part of the increase in the number Americans not participating in the labor force can be explained by Baby Boomers reaching retirement age and deciding to stop working--and not be replaced by an equal number of younger people reaching age 16 and thus becoming part of the BLS labor force population.

 

However, it is also true that the overall percentage of the non-institutionalized population over the age of 16 that is working or seeking to work in the United States--which BLS calls the employment-population ratio--has declined significantly in recent years.

 

From July to August, it dropped from 58.7 percent to 58.6 percent. In January 2009, when President Barack Obama took office, it was 60.6 percent. It reached an historical peak in April 2000, when it was 64.7 percent.

:popcorn: Sure is quiet in here.

:popcorn: Sure is quiet in here.

 

Yep, it's disappointing how Americans have stood by quietly while Congress rewards the corporate world for shipping jobs overseas as payback for campaign donations.

:popcorn: Sure is quiet in here.

 

Someone will be in shortly to spin how this isn't bad, or to put blame at Republicans or President W. Bush.....or just avoid all together.

 

 

In reality it is most politicians fault(R and D) but D's seem to be leading the way.....

Yep, it's disappointing how Americans have stood by quietly while Congress rewards the corporate world for shipping jobs overseas as payback for campaign donations.

 

Heard a lot about it during the Bush years, not much during Obama's terms. Wonder why. Saw where 55 months into the current administration and unemployment rate is down one half a percent off those highs. Where is the outrage or accountability?

Yep, it's disappointing how Americans have stood by quietly while Congress rewards the corporate world for shipping jobs overseas as payback for campaign donations.

 

...and pays people essentially not working. Perfect.

Yep, it's disappointing how Americans have stood by quietly while Congress rewards the corporate world for shipping jobs overseas as payback for campaign donations.

Do you have details on the jobs that have gone overseas recently?

Do you have details on the jobs that have gone overseas recently?

 

Oh stop. Do you really have that much to protect?

 

This country has gone down the toilet from a combination of corporate gifts and welfare gifts. Are you really gonna be the guy who sticks up for Mitch McConnell's efforts?

Heard a lot about it during the Bush years, not much during Obama's terms. Wonder why. Saw where 55 months into the current administration and unemployment rate is down one half a percent off those highs. Where is the outrage or accountability?

 

It's because the outrage changes depending on who's in office. Quit playing garbage petty politics and look at what's right for our country as a whole. I can assure you what's right is not a slew of corporate gifts with no return.

...and pays people essentially not working. Perfect.

 

While welfare abuse is a monstrous problem in the US, corporate welfare is worse. Perhaps if the corporate world spent less on advertising and lobbying they might be able to avoid layoffs.

90,473,000: Record Number Not in Labor Force--Up Almost 10M Under Obama | CNS News

 

The number of Americans who are 16 years or older and who have decided not to participate in the nation's labor force has pushed past 90,000,000 for the first time, according to data released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

 

The BLS counts a person as participating in the labor force if they are 16 years or older and either have a job or have actively sought a job in the last four weeks. A person is not participating in the labor force if they are 16 or older and have not sought a job in the last four weeks.

 

In July, according to BLS, 89,957,000 Americans did not participate in the labor force. In August, that climbed to 90,473,000--a one month increase of 516,000.

 

In January 2009, when President Barack Obama took office, there were 80,507,000 Americans not in the labor force. Thus, the number of Americans not in the labor force has increased by 9,966,000 during Obama's presidency.

 

Part of the increase in the number Americans not participating in the labor force can be explained by Baby Boomers reaching retirement age and deciding to stop working--and not be replaced by an equal number of younger people reaching age 16 and thus becoming part of the BLS labor force population.

 

However, it is also true that the overall percentage of the non-institutionalized population over the age of 16 that is working or seeking to work in the United States--which BLS calls the employment-population ratio--has declined significantly in recent years.

 

From July to August, it dropped from 58.7 percent to 58.6 percent. In January 2009, when President Barack Obama took office, it was 60.6 percent. It reached an historical peak in April 2000, when it was 64.7 percent.

 

There may be a hidden positive in this. When the economy has dropped, due to hopelessness, many people will stop looking for a job and thereby withdraw themselves form the not in labor force. Because they have removed themselves from the laborforce they are no longer considered unemployed and are not figured into the unemployment rate so therefore the "the true unemployment rate" is somewhat understated. However, when a recovery is in the works, those discouraged workers suddenly find encouragement and start looking for employment again. Thereby driving up the Not in Labor Force while they are looking for work because finding work often takes the longest for these workers since they tend to be the least skilled and being out of the labor force as long as they have can make them less marketable to employers. So if so many people are trying to reenter the workforce that must be because in their communities, things are starting to look more positive.

Yep, it's disappointing how Americans have stood by quietly while Congress rewards the corporate world for shipping jobs overseas as payback for campaign donations.

 

How much of the shipping jobs overseas could be attributed to how poorly of a job we are doing educating/training our youth and therefore the extra amount of pay demanded American workers is not justified by the skill sets they go into the work force with? I really don't see jobs being shipped being primarily due to "congressional rewards" as much as the American worker is just not very competitive in the world market.

How much of the shipping jobs overseas could be attributed to how poorly of a job we are doing educating/training our youth and therefore the extra amount of pay demanded American workers is not justified by the skill sets they go into the work force with? I really don't see jobs being shipped being primarily due to "congressional rewards" as much as the American worker is just not very competitive in the world market.

 

Thanks for being an apologist. How big are your checks that you write to support what's going on?

 

My overall point is this: Does it really matter? I hate to be an advocate for protectionism, but the bottom line is the US economy needs it. Does the American system have to die for people to realize that the corporate world is screwing us over?

I'm no professional statistician.

 

But are there more people 16 years or older than there used to be?

While welfare abuse is a monstrous problem in the US, corporate welfare is worse. Perhaps if the corporate world spent less on advertising and lobbying they might be able to avoid layoffs.

So how does the cycle end? Corporate lobby and a huge chunk of the population voting for bigger government to keep their lifestyle status quo?