Politics: A new beginning

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Not Me
I wouldn't let your special lady know that you label those who get married "discouraged," term of art or not. I think she would rather you call her a whore (only in the heat of passion, of course, and as kind of a compliment about her sexual skills) than find out getting married is something you think the discouraged do.

No, you were wrong.

[Skeks in the city]

Originally posted by bilmore

A. You truly do NOT know why unemployment is called a trailing indicator.

I wait with baited breath to hear you argue discouraged workers are actually the "frictionaly unemployed" and shows we have a healthy, dynamic economy. Easy for a lawyer to make that argument when their guild protects them against the secular trends of China and other Asian countries snapping up jobs by underbidding US labor.

B. You truly do NOT understand the concept of system drop-outs.

You either did not read or did not understand my last post.

C. You are falling for the absolute worst of the Krugman "it's Bush, so it's gotta suck, no matter the reality" schtick. This is sad.

Not as sad as Bush's economic policy of huge deficits with no end in sight. Big deficits are no way to impose fiscal discipline on the government. It's a time bomb, as likely to lead to drastic tax increases as anything else.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
No, you were wrong.

I was actually kidding, hun. I just thought it came out funny what you had said about those being discouraged getting married. I didn't think that was the way you intended for it to come across, but when I first read it, it does come across like that.

So are you saying she really doesn't like being called a whore (even in the heat of passion as kind of a compliment on her sexual skills)? Cannot say I blame her. Some women are into that, and I wouldn't be offended if it was something the guy wanted to do every now and then. But if he needs to talk dirty all the time to get his rocks off, I think he has deeper issues and he isn't someone I would be staying with very long.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Not Me
I was actually kidding, hun.

[ABJECT APOLOGY]My bad.[/ABJECT APOLOGY]

[SlaveNoMore]

bilmore
Were all of these posts today and yesterday (not this one - I just don't have the heart to go back and read any of 'em, they were so . . . strange) truly discussing the idea that there is no jobs recovery, that whatever measured decrease we've seen has simply been drop-outs, and that we thus are not in a true recovery?

My gawd, people.

A. You truly do NOT know why unemployment is called a trailing indicator.

B. You truly do NOT understand the concept of system drop-outs.

C. You are falling for the absolute worst of the Krugman "it's Bush, so it's gotta suck, no matter the reality" schtick.

This is sad.

You sound cranky. Run out of Yukon Jack?

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Nearly six months out of work, and Bobb Robbins has almost given up.
The former Techneglas worker was one of dozens of employees laid off last winter, during a series of cutbacks at the Jenkins Township manufacturing plant.

After searching for other work - including a distribution center - he decided to go back to school in the winter, he said.

Why? Frustration, mainly.

"It just seems that all the jobs are in Hazleton," said Robbins, a 37-year-old Harding resident, who is majoring in plumbing and heating technology at Luzerne County Community College.

"This area really doesn't have anything that people need to support them or their families," he said.

So why does he live there? Look, there are going to be fewer and fewer manufacturing jobs in the US. If you were counting on being able to graduate from high school and walk into a $38/hr union manufacturing job, you are going to be sorely disappointed. Those jobs are going to be fewer and fewer. You are going to need to recognize this and find another line of work to support your family. Go to school to become a plumber or a car mechanic or a teacher or an engineer or a truck driver or a nurse. But the days of someone being able to count on high paying union manufacturing jobs are over. Stop whining and get educated.

Locally, the labor force has shrunk by more than 10,000 workers in the past 18 months. More than 18,000 workers are counted as unemployed.

That means that for every two unemployed workers, there may be one discouraged worker who also is out of a job - and no longer looking.

Why do they just jump to that conculsion? Perhaps some of them have realized what Bobb said and have decided to move or get re-educated to be able to do a job that is actually available, not one that they want to be available but isn't.

Robbins had applied for work at the T.J. Maxx plant in Pittston Township, but balked at the low pay.

"You can't cut it on 8 or 9 bucks an hour," said Robbins, a married father of one.

People are giving up

I agree that that isn't much money, but is Bobb saying he would rather make $0/hr and not even look for a job (since he has become so discouraged and frustrated) than get at least $9/hr? I could understand that if he was going to spend the time looking for a job, but to just say fuck it and then not take the $9/hr job is ridiculous. And lazy.

The Scranton/Wilkes-Barre/Hazleton unemployment rate dropped from 6.3 percent in June to 6.0 percent in July, but the number of people in the labor force dropped as well - from 304,600 to 304,300. (The labor force was 314,800 in January 2002.)

That's another sign of "discouraged workers," state experts say.

Or it is a sign of people moving out of the rust belt. Last I checked, their population was decreasing, too. Maybe people are just realizing what Bobb said - that area has nothing - and decided to move. If the adult population was staying steady, maybe you could support that conclusion. But the rust belt states are loosing population, and that is a reason for the drop in the labor force, too. Why don't they take that into account?

"It's not that they've found jobs, it's that they've looked at other activities," Meckley said. "Primarily because the jobs aren't there."

Some of those other activities include returning to school.

According to Carol Bosack, director of career services at Wilkes University, more recent graduates are pursuing master's degrees rather than tackling a tough job market.

Students are "looking at different avenues," she said. "It seems to be a trend."

Rae Ann Marsland is one of those people.

Marsland - also a former Techneglas worker - lost her job in February. She is now enrolled in dental hygiene training at Luzerne County Community College, opting to return to school rather than pursue a manufacturing or service job.

"I did that for eight years, and it was going nowhere," said Marsland, 33, of Shavertown.

"I wanted to get into a field where there was a lot more opportunity for advancement. Manufacturing really isn't going anywhere."

And this is a bad thing? Someone getting educated to be able to perform a skilled job that is actually in demand in the labor market? This is a great idea, IMHO.

Are there jobs for Northeastern Pennsylvania workers?

Yes, Liuzzo said, but workers have to keep searching.

The growth in service jobs "means people have to adjust," he said. "People have to be flexible."

Exactly. No one owes you a living. Just because your Dad or Mom had a high paying union manufacturing job without any skills or education doesn't mean you will get one. Adapt to that. Get educated and get yourself a job. There is a nursing shortage in this country, and those jobs pay well. Don't whine about having to get educated to get a job in today's market. That is a good thing.

Industry experts - including Meckley and Liuzzo - also say the economy is slowly improving, and job growth could follow.

Businesses already have begun updating their equipment and hiring temporary workers, Meckley said. That growth could lead to more jobs, he said.

"They're going to hire," he said. "It's a matter of when."

I believe this is what Bilmore has been saying.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally posted by Not Me
So why does he live there?

Why don't you e-mail the reporter and ask him?

Why do they just jump to that conculsion? Perhaps some of them have realized what Bobb said and have decided to move or get re-educated to be able to do a job that is actually available, not one that they want to be available but isn't.

In which cases, they're out of a job and not looking. I suppose it's possible that everyone is leaving Scranton, but I would expect the local newspaper to have a handle on that. You figure they would be seeing more ads for real estate and yard sales.

I agree that that isn't much money, but is Bobb saying he would rather make $0/hr and not even look for a job (since he has become so discouraged and frustrated) than get at least $9/hr? I could understand that if he was going to spend the time looking for a job, but to just say fuck it and then not take the $9/hr job is ridiculous. And lazy.

Truly, the thing that it holding this country back is lazy poor people.

And this is a bad thing?

Who said that?

I believe this is what Bilmore has been saying.

Slave and I are calling him "Mr. Crankypants" for the rest of the evening.

[Not Me]

BTW - in case some of you are under the misconception that nursing requires a college degree, let me educate you. To become an RN does not require a college degree in any state I am aware of. At most, you need 2 years at a community college to become an RN. Some states allow people to become an RN with only 18 months in a hospital based vocation training program.

There is a nursing shortage in this country and you can support a family on a nurse's salary. Maybe not a family of 5, but if you cannot support that many children, you should have thought about that before you had them. If you have behaved that irresponsibly and had 5 kids you cannot support, I am sure you can get food stamps and Medicaid at a minimum.

[bilmore]

Originally posted by SlaveNoMore
You sound cranky. Run out of Yukon Jack?

On a Sunday night? Drink? Me?

(I have been reading briefs outlining how eighty-six people could all suddenly wake up and realize, for the first time, that a priest "blessed" them twenty-two years ago. I'm having a "low threshold for idiocy" night.)

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
I suppose it's possible that everyone is leaving Scranton, but I would expect the local newspaper to have a handle on that. You figure they would be seeing more ads for real estate and yard sales.

From 1990-2000, Scranton has had an increase in college educated people from about 13.5% to 15.5%. At the same time, the percentage of people without high school diplomas or GED's has declined from about 30% to about 22%.

That means that the people are bettering themselves as the manufacturing jobs evaporate. This is a good thing, not a bad thing. I just don't think people going back to school to get educated to become a skilled worker are dropping out of the labor force. On the contrary, they are increasing their ability to compete in the labor force.

http://www.census.gov/Press-Release/...argraph_PA.pdf

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Truly, the thing that it holding this country back is lazy poor people.

well, that's your theory form the start. my question has always been why would 100K people just quit looking for work LAST MONTH? I remember once or twice I quit looking while in college, and you point out the one guy who doesn't want $9/hour. I can understand his frustration, but it is hard for me to accept it happening 100,000 times last month.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Tyrone_Slothrop
Truly, the thing that it holding this country back is lazy poor people.

Anyone who can pass up a $9/hr job isn't poor. That guy who doesn't want to work for $9/hr must be getting money from somewhere, probably savings or maybe from his family or maybe by taking out a home equity loan. Either way, he isn't poor.

I applaud him for going back to school. That is what he should do. In a few years, this "discouraged" worker who "dropped out" of the labor force will be in much better shape to compete in the labor force of the 21st century.

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Skeks in the city
There are discouraged workers (like, high school and college students that would work if they could, college students that would get a job rather than go to grad school if they could, and laid off workers that become full-time time students, retirees, criminals, or inmates). This is especially so in this recession. That's because in this recession a higher percentage of people have lost their jobs due to structural changes in the economy: in other words, a higher percentage of people's jobs are permanently eliminated, so a higher percentage is not counted as unemployed while they retool for a job requiring very different skills.

Agreed, but this is a good thing, not a bad thing.

Originally posted by Skeks in the city
Of course, there are also underemployed workers that would trade-up or work more hours given the opportunity (like, laid off programmers driving a cab full-time or people working part-time or temp work while looking for a full-time job). Even if you consider the latter category underutilization rather than unemployment, it's still undesirable.

Agreed, this is a bad thing. I thought, though, that those part-time workers who want to work full-time but cannot find full-time positions were included in the unemployment numbers.

[Skeks in the city]

Originally posted by Not Me

Agreed, but [fired people re-tooling] this is a good thing, not a bad thing.

That all depend on what they retool to do, whether they earn more than they did before (taking into account changes in purchasing power), and whom pays for the transition costs (including lost wages during transition). A lot of people transition to lower paying jobs.

Agreed, this is a bad thing. I thought, though, that those part-time workers who want to work full-time but cannot find full-time positions were included in the unemployment numbers.

Nope, the Department of Labor defines the "unemployed" to exclude anyone doing any work at all as a paid employee during the reference week. Even if they're looking for a job. Part-timers looking for more work are lumped into the "employed".

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.tn.htm

[Not Me]

Originally posted by Skeks in the city
A lot of people transition to lower paying jobs.

That may be true, but because of the unions and barriers to free trade, the manufacturing jobs were paying employees more than their work was worth. This raised the cost of goods and lowered everyone else's standard of living.

Now, with cheaper goods, the average American has a higher standard of living than 30 years ago (e.g., look at how much a TV now costs relative to the average monthly take home pay compared to 30 years ago), albeit those in the manufacturing sector have a lower standard of living. But since I never worked in the manufacturing sector and want to buy cheap goods produced in Asia, fuck 'em. Those in the manufacturing sector were making too much money compared to more skilled workers, like teachers and nurses, so I am not going to feel sorry for them. Let them go to college like the rest of us had to.

Seriously, the only way to return the manufacturing sector to what it was in the 1960's is to end free trade with Asia. Why should I subsidize the manufacturing sector (by paying artificially higher prices for my goods) just so people can make college graduate level salaries without having to go to college?

Originally posted by Skeks in the city
Nope, the Department of Labor defines the "unemployed" to exclude anyone doing any work at all as a paid employee during the reference week. Even if they're looking for a job. Part-timers looking for more work are lumped into the "employed".

Doesn't anyone keep stats on this group? (yeah, I know, I could Google it, but if you already know the answer, that is much easier for me.)