patrick.net

freespeechforever says

94,184,000 Working-Age Americans NOT In Labor Force: Thanks "Trade Agreements"

That's only about a third of the American population and about half of the working age population. I know, let's blame this on laziness instead of on our economic system and the laws the disempower labor.

At least all the elected Republicans & Democrats have worked together to protect the american economy.
None of them have ever supported any trade agreements.
Thanks,to the voters for electing TRUE american PATRIOTS.

YesYNot says

NAFTA went into effect in 1994. The decline started in 2000

First off, these things take time to have a real effect. You don't just move a factory overnight. That and with the housing bubble and y2K scare employing a lot of people, the perceived initial effects were delayed.

zzyzzx is deplorable says

First off, these things take time to have a real effect. You don't just move a factory overnight. That and with the housing bubble and y2K scare employing a lot of people, the perceived initial effects were delayed

Yup, not to mention the repeal of Glass Steagal that served us well for dems-championed by Bill Clinton. It took its time to lead up to the biggest bust since the great depression. IHL wants to continue the same policies as her husband-and even says she will put him in charge.

if Ross perot would have been elected-we would be in a far different state. This time we are at the edge of a cliff and the saem architects who dismantled the post depression financial sector protections and signed massive free trade agreements want another shot at it.

zzyzzx is deplorable says

First off, these things take time to have a real effect. You don't just move a factory overnight.

I'll give you that, but the graph doesn't come close to proving cause and effect, and there is no analysis to even indicate the cause. There's just a feeling that you have that the graph kind of sort of coincides with if you take the time lag to be 6 yrs. But there were plenty of other macro-economic drivers happening in that time frame too, and no mention of those in the OP.

Daddy says this is a classic example of the nativity of the left regarding matters of finance.
lostand confused says

YesYNot says

NAFTA went into effect in 1994. The decline started in 2000

First off, these things take time to have a real effect. You don't just move a factory overnight.

As a EE I know circuit card vendors who had cost, compliance, and tax pressure after NAFTA. Offshoring was being marketed, and teams of US Lawyers and Accountants aided in the shipping of jobs overseas. I had a 500 person subcontract house in circuit cards whittle down to 100 people, they hung on and went out of business in the early 2000s.

Yes NAFTA has a 5-10 year lag, as explained by Ross Perot.

Now the economy is running on 1.5 Cylinders.

Daddy says it would be if it was a giraffe sandwich.
Tenpoundbass says

It's not Obama's fault they don't want to make a sandwich.

1. with an aging society, labor force participation was bound to decline.
2. Japan didn't sign NAFTA, had the exact same labor force partipication decline.
3. world trade was going to happen with or without NAFTA. Did you really not understand what cheaper shipping and internet communication would do?
4. how stupid are you?

YesYNot says

NAFTA went into effect in 1994. The decline started in 2000, which was after the stock market collapsed and Bush Jr. came into office and lowered taxes to give the SURPLUS back to the job creators.

Bush took office in 2001

@SharingHisWetFartsWithHisGerbil:

Free trade and trade agreements benefits us. That's why we make those agreements.

For the record--free trade is a Republican platform. If you look at the votes in Congress, NAFTA was passed by Republicans over Democratic resistance. Yes, Clinton signed the deal negotiated and signed initially by Bush, but it was clearly a Republican bill. Free trade is, and always has been, a Republican ideal.

Free trade agreements have been supported by both parties, despite what some democrats may claim (especially as they collect unions' political contributions).

This includes massive loosening of quotas of in-sourcing labor to depress wages through H1-B measures (where skilled labor area can be massively depressed as can other tiers o workers' wages).

The only ones running for or holding national, elected political offices who openly oppose further "free trade" pacts are true political outsiders, reviled by both parties and globalists.

errc says

Bush took office in 2001

I'm giving 2000 as a rough number. It's not clear from the chart if the real trend down was 1999, 2000, 2001. There is always a short flat or downturn in a recession (like 1980 and 1990). So, what's different is not the turn down after the crash in 2000, but the fact that it didn't recover in the Bush years. For Obama, there is a big drop in the recession in 2008, and again, it progresses down instead of turning around. But, there's no causal effect shown here tying this trend to NAFTA or immigration for that matter.

Anyway, Trump's best argument is that NAFTA and immigration caused the supply of labor to increase so that low wage jobs have no wage growth. This chart likely reflects a wage suppression causing less dual income families. The other reason for less dual income families might be the fact that women are realizing that it hasn't always made their life better. That's something most of the anti-feminists on PatNet should be happy about. Maybe what is upsetting is that more women and less men are working now, and in particular, more men with less education in the rust-belt cannot get a decent job.

Ironman says

Oh Roberta, every time you put your hands on the keyboard, you look like an even BIGGER asshole:

Even bigger than you? That's a very high hurdle. There is plenty of reading out there on the labor rate, but since it uses words bigger than and or the you aren't going to be able to read it.

freespeechforever says

94,184,000 Working-Age Americans NOT In Labor Force: Thanks "Trade Agreements"

Where were all those trade agreements from 1946 (when labor rates first were tracked) until 1978 when the labor participation rate rose to todays' level for the first time? https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CIVPART/

Hey bob:

The labor PARTICIPATION RATE IS NEAR AN ABSOLUTE POST WWII LOW, and it even ECHOES LEVELS NOT SEEN SINCE THE POST-GREAT DEPRESSION ERA 1930's.

freespeechforever says

The labor PARTICIPATION RATE IS NEAR AN ABSOLUTE POST WWII LOW,

I'm sure he knows; he just does it to push peoples buttons

freespeechforever says

Free trade agreements have been supported by both parties, despite what some democrats may claim (especially as they collect unions' political contributions).

This includes massive loosening of quotas of in-sourcing labor to depress wages through H1-B measures (where skilled labor area can be massively depressed as can other tiers o workers' wages).

The only ones running for or holding national, elected political offices who openly oppose further "free trade" pacts are true political outsiders, reviled by both parties and globalists.

Nope--free trade is, and always has been, a Republican idea. Have there been some very conservative Democrats that also voted for free trade? Of course. That doesn't change the fact that free trade is a right wing wet dream.

94,184,000 Working-Age Americans NOT In Labor Force:

Single worst economic theory Anti American people push

Gold Bugs and MMT ....

Where did we lose 94,000,000

Manufacturing as a % of the workforce has been fallen since 1940 as most of the productivity gains came in that sector

We call this displacement technology

Also the smallest work force sector in America

Logan Mohtashami says

Manufacturing as a % of the workforce has been fallen since 1940 as most of the productivity gains came in that sector

We call this displacement technology

Also the smallest work force sector in America

Manufacturing jobs will continue to shrink. Either due to China, or due to robots. Why fight the tide? Americans should let it go.

Strategist says

Americans should let it go.

They did...

155 Million working
43 year lows in unemployment claims
Highest Job openings ever recorded on planet earth... even in manufacturing

This is war cry for the extreme left and right it makes no sense what so ever.. take the smallest sector in the U.S. which is in a recession due to oil and people try to give it a high variable multiplier effect

"43 year lows in unemployment claim."

The real rate of unemployment using the method once used upon a time under Reagan (as just one example) is around 11.7%.

The picture is even more grim when one considers that a record number of Americans who are working are underemployed, marginally attached to the work force, have 2 or even 3 part-time jobs, have declining real wages, etc.

If one were to group underemployed to the stats, real unemployment rate would ebb closer to 18%.

And then, we have the whole issue of those 94 million+ Americans of working age who either can't find work or sent out 5,000 resumes or went on 250 interviews without luck.

Logan is to economics what proctologists are to vaginas.

He's also hitting the crack pipe something fierce.

When the next severe downturn happens, Logan will move into his mom and dad's basement.

I understand why you Anti American trolls hate this country

Men .. are brave.... Americans are brave

Americans work

Anti American Trolls, hate Brave American men.. because they can never ever be that strong

hence why they hide behind fake names

Logan, I guarantee you that I have more ledger and liquid wealth than you. I know this because you chose to post details about your personal finances, and it's not even a close call, really.

My or your level of wealth really isn't material, however, except to the degree you raise the issue and insinuate that those having your less than rosy prognostication about the future direction of the economy are somehow unsuccessful financially themselves.

I personally know a former partner of Nassim Taleb while at Empirica Capital LLC who now lives in Northport Michigan (my child goes to his childrens' school), who is about 5,000x wealthier than you (and much more so than I), and he is also a literal genius who made hundreds of millions shorting the world in 2007-2008, and if you think I'm pessimistic, you don't comprehend the meaning of that adjective.

freespeechforever says

Logan, I guarantee you that I have more ledger and liquid wealth than you.

Give me your name then

Don't be a coward and hide behind that fake name

freespeechforever says

Nassim Taleb

Another black swan death caller

Your hatred for this country is clear...

Can't read data worth squat...

Rag tag anti American trolls all on this site....

Only because you hate America that you sit behind a fake name and cry everyday about this country

Men... don't cry... Men Don't beg

Americans don't beg

Only Trolls do ....

I will do what ever I can to destroy the extreme left and right and their worthless economic rants... Because that's what Americans do .... they don't cry or hide behind fake names....

They always fight to progress forward

I don't post personal information on the web. Bad form.

I will generalize truthfully when it's in response to those with bad form, who are ignorant of such basic things a the business cycle, the credit-debt/consumption-demand curve, etc., and who make such bad decisions, however (such as posting ho,e address/office info).

freespeechforever says

Bad form.

I don't believe that you believe that this country is as miserable as your fake name says it is

All of you are educated men and women...

You create left wing and right wing people on this site but you give up your education when you talk normal

They're asking me to debate David Stockman at the end of the month... If I get that chance on air

I am going to show all of you Why the Anti Fed crowd has been wrong and why the Anti American crowd has been wrong...

I pray I can get the video on this so you all can hear... why we kick ass as a country!!

Why all of you are wealthy because of it

freespeechforever says

Hey bob:

The labor PARTICIPATION RATE IS NEAR AN ABSOLUTE POST WWII LOW, and it even ECHOES LEVELS NOT SEEN SINCE THE POST-GREAT DEPRESSION ERA 1930's.

You are obviously too stupid to click on the link and look at the chart? This has to be yet another ironbrain alt account. Only ironbrain is mathematically challenged enough to honestly believe believe 62% down from 67% is near an absolute post WWII low of 57.5%.

Hey dumbass, no one knows the 1930's participation rate, records weren't kept until 1946. You are part of the just make shit up movement I see.

Great job adding to the conversation there ironbrain. Or at least making such a fool out of yourself as to be entertaining.

MMR says

freespeechforever says

The labor PARTICIPATION RATE IS NEAR AN ABSOLUTE POST WWII LOW,

I'm sure he knows; he just does it to push peoples buttons

You can't look at the chart either? or have you been taking math lessons from ironbrain? Obviously a trump voter, it's true because hey I just made it up.

Logan, you're a nice enough guy, and literate on specific economic matters such as mortgage originations and such, but you wander too far from your core knowledge base and into pure Pollyanna too often, and it makes you look really ignorant.

It's really bad that american voters haven't had any say in where this country has ended up after + 200 years.
DAMN THOSE ELECTED OFFICIALS! IT'S ALL THEIR FAULT!

YesYNot says

I'll give you that, but the graph doesn't come close to proving cause and effect,

Its funny, you guys still think of me as a loan officer... when I am asked to speak at national conferences about economics

I promise you, if I get the shot against David Stockman... bring down the Anti Fed crew ..

Math, Facts and data wins!

Limf (x) =sky
x-a

http://www.americatalyst.com/content/2016-americatalyst-fast-forward

Logan Mohtashami says

Men .. are brave.... Americans are brave

Americans work

None of these charts change the story.
- If jobs were lost due to technology, we would be in a productivity boom. We aren't. This explanation just doesn't compute.
- The number of jobs in manufacturing is large. Apple employs in its supply chain 10x the number of its US employees working on development.
- Each manufacturing job did support probably 10x as many service jobs around them. (food, retail, etc...)
- many of the jobs you show are minimum wage or part time, do not replace manufacturing income.
- Instead as we lost the backbone of manufacturing we had to compensate that lost income with debt. The US national debt grew an average 9% per year since 1980.

This, coupled with not-in-workforce statistics, shows eloquently that the current globalization is not working well and is a very negative force for a large part of the population.
Denying there is a problem is silly.

Heraclitusstudent says

- If jobs were lost due to technology, we would be in a productivity boom. We aren't. This explanation just doesn't compute.

What you're not accounting for are the job created by technology and why we have 155 Million working

Heraclitusstudent says

- The number of jobs in manufacturing is large.

We have the highest job opening for manufacturing in this cycle and it's the lowest work force group we have in America