4 ms·
The two - very telling - numbers to explain worries about money: - 62.4% Civilian Labor Force Participation Rate - the lowest in 38 years! (http://data.bls.gov
by jazzyk 11y ago
The two - very telling - numbers to explain worries about money:
- 62.4% Civilian Labor Force Participation Rate - the lowest in 38 years! (http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000 http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000)
- 9M people on Disability Insurance, double the number in 1995 and six times the number in 1970 (http://fortune.com/2015/10/08/disability-insurance-unemployment-great-recession http://fortune.com/2015/10/08/disability-insurance-unemploym...)
- jazzyk 11y agoForgot to say that these numbers are rarely ever mentioned by the mainstream media (MSM), not to spoil the back-slapping narrative of politicians and their sycophants "See? We stabilized the economy and saved you from a depression" (at the cost of $1T new debt/year).
- cryoshon 11y agoNot sure why you got downvoted for this, you are entirely right regarding the shyness of the MSM to discuss the actual state of the economy. Part of it is due to the perception of the economy creating the reality of the economy, but it's also much more in line with the government to say that things are rosy.
- morgante 11y ago> Forgot to say that these numbers are rarely ever mentioned by the mainstream media (MSM) I see despairing articles about the state of the American middle class in the media all the time. In fact, this very article is from the mainstream media.
- jazzyk 11y agoNot the headline news, which is what most people consume. There ARE despairing articles to be found, but you need to reach out a bit to find them.
- drzaiusapelord 11y ago>62.4% Civilian Labor Force Participation Rate - the lowest in 38 years! You can't really have it both ways. We can't have automation, competitiveness, efficiency, a move way from the consumerist lifestyle, etc and expect 1970's style employment levels. Not to mention, at lot of the jobs from that era were back-breaking and dangerous manufacturing jobs. These weren't desirable jobs and many of the people who had them did their best to work their way out of them via retraining, college, moving to management, etc. Keeping everyone employed is just a fool's errand this late in the capitalism game. More "make work" jobs isn't the solution here. Ideally, this is the narrative we need to start spreading. Things like minimum guaranteed income shouldn't be shameful concepts to push.
- cryoshon 11y agoI agree. The problem is that the right wing (and honestly, the Democratic party too) are going to say that if you support a negative income tax or basic income, you are a communist/socialist/radical/student who is unemployed/poor and doesn't want to work hard (perpetually) to earn your keep, which they view as necessary to be eligible for benefits in society. The American work ethic is to compete viciously for chances to work hard, for too long, forever, for little in return. It's an unmitigated failure, but people fear change and cling to tradition.
- JustSomeNobody 11y agoNo! They American work ethic has historically been work hard to provide for your family because that's ... what ... you ... do! It is failing because greed has become the norm. People's attitudes have gone from help your family and friends to help yourself. It has moved away from community to individualism. That's what's changed. When Andrew decimated south Florida people were in dire straights. Everyone wanted to help. When the convoys of utility workers, food and water were allowed to go in finally, people pulled off the side of the highway and cheered and wept because, finally, help was on its way. Contrast that to the bumbling eff up that was Katrina. People were falling over themselves trying to blame everyone else for that. That's the difference now. How we got this way, I don't know. But it's disgusting. A basic income doesn't fix this. We need an attitude adjustment in this country.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]