America’s Unequal Economic Recovery

kg21

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 25, 2021
Messages
3,051
Reaction score
1,351
Points
113
Old white men complaining about old white men. This is beautiful!
All the while supporting an old, white, racist president. It is indeed beautiful.
 

kg21

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 25, 2021
Messages
3,051
Reaction score
1,351
Points
113
And you wonder why they can't find workers for low wage shit jobs...
Can't make it up...
🤣🤣🤣
Don't worry, the caravans will fill these jobs.

Oh, and these jobs were here under the last president and those jobs seemed to be filled. What happened?
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
23,272
Reaction score
7,017
Points
113
You are making up bs, like the worker shortage is due to $300 unemployment payments. So the worker shortage should be over anytime now, real soon right?
No - I have pointed out a number of times where you claim someone has said something they didn’t. You did it here again. I never said that was the only reason. We have discussed other reasons on her 🙄. What I actually said is that the $300/week payments that went to an estimated 20-million for months after the job market was no longer hurting was a (the) major driver with inflation and the labor shortage. I never said either was due to that. This isn’t a simple 1-variable equation that you can understand. The BLS numbers from August support my claim and that was only the second month after half the State’s ended it. But, as usual, you make up bs claims because it is all you got. Desperate.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,617
Reaction score
5,567
Points
113
Don't worry, the caravans will fill these jobs.
Hopefully


Oh, and these jobs were here under the last president and those jobs seemed to be filled. What happened?

Lots of people retired, immigrant flow cut off and lots of other people just said fuck working.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,617
Reaction score
5,567
Points
113
No - I have pointed out a number of times where you claim someone has said something they didn’t. You did it here again. I never said that was the only reason. We have discussed other reasons on her 🙄. What I actually said is that the $300/week payments that went to an estimated 20-million for months after the job market was no longer hurting was a (the) major driver with inflation and the labor shortage. I never said either was due to that. This isn’t a simple 1-variable equation that you can understand. The BLS numbers from August support my claim and that was only the second month after half the State’s ended it. But, as usual, you make up bs claims because it is all you got. Desperate.
When will the labor market come back into balance?
 



USAF

Well-known member
Joined
May 24, 2019
Messages
4,319
Reaction score
4,479
Points
113
No - I have pointed out a number of times where you claim someone has said something they didn’t. You did it here again. I never said that was the only reason. We have discussed other reasons on her 🙄. What I actually said is that the $300/week payments that went to an estimated 20-million for months after the job market was no longer hurting was a (the) major driver with inflation and the labor shortage. I never said either was due to that. This isn’t a simple 1-variable equation that you can understand. The BLS numbers from August support my claim and that was only the second month after half the State’s ended it. But, as usual, you make up bs claims because it is all you got. Desperate.
Look at Spoof trying to Serwanga back from the story he's been peddling for a year now. "$300 PaYmEnTs!!!1!"

Not only a fraud, but a weasel too.
 

Go4Broke

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2010
Messages
6,079
Reaction score
2,068
Points
113

Good News: There’s a Labor Shortage.

Many employers are alarmed about the current labor shortage — the phenomenon of a labor market with more job openings than unemployed workers. There are two supposed problems, they allege. - First, that the labor shortage is caused by government benefits that discourage work. - And second, that the shortage will harm the economy.

Let’s start with the causes of the current labor shortage. Research on this question is unambiguous: We don’t know what’s going on. One logical explanation is that generous pandemic unemployment insurance benefits are now giving Americans reason not to work. But the data don’t bear this out. Multiple analyses find that generous benefits did discourage workers from seeking new jobs. But the effects were small. States that terminated federal pandemic unemployment benefits ahead of schedule this summer saw only a minuscule decline in unemployment relative to those that didn’t.

People’s valuation of their own time has changed: Americans are less eager to do low-paid, often dead-end service and hospitality work, deciding instead that more time on family, education and leisure makes for a higher standard of living, even if it means less consumption. If the lack of enthusiasm for bad jobs lasts, does this bode ill for the U.S. economy? The answer is no — and here’s why: The U.S. doesn’t have a job quantity problem; instead, it has a job quality problem.

For the past 40 years, our economy has generated vast numbers of low-paid, economically insecure jobs with few prospects for career advancement. On almost every measure — pay, working environment, prior notice of job termination, and access to paid vacation, sick time and family leave — non-college-educated U.S. workers fare worse than comparable workers in other wealthy industrialized nations. Consider this: Low-education workers in Canada make one-third more per hour than their U.S. counterparts. Of course, America’s job-quality problem is longstanding. So what does it have to do with the pandemic?

Let’s say that you like cheap burgers and don’t lose sleep over the low wages burger flippers earn. Would it bother you to know that their well-being is subsidized by taxpayers? Members of the bottom fifth of U.S. households receive an average of $9,500 per person per year in means-tested government benefits like Medicare, Medicaid and food stamps.

More than 20 percent of income for the poorest fifth of households comes from refundable tax credits like the earned-income tax credit, which supports low-wage families with children. So, one reason companies can pay such low wages is that you’re paying for the things their low-wage workers can’t afford. These benefits are indispensable. But they are necessary precisely because it’s so common for Americans to be both working and poor. If wages were higher, more workers could pay for necessities out of pocket; we wouldn’t need to tax the rich as much to support the poor.

Bottom line: That burger isn’t as cheap as you think; it’s just that you’re paying part of your meal tab in federal taxes. As pandemic stimulus programs wind down, the current labor crunch could vanish, but I wouldn’t bet on it. For years, social scientists have warned that because of declining birthrates, retiring baby boomers and severe immigration restrictions, we’re approaching an era of labor scarcity.

The good news is that this long-term demographic crunch is going to make cheap labor more rare. Countries undergoing similar demographic changes have seen rising wages among young non-college-educated workers, falling inequality, and more “healthy” automation — like those fast-food robots. Labor scarcity may mean you’ll be speaking your orders to a conversational AI at the drive-through. But it won’t hurt that much, and the workers who are not doing those jobs will probably be better off in the jobs they’ll do instead.

Labor scarcity won’t solve all our labor market problems. Numerous institutional maladies have made life abysmal for many less-educated workers in the U.S. Those maladies need to be fixed. But on this Labor Day weekend, let’s also raise a (self-serve) toast to labor scarcity — while hoping that the Delta variant does not weaken the strong hand that labor was recently dealt.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/09/04/opinion/labor-shortage-biden-covid.html
 




howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
59,696
Reaction score
15,342
Points
113
Look at Spoof trying to Serwanga back from the story he's been peddling for a year now. "$300 PaYmEnTs!!!1!"

Not only a fraud, but a weasel too.
Wasswa?
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
23,272
Reaction score
7,017
Points
113
Has Spoof overtaken 2 as GH`s top economic expert?
You are an idiot. I don't claim to be an economic expert. I give my opinions on a message board and in this case have backed it up with actual data - not twitter posts and opinion articles. Give it a shot sometime 🤷‍♂️
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
23,272
Reaction score
7,017
Points
113
When will the labor market come back into balance?
I don't know. It has started trending back that way already (see BLS data from August) and I would expect that trend to continue. I have never claimed to know when it would be "back into balance" - only that removing a (the) major driver that is causing it ($300/week freebies) will help bring it back into balance.
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
23,272
Reaction score
7,017
Points
113
Worth mentioning again....
All you wackos trying so hard to say the $300/week Freebie didn't play a major role in the labor crisis are arguing that people will choose to work, even if the Gov't will pay them the same (or virtually the same) to sit at home. Logic be damned - gotta defend Joe!
 




Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
23,272
Reaction score
7,017
Points
113
You have no data to back up this assumption
And how would one gather that data Wally? I have been saying since March on here that the metric we need to watch was open jobs because I could see in my industry research that people weren't applying for jobs. I was called a "crackpot" and lectured about how there are "many people" that would love a job if there was one available. Well, my statement proved correct as the Country marched on an 8-month streak of rising job openings - going into historic levels (like 40% higher than we had EVER been before). We finally turned the corner in August. This is just ~ 2-months after just 50% of the States removed the $300 "sit on your arse" money.
1635183675984.png
What do you think the numbers will show for September, and especially for October (~2-months after the rest of the Country removed the $300)?
 


Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,617
Reaction score
5,567
Points
113
And how would one gather that data Wally? I have been saying since March on here that the metric we need to watch was open jobs because I could see in my industry research that people weren't applying for jobs. I was called a "crackpot" and lectured about how there are "many people" that would love a job if there was one available. Well, my statement proved correct as the Country marched on an 8-month streak of rising job openings - going into historic levels (like 40% higher than we had EVER been before). We finally turned the corner in August. This is just ~ 2-months after just 50% of the States removed the $300 "sit on your arse" money.
View attachment 14973
What do you think the numbers will show for September, and especially for October (~2-months after the rest of the Country removed the $300)?
What is the chart, it has no labels.

I am assuming its job openings. An irrelevant chart to the discussion. The number of people working is what's relevant to your $300 hypothesis.

Job openings don't necessarily correlate with number of people working.
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
23,272
Reaction score
7,017
Points
113
What is the chart, it has no labels.

I am assuming its job openings. An irrelevant chart to the discussion. The number of people working is what's relevant to your $300 hypothesis.

Job openings don't necessarily correlate with number of people working.
Yes, your assumption is right (I stated in my text what it was).
- Open jobs 40% higher than anytime in our history is irrelevant?
- Open jobs is irrelevant to a hypothesis that centers around people not taking available jobs?
- Is the number of UI claims plummeting since the end of August also irrelevant?

Your whole argument is that getting paid the same to sit at home didn't make people want to sit at home. I'm really not sure where to go from there - we are in looney bird land.
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
23,272
Reaction score
7,017
Points
113
@Wally:
Number of employed persons. 26-states removed the freebie in June. 24 in Sept.
1635195804471.png

Edit: Bad math 🤣
 
Last edited:

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,617
Reaction score
5,567
Points
113
Yes, your assumption is right (I stated in my text what it was).
- Open jobs 40% higher than anytime in our history is irrelevant?
- Open jobs is irrelevant to a hypothesis that centers around people not taking available jobs?
- Is the number of UI claims plummeting since the end of August also irrelevant?

Your whole argument is that getting paid the same to sit at home didn't make people want to sit at home. I'm really not sure where to go from there - we are in looney bird land.

Unemployment insurance, $300?

COVID caused more than 3 million Americans to retire early, a new Fed analysis finds​

 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
59,696
Reaction score
15,342
Points
113
@Wally:
Number of employed persons. 26-states removed the freebie in June. 26 in Sept.
View attachment 14977
There are 52 states now? Sweet. Let's get those DC and PR Senators seated ASAP.
 

Wally

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 15, 2016
Messages
12,617
Reaction score
5,567
Points
113
The above accounts for a significant amount of the labor force change.
 



Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
23,272
Reaction score
7,017
Points
113
The above accounts for a significant amount of the labor force change.
Yes. Early retirements are also affecting the labor shortage. This has been discussed before and I’m not sure anyone has disputed that.

On the article…. I’ll start by saying I like the STL Fed. The method used to determine the data is subjective, but STLFed is a reliable source. I do have a couple footnotes to this article, however. First, the headline is silly. Many of these folks were likely collecting the $300/week. Being unemployed when you are getting UI, stimulus checks, extra UI payments, and the market is good for your savings doesn’t sound like a bad gig - let’s see these retirements last. I also don’t think these are the lower income jobs they are leaving - which have been the hardest ones to fill. But yes, valid point.

Next, I think the 5.25 Million number he states is cherry picking. I think I know where he is getting it, but he doesn’t explain. Most estimates put the number of people who were getting the extra $300/week freebie at 20 Million. That number is why your “$300” yells are so disingenuous. It is $300 x 20-million per week. 36-weeks in 2021. More than that, it put many into the “make more not to work” range which is my whole point.
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
59,696
Reaction score
15,342
Points
113
The above accounts for a significant amount of the labor force change.
Given the choice between "a huge chunk of the labor force was near retirement age and hung it up early" and "$300/week means no one wants to work" Spoof thinks the answer is obvious....
 

Spoofin

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 11, 2013
Messages
23,272
Reaction score
7,017
Points
113
Given the choice between "a huge chunk of the labor force was near retirement age and hung it up early" and "$300/week means no one wants to work" Spoof thinks the answer is obvious....
Right. It’s one or the other. Brilliant as always Howie.

I also love your “$300/week” mis-representation of the situation. $300 extra ($7.50/hour) a week (on top of UI) may not mean much to you - but it put plenty of people into the “make the same or more” category - so yeah, it’s really obvious to me that people would choose not to work in that situation. Not so obvious to you. 🤷‍♂️
Open jobs dropping and # employed rising since it was removed is totally a coincidence too. CNN says so. 🙄
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
59,696
Reaction score
15,342
Points
113
Right. It’s one or the other. Brilliant as always Howie.

I also love your “$300/week” mis-representation of the situation. $300 extra ($7.50/hour) a week (on top of UI) may not mean much to you - but it put plenty of people into the “make the same or more” category - so yeah, it’s really obvious to me that people would choose not to work in that situation. Not so obvious to you. 🤷‍♂️
Open jobs dropping and # employed rising since it was removed is totally a coincidence too. CNN says so. 🙄
It's not one or the other, but it's not equal either.
 


jovs

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 3, 2008
Messages
3,790
Reaction score
314
Points
83
My Dad was a school bus driver who did odd misc lawn jobs to fill in the gaps, and I have two older brothers who are in their early-mid 50's who have never made more than $22/hr. But yeah, it's all about the environment and having some massive advantage over others in your upbringing. Sure.... that makes sense because it allows people to justify to themselves why they aren't as successful as they think they should be. Keep thinking that, those damn high-earners had the deck so stacked in their favor, how could they possibly not make it big?
Your brothers either live in a low cost area or have owned their home for years, if you paid 80k for your home you can probably afford it when you make $22/hr, if that same home costs 250k you probably aren't going to be able to swing it, that's the problem people are facing right now, with rents and home prices so high many people are facing this issue, I don't care what ethnicity you are it is a huge problem.
 




Top Bottom