is the job participation rate. There's a malaise in the workforce that is going to be difficult to overcome without some serious job expansion. Is it time for manufacturing to make a comeback with the high percentage of unskilled (unmotivated) workers?
Looking at the feeble yearly rise in median wages, Mr. Chamberlain said such figures mask a huge disparity among industries. Referring to data from the summer, he said that workers in the financial services, construction and graphic design sectors saw hefty double-digit wage growth from the previous year. Those suffering some of the steepest wage declines included those in the manufacturing (down more than 12 percent since last year), retail clothing and textile industries.
very disappointing report. Only 142,000 jobs created in September, with substantial revisions downward for July and August as well. 45,000 of those jobs were in retail and food.
The labor force participation rate declined to 62.4%, the lowest in thirty-eight years. Some of that is baby boomers retiring, but there is still a lot of slack in the labor market. A lot of people have long since given up looking for work. The unemployment rate was unchanged at 5.1%, with the U-6 at 10%. Wages and the average hourly work week were essentially unchanged.
The report just adds more fuel to the argument that the Fed will not increase interest rates this year. That and the wretched economies elsewhere, including China, Europe, and the basket case that is Brazil.
There has been little if any wage growth for quite some time. Lack of wage growth means less consumer spending, which is two-thirds of the economy. The Consumer Confidence Index did rise by 1.7 points.
Wall Street was clearly distressed by the report. The Dow was off more than two hundred points earlier, although it has recovered about half those losses.
The problem is that this may be as good as it gets. A future of mostly low wage, service sector jobs with little wage growth. The country needs $2 - $6 trillion in infrastructure spending. Those would be mostly good paying jobs that could be paid for with a financial transactions tax.
Everyone seems to want a hike, yet there's no sign of the economy rolling. Certainly not overheating.
I think we want a hike because we think that means things are good, even if they aren't. Glad Yellen didn't budge.
wasn't there a huge bump in infrastructure during the stimulus (shovel ready jobs)? That didn't seem to improve things. Are you talking about sector infrastructure (e.g., retooling for expanded manufacturing).
BTW... good run down, I'm not nit picking at your excellent synopsis of the jobs report.
is the job participation rate. There's a malaise in the workforce that is going to be difficult to overcome without some serious job expansion. Is it time for manufacturing to make a comeback with the high percentage of unskilled (unmotivated) workers?
Manufacturing is no longer necessarily an unskilled worker area. Material handling, production machine operating, QC are automated. Skilled trades- toolmaker, computer-controlled machine setup are in demand, but those are skilled trades. Look around you and see how many jobs someone without some specialized skill or training can do- there aren't many.
The country needs $2 - $6 trillion in infrastructure spending. Those would be mostly good paying jobs that could be paid for with a financial transactions tax.
Might I suggest a financial transactions tax that would raise between $2 - $6 TRILLION in revenues, even over a 10 year period, might do more harm than good? And putting the necessary mechanism (tax provisions) in place might change behavior to an extent that the actual increase in revenues would never approach that amount.
wasn't there a huge bump in infrastructure during the stimulus (shovel ready jobs)? That didn't seem to improve things. Are you talking about sector infrastructure (e.g., retooling for expanded manufacturing).
BTW... good run down, I'm not nit picking at your excellent synopsis of the jobs report.
Yeah, the shovel ready jobs were a joke. But that doesn't change the fact that the roads, bridges, dams, sewers, sanitation systems, and just about everything else is falling apart.
The country needs $2 - $6 trillion in infrastructure spending. Those would be mostly good paying jobs that could be paid for with a financial transactions tax.
Might I suggest a financial transactions tax that would raise between $2 - $6 TRILLION in revenues, even over a 10 year period, might do more harm than good? And putting the necessary mechanism (tax provisions) in place might change behavior to an extent that the actual increase in revenues would never approach that amount.
Most proposed FTT are too low, and therefore won't raise enough money. We need trillions, not only to fix the infrastructure, but to also deal with rising health care costs, and the national debt. Whatever the tax rate, I would write the legislation authorizing it to require that the annual revenue it generates be split into thirds: one third to reduce the national debt, one third for infrastructure, and one third for health care.
No solution is perfect. All taxes cause some pain. But don't make the perfect the enemy of the good. I favor cutting taxes and removing deductions, to simplify the tax code, and hopefully spur some economic growth. But doing so will never produce enough growth to raise the trillions we need. Neither will properly reclassifying carried interest from a capital gain to ordinary income, or reforming stepped up basis. Either come up with the money or do without. A FTT isn't painless, but it's the least painful way to raise what we need.
by not including millions that have been unemployed for more than a year. Those unfortunate people are now classified as having 'left the workforce'. But they are still people that want to work but have no jobs.
That is why more people are on food stamps now than ever before.
The economy has not improved. I have worked in technology sales for twenty years and business growth has stopped. It has never been this bad before. It is not reported anymore because it is no longer part of the narrative.
down not only because people cannot find work - More people have disabilities than before (the standards for disability have not changed, there are just more people who have them) because the baby boomer generation has the highest rate of obesity and chronic illness in U.S. History. 10,000 people are turning 65 each day, and that will continue for the next 15 years. Which means that those ages 55-65, who are most likely to be disabled, are going onto disability with legitimate claims. In addition, workforce specialization has pushed more people to return to school and gain more advanced skills to compete in the global labor market. So, that contributes to the decline in participation.
they talk about investments in infrastructure. The billions of dollars wasted on the phoney stimulus (and green energy) put the economy into the current malaise. More detramental, the stimulus postponed the real infrastructure improvements that will help economic growth.
...so that higher income households get to keep more of their hard earned dollars. We should also abolish taxes on Capital Gains and Ordinary Dividends. That way, with the wealthy keeping more of their money, it will generate the sort of economic multiplier this nation has been missing since the Reagan years.
Add to that the amazingly wasteful spending in Congress... what we need to do is slash Washington spending to the bone and let the private sector take over most of the much needed tasks that lay ahead for our country.
In a phrase, we need to return to "Trickle Down Economics" where everyone in society benfits when the wealthy acumulate a certain threshold of wealth and then begin to invest that wealth in the private and public sectors.
It's that simple. We need to inscentivize and enrich the rich... that will (in the long run) close the gap between the very wealthy and everyone else.
We can still turn this ship around as soon as we return to Reaganomics.
Anybody who works more than 30 hours a week unless they're management will be dropped below and lose their benefits and anybody with restrictions not FMLA related will be laid off. Restrictions like school or other jobs.
I work over 30 and have restrictions due to another job. Plus I only have this job for the benefits....looks like I'm screwed.
No solution is perfect. All taxes cause some pain. But don't make the perfect the enemy of the good.
Using a mid-point in your estimate, you're talking about $400 BILLION dollars a year coming from a financial transactions tax. I don't see that as the perfect being the enemy of the good. I see it as a financial disaster that would do more harm to the economy than good. I think it could actually cause a reduction in revenues. At a minimum it would result in a reduction in revenues from recognized capital gains which would at least partially offset the revenues it raises.
they talk about investments in infrastructure. The billions of dollars wasted on the phoney stimulus (and green energy) put the economy into the current malaise. More detramental, the stimulus postponed the real infrastructure improvements that will help economic growth.
Wow! That's a lot of ignorance to squeeze into one 3 sentence post. Impressive!
[P.S. I would try to explain to you that the stimulus was a RESPONSE to the crisis, not the CAUSE of it, but I think we both know I'd be wasting my time.]
RE: Liberal who has to side with njm on this one Â
Adding ineffiencies (taxes) to the financial sector is a really poor idea. We need that engine to operate as smoothly as possible.
+1.
I really dont understand the call for higher rates. I think the "normalization" argument is just politics -- people who think low interest rates are artificially propping up the economy #s, and by extension the president. I think the proponents of this believe it even though many dont realize it. Obviously cant prove the subconscious of others. Or people who think that the only reason government spending continues unabetted is the lack of vig (there's something to that argument). But there is no threat of inflation, and the economy is weak enough as it is. Not the time to raise rates.
RE: I think what we need is a revision in the tax code... Â
...so that higher income households get to keep more of their hard earned dollars. We should also abolish taxes on Capital Gains and Ordinary Dividends. That way, with the wealthy keeping more of their money, it will generate the sort of economic multiplier this nation has been missing since the Reagan years.
Add to that the amazingly wasteful spending in Congress... what we need to do is slash Washington spending to the bone and let the private sector take over most of the much needed tasks that lay ahead for our country.
In a phrase, we need to return to "Trickle Down Economics" where everyone in society benfits when the wealthy acumulate a certain threshold of wealth and then begin to invest that wealth in the private and public sectors.
It's that simple. We need to inscentivize and enrich the rich... that will (in the long run) close the gap between the very wealthy and everyone else.
We can still turn this ship around as soon as we return to Reaganomics.
Preach it from the mountaintop brother!!!!! Our biggest problem in this country is that the rich aren't wealthy enough.
You want to help the middle class? Give billionaires a tax break and just sit back and watch that money trickle down!
is conceptually in the real of a sin tax, like we put on cigs and drinks. Except financial transactions arent sins. They're overwhelmingly good for the economy. And we'll just chase them off shore, to the UK where those people can then have the good jobs that follow.
It's a bad idea from "my" side. It's not even a bad idea attempting to address a good concern. It's just bad.
1) Pushing the tax rate on investment income to zerois a spectacularly bad idea. Guaranteed, if you do that, millions of business owners will find a way to convert ordinary income into investment income. It isn't that difficult. Plus doing so
just increases income and wealth gaps.
2) Large transaction taxes reduce the value of securities. They also gut market liquidity, which is already a major concern.
3) Federal disbursement of funds for infrastructure has been around since the 1950's, and it never worked very well. Horribly incompetent and politicized project selection, spectacularly long delays from approval to disbursement, and a vast number of other problems. Focus on "shovel-ready projects," and you get lots of ....shovels.
4) The stubbornness of many involved in looking at the impact of global trends and the excess strength of the dollar in affecting job creation is a sore point with a fair amount of observes, myself included as a minor player.
5) Back to globalization and technological change--yeah, it's in there. Wage growth has been stuck in a 2% annual track for 5 years, and as the economy supposedly improved, it didn't get any better.
is conceptually in the real of a sin tax, like we put on cigs and drinks. Except financial transactions arent sins. They're overwhelmingly good for the economy. And we'll just chase them off shore, to the UK where those people can then have the good jobs that follow.
It's a bad idea from "my" side. It's not even a bad idea attempting to address a good concern. It's just bad.
Why would a minuscule financial transactions that sought to limit high frequency trading be a bad thing? And it seems the EU is likely to implement one so I don't see us losing jobs to them if we did implement one.
the problem with the sassy never ending tit for tat between lefty hipsters and old fashioned east coast mainstream rightists over tax policy is sort of avoiding a whole pile of other issues that could be really fun to explore, funny humor notwithstanding, they are changing the subject conveniently
RE: I think what we need is a revision in the tax code... Â
...so that higher income households get to keep more of their hard earned dollars. We should also abolish taxes on Capital Gains and Ordinary Dividends. That way, with the wealthy keeping more of their money, it will generate the sort of economic multiplier this nation has been missing since the Reagan years.
Add to that the amazingly wasteful spending in Congress... what we need to do is slash Washington spending to the bone and let the private sector take over most of the much needed tasks that lay ahead for our country.
In a phrase, we need to return to "Trickle Down Economics" where everyone in society benfits when the wealthy acumulate a certain threshold of wealth and then begin to invest that wealth in the private and public sectors.
It's that simple. We need to inscentivize and enrich the rich... that will (in the long run) close the gap between the very wealthy and everyone else.
We can still turn this ship around as soon as we return to Reaganomics.
Of course, this is has nothing to do with the topic at hand, but rather an idiotic rant by one of the least informed posters (across multiple topics).
your partisanship is clouding your abilty to reason. You can't waste billions of dollars during an economic recovery and claim that it wasn't impactful. I understand you have an opinion... unfortunately, the stimulus didn't solve the economic recession, it has perpetuated the malaise.
RE: I think what we need is a revision in the tax code... Â
...so that higher income households get to keep more of their hard earned dollars. We should also abolish taxes on Capital Gains and Ordinary Dividends. That way, with the wealthy keeping more of their money, it will generate the sort of economic multiplier this nation has been missing since the Reagan years.
Add to that the amazingly wasteful spending in Congress... what we need to do is slash Washington spending to the bone and let the private sector take over most of the much needed tasks that lay ahead for our country.
In a phrase, we need to return to "Trickle Down Economics" where everyone in society benfits when the wealthy acumulate a certain threshold of wealth and then begin to invest that wealth in the private and public sectors.
It's that simple. We need to inscentivize and enrich the rich... that will (in the long run) close the gap between the very wealthy and everyone else.
We can still turn this ship around as soon as we return to Reaganomics.
I don't know who first said it, but the only thing that trickles down is the rich pissing on the poor.
because HFT shouldnt be limited. Brokerages should be allowed to sell info letting others front run their clients, but otherwise there is no good reason to sin tax HFT. I tink HFT is not particularly productive to society. I dont buy the liquidity argument for it, on the whole. But nor do I think it is particularly destructive. I just dont think it qualified for a sin tax.
I think tax rates should go up when we're doing a bit better because I care about deficits. But Im not for funding government by just picking on a line of business here or there and saying they have a particular duty to contribute to the fisc. The people kvetching about the complexity of the tax code are not all mouth breathers -- there is something real to the charge.
your partisanship is clouding your abilty to reason. You can't waste billions of dollars during an economic recovery and claim that it wasn't impactful. I understand you have an opinion... unfortunately, the stimulus didn't solve the economic recession, it has perpetuated the malaise.
I think the person blaming the economy on overinvestment in green energy should not be cavalierly throwing around accusations of clouded ability to reason.
your partisanship is clouding your abilty to reason. You can't waste billions of dollars during an economic recovery and claim that it wasn't impactful. I understand you have an opinion... unfortunately, the stimulus didn't solve the economic recession, it has perpetuated the malaise.
1) Billions of "wasted"stimulus dollars actually can stimulate an economy - this is pretty basic economics. Not that I agree that investments in solar energy were wasted.
2) Pretty much all non-partisan objective analysis of the stimulus concoudes that it did create millions of jobs (if you think about it, how could spending billions of dollars not create jobs???). See below.
Maybe it's not ME who's being willfully ignorant because of partisan politics, but someone else? Just a thought.
Quote:
As we have written before, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office released a report in August that said the stimulus bill has "[l]owered the unemployment rate by between 0.7 percentage points and 1.8 percentage points" and "[i]ncreased the number of people employed by between 1.4 million and 3.3 million."
“Simplicity is a great virtue but it requires hard work to achieve it and education to appreciate it. And to make matters worse: complexity sells better.”
¯ Edsger W. Dijkstra
“Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius — and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction.”
¯ Ernst F. Schumacher
Watch.
The income gap is just going to continue to get worse and worse.
Lackluster Jobs Report - ( New Window )
The labor force participation rate declined to 62.4%, the lowest in thirty-eight years. Some of that is baby boomers retiring, but there is still a lot of slack in the labor market. A lot of people have long since given up looking for work. The unemployment rate was unchanged at 5.1%, with the U-6 at 10%. Wages and the average hourly work week were essentially unchanged.
The report just adds more fuel to the argument that the Fed will not increase interest rates this year. That and the wretched economies elsewhere, including China, Europe, and the basket case that is Brazil.
There has been little if any wage growth for quite some time. Lack of wage growth means less consumer spending, which is two-thirds of the economy. The Consumer Confidence Index did rise by 1.7 points.
Wall Street was clearly distressed by the report. The Dow was off more than two hundred points earlier, although it has recovered about half those losses.
The problem is that this may be as good as it gets. A future of mostly low wage, service sector jobs with little wage growth. The country needs $2 - $6 trillion in infrastructure spending. Those would be mostly good paying jobs that could be paid for with a financial transactions tax.
I think we want a hike because we think that means things are good, even if they aren't. Glad Yellen didn't budge.
BTW... good run down, I'm not nit picking at your excellent synopsis of the jobs report.
From and investment perspective, there will be alot of good buying opportunities.
Might I suggest a financial transactions tax that would raise between $2 - $6 TRILLION in revenues, even over a 10 year period, might do more harm than good? And putting the necessary mechanism (tax provisions) in place might change behavior to an extent that the actual increase in revenues would never approach that amount.
C'mon Russia! You can do it!
BTW... good run down, I'm not nit picking at your excellent synopsis of the jobs report.
Yeah, the shovel ready jobs were a joke. But that doesn't change the fact that the roads, bridges, dams, sewers, sanitation systems, and just about everything else is falling apart.
Remember this?
Quote:
The country needs $2 - $6 trillion in infrastructure spending. Those would be mostly good paying jobs that could be paid for with a financial transactions tax.
Might I suggest a financial transactions tax that would raise between $2 - $6 TRILLION in revenues, even over a 10 year period, might do more harm than good? And putting the necessary mechanism (tax provisions) in place might change behavior to an extent that the actual increase in revenues would never approach that amount.
Most proposed FTT are too low, and therefore won't raise enough money. We need trillions, not only to fix the infrastructure, but to also deal with rising health care costs, and the national debt. Whatever the tax rate, I would write the legislation authorizing it to require that the annual revenue it generates be split into thirds: one third to reduce the national debt, one third for infrastructure, and one third for health care.
No solution is perfect. All taxes cause some pain. But don't make the perfect the enemy of the good. I favor cutting taxes and removing deductions, to simplify the tax code, and hopefully spur some economic growth. But doing so will never produce enough growth to raise the trillions we need. Neither will properly reclassifying carried interest from a capital gain to ordinary income, or reforming stepped up basis. Either come up with the money or do without. A FTT isn't painless, but it's the least painful way to raise what we need.
That is why more people are on food stamps now than ever before.
The economy has not improved. I have worked in technology sales for twenty years and business growth has stopped. It has never been this bad before. It is not reported anymore because it is no longer part of the narrative.
Add to that the amazingly wasteful spending in Congress... what we need to do is slash Washington spending to the bone and let the private sector take over most of the much needed tasks that lay ahead for our country.
In a phrase, we need to return to "Trickle Down Economics" where everyone in society benfits when the wealthy acumulate a certain threshold of wealth and then begin to invest that wealth in the private and public sectors.
It's that simple. We need to inscentivize and enrich the rich... that will (in the long run) close the gap between the very wealthy and everyone else.
We can still turn this ship around as soon as we return to Reaganomics.
they have no more relevance than an donkey does to play the guitar
I work over 30 and have restrictions due to another job. Plus I only have this job for the benefits....looks like I'm screwed.
No solution is perfect. All taxes cause some pain. But don't make the perfect the enemy of the good.
Using a mid-point in your estimate, you're talking about $400 BILLION dollars a year coming from a financial transactions tax. I don't see that as the perfect being the enemy of the good. I see it as a financial disaster that would do more harm to the economy than good. I think it could actually cause a reduction in revenues. At a minimum it would result in a reduction in revenues from recognized capital gains which would at least partially offset the revenues it raises.
Wow! That's a lot of ignorance to squeeze into one 3 sentence post. Impressive!
[P.S. I would try to explain to you that the stimulus was a RESPONSE to the crisis, not the CAUSE of it, but I think we both know I'd be wasting my time.]
+1.
I really dont understand the call for higher rates. I think the "normalization" argument is just politics -- people who think low interest rates are artificially propping up the economy #s, and by extension the president. I think the proponents of this believe it even though many dont realize it. Obviously cant prove the subconscious of others. Or people who think that the only reason government spending continues unabetted is the lack of vig (there's something to that argument). But there is no threat of inflation, and the economy is weak enough as it is. Not the time to raise rates.
Add to that the amazingly wasteful spending in Congress... what we need to do is slash Washington spending to the bone and let the private sector take over most of the much needed tasks that lay ahead for our country.
In a phrase, we need to return to "Trickle Down Economics" where everyone in society benfits when the wealthy acumulate a certain threshold of wealth and then begin to invest that wealth in the private and public sectors.
It's that simple. We need to inscentivize and enrich the rich... that will (in the long run) close the gap between the very wealthy and everyone else.
We can still turn this ship around as soon as we return to Reaganomics.
Preach it from the mountaintop brother!!!!! Our biggest problem in this country is that the rich aren't wealthy enough.
You want to help the middle class? Give billionaires a tax break and just sit back and watch that money trickle down!
It's a bad idea from "my" side. It's not even a bad idea attempting to address a good concern. It's just bad.
just increases income and wealth gaps.
2) Large transaction taxes reduce the value of securities. They also gut market liquidity, which is already a major concern.
3) Federal disbursement of funds for infrastructure has been around since the 1950's, and it never worked very well. Horribly incompetent and politicized project selection, spectacularly long delays from approval to disbursement, and a vast number of other problems. Focus on "shovel-ready projects," and you get lots of ....shovels.
4) The stubbornness of many involved in looking at the impact of global trends and the excess strength of the dollar in affecting job creation is a sore point with a fair amount of observes, myself included as a minor player.
5) Back to globalization and technological change--yeah, it's in there. Wage growth has been stuck in a 2% annual track for 5 years, and as the economy supposedly improved, it didn't get any better.
It's a bad idea from "my" side. It's not even a bad idea attempting to address a good concern. It's just bad.
Why would a minuscule financial transactions that sought to limit high frequency trading be a bad thing? And it seems the EU is likely to implement one so I don't see us losing jobs to them if we did implement one.
I'm far from an expert on this but it seem like a good deal to me.
The Case for a Financial Transactions Tax - ( New Window )
Add to that the amazingly wasteful spending in Congress... what we need to do is slash Washington spending to the bone and let the private sector take over most of the much needed tasks that lay ahead for our country.
In a phrase, we need to return to "Trickle Down Economics" where everyone in society benfits when the wealthy acumulate a certain threshold of wealth and then begin to invest that wealth in the private and public sectors.
It's that simple. We need to inscentivize and enrich the rich... that will (in the long run) close the gap between the very wealthy and everyone else.
We can still turn this ship around as soon as we return to Reaganomics.
Of course, this is has nothing to do with the topic at hand, but rather an idiotic rant by one of the least informed posters (across multiple topics).
Add to that the amazingly wasteful spending in Congress... what we need to do is slash Washington spending to the bone and let the private sector take over most of the much needed tasks that lay ahead for our country.
In a phrase, we need to return to "Trickle Down Economics" where everyone in society benfits when the wealthy acumulate a certain threshold of wealth and then begin to invest that wealth in the private and public sectors.
It's that simple. We need to inscentivize and enrich the rich... that will (in the long run) close the gap between the very wealthy and everyone else.
We can still turn this ship around as soon as we return to Reaganomics.
I don't know who first said it, but the only thing that trickles down is the rich pissing on the poor.
...so nice to hear from you.
Hope you are doing well.
...so nice to hear from you.
Hope you are doing well.
Likewise - let's keep your posting focused on the topic at hand, shall we?
I think tax rates should go up when we're doing a bit better because I care about deficits. But Im not for funding government by just picking on a line of business here or there and saying they have a particular duty to contribute to the fisc. The people kvetching about the complexity of the tax code are not all mouth breathers -- there is something real to the charge.
I think the person blaming the economy on overinvestment in green energy should not be cavalierly throwing around accusations of clouded ability to reason.
1) Billions of "wasted"stimulus dollars actually can stimulate an economy - this is pretty basic economics. Not that I agree that investments in solar energy were wasted.
2) Pretty much all non-partisan objective analysis of the stimulus concoudes that it did create millions of jobs (if you think about it, how could spending billions of dollars not create jobs???). See below.
Maybe it's not ME who's being willfully ignorant because of partisan politics, but someone else? Just a thought.
Did the Stimulus Create Jobs? - ( New Window )
¯ Edsger W. Dijkstra
“Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius — and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction.”
¯ Ernst F. Schumacher