The Employment to Population Ratio

oh look, a strawman

 

There's a reason that the US has problems, such as an underclass, while other Western countries do not. And it isn't a supply side phenomenon. Ultimately it reflects structural flaws in the economy which have been enabled through market fundamentalism.

 

our founders were libertarians who created greatest country in human history .How is that counter to reality?

 

lol, our founders were radical liberals. There were no libertarians at that point.

 

Obviously has nothing to do with market fundamentalism but rather with crippling libcommie welfare entitlements and the liberal attack on the schools families and religion of America. Now do you understand?

 

libertarian conservatives believe in tiny tiny govt as did our founders.

are you saying you are for tiny govt now or you would have been for it then??? Do you have any idea??

 

of course if true you would not be so afraid to provide an example

 

And the power structure knows this. In america the corpoate state knows full well is has lost all semblance of legitimacy and that it is unable to answer the needs of the people and society at large. So they send out the howlers.

 

so you want to switch to Republican capitalism??

 

The founders believed in aristocratic rule of the masses by the wealthy, they just didn't want to be ruled themselves by anyone else. Only affluent white land holding males even got to vote. The vision was that only the aristocracy had any role in representation. And yeah, the Wall Street/donor/"job creator" class is very enamored with the concept and has come very far in taking the nation back to that via backdoor means which they are codifying.

 

That's funny, we've dealt with that.

 

you deal with nothing, you just rant against the system but don't know if you are capitalist or communist

 

of course if true the govt would not have had only a few enumerated powers. Do you even know what aristocratic rule means??

 

Our founders didn't believe in tiny tiny government.

I'm for effective government.

 

If you can't trust yourself to walk someone else's dog, you can't trust yourself to have children. Let alone run a business or even leave the house without your mother.
Any accident you could cause walking a dog you could cause just by wallking alone.
Insure yourself. You are a liability to mankind.

Insurance to walk a dog. How ridiculous.
It's quite clear that you don't own a business. Never have and never will.
Frankly you sound unemployable. A drain on humanity's resources. Not willing to take personal responsibility for even the most trivial of endeavours.

 

Yeah we did, and you have nothing else, so you're stuck on the nonsense of "so you want to switch to Republican capitalism??".

 

if choice is not capitalism versus communism what is it?? Do you have any idea?

 

If you don't like strawmen, don't use them. Or keep whining and whinging about them being used against you like a pathetic hypocrite. You and Reiver would have that in common.

 

It would make a great difference. State and local governments are much more constrained in their spending, and cannot easily create debt for their citizens to repay. As such fraud, waste, and corruption would be made much more difficult to initiate.
Yes, I do realize that perhaps 100+ million 'people', probably mostly Americans are receiving some form of government assistance and until we begin to take some rational action it is only going to grow worse and more costly.

 

You always struggle to actually reply to the comments posted, instead preferring to crow righteousness (something fascists often do too, mind you). That libertarian groups have been funded by the rich elite is a matter of fact (e.g. just one piece chosen randomly https://www.newstatesman.com/politi...-be-tax-free-libertarian-dreams-koch-brothers ). We also know that neoliberalism, through its ideological assault based around market fundamentalism, has intensified income inequality and ensured greater levels of working poverty. That isn't a celebration of freedom. That is enforced intensification of rent-seeking.

I worked you out long ago. You're a right winger desperate for a more exotic label. And right wingers are just 'herd' for the corporate elite, easily manipulated because they have no considered comprehension of economic reality.

 

Ultimately it reflects human's limitations in various situations. All of us do not possess equal potential...

 

You talk about 'worse' yet it's never quantified? You have your diatribe about fraud in government programs but it's never quantified. No matter who is administering these programs, society and/or government cannot simply force them to obtain reasonable employment or cut their assistance cord pushing people on the streets...

 

Who said we did? But much of economicoutcome reflects inequality of opportunity. The focus on supply side limitations provides a means to hide from the bigger issues. That blinkering is typically required as, if we shifted away from the 'blame the feckless' games, those issues would undoubtedly lead to rejection of the right wing consensus (and threaten the economic status quo).

 

It would be worthwhile reading how the BLS actually collects its statistics. See that explanation here, "Where do the statistics come from?".

I frankly do not see how the variable you mention would affect statistical results. Given that "working at home" also means being paid by a company to do so. Those that work at home and derive a revenue personally from that work, independent of any company, are likely to be a minor percentage of the total ...

 

I suspect the physical incapacity is a result of the mental incapacity to find a job. If we have learned anything from the Great Depression it was that those who lost their jobs also faced the cruel fact that their job had moved elsewhere - and more than likely to the Far East.

There were no jobs to go back to once the economy started to improve after 2014. Production lines in the US had been automated where possible - and the lower-cost labor-intensive products are still being imported from the Far East.

We are at an historic point in the evolution of the nation. One that is very much like the advent of the Industrial Age in the middle of the 19th century that replaced the Agricultural Age. People fled the farms to find jobs in cities where manufacturing plants were located. There, they were taught the not so difficult rote-tasks of slapping parts into finished products on a production-line.

The percentage of our manufacturing work-force, once quite high, is now barely 12% of the total. The advent of compertized-robotic production lines has displaced much of that work once done by hand.

Which is why it is absolutely important that we allow coming generations to obtain the the kinds of degrees that companies are looking for presently (in our Information Age). Those credentials can only be obtained by means of a Post-secondary Education (vocational, 2- or 4-year college/university).

And also allow the present generation of unemployed who are trainable to return to school to obtain the necessary qualifications.

It is in the country's best interests to assure that the higher level degrees are not prohibitively expensive, or the Federal Government will be obliged to pay persistent Unemployment Insurance for those who cannot maintain a decent living by constant employment.

The country, like all advanced market-economies today, cannot afford to do otherwise than subsidize Tertiary Education just as it learned to finance secondary-schooling at the turn of the 20th century ...