patrick.net

 
  forgot password?   register

#housing #investing #politics more»
757,023 comments in 77,874 posts by 11,065 registered users, 3 online now: errc, Fucking White Male, WorkInProgress

new post

It's the jobs stupid

By Fucking White Male   2016 Mar 9, 7:03pm   11,793 views   57 comments   watch (0)   quote      

Just completed interviews for entry level jobs where I work. Starts at $39k a year with good benefits. This is Los Angeles so pay in not so great to start though there is upward potential.

Min job req is a hs diploma. 10 candidates, 7 had bachelors degrees, all had at least AA. The few I spoke to said the job market is almost impossible and were thrilled to be interviewing.

If I wasn't convinced the economy was still in the shitter as far as the average dude is concerned, I am now. I'm happy we are getting quality people who will make strong supervisors down the road. But no reason any of these people should have been settling for these positions.

« First     « Previous     Comments 18-57 of 57     Last »

18   Quigley   2016 Mar 10, 10:53am     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

With more jobs available, the jobs will pay more. It's simple competition for labor. The oligarchs and their supporters like iwog hate having to compete for labor. Thus we have these horrid trade agreements and uncontrolled immigration to get the workforce and jobs into a smaller ratio. Oligarchs don't want a free middle class. They want slaves who know their place.

19   bob2356   2016 Mar 10, 10:55am     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

iwog says

http://www.bankrate.com/finance/jobs-careers/fields-obamacare-creating-jobs-1.aspx

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/private-sector-jobs-soar-under-obamacare

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-20/dozens-of-startups-in-obamacare-s-wake-reveal-law-as-job-creator

http://www.newsweek.com/what-has-obamacare-done-jobs-316195

https://www.nationaljournal.com/s/69776/obamacare-is-creating-jobs-yes-really

http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/09/22/another-study-debunks-myth-that-obamacare-stymi/205723

Is this really and truly serious or is this a joke? Did you actually read any of these?

"It's too early to tell whether the ACA is playing a significant role in job creation and hiring," says Hoffman. "While we can see general employment trends, including health care job numbers, it will take more analysis to determine the motivation behind any movement."

March 2010 is the month President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act into law. In other words, America’s private sector started hiring again, not around the same time as “Obamacare,” but quite literally the exact month the president put pen to paper and made the ACA the law of the land.

That actually really has to be a joke since there were 3 years rising employment before the aca actually started. WTF? People hired for 3 years because they know aca was coming? Who knew the duck had a sense of humour.

The pace of job growth has actually increased in the past few months as the Administration began to enforce the employer penalty provisions of the law. Of course, the drop in unemployment and rise in payroll jobs might have been even faster if the ACA had not passed.

A new study from the Kaiser Family Foundation shows that, contrary to right-wing media assertions, the overwhelming majority of employers have not responded to health insurance mandates in the Affordable Care Act by slashing jobs, converting full-time positions to part-time, or putting off hiring new workers. Fox News and The Wall Street Journal spent years claiming health care reform would threaten American jobs.

Not cutting jobs doesn't mean increasing. Not in the real world, maybe in wally/iwogworld.

"It's too early to tell whether the ACA is playing a significant role in job creation and hiring,"

All right out of your articles. None say aca actually increased employment. They say employment increased since aca was passed. Read past the headlines next time. You need learn more about the terms causation and correlation.

20   tatupu70   2016 Mar 10, 10:59am     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

Quigley says

With more jobs available, the jobs will pay more. It's simple competition for labor. The oligarchs and their supporters like iwog hate having to compete for labor. Thus we have these horrid trade agreements and uncontrolled immigration to get the workforce and jobs into a smaller ratio. Oligarchs don't want a free middle class. They want slaves who know their place.

Have you ever read what Iwog posts? You sound like Bass now.

21   Quigley   2016 Mar 10, 11:26am     ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike   quote    

tatupu70 says

Have you ever read what Iwog posts? You sound like Bass now.

I can read between the lines. When a guy hotly supports a group that is and has been fucking the people over for years by policies that drive wages down, create fear of a PC witch hunt, and keep things spiraling down until we all achieve slave status, I know he's pro-oligarch. Pro-status quo is pro-oligarch.

22   tatupu70   2016 Mar 10, 11:28am     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

Quigley says

I can read between the lines. When a guy hotly supports a group that is and has been fucking the people over for years by policies that drive wages down, create fear of a PC witch hunt, and keep things spiraling down until we all achieve slave status, I know he's pro-oligarch. Pro-status quo is pro-oligarch.

Which group?

23   tatupu70   2016 Mar 10, 12:18pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

Ironman says

Notice, "Seasonally Adjusted".... they can make the chart say whatever they want

You are the biggest idiot on pat.net. How the hell is seasonally adjusting going to cause unemployment to continually drop for 7 YEARS? Do you have any clue how the world works?

24   iwog   2016 Mar 10, 12:24pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

bob2356 says

All right out of your articles. None say aca actually increased employment. They say employment increased since aca was passed. Read past the headlines next time. You need learn more about the terms causation and correlation.

Grow up please. "PROVE ALL THOSE JOBS ARE FROM OBAMACARE!!! PROVE IT!!!!!" You're just a fucking douchebag. You can acknowledge the inflection point but instead of actually looking at where the jobs came from, you simply deny any effect whatsoever. Apparently Obama was such a great president that he created jobs WITHOUT Obamacare.

http://documents.bayareacouncil.org/acaeconimpactstudy.pdf

Are you capable of comprehending that Obamacare was sold to the right as a job killer?

25   iwog   2016 Mar 10, 1:00pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

Anyone who really cares about the labor participation rate should look here.

http://www.factcheck.org/2015/03/declining-labor-participation-rates/

Bureau of Labor Statistics, November 2006: Every year after 2000, the rate declined gradually, from 66.8 percent in 2001 to 66.0 percent in 2004 and 2005. According to the BLS projections, the overall participation rate will continue its gradual decrease each decade and reach 60.4 percent in 2050.

Wow......the BLS can tell the future!!!!!!!! They must have a time machine.

26   tatupu70   2016 Mar 10, 1:02pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

Ironman says

Maybe because it hasn't dropped for 7 years..

Ah, yes--shadowstats. The bastion of lies for the uneducated. It has been proven, over and over again, to be utter BS. I'm not surprised you like it.

Ironman says

But, if you're looking for areas that DID drop, try the LFPR, Homeownership, Incomes, etc..... well, you can thank Obama for this chart

Did Obama cause people to age? He really is powerful.

Regardless, do you understand that seasonal adjustment CANNOT cause any stat to fall for 7 years? You get that, right?

27   indigenous   2016 Mar 10, 1:04pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

iwog says

Bureau of Labor Statistics, November 2006: Every year after 2000, the rate declined gradually, from 66.8 percent in 2001 to 66.0 percent in 2004 and 2005. According to the BLS projections, the overall participation rate will continue its gradual decrease each decade and reach 60.4 percent in 2050.

That doesn't seem possible with the millennials coming on board?

28   iwog   2016 Mar 10, 1:10pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (2)   quote    

indigenous says

That doesn't seem possible with the millennials coming on board?

That's what makes you a retarded internet pussy without skills or knowledge instead of someone working at the BLS.

The BLS predicts a gradual decline over many years of the labor participation rate. WELL LOOKIE THERE!!!!! We see a gradual decline in the labor participation rate over many years. Here's the actual report published in 2006. Understand? 2006.

http://www.bls.gov/opub/mlr/2006/11/art3full.pdf

29   tatupu70   2016 Mar 10, 2:15pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

The concept of noise is obviously foreign to CIC.

30   indigenous   2016 Mar 10, 6:11pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

iwog says

That's what makes you a retarded internet pussy without skills or knowledge instead of someone working at the BLS.

I'm sorry mutt but this graph indicates that you have your head up your ass, as usual:

31   iwog   2016 Mar 10, 6:14pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

indigenous says

I'm sorry mutt but this graph indicates that you have your head up your ass, as usual:

ROFLOL...,......did you know "this graph" is inside the study I linked? The very one that predicts this drop in labor participation rate? NO YOU DIDN'T BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T READ IT!!!"

You are a fucking retard. Kill yourself.

32   indigenous   2016 Mar 10, 6:17pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

Yea that is cute with all your theatrics and all, but go fuck yourself bitch, the population is going to increase big time, so your idea that job participation is decreasing is ridiculous.

33   iwog   2016 Mar 10, 6:20pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

indigenous says

Yea that is cute with all your theatrics and all, but go fuck yourself bitch, the population is going to increase big time, so your idea that participation decreasing is ridiculous.

Posting a study predicting this very effect from 2006 is...........theatrics!!!!!! LOL

Meanwhile your ENTIRE brain-dead analysis is "The population is going to increase big time."

Are you even capable of comprehending the FACT that the BLS KNEW about the labor participation rate dropping before it happened???????? No, you're not. You're clearly too fucking stupid. Facts mean nothing to you because you're a steaming pile of shit ALL THE TIME.

Kill yourself.

34   indigenous   2016 Mar 10, 7:18pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

iwog says

Are you even capable of comprehending the FACT that the BLS KNEW about the labor participation rate dropping before it happened????????

One thing I don't understand tard boy, Your BLS study:

The 0.6-percent annual growth rate from 2005
to 2050 reflects a projected population of 322.6
million and a labor force participation rate of 60.4
percent in 2050.

My chart show the population in 2050 being 438 million.

35   iwog   2016 Mar 10, 7:21pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

indigenous says

The 0.6-percent annual growth rate from 2005

to 2050 reflects a projected population of 322.6

million and a labor force participation rate of 60.4

percent in 2050.

Get back to me when you stop lying and can actually read the charts.

36   indigenous   2016 Mar 10, 7:22pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

No tard boy, I'm quoting your article.

37   iwog   2016 Mar 10, 7:23pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

indigenous says

No tard boy, I'm quoting your article.

You think so? Okay paste the image of a projected population of 322.6 by 2050 from that study.

(for everyone else, this is going to be another question assclown boy runs away from for a week)

38   indigenous   2016 Mar 10, 7:24pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

No tard boy, what I have quoted is from the first page of your article/

39   Strategist   2016 Mar 10, 7:28pm     ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike   quote    

iwog says

Those jobs were due to a recovery from the "great recession". It had nothing to do with Obamacare.

40   iwog   2016 Mar 10, 7:29pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

Strategist says

Those jobs were due to a recovery from the "great recession". It had nothing to do with Obamacare.

How do you know?

41   iwog   2016 Mar 10, 7:31pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

indigenous says

No tard boy, what I have quoted is from the first page of your article/

You're misreading it. Here's what they are referring to:

42   Strategist   2016 Mar 10, 7:32pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

iwog says

Strategist says

Those jobs were due to a recovery from the "great recession". It had nothing to do with Obamacare.

How do you know?

A recession results in job losses, and a recovery results in job gains. The credit does go to Obama for the recovery, but to give credit to Obamacare for all the jobs gained is way off.

43   indigenous   2016 Mar 10, 7:38pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

This from your link:

The U.S. population is expected to grow more slowly in future decades than it did in the previous century. Nonetheless, the total population of 319 million in 2014 is projected to reach the 400 million threshold in 2051 and 417 million in 2060.

It agrees with my charts.

44   indigenous   2016 Mar 10, 7:39pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

Strategist says

The credit does go to Obama for the recovery

Starting from a VERY low bar. But you statement is waaay off.

45   Strategist   2016 Mar 10, 7:41pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

indigenous says

Strategist says

The credit does go to Obama for the recovery

Starting from a VERY low bar. But you statement is waaay off.

You have a point, but Obama still gets the credit for the recovery.

46   indigenous   2016 Mar 10, 7:43pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

Strategist says

Obama still gets the credit for the recovery.

Why?

47   iwog   2016 Mar 10, 7:43pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

Strategist says

A recession results in job losses, and a recovery results in job gains. The credit does go to Obama for the recovery, but to give credit to Obamacare for all the jobs gained is way off.

I posted an actual very specific study proving jobs were created by Obamacare in California. I'm pretty sure the conclusions can be applied elsewhere.

48   iwog   2016 Mar 10, 7:44pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

indigenous says

This from your link:

The U.S. population is expected to grow more slowly in future decades than it did in the previous century. Nonetheless, the total population of 319 million in 2014 is projected to reach the 400 million threshold in 2051 and 417 million in 2060.

It agrees with my charts.

ROFLOL......yeah I know, it agrees with your charts. However you're so fucking stupid that you don't realize it was YOUR ATTEMPT TO DISCREDIT THE STUDY which caused you to post the wrong information in the first place. By AGREEING with the study you are now basically shooting your stupid argument in the head.

49   indigenous   2016 Mar 10, 7:44pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

iwog says

I posted an actual very specific study proving jobs were created by Obamacare in California. I'm pretty sure the conclusions can be applied elsewhere.

WTF, you simply do not have a modicum of understanding of economics.

50   Strategist   2016 Mar 10, 7:46pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

iwog says

Strategist says

A recession results in job losses, and a recovery results in job gains. The credit does go to Obama for the recovery, but to give credit to Obamacare for all the jobs gained is way off.

I posted an actual very specific study proving jobs were created by Obamacare in California. I'm pretty sure the conclusions can be applied elsewhere.

Maybe some jobs were created by Obamacare, but your chart seems to claim all the jobs created was due to Obamacare. That would be impossible.

51   iwog   2016 Mar 10, 7:48pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

Strategist says

Maybe some jobs were created by Obamacare, but your chart seems to claim all the jobs created was due to Obamacare. That would be impossible.

Naw, never said that but the inflection point is pretty damn clear and it's not in 2008 or 2009. It's 2010 long after the stock market, the real estate market, and corporate profits had already been rising for a year.

52   Strategist   2016 Mar 10, 7:48pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

indigenous says

Strategist says

Obama still gets the credit for the recovery.

Why?

Obama did what it took to prevent a depression. I give him credit for that.

53   iwog   2016 Mar 10, 7:52pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

Strategist says

Obama did what it took to prevent a depression. I give him credit for that.

My brother ran a healthcare company for that entire period and he said the capital investment was massive. I think Obamacare is responsible for a significant number of new jobs which is exactly the opposite of what Republicans have always said. ONE party got it right. ONE party isn't fit to run government.

54   Strategist   2016 Mar 10, 7:54pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

iwog says

Strategist says

Maybe some jobs were created by Obamacare, but your chart seems to claim all the jobs created was due to Obamacare. That would be impossible.

Naw, never said that but the inflection point is pretty damn clear and it's not in 2008 or 2009. It's 2010 long after the stock market, the real estate market, and corporate profits had already been rising for a year.

The stock market is normally ahead of any recovery curve.

55   indigenous   2016 Mar 10, 7:55pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike (1)   quote    

Strategist says

Obama did what it took to prevent a depression. I give him credit for that.

Fuck No. Not that I'm defending Bush, but Obama passed the ACA and Dodd Frank that will have huge effects on the economy in the future.

He is just another megalomaniac who desperately needs to be bitch slapped to the curb. What really sucks is that because of this kind of ignorance Hillary will be elected next. Gawd fucking dammit.

56   bob2356   2016 Mar 11, 5:46pm     ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike   quote    

iwog says

Grow up please. "PROVE ALL THOSE JOBS ARE FROM OBAMACARE!!! PROVE IT!!!!!" You're just a fucking douchebag. You can acknowledge the inflection point but instead of actually looking at where the jobs came from, you simply deny any effect whatsoever. Apparently Obama was such a great president that he created jobs WITHOUT Obamacare

You would be the expert on being a fucking douchebag. Inflection point? You claim aca create "millions" of jobs. Show where all the jobs created for the 3 years from the signing of aca to the implementation of aca were created by the aca. Where did these jobs come from? What jobs are they? What did aca do to create them. What a load of shit even for you.

All of your articles, that would be the ones YOU posted, just say that jobs were created but they don' t know if aca had anything to do with it. Yet you do. It's true because the duck SAYS it's true. Is indiginous yet another one of you alt accounts?

iwog says

http://documents.bayareacouncil.org/acaeconimpactstudy.pdf

This has got to be a joke, did you actually read it? Here let's go to the chart since you are so in love with charts. Can't cut an past the chart. Lets' look at table #4 projected employer changes. Column 1 employer mandate 54,562 jobs, column 2 small business tax credits 29,932 jobs. Great that's 85,494 jobs. Whoops. Now read the explanation. The employer mandate is lost jobs. It should have been labelled LOST jobs of 54,562 with a net LOSS of of 24,630 jobs. Let's look at table #6 increased labor force participation. Very impressive 47,185 increase in labor force participation. Whoops. Now read the explanation. That's people who MIGHT have better health, IF they get health insurance, who MIGHT be AVAILABLE to work. I can see why you love this report, it's a whole bunch of maybe, suggested, possible, projected, perhaps, implies, is likely to be, expected impact, etc., etc.. Suppositions building on suppositions isn't even close to proof of anything. Even worse the report assumes a closed system where all PROJECTED increases in spending will be in the economy of CA. WTF? Nothing will go to companies outside of CA? Medical equipment, large national health care providers, pharma, etc., etc. etc. from out of state aren't going to be getting anything? Insane.

Who wrote this crap and why?

57   iwog   2016 Mar 11, 7:40pm     ↑ like   ↓ dislike   quote    

bob2356 says

Who wrote this crap and why?

You know that was published in 2012 right? Nawwww you didn't even check.

« First     « Previous     Comments 18-57 of 57     Last »

users   about   suggestions   contact  
topics   random post   best comments   comment jail  
patrick's 40 proposals  
10 reasons it's a terrible time to buy  
8 groups who lie about the housing market  
37 bogus arguments about housing  
get a free bumper sticker:

top   bottom   home