The end of capitalism as we know it?

[Njorl]

The hardest jobs to fill here are the temporary skilled building trades. We have a lot of work going on at the lab, and electricians essentially dictate the terms of their employment.

Scientists and engineers are being offered incentive packages to quit or retire.

Njorl

 

[Adam]

Man, that's funny. I supply figures from US census material, and the response is "I can't see it right in front of my eyes, so it's wrong". Wow. Even the US government is not a good source of data for the blind patriots. Very funny.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

America is the land of opportunity, things are better than ever before. Quit whining and get a job.

If you would learn to pay attention you will see that I started this converstation by talking about my job. I can see that your observation skills are seriously lacking. Thanks for the demo.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

The information I see as relevant to that is the Census bureau's income stats, which disagree: incomes across all income groups are rising and have been since stats started being recorded in the '60s.

After adjusting for inflation? Could you post some information?

Latch-key kids? I see that as a biproduct of women's lib: women choosing to work whether they have to or not. That and more single-parent families, a different issue altogether.

Maybe that's how you saw it. The was we saw it, we needed the money to make the most basic ends meet; I grew up on powdered milk. Perhaps you are too young to remember the double digit inflation.

Saving less? People are buying bigger houses and more expensive cars than they used to. Again, a choice.

To some extent I agree. Credit companies allow us to dig the hole even deeper.

Its near the highest its ever been - which is unsurprising considering interest rates are near the lowest they've ever been. Unemployment stats (as Mattius suggested) disagree with you. The economic cycle lasts about 5-10 years. One year numbers are utterly meaningless for setting a trend. And btw, the numbers for this past year show marked improvement. Care to trend that out?

You are completely ignoring underemployment and those who have completely given up looking for work when you look at the unemployment numbers. Also, personal debt has been increasing in spite of what are usually now two income households. Remember, the middle class used to get by on one income. I call that a long slide.

 

[russ_watters]

After adjusting for inflation? Could you post some information?

The link is in the post that followed.

Perhaps you are too young to remember the double digit inflation.

I am: that was 25+ years ago. I thought we were talking about the economy going downhill (or not) today? In fact, now you seem to be arguing that it was worse 25 years ago...

You are completely ignoring underemployment and those who have completely given up looking for work when you look at the unemployment numbers.

I must admit I don't have stats on that - but then, there aren't any reliable stats on that. And the stats also do include things like people who choose to be unemployed and they shouldn't. Job flux is why economists consider ~5% unemployment to be full employment. Unemployment stats are always based on the same thing, so you most certainly can compare them from one cycle to the next.

Man, that's funny. I supply figures from US census material, and the response is "I can't see it right in front of my eyes, so it's wrong". Wow. Even the US government is not a good source of data for the blind patriots. Very funny.

Yes, Adam, you amuse me very much. You aren't very good at manipulating statistics. They don't lie.

If you'd like to try justifying your stats, feel free. For example, compare the ones you gave with the ones from the following year. Did the "trend" you implied continue or not?

 

[Adam]

No manipulation is required. I HAVE supplied the data. I can see you wish to ignore it and make ad hominem attacks again, but that's very clear to everyone.

Between 2000 and 2001, poverty rose to 11.7% of the population, or 32.9 million people, up from 11.3% and 31.6 million.

23.3 million people sought and received emergency hunger relief from our network of charities in 2001.

Soldiers executing POWs.

POWs held for years without charge.

Using 75% of the world's oil production.

Average unemployment rates in the past year have risen: in 2001, the rate was 4.8%, but jumped to 5.7% in 2002.

In the last decade, the average US household consumer debt (non-mortgage) has increased from approximately $8,500 to $14,500. (Federal Reserve Statistical Releases and U.S. Census Bureau)

According to the Federal Reserve, outstanding non-secured consumer debt rose from $355 billion in 1980 to $1.2 trillion in 1996 to $1.65 trillion in 2001 and is expected to exceed $2.2 trillion by 2004.

 

[hughes johnson]

Quit whining and get a job.

Ivan Seeking,
So sorry! I should have said "quit whining and get another job". I also could have said "quit whining and get two jobs". This is America, so you can have as many jobs as you want. You are also allowed to make as much money as you want. Things have never been better; you can't swing a dead cat around here without hitting a millionaire. So enjoy yourself, the only one stopping you, is you.

 

[Adam]

Woohoo! Blind fanaticism!

 

[Dissident Dan]

The link is in the post that followed

That link does not adjust for inflation.

------------------------------------------

Anyway, whether or not capitalism brings its own end, which I don't think it will, I think that we need a system to help displaced workers who lose their jobs as result of new technology or large layoffs, and I think that it would be great if in the future would could have a system in which most people do not need to work.

 

[kawikdx225]

Extra
Jobless claims lowest since 2000
advertisement


Decline surprises analysts and bodes well for April employment report due Friday. Wages also show an increase, adding to fears of inflation.

By MSN staff and news services

The number of Americans filing initial claims for jobless pay dropped last week to the lowest level since 2000, the government said on Thursday, bolstering expectations for a strong April employment report.

for the whole article
http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/invest/extra/P83006.asp

Since Bush is blamed for a poor economy then he should also be credited when the economy is good right?...Looks like he's doing a fine job to me.

 

[Njorl]

Extra
Jobless claims lowest since 2000
advertisement


Decline surprises analysts and bodes well for April employment report due Friday. Wages also show an increase, adding to fears of inflation.

By MSN staff and news services

The number of Americans filing initial claims for jobless pay dropped last week to the lowest level since 2000, the government said on Thursday, bolstering expectations for a strong April employment report.

for the whole article
http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/invest/extra/P83006.asp

Since Bush is blamed for a poor economy then he should also be credited when the economy is good right?...Looks like he's doing a fine job to me.

That is a sliver of data for a single month. New jobless claims are probably the single worst stat to push if you are a Bush supporter. They have been ghastly over the rest of his presidency. He is going to be the only president to preside over a net job loss since Herbert Hoover. If you put the argument in terms of unemployment instead of job losses (they are different), it is less clearly bad for Bush. The only way the economy looks good is in GNP trend. While it is arguable that growth cures all ills eventually, those without jobs don't care about eventualities.

Njorl

 

[hughes johnson]

Woohoo! Blind fanaticism!

Blind? No, sitting around on your *** and whining instead of going out and making a success out of yourself when there are plenty of jobs - that is blind.

fanaticism? No, making a living, being a success, and supporting one's family is not generally considered to be fanaticism, unless one is a bum.

 

[cragwolf]

Blind? No, sitting around on your *** and whining instead of going out and making a success out of yourself when there are plenty of jobs - that is blind.

The trouble is that society defines success in a particularly limited and myopic way. Anything outside that tiny frame is defined as failure, or laziness, or being a bum, or weird. Society also rewards achievements in a rather irrational and haphazard manner: some are richly rewarded, some are totally ignored, and some are even punished.

fanaticism? No, making a living, being a success, and supporting one's family is not generally considered to be fanaticism, unless one is a bum.

Calling someone a bum because s/he does not live up to society's narrow definition of success is fanaticism. Calling someone a bum because their favoured mode of creative expression is not conducive to profit is fanaticism.

 

[Adam]

Hughes Johnson, you are remarkably good at entirely missing the point.

Watch closely:
1) Bill Gates has lots of money.
2) Bill Gates says "I have lot sof money, therefore nobody in the USA is poor or hungry.
3) Bill Gates is correct.

That is the argument you have been using. Does it make any sense whatsoever? No, it doesn't. Please try thinking, then come back.

 

[hughes johnson]

Hughes Johnson, you are remarkably good at entirely missing the point.

Watch closely:
1) Bill Gates has lots of money.
2) Bill Gates says "I have lot sof money, therefore nobody in the USA is poor or hungry.
3) Bill Gates is correct.

That is the argument you have been using. Does it make any sense whatsoever? No, it doesn't. Please try thinking, then come back.

1) There are lots of jobs and not many workers here. I could work 3 jobs if I wanted to. So could anyone else.

2) I agree with you; Bill Gates is right.

3) Australian firing squad:
READY!...
FIRE!...
AIM!

 

[hughes johnson]

Calling someone a bum because s/he does not live up to society's narrow definition of success is fanaticism. Calling someone a bum because their favoured mode of creative expression is not conducive to profit is fanaticism.

Sorry you're not doing well, perhaps you should find yourself a different favoured mode of creative expression.

 

[Adam]

There are lots of jobs and not many workers here. I could work 3 jobs if I wanted to.

Australian firing squad:
READY!...
FIRE!...
AIM!

That changes the 30 million people living in poverty... how, exactly?

 

[hughes johnson]

That changes the 30 million people living in poverty... how, exactly?

30 million? You're crackers.

 

[Adam]

You mean the US government is crackers? That's where the figure comes from. Well, if you insist. :D

 

[hughes johnson]

You mean the US government is crackers? That's where the figure comes from. Well, if you insist. :D

All governments are crackers. Ours would probably even hire you. From what I can tell, you love to make up BS statistics. There is a GREAT demand for people like you in our government. Then you would no longer be part of the 174% of our population that is living in poverty, and people like me wouldn't think of you as a bum.

 

[Adam]

And we are still left with these facts:

etween 2000 and 2001, poverty rose to 11.7% of the population, or 32.9 million people, up from 11.3% and 31.6 million.

23.3 million people sought and received emergency hunger relief from our network of charities in 2001.

Soldiers executing POWs.

POWs held for years without charge.

Using 75% of the world's oil production.

Average unemployment rates in the past year have risen: in 2001, the rate was 4.8%, but jumped to 5.7% in 2002.

In the last decade, the average US household consumer debt (non-mortgage) has increased from approximately $8,500 to $14,500. (Federal Reserve Statistical Releases and U.S. Census Bureau)

According to the Federal Reserve, outstanding non-secured consumer debt rose from $355 billion in 1980 to $1.2 trillion in 1996 to $1.65 trillion in 2001 and is expected to exceed $2.2 trillion by 2004.

Thus far, your ad hominems have changed nothing. Congratulations! :)

 

[hughes johnson]

Government statistics on poverty in the U.S. are absolutely meaningless. Our "underground economy" is HUGE. Many self-employed people in this country report only a very small portion of their actual income. The international underground drug trade is so large that at times it affects the fed's ability to regulate the economy! We have millionaires in this country who are listed as living in poverty. Money laundering in this country is big business. You don't live here so you don't know. The statistics are hogwash. I'm telling you that there is so much money flying around right now that making money in business is like shooting fish in a barrel.

 

[Adam]

Ah, okay, I see how it works. Statistics which go against whatever you say at any given time are unreliable, regardless of the source. However, statistics which support whatever you say at any given time are reliable. Got it. Thanks for clearning that up.

 

[hughes johnson]

Ah, okay, I see how it works. Statistics which go against whatever you say at any given time are unreliable, regardless of the source. However, statistics which support whatever you say at any given time are reliable. Got it. Thanks for clearning that up.

No, this is how it works:
Don't believe what you see with you own eyes, believe what the government tells you.

 

[Adam]

Good grief. We need some sort of test for membership. Seriously.

 

[hughes johnson]

Did you see the new employment figures that were released today? Normally 6% unemployment is considered to be "full employment". We are now at 5.6%. That means we are 100.4% employed (you got to love the government's logic).

Good grief. We need some sort of test for membership. Seriously.

I heard that this is in the works. The rumors are that the test is going to be based on reading comprehension and statistics. We are all going to miss you.
Best of luck,
hughes

 

[selfAdjoint]

You do know that the definition of unemployment was changed a few years ago, to make the numbers less scary. The people who weren't actively looking for jobs, who had been counted as unemployed before, were now dropped. So to compare, I've seen 5.5% unemployment under the new system equated to 7% under the old one. As for 6% being full employment, that of course is what employers like to believe, but nobody else does.

 

[hughes johnson]

As for 6% being full employment, that of course is what employers like to believe, but nobody else does.

No matter how good things get, some people will be in between jobs, some people enjoy being laid off in the winter to get some time in Florida, and some people are unemployable for various reasons. To say that nobody believes this is certainly incorrect.

 

[kat]

Others are employed "under the table" and yet reporting unemployed for various reasons.

 

[Adam]

Yep, there are all sorts of ways you can justify your denial.