Trumps absurd claim about the US labor force

[woodsrider]

Trying to play catch up on this. Did President Trump change the way the metric is calculated?

[doomer]

Whether it is 10 degrees out or 15 degrees out...one needs a coat.

[Voice of Reason]

Is there a link that will show us the history of the 94 million out-of-work statistic?

[Voice of Reason]

Ironically, an article that included the information I was looking for popped up as I was looking at something else. Here is a link to the article:

 

Correcting The 'Alternative Facts' About The 'Silent Nation Of Jobless Americans' Who 'Aren't Part Of Our Economy' | Seeking Alpha

 

The key stat he points out is 94% of the 94 million do not want a job now for various reasons that you can see listed in the link. The Not in Labor Force number has been a steady increase since the late 1980s, when it was around 63 million.

 

The number of people out of work and actively looking for a job in the past year is 2,340,000.

 

As to the labor force participation rate that has been mentioned in this thread a couple of times, the current rate is only 1% lower than the rate it was in 1980 and is at a higher level than any time prior to 1978.

Edited March 2, 2017 by Voice of Reason

[mcpapa]

I've been out of work for over 8 years.

[Hellcats]

I've been out of work for over 8 years.

 

Drag on the society ! Get out and get a job! :lol2:

[Mitch Rapp]

Ironically, an article that included the information I was looking for popped up as I was looking at something else. Here is a link to the article:

 

Correcting The 'Alternative Facts' About The 'Silent Nation Of Jobless Americans' Who 'Aren't Part Of Our Economy' | Seeking Alpha

 

The key stat he points out is 94% of the 94 million do not want a job now for various reasons that you can see listed in the link. The Not in Labor Force number has been a steady increase since the late 1980s, when it was around 63 million.

 

The number of people out of work and actively looking for a job in the past year is 2,340,000.

 

As to the labor force participation rate that has been mentioned in this thread a couple of times, the current rate is only 1% lower than the rate it was in 1980 and is at a higher level than any time prior to 1978.

Prior to 1980, it was far more common for men to be the single breadwinner in a family consisting of two married people with children. The labor participation rate began climbing as the marriage rate declined and single parent households became more common.

 

Obama left office with the labor participation rate being below its level during the depths of the recession. The recovery from that recession was anemic, with low wages, part time jobs substituted for full time jobs, and a plunging labor participation rate.

 

[TABLE=class: grid, width:600]

[TR]

[TH]Year[/TH]

[TH]Jan[/TH]

[TH]Feb[/TH]

[TH]Mar[/TH]

[TH]Apr[/TH]

[TH]May[/TH]

[TH]Jun[/TH]

[TH]Jul[/TH]

[TH]Aug[/TH]

[TH]Sep[/TH]

[TH]Oct[/TH]

[TH]Nov[/TH]

[TH]Dec[/TH]

[/TR]

[TR=class: odd]

[TH]2007[/TH]

[TD]66.4[/TD]

[TD]66.3[/TD]

[TD]66.2[/TD]

[TD]65.9[/TD]

[TD]66.0[/TD]

[TD]66.0[/TD]

[TD]66.0[/TD]

[TD]65.8[/TD]

[TD]66.0[/TD]

[TD]65.8[/TD]

[TD]66.0[/TD]

[TD]66.0[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: even]

[TH]2008[/TH]

[TD]66.2[/TD]

[TD]66.0[/TD]

[TD]66.1[/TD]

[TD]65.9[/TD]

[TD]66.1[/TD]

[TD]66.1[/TD]

[TD]66.1[/TD]

[TD]66.1[/TD]

[TD]66.0[/TD]

[TD]66.0[/TD]

[TD]65.9[/TD]

[TD]65.8[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: odd]

[TH]2009[/TH]

[TD]65.7[/TD]

[TD]65.8[/TD]

[TD]65.6[/TD]

[TD]65.7[/TD]

[TD]65.7[/TD]

[TD]65.7[/TD]

[TD]65.5[/TD]

[TD]65.4[/TD]

[TD]65.1[/TD]

[TD]65.0[/TD]

[TD]65.0[/TD]

[TD]64.6[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: even]

[TH]2010[/TH]

[TD]64.8[/TD]

[TD]64.9[/TD]

[TD]64.9[/TD]

[TD]65.2[/TD]

[TD]64.9[/TD]

[TD]64.6[/TD]

[TD]64.6[/TD]

[TD]64.7[/TD]

[TD]64.6[/TD]

[TD]64.4[/TD]

[TD]64.6[/TD]

[TD]64.3[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: odd]

[TH]2011[/TH]

[TD]64.2[/TD]

[TD]64.1[/TD]

[TD]64.2[/TD]

[TD]64.2[/TD]

[TD]64.1[/TD]

[TD]64.0[/TD]

[TD]64.0[/TD]

[TD]64.1[/TD]

[TD]64.2[/TD]

[TD]64.1[/TD]

[TD]64.1[/TD]

[TD]64.0[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: even]

[TH]2012[/TH]

[TD]63.7[/TD]

[TD]63.8[/TD]

[TD]63.8[/TD]

[TD]63.7[/TD]

[TD]63.7[/TD]

[TD]63.8[/TD]

[TD]63.7[/TD]

[TD]63.5[/TD]

[TD]63.6[/TD]

[TD]63.8[/TD]

[TD]63.6[/TD]

[TD]63.7[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: odd]

[TH]2013[/TH]

[TD]63.6[/TD]

[TD]63.4[/TD]

[TD]63.3[/TD]

[TD]63.4[/TD]

[TD]63.4[/TD]

[TD]63.4[/TD]

[TD]63.3[/TD]

[TD]63.3[/TD]

[TD]63.3[/TD]

[TD]62.8[/TD]

[TD]63.0[/TD]

[TD]62.9[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: even]

[TH]2014[/TH]

[TD]62.9[/TD]

[TD]62.9[/TD]

[TD]63.1[/TD]

[TD]62.8[/TD]

[TD]62.8[/TD]

[TD]62.8[/TD]

[TD]62.9[/TD]

[TD]62.9[/TD]

[TD]62.8[/TD]

[TD]62.9[/TD]

[TD]62.9[/TD]

[TD]62.7[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: odd]

[TH]2015[/TH]

[TD]62.9[/TD]

[TD]62.7[/TD]

[TD]62.7[/TD]

[TD]62.8[/TD]

[TD]62.9[/TD]

[TD]62.6[/TD]

[TD]62.6[/TD]

[TD]62.6[/TD]

[TD]62.4[/TD]

[TD]62.5[/TD]

[TD]62.5[/TD]

[TD]62.7[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: even]

[TH]2016[/TH]

[TD]62.7[/TD]

[TD]62.9[/TD]

[TD]63.0[/TD]

[TD]62.8[/TD]

[TD]62.6[/TD]

[TD]62.7[/TD]

[TD]62.8[/TD]

[TD]62.8[/TD]

[TD]62.9[/TD]

[TD]62.8[/TD]

[TD]62.6[/TD]

[TD]62.7[/TD]

[/TR]

[TR=class: odd]

[TH]2017[/TH]

[TD]62.9[/TD]

[TD] [/TD]

[TD] [/TD]

[TD] [/TD]

[TD] [/TD]

[TD] [/TD]

[TD] [/TD]

[TD] [/TD]

[TD] [/TD]

[TD] [/TD]

[TD] [/TD]

[TD] [/TD]

[/TR]

[/TABLE]

[Voice of Reason]

I think the labor participation rate is going to continue to go down. It is a function of demographics - aging Baby Boomers and people who have accumulated sufficient dollars to retire early.

[LIPTON BASH]

It seems retiring before 65 may be contributing to the growth of missing workers.

 

But retiring before 65 is becoming less common. It is less common today than it was 5 years ago , less common 10 years ago as it was 5 years ago , and so on and so on. A majority of American's can't afford to because Pensions are in a deep decline, companies don't provide health care and people wait to long to start saving. So to blame people retiring before 65 on a historical number of people out of the work force is a fallacy.

 

The biggest issue the government contributes to the labor force force problem is the out right abuse of the Social Security Disability system. Way to many people are getting approved.

[Clyde]

Folks, stop.

 

He clearly was trying to make us believe 94M are sending out resumes but cannot find a job. Clear as day.

 

He said the same thing in January but made it even MORE obvious. He actually explained it.

 

 

Right now, there are 96 million [people] wanting a job and they can't get [one],” he said. “You know that story. The real number. That's the real number."

 

 

 

How Donald Trump's Sound Bites Play the Media - The Atlantic

[Mitch Rapp]

Folks, stop.

 

He clearly was trying to make us believe 94M are sending out resumes but cannot find a job. Clear as day.

 

He said the same thing in January but made it even MORE obvious. He actually explained it.

 

 

Right now, there are 96 million [people] wanting a job and they can't get [one],” he said. “You know that story. The real number. That's the real number."

 

 

 

How Donald Trump's Sound Bites Play the Media - The Atlantic

Trump said a lot of things that were not true prior to taking the oath of office. On more than one occasion, I have called him a pathological liar.

 

However, you are still wrong for accusing him of lying during his speech before Congress. He chose his words carefully and said what he meant. If you want to criticize many of the things that Trump has said in the past couple of years, then it should not be hard to nail him on a pattern of lies.

 

But here's the thing...Trump ran against a candidate in November who was much more dishonest than he was. Had you railed against Hillary Clinton instead of defending her dishonest denials of wrong doing, you would have much more credibility with your endless barrage of attacks on Donald Trump.

 

Let's limit our attacks on Donald Trump on what he says and does as POTUS, Clyde. That is what I have tried to do, and I know that I was much more critical of Trump the candidate than you were.

[Clyde]

Trump said a lot of things that were not true prior to taking the oath of office. On more than one occasion, I have called him a pathological liar.

 

However, you are still wrong for accusing him of lying during his speech before Congress. He chose his words carefully and said what he meant. If you want to criticize many of the things that Trump has said in the past couple of years, then it should not be hard to nail him on a pattern of lies.

 

Are you still contending that the POTUS was NOT intending to mislead the public on how many people are LOOKING for jobs? Come on now. Your obvious intelligence tells me you do not believe that.

 

But here's the thing...Trump ran against a candidate in November who was much more dishonest than he was. Had you railed against Hillary Clinton instead of defending her dishonest denials of wrong doing, you would have much more credibility with your endless barrage of attacks on Donald Trump.

 

You need to pay more attention. I repeatedly said how bad a candidate HRC was. Repeatedly.

 

Let's limit our attacks on Donald Trump on what he says and does as POTUS, Clyde. That is what I have tried to do, and I know that I was much more critical of Trump the candidate than you were.

 

 

What he says and does? What else is there ? I gave you the exact quote he used in January. I'm not inferring anything.

[Clyde]

 

Did you ever express similar outrage as Obama repeatedly touted the official unemployment rate , which grossly understates the unemployment problem in this country? I'm guessing not.

 

What I did was post multiple links explaining the differences between all of the measures so we could have intelligent discussions. It helped everyone get a better feel for what was being presented. It clearly showed that the measurement that President Obama and every other POTUS has used was not the whole story.

 

What I didn't do was keep playing a game of semantics.

[Mitch Rapp]

What I did was post multiple links explaining the differences between all of the measures so we could have intelligent discussions. It helped everyone get a better feel for what was being presented. It clearly showed that the measurement that President Obama and every other POTUS has used was not the whole story.

 

What I didn't do was keep playing a game of semantics.

Everybody knows what you have been doing. There is no need to explain it.

[Mitch Rapp]

Are you still contending that the POTUS was NOT intending to mislead the public on how many people are LOOKING for jobs? Come on now. Your obvious intelligence tells me you do not believe that.

 

 

 

You need to pay more attention. I repeatedly said how bad a candidate HRC was. Repeatedly.

 

 

 

 

What he says and does? What else is there ? I gave you the exact quote he used in January. I'm not inferring anything.

That's not how this works, Clyde. The topic was Trump's recent speech, not what he said before he took office. Nice try at diverting attention away from the fact that all Trump did was cited a statistic that was taken straight from Obama's BLS. It is you opinion that Trump cited that statistic to mislead people who are bad at math. Nothing wrong with having an opinion, as long as you don't put it on equal footing with indisputable facts.