Featured Jobs Report: 204,000 Jobs Added in August

This looks like a good spot to put this:

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...-force-participation-rate-matches-36-year-low


Record 92,269,000 Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Matches 36-Year Low


(CNSNews.com) - A record 92,269,000 Americans 16 and older did not participate in the labor force in August, as the labor force participation rate matched a 36-year low of 62.8 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The labor force participation rate has been as low as 62.8 percent in six of the last twelve months, but prior to last October had not fallen that low since 1978

 

The retired accounts for a third of the labor force?

 

U.S. Unemployment: Retirees Are Not The Labor Exodus Problem

Since 2008, the civilian non-institutional population has jumped by 11.9 million, yet the civilian labor force has only increased by 1.1 million, according to annual figures published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The above numbers speak to a pronounced drop in labor force participation—that is, those working or looking for work—with the participation rate dropping from almost 66 percent throughout 2008 to its current level of 62.8 percent, the lowest it’s been since 1978.

If the labor force participation rate had held steady at its 2008 level, unemployment would be 11.2 percent instead of the current reported rate of 6.7 percent.

That labor force participation has been dropping is undisputed. The question is why.

Is the decline in labor force participation a result of older people retiring en masse, younger people failing to enter the work force, or both?

If it is the former, then Americans can take confidence in the reported unemployment rate of 6.7 percent, that its steady drop is very real and means labor market conditions are in fact improving.

If, however, younger Americans are not entering the labor force and/or middle-aged people are dropping out, quite the opposite. The reported unemployment rate then understates the reality of current labor market conditions. Then, individuals are not looking for work conceivably because there is little work to be found and so they are giving up — in short, an economic calamity.

On one side are those who take the view that what is being observed are actually Baby Boomers leaving the workforce and retiring, such as minnpost.com’s Erik Hare, writing in a piece, “Decline in labor force driven by retirement, not discouragement.”

Hare calls it a “lie” that “this is the result of people giving up looking for work, a sign that the ‘recovery’ is weak.” Instead, Hare points to a Philadelphia Federal Reserve study on the topic that takes a narrow look at Bureau nonparticipation data, concluding that retirements beginning in 2010 began to play a role in driving down the participation rate.

The trouble with the study is that labor participation has been declining a lot longer than since 2010. In fact, it peaked in 1997 at 67.1 percent, and has dropped annually ever since. As the study notes, “retirement had not played much of a role until around 2010.” By then, the rate had already dropped 2.4 percent.

Meaning, retirement cannot be thought to have played much of a role in the participation rates up until that point, and may only be tangentially affecting it now.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/realspi...nt-retirees-are-not-the-labor-exodus-problem/

 

Rather Simplistic answer.

I don't think that explains it at all.

 

Record Low Labor Participation Rate Not Due to Retirement or School

We can see from the above young people are participating dramatically less in the labor market now in comparison to 1999. We can also see more people over the age of 60 are either working or looking for work as well.


http://www.economicpopulist.org/con...pation-rate-not-due-retirement-or-school-5431

 

Of course it is. It's just as inaccurate to blithely write it all off as retirements, as you did.

Especially since the number of seniors in the workforce has been on the increase since the recession began.

 

Which is insignificant and does nothing to help the discussion. When 75 to 80% of the folks not working want and need a job we are in a world of hurt. It certainly shows the economy is not what it is being billed as.

 

I would venture to say the word being thrown about is "Recovery" ....as in economic recovery. :smilewinkgrin:

 

Define retirees.....like what age bracket, what economic level, etc. Is there data you can point to?

 

thats a realistic answer on your part......BO's not so much.

 

When we have that many people dropping out of the work force there is no recovery.

 

Seriously, I would almost venture to say that there are full communities (even States) that are on Food Stamps, Disability & other forms of Government assistance. Thats hardly a robust economy.

 

If "WE" are in "Recovery" ......OK, lets use a famous Alcoholics Anonymous expression to clarify....then we have fallen OFF THE WAGON :BangHead:

 

We live in an area that has been affected by the oil and gas boom. However they are all coming in the area from Texas and Oklahoma people here have been on assistance so long that you can't get them to go to work

 

Then send them all to Mexico & we will take the ones wanting to Join the Military & actually work. This BO guy is handing out Food Stamps like candy. And you know, thats OK as a safety net measure.....but not a forever thing. :smilewinkgrin: