Hey guess what, if they don't want to work then they can starve in my books! "I made 90k in my last job and refuse to work for 40k because I'm better than that." well whoop de fucking do. I have no sympathy and would not throw spare pennies at these fucks if I seen them begging on the street.
Buffalo NY is probably one of the greatest shitholes in America. Why anyone would live up there is beyond me. My advice: get on a greyhound and move. Yes people will lose jobs and yes there will be underemployment in a Democratic, Capitalistic society. Outside of Communism... the only other person who was able to achieve full employment was Adolf Hitler. Full employment is never gonna happen. 4 to 5% is perfectly reasonable here in America. Yes it will suck for some people but it will equal good for the greatest majority. Communism would be the only way to get 100% of the population all working and earning a livable wage. But is that the path you truly want for America Bluntz?
10% flat tax....US flies.... Bureaucratic needs eliminated.... Foreign companies will want to come to the US.... Consumers will have better jobs and more money... Globalization will come to the US...not leave it... The best of Europe and all countries will want to be in the USA....
I've never understood why people believe this 6 months you are no longer counted thing. It is simply not true. The calculation is simple: A person (aged 16-74) falls into one of three categories: 1) Worked for pay at least one hour 2) Did not work for pay at least one hour, but has made an attempt to find a job within the last four weeks 3) Did not work for pay, did not seek job within last four weeks Employment rate is (Group 2)/(Group 1 + Group 2) You don't fall out of the workforce after 6 months. It has nothing to do with unemployment benefits. If you have sent out a resume, followed up on a resume you've already send, read the classifieds, visited monster.com or done one shred of any activity resembling someone who wants to be employed within the last four weeks, you are counted in the workforce. There are certainly problems the number doesn't capture, like underemployment or "underground" employment. And there are some number of unemployed people who would love to have a job if only it didn't entail actually looking for a job. But the number isn't as far off as some people would have you believe.
How are you counted after 6 months? How do they know you sent out a resume? Itâs like people don't get it. I know a lot of people who don't work or work part time. They have a car and live at moms. They might deliver pizza 2 days a week and make 250 cash. Its not what they want to do its there only choose. There parents spent good money on them for college but they can't find jobs. My cousin has not found a job in 2 years since graduating. He does part time work and lives with his parents. There are a lot of kids with that problem.
Buffalo, NY only recently went down the shithole thanks to government officials embezzling millions of dollars. Another town that went through similiar situation is Rochester, NY, which used to be an awesome city. With the tech bust, however, the jobs & economy simply went down the shithole as well. You may think these are isolated cases but this is all over USA. The middle of the country has been hit the worst. Noone is preaching full employment, but the 5% unemployment is pure bullcrap. I see you are having problems understanding this, but all those people that were laid off 3 years are no longer counted by the government as part of the labor pool 6 months later whether they are looking for a job or not. And although unemployment checks are nice, I truthfully doubt that the millions that were laid off all decided to just be couch potatoes until their benefits ran out. So in other words, since you have problems comprehending this, the government is blatantly lying about the current job situation. If 25% of the population has been looking for a job for the last 2 years, it has zero effect on the current unemployment rate. Well I'm willing to speculate that close to 20% of the population is in need of a job but are being held afloat by heavy credit expansion and second mortgages. You need to read the articles linked in this thread, they are very enlightening. The key problem right now is that with all the stimulus by the Fed, corporations just will not spend their rising profits on hiring & capital expenditures. Instead they keep cutting jobs and keep outsourcing, letting the execs collect huge bonuses at the expense of American workers.
They are counted after 6 months the same way they are counted the first six months - they are asked. The unemployment number is from surveys done on a sampling of households and then extrapolated. By the way, this is very different from the payroll numbers (ie jobs created/lost) which are calculated from actual payrolls (I think - but am not positive). And I do agree with what you say - underemployment is potentially a major problem, and is not accounted for at all in the unemployment numbers (or any other economic number I've ever heard of).
libertad, a flat tax? that's a nice idea, but i don't think it's coming any time soon. they couldn't even reform social security. a flat tax is an even bigger change than private accounts, considering that the argument for it isn't as immediately relevant to the american public as social security reform. and do you think if america falls into a severe recession that they would institute a flat tax? during those circumstances they tend to raise taxes on the rich. the 30's is a good example.
Here is a link about the situation http://www.rescueamericanjobs.org/a...m=unemployment-statistics-stand-up-be-counted I read another analysis, which I couldn't find, that compared the way unemployment is calculated today vs. 1980. Using the 1980 scheme, the unemployment rate is over 12%. The government only includes those who are collecting benefits, or specifically asked to be included.
killaTwill...wrote... libertad, a flat tax? that's a nice idea, but i don't think it's coming any time soon. they couldn't even reform social security. a flat tax is an even bigger change than private accounts, considering that the argument for it isn't as immediately relevant to the american public as social security reform. and do you think if america falls into a severe recession that they would institute a flat tax? during those circumstances they tend to raise taxes on the rich. the 30's is a good example ..................................................................................... As I have mentioned in earlier posts...Milton Friedman suggests a consumption tax...which I also think is best...but to equate to no more than a 10 percent flat tax...I really believe that Friedman is right....no income tax is the best system.... I personally have several homes in various countries...and I have been involved in the markets for over 30 years and have worked for most of the major brokerages...I also have spent time in a PHd program in Economics before the realty of finances came calling...when I was younger... Look the US cannot and should not jeopardize itself....It needs to nurture what it represents...and hold strong...so that the rest of the world will have assurance that all is well with the USA.. I have spent a number of years in the USA but I do not live there now... I can tell you this...What the US is in now...is not a practice drill....It really needs to make some radical moves.... A 10 percent flat consumption tax would attract the cream of the crop from all over the world...and would provide a possible solution to completely reverse its woes... I love the markets...eat.. sleep... and trade...and I would love to see a lot more of that paper spinning prices through the direct access tube....The internet has made my lifestyle possible...and I want to see opportunities grow and thrive.... The US needs the right leadership...and she will find it soon...there are changes in the wind.....