patrick.net
An Antidote to Corporate Media
1,195,231 comments by 14,007 users - Ceffer, RWSGFY online now
invite responseComments 1 - 4 of 4 Search these comments
curious2
2014 Aug 14, 9:09am
10M jobs short of where we were in the latter half of the 20th century.
No, it shows jobs have increased since then, but population has increased more. It doesn't show why the gap has widened - perhaps more people are retiring early or starting their own businesses. You're telling them all (and yourself) to "get a job" employed by an employer, based on your misreading of your own graph. It's about equivalent to claiming we have 10M too many people: if you could deport them all (who first?), then suddenly there would be, by your reckoning, enough jobs for everyone. But, you won't even see this comment, because I'm among the more than 60 PatNet users you ignore; you lose yourself in your false projections onto Rohrschach data, and use FRED statistics like a drunkard uses lampposts: for support, rather than illumination.
Bellingham Bill
2014 Aug 15, 4:56am
So we have 120M full-time jobs, and $6T government spending.
Dividing the latter by the average annual wage:
says gov't spending should be creating 140M full-time jobs now.
Obviously this is too ballparky -- not all gov't spending directly (or short-hop indirectly) hits a paycheck -- but it shows the trend of government expansion.
adds an estimate of us "hitting the wall" in the early 1990s, bouncing off of it, then going back to big government 2001-now.
fight, fight, fight. troll, troll, troll
Do you have a list of the 10 million jobs that are still in the economy?
I made this for a reddit thread yesterday, thought it was interesting . . .
http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/graph/?g=HEs
Blue is full-time jobs, red is the long-term trend (78% of age 25-64)
Zooming on current events:
shows this economy is still 10M jobs short of where we were in the latter half of the 20th century.