Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Markle and the Labor Force Participation rate

Markle and the Labor Force Participation rate

+6
Sal
Wordslinger
Markle
2seaoat
ZVUGKTUBM
boards of FL
10 posters

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Go down  Message [Page 2 of 6]

2seaoat



Double down on Duh.


During the 1970s and 1980s, the labor force grew vigorously as women’s labor force participation rates surged and the baby-boom generation entered the labor market. However, the dynamic demographic, economic, and social forces that once spurred the level, growth, and composition of the labor force have changed and are now damping labor force growth. The labor force participation rate of women, which peaked in 1999, has been on a declining trend. In addition, instead of entering the labor force, baby boomers are retiring in large numbers and exiting the workforce. Once again, the baby-boom generation has become a generator of change, this time in its retirement.



Last edited by 2seaoat on 12/6/2014, 12:10 am; edited 1 time in total

Sal

Sal

Willful ignorance is a sin.

2seaoat



His handlers have him posting on newspaper forums where he does not get critical interaction. He routinely gets destroyed here, and you can clearly see by his drop in postings that he is frustrated and angry. He has run from boards stats, and then he wimpers back and posts this nonsense after repeatedly being trounced........it is not a good time for Mr. Markle. All I get in response to my slicing and dicing his nonsense is a laughing pink panther.......I guess that is his pink flag of surrender.

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

It must be the dementia.....

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Markle

Markle

2seaoat wrote:Double down on Duh.

During the 1970s and 1980s, the labor force grew vigorously as women’s labor force participation rates surged and the baby-boom generation entered the labor market. However, the dynamic demographic, economic, and social forces that once spurred the level, growth, and composition of the labor force have changed and are now damping labor force growth. The labor force participation rate of women, which peaked in 1999, has been on a declining trend. In addition, instead of entering the labor force, baby boomers are retiring in large numbers and exiting the workforce. Once again, the baby-boom generation has become a generator of change, this time in its retirement.

Have you looked up the definition of RATE?  Try it...you'll like it!  Learn something too.

How do you explain how we have MORE people in the Labor Force today than we did in the 1970's and 1980's.

MORE people in the labor force and FEWER of them working. How is that a good thing?

Guest


Guest

Then you throw in stagnant wages... stingy credit... and burdensome biz regulations and taxes. Good strategy?

Only in utopiaville.

boards of FL

boards of FL

It's almost as if Markle is trying to pretend that this never happened.

https://pensacoladiscussion.forumotion.com/t16954-markle-and-the-labor-force-participation-rate


_________________
I approve this message.

boards of FL

boards of FL

OK, Markle. It appears that you want to discuss the LPR again. The floor is yours.

Please proceed, governor.


_________________
I approve this message.

boards of FL

boards of FL

It's never going away, Markle. Either make an intelligent argument, or suffer embarrassment.


_________________
I approve this message.

boards of FL

boards of FL

Merged!


_________________
I approve this message.

Guest


Guest

boards of FL wrote:Merged!

What's next? Enhanced interrogation techniques? It must be terribly irritating not to be able to frame speech as you wish.

Pull up your pants and use your big boy words to make your case... I think you ignore as much as you value.

When have you ever spoken negatively about stagnant wages, sluggish credit, federal reserve policy, tax and spend debt?

boards of FL

boards of FL

PkrBum wrote:When have you ever spoken negatively about stagnant wages, sluggish credit, federal reserve policy, tax and spend debt?


Feel free to make that case, PkrBum.  The floor is yours.


Please proceed, governor.


_________________
I approve this message.

Guest


Guest

Many here do often... including myself. You don't hear it... and certainly never entertain the idea of it's relevance.

I don't even blame it on one party... but it somehow threatens your ideologic sensibilities. You're conditioned comrade.

boards of FL

boards of FL

PkrBum wrote:Many here do often... including myself. You don't hear it... and certainly never entertain the idea of it's relevance.

I don't even blame it on one party... but it somehow threatens your ideologic sensibilities. You're conditioned comrade.


Well look at that. PkrBum is at a loss for words when it is time to get down to real discussion. Who would have guessed? Such odd behavior from PkrBum.


_________________
I approve this message.

Markle

Markle

Progressives can't stand the heat, FACTS on the LABOR FORCE PARTICIPATION thread...magically disappears. Go figure!

They CANNOT support their argument, so they erase the FACTS.

BOF was so desperate that he, being the only one with the ability, attached his...shall we say misleading...thread to the top of the page.

Grow up kiddies.

Markle

Markle

Second attempt at the FACTS. Something my far left Progressive good friends seem to find

BOF, like the main stream media, touts a meager 321,000 new jobs. IGNORES 11,918,000 who have dropped out since OBAMA.

Just can't make these things up.

Labor Force Participation Remains at 36-Year Low

December 5, 2014 - 9:17 AM

(CNSNews.com) - The labor force participation rate remained at a 36-year low of 62.8 percent in November, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The participation rate, which is the percentage of the civilian noninstitutional population who participated in the labor force by either having a job during the month or actively seeking one, was 62.8 percent in November which matches the percentage since March 1978.

In November, according to BLS, the nation’s civilian noninstitutional population, consisting of all people 16 or older who were not in the military or an institution, reached 248,844,000. Of those, 156,397,000 participated in the labor force by either holding a job or actively seeking one.

The 156,397,000 who participated in the labor force was 62.8 percent of the 248,844,000 civilian noninsttutional population, which matches the 62.8 percent rate in April, May, June, August and October of 2014 as well as the participation rate in March of 1978. The participation rate hit its lowest level of 62.7 percent in September 2014.

Another 92,447,000 people did not participate in the labor force. These Americans did not have a job and were not actively trying to find one. When President Obama took office in January 2009, there were 80,529,000 Americans who were not participating in the office, which means that since then, 11,918,000 Americans have left the workforce.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/ali-meyer/labor-force-participation-remains-36-year-low-0

Contrary to the belief of 2seaoat, the POPULATION of workers in America has GROWN every year. 2seaoat, and I would presume BOF think because baby boomers, like myself, are retiring NO ONE IS REPLACING THEM. I know, stunning isn't it?

2seaoat



I am one of those drop outs who is enjoying semi retirement, as are most of my high school friends who have left their jobs with ample savings and signed up with the ACA for the next three to four years. Retirement is when you quit participating. A very difficult concept for some. I imagine you still need to work, because why else would you shill for the Koch brothers at your age?

boards of FL

boards of FL

The floor is yours, Markle. We're all still waiting.


_________________
I approve this message.

2seaoat



Mr. Markle is hiding as usual. He uses the word meager 321K job gain in a month, yet in 96 months President Bush created only:

Here are Bush’s numbers: It’s 8.657 million jobs gained, and 7.121 million jobs lost, for a net job-creation number of 1.536 million.

So the economy during President Obama's term in office only needs five meager months to exceed all of President Bush's term. Mr. Markle has lost it. He is not around here much anymore because he gets what's left of his head handed to him in every thread. A MEAGER 321k job gain......what a hoot.

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

2seaoat wrote:Mr. Markle is hiding as usual.  He uses the word meager 321K job gain in a month, yet in 96 months President Bush created only:

Here are Bush’s numbers: It’s 8.657 million jobs gained, and 7.121 million jobs lost, for a net job-creation number of 1.536 million.

So the economy during President Obama's term in office only needs five meager months to exceed all of President Bush's term.   Mr. Markle has lost it.  He is not around here much anymore because he gets what's left of his head handed to him in every thread.   A MEAGER 321k job gain......what a hoot.

He has yet to explain to us how either a John McCain or Mitt Romney presidency would have better numbers than President Obama has had.

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Markle

Markle

1  BOF, like the main stream media, touts a meager 321,000 new jobs. IGNORES 11,918,000 who have dropped out since OBAMA. Today at 5:58 pm
Markle

Posts: 8757
Join date: 2012-06-16
Age: 70
Location: Tallahassee
Second attempt at the FACTS. Something my far left Progressive good friends seem to find

BOF, like the main stream media, touts a meager 321,000 new jobs. IGNORES 11,918,000 who have dropped out since OBAMA.

Just can't make these things up.

Labor Force Participation Remains at 36-Year Low

December 5, 2014 - 9:17 AM

(CNSNews.com) - The labor force participation rate remained at a 36-year low of 62.8 percent in November, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The participation rate, which is the percentage of the civilian noninstitutional population who participated in the labor force by either having a job during the month or actively seeking one, was 62.8 percent in November which matches the percentage since March 1978.

In November, according to BLS, the nation’s civilian noninstitutional population, consisting of all people 16 or older who were not in the military or an institution, reached 248,844,000. Of those, 156,397,000 participated in the labor force by either holding a job or actively seeking one.

The 156,397,000 who participated in the labor force was 62.8 percent of the 248,844,000 civilian noninsttutional population, which matches the 62.8 percent rate in April, May, June, August and October of 2014 as well as the participation rate in March of 1978. The participation rate hit its lowest level of 62.7 percent in September 2014.

Another 92,447,000 people did not participate in the labor force. These Americans did not have a job and were not actively trying to find one. When President Obama took office in January 2009, there were 80,529,000 Americans who were not participating in the office, which means that since then, 11,918,000 Americans have left the workforce.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/ali-meyer/labor-force-participation-remains-36-year-low-0

Contrary to the belief of 2seaoat, the POPULATION of workers in America has GROWN every year. 2seaoat, and I would presume BOF think because baby boomers, like myself, are retiring NO ONE IS REPLACING THEM. I know, stunning isn't it?



Last edited by Markle on 12/6/2014, 7:31 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : Frightened BOF)

Guest


Guest

I doubt either could've run up the debt obama has... so you've got that going for that absurd postulation.

2seaoat



I doubt either could've run up the debt obama has... so you've got that going for that absurd postulation.


The tow truck bill had to be paid to get the economy out of the ditch. The President did not put this country there, but he sure has got us out. The key to focus on is the length of the recovery without a major setback.....remarkable.

Guest


Guest

boards of FL wrote:
PkrBum wrote:Many here do often... including myself. You don't hear it... and certainly never entertain the idea of it's relevance.

I don't even blame it on one party... but it somehow threatens your ideologic sensibilities. You're conditioned comrade.


Well look at that.  PkrBum is at a loss for words when it is time to get down to real discussion.  Who would have guessed?  Such odd behavior from PkrBum.

Markle and the Labor Force Participation rate - Page 2 Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRtTmmH6ZthzMbi-Qq4I7O_Fx1K2Fy7srMwwCjDjoFa7KhtQIcfwQ

Yes I'm sure you feel that way...

*****CHUCKLE*****

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jzsKJvWiEI

Smile

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

PkrBum wrote:I doubt either could've run up the debt obama has... so you've got that going for that absurd postulation.

I maintain that since both GOP candidates were establishment people, both would have found ways to run big deficits. Remember, Romney didn't think we have a big enough military, and was ready to splurge for the MIC. That takes money, and I am certain he would have found the right excuses to do it the easy way (borrow more money from the Fed). A crisis with Iran or ISIS, for example, would have been all it would take.

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 2 of 6]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Markle and the Labor Force Participation rate

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum