Labor Force Participation Rate Falls To Lowest In 50 years (cnbc.com) 182
The US unemployment rate fell to 4.2% in June largely because 720,000 people left the labor force, pushing participation to 61.5%. Excluding the Covid-era jobs market, that's the lowest participation rate since June 1976. CNBC reports: The decline in the labor force marks a "massive exodus" driven by multiple factors, said Mike Reid, head of U.S. economics at RBC. "The unemployment rate fell to 4.2% as both the number of unemployed workers and the size of the labor force pulled back," Reid wrote in a post-report commentary. "This may well be a story of retirements but could also be a story of prior job seekers dropping out of the labor force."
[...] [T]he rolls of those counted as not in the labor force, a group that includes the unemployed and those not looking for work, jumped by 832,000. And while the establishment survey, which counts jobs filled, showed growth for the month of 57,000, the survey of households, which counts the actual level of those working, tumbled by 507,000. On a year-over-year basis, the labor force is down by just over 1 million, while the level of the employed also has fallen by 1.06 million and the ranks of the unemployed have risen by 40,000. The employment-to-population ratio slipped to 59% in June, the lowest since October 2021. All that has happened while the unemployment rate has risen by just one-tenth of a percentage point to 4.2%.
The drop in participation is sometimes attributed to a shrinking immigrant population and retiring baby boomers and Gen Xers. However, in June the biggest plunge came from what is defined as "prime age" workers, or those between the ages of 25 and 54. That rate fell 0.6 percentage point to 83.3%, its lowest since December 2023. "Looking at the statistics now, that argument doesn't hold up so well," North said of the retirement and immigration rationale. "I hate to use the word 'alarming,'" he added, but said the numbers are cause for concern.
[...] [T]he rolls of those counted as not in the labor force, a group that includes the unemployed and those not looking for work, jumped by 832,000. And while the establishment survey, which counts jobs filled, showed growth for the month of 57,000, the survey of households, which counts the actual level of those working, tumbled by 507,000. On a year-over-year basis, the labor force is down by just over 1 million, while the level of the employed also has fallen by 1.06 million and the ranks of the unemployed have risen by 40,000. The employment-to-population ratio slipped to 59% in June, the lowest since October 2021. All that has happened while the unemployment rate has risen by just one-tenth of a percentage point to 4.2%.
The drop in participation is sometimes attributed to a shrinking immigrant population and retiring baby boomers and Gen Xers. However, in June the biggest plunge came from what is defined as "prime age" workers, or those between the ages of 25 and 54. That rate fell 0.6 percentage point to 83.3%, its lowest since December 2023. "Looking at the statistics now, that argument doesn't hold up so well," North said of the retirement and immigration rationale. "I hate to use the word 'alarming,'" he added, but said the numbers are cause for concern.
Probably people entirely disillusioned (Score:5, Insightful)
Good for the MAGA morons, because they can claim "unemployment is down". Very bad for the country.
Re:Probably people entirely disillusioned (Score:5, Insightful)
I was thinking the same, they play with numbers so that the unemployment rate looks better than it is, discouraged workers, those who haven't looked in the last 4 weeks (which could for a variety of reasons, illness, family issues, taking time to retrain, transportation problems, etc.), or a parent who has to stay home because childcare is insanely expensive and they'd spend more on it than they'd make (yes, it actually can happen). And people giving up looking for working or just retiring a bit early because their career it shot (I'm thinking AI replaced jobs) isn't a good thing.
Also, there's the issues of being underemployed, or taking jobs at a lower wage than they would normally, etc. So while they may be 'employed' their situation has degraded compared to the past.
Re: (Score:2)
I was thinking the same, they play with numbers so that the unemployment rate looks better than it is
No one is playing with numbers. The unemployment has always had multiple different definitions with multiple different results. U-3 (the traditional number you're complaining about) has had the same definition for a long time.
If you want to look at discouraged workers you want to look to something like U-4 or U-6 as the unemployment numbers, they are also published by the government and also have an unchanged definition.
Unemployment and labour force participation is not the same thing. The latter includes c
Re: (Score:2)
U-6 has always been the better figure to look at, and I don't know why it isn't the one the press cares about. Blame them, not the people who publish the numbers you say are hidden.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree with one thing here, voters are dumb. Specifically the kinds of votes like you who don't understand the difference between U-3 and U-4 unemployment numbers published by the government the same way they have been for a long time.
Come up with whatever definition of unemployment you like, I guarantee you it falls into one of the stats published by the government with a clear definition.
Also labour force participation is not the same as disillusioned people. The latter are included in U4-U6 statistics w
Re: (Score:2)
All because they skipped math class.
AI and Robots (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Yep. But it looks like that one is a bust. Again.
Re: (Score:2)
No, the time isn't here yet, you haven't thrown in enough tokens yet. Spin that wheel!
Re: (Score:2)
If AI and robots are taking people's jobs such that they aren't wanted for new employment, it would certainly be consistent with large numbers of people dropping out of the workforce.
Re:Probably people entirely disillusioned (Score:5, Insightful)
It is global. We saw these trends reported in China as the "Lie Flat" and "Let it Rot" movements. In Japan as "Satori Generation" or even "Hikikomori".
Hell in a handbasket... all of us.
Re:Probably people entirely disillusioned (Score:4, Informative)
When Obama was showing a low unemployment rate, MAGA was effective in claiming the "real" number was the labor force participation being low.
Democrats however are too dumb to do the same and capitalize on it like MAGA was able to.
Re: (Score:2)
References:
https://x.com/realDonaldTrump/... [x.com]
https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/d... [rushlimbaugh.com]
Re: (Score:2)
So one tweet from Trump from back when he wasn't relevant in US politics yet and a single post from Rush Limbaugh, someone who only MAGA types listen to, was MAGA being "effective in claiming the "real" number was the labor force participation being low."? What a laugh, this was never a major thing during the Obama administration.
Re: (Score:2)
It was obvious then why it was happening, not so clear now though. But still bad. I can't say it isn't fair to criticize Trump for the same, but it's important to know why it's happening and at this point I'm not sure we do.
It's very unlikely to be the case, but the one condition I can think of where a rising U-6 would be a positive sign would be people leaving the workforce to have more children.
Re: (Score:2)
Democrats however are too dumb to do the same and capitalize on it like MAGA was able to.
If Democrats just become MAGA idiots with a slightly different logo then you're completely fucked. If you need to be an utter shitbag to get into power, you'll be an utter shitbag in power. The Dems are perhaps smart enough to realise there's no point governing if they're going to be as bad as MAGA. May as well have the genuine article in that case.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
your argument is that your team are better at lying?
It's not a lie. The unemployment rate is crap. Both parties like to use it to lie about how good things are when they are in charge, which is why most of them don't want to kill that goose.
Re: (Score:2)
No. My point is that the Republicans either don't think that far ahead or don't mind killing the golden goose because they feel their base is too dumb to remember and they can wing it if/when the time comes. Democrats meanwhile think too much.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Probably people entirely disillusioned (Score:4, Informative)
The labor participation rate has been trending down since the middle of 2000 when it peaked at 67.3. It dropped to 65.8 at the beginning of 2005, worked it's way back up to 66.4 after 2 years then started trending down until dropping to 66.1 by August of 2008. After which it fell off a cliff and continued dropping to 62.4 by 2015. It worked it's way back up from there to 63.6 until February 2020. Then Covid tanked the economy and we hit an all time low of 60.1 in April of 2020. It rebounded to 62.8 by November of 2023 and has continued the downward trend since.
The same labor participation nonsense was used after the 2008 crash as well. December 2023 it was at 62.5. It was at a post Covid high of 62.8 in November 2023. So I don't know why TFA chose December 2023. The last time it was this low was March of 2021. Outside of Trump's first term the participation rate hasn't been above 63 since 2014 and was on a 14 year downward trend by that point. The fact that it hasn't changed by more than 1.5% in the last 14 years isn't as concerning as the trend for the last 26 years.I don't recall anyone going crazy when the labor participation rate went from 65.7 in January 2009 to 62.5 by October 2015.
The reality is is that there hasn't been a roaring economy since before the dotcom bubble burst.
Re: (Score:3)
The reality is is that there hasn't been a roaring economy since before the dotcom bubble burst.
Yet admitting that would make some people look very bad, because they use this hallucination as justification why all the crap they do is actually good for everybody.
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
And in actual reality, you could have looked up the numbers, found that your "interpretation" is nonsense and moved on. But you chose to project a false positive image. This indicates you are either not very smart or a liar. Grat job!
If I missed sarcasm, my apologies. It is hard to tell these days and some people may actually believe the utter crap you posted.
Re: (Score:3)
So, you have still not looked up and you were actually serious. Fascinating. Dumb and dumber.
Since a simple search seems to be too much for you, here are some actual numbers: https://www.guardianlife.com/r... [guardianlife.com]
tl;dr: Early retirement is _down_, not up.
Re: (Score:3)
Exactly. Early retirement is down. People are struggling. There is no "abundance" to be found anywhere, except for the rich. _They_ are getting richer.
Here is a reference: https://www.sofi.com/learn/con... [sofi.com]
The average US salary is around $66k.
Re: (Score:2)
I turn 50 next year. Not super excited about that milestone.
(Yes, I am being facetious)
Re:Probably people entirely disillusioned (Score:5, Insightful)
Not necessarily. While that is absolutely what the administration will do, and is doing, for a lot of the "angry boomer" set, they will be feeling this on the ground and in their community, and it can lead to one of the cardinal rules of politicking being violated;- "Dont tell the punters that the thing they are experience isnt what they are experiencing". When politicans say "The economy is great, look at this GDP!" but people are feeling like everything is more expensive, their kids cant find jobs, their own job is becoming more insecure, and the rent or mortgage payments keeps going up, then people just get angry and feel like they are being lied to and betrayed, and its that sense of being lied to and betrayed that lead to so many people going "Well this trump guys kind of an asshole, but at least he's honest".
Now, you and I know that "Honest" is literally the opposite of what trump is, but when Trump was out there campaigning that washington technocrats where letting people down, well he wasnt wrong. The institutional Dems and Republicans where very happy to stick with a status quo that had been getting worse and worse for average people ever since the sub prime mortgage crisis. Obama promised hope and change, but other than a marginally better health care system, not much changed. Biden seemed content to just try and fix some, but not all, of Trumps damage from his first term. People where angry, because the technocrats where telling them that "Everythings fine, America is America-ing, everything in its place" , meanwhile jobs where still fleeing offshore, grandma cant afford her diabetes meds, and wages where pegged while inflation ran rampant. Trump promised to fix that. Trump DIDNT fix that, and in fact made it worse, but the promise not the reality is what got him in the door.
There are lessons for Trumps opponents here, but the biggest is, the people on the fence about MAGA and the people who where marginally MAGA *can* be reached, and when the Dems get back in power, they actually need to concretely resolve the anxieties that caused Trump to get in in the first place. Because if America was working, Trump would have been impossible.
Re:Probably people entirely disillusioned (Score:4)
No argument about any of that. One problem might be that the Democrats have a harder time seeing a rather large part of the voters as idiots. The Republicans clearly have less of an issue with that idea and Trump has no problem with that at all, probably because he is one himself.
billionaires and boomers (Score:3, Insightful)
Billionaires and Boomers have all of the money. Billionaires are hellbent on just collecting more. Boomers are holding on for their impending medical bankruptcy. The rest of us are fighting for scraps.
Re: (Score:2)
how many prime-age unemployed workers are still living in their parents basements.
If they're smart it would be all of them. Why waste money on rent when you have no income? Why leave your aging parent(s) to fend for themselves?
Stats are complicated (Score:5, Insightful)
But I've never believed the unemployment rate was a valid measure of economic health. The numbers are fudged in too many ways.
How many people are able to work, want to work, and can't find full time employment above poverty line wages? That's what you need to look at.
Re:Stats are complicated (Score:5, Informative)
The six state measures are based on the same definitions as those published for the United States:
U-1, persons unemployed 15 weeks or longer, as a percent of the civilian labor force;
U-2, job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs, as a percent of the civilian labor force;
U-3, total unemployed, as a percent of the civilian labor force (this is the definition used for the official unemployment rate);
U-4, total unemployed plus discouraged workers, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus discouraged workers;
U-5, total unemployed, plus discouraged workers, plus all other marginally attached workers, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers; and
U-6, total unemployed, plus all marginally attached workers, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all marginally attached workers.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Last I checked, CPI numbers exclude subsidized costs (foodstamps). I assume that's what you refer to by subsidies.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know whether begging is officially considered "work".
Re:Stats are complicated (Score:4, Funny)
Good News! Trump fired the people responsible for reporting the numbers. New staff have been appointed to produce better numbers. Solved!
Re:Stats are complicated (Score:4, Informative)
Good News! Trump fired the people responsible for reporting the numbers.
Re: (Score:2)
How many people are able to work, want to work, and can't find full time employment above poverty line wages? That's what you need to look at.
Is it? Why do I need to look at *THAT* number? Be specific. There's a reason there are close to 10 different employment metrics being tracked. They all track different things for different purposes giving us a different insight into different areas of the economy.
There's value in knowing the difference between people who are actively looking, people who are not actively looking, people who have given up, people who can't look, etc.
"Left the labor force" (Score:2, Insightful)
720,000 people left the labor force
This is the blandest, most watered-down way to say "lost their job" yet. Quite nauseating.
Re:"Left the labor force" (Score:5, Informative)
No, it means they left their jobs and stopped looking for new ones. Which is muddled by the fact that some forms of self employment may show up as this sort of behavior, depending on whether its under-the-table type work.
Re:"Left the labor force" (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
No, it means that they've lost their jobs and their Unemployment Benefits have run out. The various government agencies responsible for these numbers assume that if you're not receiving government handouts you've left the workforce and they stop counting you as unemployed.
Citation? It seems consistent with personal experience. I have only ever been poled while I was collecting unemployment. I have exhausted my benefits multiple times for extended periods, including now. Yet, I can't seem to find any official or even reputable source that says this.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The Official Story from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics [bls.gov]: "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."
St
Re: (Score:2)
That's one condition that can cause you to have "left the workforce". Another is that you were terminated without unemployment and haven't resumed work after a certain amount of time. Many people who lose their jobs do not qualify for unemployment at all.
Re: (Score:2)
That's why trumpies get off on firing people instead of RIFs or attrition to reduce the workforce.
It's all about the cruelty and destructiveness. nothing more.
Re:"Left the labor force" (Score:5, Informative)
Left the labor force [bls.gov] also means not actively looking for work. So it's more than just the losing a job, but also giving up looking. So people who "lost their job" and also retire, die, become a student, care for family, just become disheartened and give up.
So less about being sickeningly weasel worded, but having a different technical meaning that's a little different than common layperson usage.
Re: (Score:2)
All true, and it also includes working under the table. They are getting lunch money somewhere, but where seems to be eluding the official statistics.
Re: "Left the labor force" (Score:2)
People who work "under the table" absolutely say they have jobs. If a respondent is so feebleminded that they actually believe the BLS is using the surveys to enforce federal labor law, they're almost certainly too stupid to actually hold the job you believe they're lying about
Re: (Score:2)
But you still didn't answer the question, what are all these people missing from the workforce actually doing? I know two millennials who are literally living in their mother's basement playing video games on her dime, but is this normal? Is the drug trade taking that many people?
No one knows where the missing workers are, or what they are doing.
Re:"Left the labor force" (Score:5, Informative)
720,000 people left the labor force
This is the blandest, most watered-down way to say "lost their job" yet. Quite nauseating.
That's absolutely not what it means.
"Left the labor force" doesn't mean "they lost their job" it means "they aren't looking for a job". Examples of cases where people "leave the labor force" include (but aren't limited to):
* Retired.
* Had a child and decided to become a stay-at-home parent.
* Decided to spend their time caring for an elderly relative.
* Decided to go back to school.
* Gave up on working after being unable to find a job.
* Had a financial windfall and decided to stop working.
And so on. The "gave up after being unable to find a job" is not particularly likely in a job market where only 4.2% of people who want a job don't have one, though I suppose some may choose not to work rather than work in a less-desirable job than they had before.
Also, it's July 2. June employment numbers are basically worthless at this point. Give them a quarter or so to get more data and correct the numbers. The initial numbers are based on only on employer reporting data, which skews it in various ways. The government uses several other data sources including surveys, but it takes time for that data to come in, which is why these numbers are generally corrected 2-3 months after they come out.
Re: (Score:3)
It describes people who are no longer counted in a specific survey category.
Those people got to the "lost their jobs" stage 6 month prior, at which time they were designated as unemployed in the survey.
not at all correct (Score:3)
"Left the labor force" means you are no longer employed or looking for work. Example - you retired. Or became a SAHM. Or took disability. Or decided work just wasn't for you anymore. While not having a job is obviously a predicate for not being part of the labor force, normally people who are laid off immediately begin looking for work because it was an unplanned exit and they still have bills to pay. Hence, they are still part of the labor force.
Now, those people at Microsoft who took early retirement, I g
Re: (Score:2)
This is the blandest, most watered-down way to say "lost their job" yet. Quite nauseating.
Or they're like me in their late 40s and early 50s with a bit of money behind them, mortgage almost paid off or paid off and just said "fuck it I can't be arsed anymore." I'm a lorry driver here in the UK, a "trucker" in American. I've spent the last 15 years aggressively saving and investing, I've got enough "fuck you money" that I no longer have to work if I don't want to. I'd already cut my days down last year to four. This year I'm down to 2 to 3 days - I've actually only worked one this week - and will
People Underestimate COVID damage (Score:5, Interesting)
I was an essential worker during Covid, and I got it twice. I was just never the same after, spacy forgetful, all kinds of problems. At work I was top tier before, but had problems after. Like I hyper aged from COVID or something. I wouldnâ(TM)t underestimate the amount of people who are actually messed up as workers from that.
Re:People Underestimate COVID damage (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
You mean if I got COVID a few times I could have turned my life into a video game? Dang, I missed out.
Re: People Underestimate COVID damage (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: People Underestimate COVID damage (Score:5, Informative)
The shift away from high rates of severe, widespread microvascular clotting occurred primarily between late 2021 and early 2022, driven by the sequential arrivals of the Delta and Omicron variants alongside widespread population immunity. While early-wave infections frequently presented as a devastating systemic clotting disorder, a multi-phase transition drastically reduced both the incidence and scale of thrombotic complications. [1] [slashdot.org], [2] [slashdot.org], [3] [slashdot.org], [4] [slashdot.org] Phase 1: Mid-2021 (The Delta Wave & Early Vaccination) By the time the Delta variant became dominant in the summer of 2021, mass vaccination campaigns had significantly altered clinical presentation. [3] [slashdot.org], [5] [slashdot.org]
Phase 2: Early 2022 (The Omicron Shift) The true evolutionary tipping point for how the virus interacted with human blood vessels arrived with the Omicron variant in late 2021 and early 2022. [4] [slashdot.org]
The Baseline Today While the acute risk of widespread microvascular collapse has fundamentally stabilized, the virus has not completely lost its thrombogenic edge. Large database reviews, including studies tracked by the CDC [cdc.gov], confirm that patients diagnosed with COVID-19 still experience a roughly 73% increased risk of a thrombotic event in the year following their illness when compared to patients infected with other acute respiratory infections like influenza. The difference today is that the risk is an incremental, post-acute vascu
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Functional unemployment is 20% (Score:5, Insightful)
It's become so obvious that the books are cooked I don't think anyone can ignore it anymore and I have seen economists come up with all sorts of fun euphemisms to describe the actual situation.
None of this is sustainable. Here is where all the libertarian twats worried about toaster licenses show up to tell us why it's a good thing that Civilization is collapsing because nobody's going to tell them what to do right?
The average american, about 60%, read as a 6th grade level or the level of a 12-year-old. When you are 12 you get this burning desire to not be told what to do. Some people grow out of it and some people become libertarians or Republicans or some combination thereof.
Like the old joke, There are two novels that can change a bookish kid's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know if you recall, but Republicans were very effective in 2016 in saying the "real" unemployment rate was that number by touting the U-6 number.
Rush Limbaugh (back then the most influential Republican, also a top advocate for cigar smoking): https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/d... [rushlimbaugh.com]
Rush Limbaugh: https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/d... [rushlimbaugh.com]
Here's a tweet from Trump about it. https://x.com/realDonaldTrump/... [x.com]
Re:Functional unemployment is 20% (Score:4, Interesting)
Like the old joke, There are two novels that can change a bookish kid's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.
I never did read LotR, nor did I see the movies. I did, however, read Atlas Shrugged. In those days I ate books the way I ate potato chips; I found a thick book in the school library on a Friday and figured I was set for the weekend. I had no idea what I was in for. Your mention of "unbelievable heroes" and "emotionally stunted" is spot on. It wasn't until well into my 20's that I finally started to let my observations of the world inform my critical faculties rather than the other way 'round. The more I observed and thought for myself, the more I skewed toward Democratic Socialism.
I'm sure that Libertarians are some of the favorite lapdogs of the oligarchy. Hell, they may even manage to stay employed when so many others are being pushed out of the labour farce. And no, that's not a typo.
Average citizens in most of the modern world fell or were pushed into the corporatocracy trap, and their life circumstances are largely the playthings of billionaires and their minions. I like to think that if FDR had had a like-minded successor, at least the Western world would be a much better place.
Re:Functional unemployment is 20% (Score:5, Interesting)
President Harry S. Truman proposed universal health insurance in 1945, where workers would pay a fee or tax and the government would then pay the doctor or hospital of the patient's choice
The AMA claimed this was "socialism" because the federal government controlled the money. They hired the public relations firm Whitaker and Baxter to launch one of the largest political advertising campaigns in U.S. history up to that point.
We have to recognize the propaganda war that we grew up in, and the results of which we live with today in order to stop this madness
Re: (Score:3)
We have to recognize the propaganda war that we grew up in, and the results of which we live with today in order to stop this madness
Too true. Unfortunately, the last two or three decades have seen the extreme dumbing-down of US citizens. Critical thinking was actively thwarted, curiosity became a justification for casting people out, and the desire for knowledge became a social liability. This resulted in a pliable populace which reflexively goes along to get along, even if where they're going and what they're getting is an extended visit in hell on the way to oblivion.
Re: (Score:3)
... This assumption that all R voters are automatically dumb.
I neither assumed, nor implied, any such thing. However, all those Trump voters in Red states who have since lost healthcare and elder care and school lunches - along with many well-off voters who are about to lose the farms which in some cases have been in their families for generations - have been gaslit into putting the noose around their own necks and are still doubling down on the choice they made. I'm quite happy to state categorically that their actions are "automatically dumb".
It's quite simple. For a lot of the (R) voting folks they have healthcare and they have money and the only thing you are saying to them is "vote for me and I'll take care of some issue"....
To quote the Jessica A
Re: (Score:2)
So what is this whole thing about "All those Trump voters in Red states who have since lost healthcare and elder care and school lunches".... really? all of them? You checked? One by one?
My statement neither says nor implies that all Trump voters in Red states lost out - it refers only to subset of Trump voters who did lose those things. If you're being disingenuous, please stop. If you didn't parse my comment correctly, that's not my fault.
I'd much rather have my 401k hit my retirement goals 5 years early. Inflation is literally good for me. It just means I get a higher salary and can pay off my low rate mortgage faster.
Do you imagine that this constitutes enlightened self-interest on your part? If so, then you're only half right. You might want to seek enlightenment; in its absence you may find that what you see as self-interest is an illusion.
You are not an island. Yo
Re: (Score:2)
Pay me properly, then I'll work. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Ding, ding, ding! Winner winner, chicken dinner.
The economy is going to have to start coughing up real cash. But it is hard to do when the country gets flooded with 20 million poor people who will say "Si" to any low-ball, dirt-bag wage, while the other side of the coin is the heavy industrial jobs that left the country in the 80's and 90;s, and took big fat blue-collar paychecks with them.
We need a complete turnaround on several fronts, my personal candidate to effect them is the FairTax, but you've hea
The 13th could get used by the current regime (Score:3)
to lock up those who don't work by bringing back vagrancy laws. (Or at least they could try in certain states)
The 13th amendment to the constitution reads:
"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Notice this little gem:
except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted
Imagine this: State police raiding homeless camps, arresting them for vagrancy, then imprisoning them. In prisons in certain states if you refuse to work, your life will be made miserable.
However the government first has to prove to a jury beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty. (Due Process)
Let's hope most jurors would believe in a "Fully informed jury" in this case,
Re: (Score:2)
It's funny in a depressing way. Trump's latest tariffs are based on involuntary labour, which to me means that if we import American goods, they might be made by involuntary prison labour, so we have to stop importing stuff from America to avoid the tariffs.
The stuff I've seen made by American prison labour has been crap, even worse then the minimum wage workers produce.
Re: (Score:2)
That's true, and historically in the US, laws against vagrancy were passed after the Civil War and were enforced much more against Black folks than white. Some references include Slavery by Another Name: The Re-Enslavement of Black Americans from the Civil War to World War II [wikipedia.org] , by Douglas A. Blackmon and The Condemnation of Blackness: Race, Crime, and the Making of Modern Urban America, by Khalil Gibran Muhammad [wikipedia.org].
Michelle Alexander [wikipedia.org], in The New Jim Crow: Mass Incarceration in the Age of Colorblindness also
Re: (Score:2)
cooked number and still falling (Score:3, Interesting)
The Trump administration is cooking the books but they can't do it fast enough to head this off.
Even with the shell game the numbers are falling.
This is a post pandemic, starting to be AI era job market. Kinda looks like the pre-genocide Gaza strip, where one young person would support seven family members. This is my Signal chat today - two people overdrawn, one about to default on mortgage, a fourth who needs to move for safety's sake but can not afford.
This is a global phenomenon and the Hormuz "peace" where both sides keep shooting is NOT helping.
Years ago Republican pollster Frank Luntz, when asked how bad things might get, deadpanned "France. 1793."
We're not there yet, but you can faintly hear the thunk of falling guillotine blades, if you listen closely ...
Re: (Score:2)
Years ago Republican pollster Frank Luntz, when asked how bad things might get, deadpanned "France. 1793."
We're not there yet, but you can faintly hear the thunk of falling guillotine blades, if you listen closely ...
I hear that "thunk" in my fantasies; but for all my mentions here on Slashdot of torches and pitchforks, I don't believe I'll ever hear it in real life. Between the public-facing tech giants such as Google, Microsoft, and Meta; and companies such as Palantir with lower public profiles; the surveillance apparatus is so pervasive that the secret planning required to bring down the overlords is no longer possible.
Now, bringing back the era of blades hissing through aristocrats' necks might become possible if t
Re: (Score:2)
Years ago Republican pollster Frank Luntz, when asked how bad things might get, deadpanned "France. 1793."
Frank Luntz [wikipedia.org] isn't just a pollster: he is (or has been) a propagandist, inventing terms like "death tax" and "death panels". Wikipedia notes: "His work has included developing talking points and other messaging for Republican causes, assistance with messaging for Newt Gingrich's Contract with America, and public relations support for The Israel Project. He is a former climate denier[3] and has advocated use of vocabulary crafted to produce a desired effect, including use of the term death tax instead of est
How hard is it to just create jobs ? (Score:3, Insightful)
I mean manual jobs, but not necessarily hard physical labour - secretarial, light manufacturing, litter collecting, painting, whatever.
It doesn't have to add to the bottom line overall, but just benefit society a bit.
Why can't cities make work like this for people who are not working, and pay them substantially more for doing that work than for doing nothing ?
And give unemployed people back some pride, and sense of participation in normal society.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Notable from the article that will anger MAGA: "Being a voter or a Democrat was not a prerequisite for a relief job. Federal law specifically prohibited any political discrimination against WPA workers."
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:How hard is it to just create jobs ? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:How hard is it to just create jobs ? (Score:4, Insightful)
White folks used to pick the fruit in the orchards. I picked cucumbers as a teenager. Call the employment office and see how to get hired.
Re: (Score:2)
How hard is it to just create jobs for the sake of jobs ?
For whom? This article is about labour force participation. What's the point of creating jobs for people who have retired, people who have died, people who aren't old enough to work yet, or people who have stopped working for personal reasons such as potentially going back to study or caring for someone, or became a bitcoin millionaire, or ended up in jail without a Trump pardon?
That is what this article is talking about. There's plenty of jobs out there. Unemployment figures are quite low.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I'm not even clicking the "Apply" button (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
And $20,000 invested in the NASDAQ in 2000 [macrotrends.net] could turn into less than half that a couple of years later. Not to mention that the problems ClassicASP describes didn't start recently: they've happened intermittently and repeatedly in the past. You seem to have grabbed onto survivorship bias [wikipedia.org] here.
Anonymous boasting also seems a bit odd.
Good News! (Score:3)
This is good news, because it means America is so rich, 40% of the population does not even need to work.
Re:time to eat billionaires (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes it's like Mad Cow Disease. Best not to eat them, just institutionalize them.
Re: time to eat billionaires (Score:2)
Well, as someone who lived through the mad cow in the UK, it is certainly best to avoid burgers made from them...stick to prime cut steaks.
Moo.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
We should give people UBI, but then we have the right to lock up people who cannot manage their own lives and to get them off drugs, the hard way if necessary.
It will often save their lives and more often give them a chance to live a decent. productive, happy life.
And save the rest of us from the consequences of them not being able to manage their lives by themselves.
Re: (Score:3)
That cost would cripple taxpayers and squeeze businesses to the point where they can't afford to hire, kicking off a downward spiral with a positive feedback loop. That's what happened in the Great Depression, and it took a world war to break it.
We need pro-growth policies so that small businesses can grow and hire. That cycle spirals upward.
And here's an idea for one - no business taxes i
Re: (Score:2)
You replied "As far as "saving" people from themselves. That's a fantasy. You can't help someone who is mentally ill."
You can help people who cannot help themselves when you put them somewhere they can be helped, like it or not.
That will cost much more than UBI, but it will make our society better and safer for everyone.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We owe it to them to get them somewhere they can be looked after, and to them and ourselves not to make them into committers of crime, being "looked after" in jail.