Posted by Tina
As we head into Fall the employment situation in America remains bleak despite the happy face applied by President Obama and his cheer leaders. it’s not surprising that the public isn’t swallowing his line that things are “getting better,” conditions on the street and in our own households tell the true story. The latest jobs report indicates 151,000 jobs were created last month which was quite a bit lower than expected (181,000). But the jobs numbers and the unemployment rate don’t adequately reflect the poor economic conditions that will face our new president. As CNBC points out:
A more encompassing rate that included discouraged workers and those holding part-time jobs for economic reasons held steady at 9.7 percent. Among demographic group, the unemployment rate for those without a high school diploma jumped from 6.3 percent in July to 7.2 percent. … Those counted as not in the labor force increased by 58,000 to 94.4 million. … the biggest jobs gains came in bars and restaurants, which added 34,000 positions. Social assistance grew by 22,000, professional and business services added 22,000 and Wall Street-related positions grew by 15,000. Health care also contributed 14,000. On the upside, the household survey showed full-time jobs increased by 319,000, while part-time positions declined by 388,000.
That 94.4 million not in the labor force indicates a disturbing situation that is now coming to the fore:
Labor Day is an appropriate moment to reflect on a quiet catastrophe: the collapse, over two generations, of work for American men. During the past half-century, work rates for U.S. males spiraled relentlessly downward. America is now home to a vast army of jobless men who are no longer even looking for work—roughly seven million of them age 25 to 54, the traditional prime of working life.
This is arguably a crisis, but it is hardly ever discussed in the public square. Received wisdom holds that the U.S. is at or near “full employment.” Most readers have probably heard this, perhaps from the vice chairman of the Federal Reserve, who said in a speech last week that “it is a remarkable, and perhaps underappreciated, achievement that the economy has returned to near-full employment in a relatively short time after the Great Recession.”
Near-full employment? In 2015 the work rate (the ratio of employment to population) for American males age 25 to 54 was 84.4%. That’s slightly lower than it had been in 1940, 86.4%, at the tail end of the Great Depression. Benchmarked against 1965, when American men were at genuine full employment, the “male jobs deficit” in 2015 would be nearly 10 million, even after taking into account an older population and more adults in college.
The “army” of working aged men that are not working is attributed to the loss in manufacturing jobs and the stagnant economy but some believe there are other factors at work. The American male was once revered as the head of the family, the breadwinner, the protector and innovator. He held a important place in society giving him both respect and purpose. Decades of disparaging attitudes toward males, social changes, and governmental policies have pushed males and their importance to the background. This trend may make hard core feminists smack high fives but it bodes ill for the general well being of our society:
What we might call “sociological” factors are evident, not least the tremendous rise in unworking men who draw from government disability and means-tested benefit programs. There are also the barriers to work for America’s huge pool of male ex-prisoners and felons not behind bars—a poorly tracked cohort that accounts for one adult male in eight in the civilian population, excluding those in jail now. …
… The male retreat from the labor force has exacerbated family breakdown, promoted welfare dependence and recast “disability” into a viable alternative lifestyle. Among these men the death of work seems to mean also the death of civic engagement, community participation and voluntary association.
Men must be valued in societies. If they are not they can turn into societal liabilities as gang members, prisoners, and the shiftless. It is incumbent upon society, and in particular women, to value the males in our lives showing them respect. A paper by Diane A. Sears, Why Men are Important, explores the contributions men make to our families, communities and our world. It’s short but succinct and well worth reading if only as a reminder that it is a mistake to devalue men and the important roles they play in our world.
We are coming up to an important election. A number of citizens will vote for Hillary Clinton, in part, because it would mean they participated in electing the first female president of our nation. I can’t think of a worse reason for casting a vote particularly in this time of danger and economic turmoil. If ever there was a time when we needed a strong steady experienced hand at the wheel it is now. Donald Trump is poised to improve economic conditions, to enact policies that provide good job opportunities, and to stand firm for law and order and as a strong leader in the terror war. Donald Trump is the strong horse in this election.
CNS News:
We’re fast approaching the time when there’s no one left to pull the cart, if we’re not already there. Socialism (government based in communism/fascism) doesn’t work. Neither do attitudes and policies that devalue and subjugate males.
I’ve read a few articles where you state that Trump would improve economic conditions. What I haven’t seen in any of them is citations of economists to back up this position. Outside this blog, I’ve seen many economists on both sides of the aisle say a Trump presidency would plunge the United States into a recession.
Moody’s: Where Trump’s Economic Policies Might Spark Recession, Clinton’s Could Boost GDP And Lower Unemployment
http://www.forbes.com/sites/maggiemcgrath/2016/07/29/moodys-where-trumps-economic-policies-might-spark-recession-clintons-could-boost-gdp-and-lower-unemployment/#4011f0a32348
Economists Who’ve Advised Presidents Are No Fans of Donald Trump
In a WSJ survey, no former members of the White House Council of Economic Advisers—spanning eight presidents—openly support Mr. Trump
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2016/08/25/economists-whove-advised-presidents-are-no-fans-of-donald-trump/
Why a conservative economist says Trump could make America ‘the North Korea of economics’
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/05/06/how-trump-could-make-america-the-north-korea-of-economics/
Another Economist Says Trump Presidency Would Lead to Recession in U.S.
Gregory Daco of Oxford Economics claims that Donald Trump’s policies would send the U.S. economy into recession by end of 2017.
https://www.thestreet.com/story/13624715/1/another-economist-says-trump-presidency-would-lead-to-recession-in-u-s.html
It’s also important to note that Trump lacks the support of any living former president, and has been condemned by the last two heads of the CIA.
People who know how to do this job say Trump can’t do it. Trump himself has proven he can’t do it with his erratic behavior, contradictory and offensive statements, and economic and international ignorance (he didn’t know what Brexit was, or that Russia had already invaded Ukraine, or what the nuclear triad was, or…). Most people are listening to the experts. The few Americans still supporting Trump aren’t needed to defeat him, but they should start thinking about what they want their grandchildren to remember about how they reacted in this important moment.
“What I haven’t seen in any of them is citations of economists to back up this position.”
That’s incredible since he has several distinguished economists on his team. I posted about several of them on another thread.
In my opinion we have been in a non-recovery with a stock market propped up by the feds printing money. The average growth of less than 2% pretty much proves it, as do the realities of those seeking meaningful employment.
The fed has backed itself into a corner without creating a robust and thriving economy following the last recession, which was supposedly over in June 2009.
In my opinion we are headed for another crash…some say a doozy because of all this dicking around by the so-called smarter economist that embrace Keynesian policies. So you should know if we do have one it won;t be a result of Trumps plan…which may be the real reason behind those economists that criticize Trump It is their policies that have brought on this failure and it is their failure to enact workable reforms that will cause the coming recession.
I don’t know why, given the lousy record over eight years, you would take the word of these failures…the so-called smarter economists. What have their ideas brought us but misery, lost jobs, low paying jobs, higher prices, bloated government, and dread about the future? Does it occur to you they could be wrong? Does it occur to you at least some of what they say is purely political?
Have you considered that no person who is elected to the presidency is ever prepared for the job? George Bush had the benefit of having been around when his father served but most begin having no experience whatsoever. The presidency is a unique job like no other.
Trump does have vast experience as an executive and leader. He has been through rough times and survived to be even more successful. Trump is a work horse…a Clydesdale!
Clinton has a record of failure, deceit, and carelessness. She also seems to lack the stamina required…a horse ready for the pasture.
Between the two there is no comparison in terms of who is qualified to take on the responsibilities of this unique and challenging job!
None!
CNN Money:
Economist Larry Kudlow, “Trump Tax Plan Will Bring ‘Tremendous Movement of Capital and Labor Back to the United States’”
Video – Economist Stephen Moore – Trump will grow the economy
video – Dr. Laffer: “Why a Trump victory will result in an economic boom”
Tim (Chris?) your impressions of Trump are surface impressions that reflect the left bias so prominent in media and academic circles. The fact that they cannot and will not accurately report even on current conditions makes those opinions highly suspect.
The American public has been played by a biased media for decades. TownHall demonstrates the absurdity of their slanted opinion pieces in a single paragraph:
I’m sure you’ve heard about the economic conditions in Venezuela which began long before oil collapsed!
I did not know Laffer had such a divers presidential support background.
I agree with his analogy, when we’re at the bottom, like we are right now, there is only one way to go and that is up, with the right leadership and plan. Electing Hillary, who will be the third term of Obama’s failed policies, would be disastrous for our economic recovery.
I’ve read a few articles where you state that Trump would improve economic conditions. What I haven’t seen in any of them is citations of economists to back up this position. Outside this blog, I’ve seen many economists on both sides of the aisle say a Trump presidency would plunge the United States into a recession.
Moody’s: Where Trump’s Economic Policies Might Spark Recession, Clinton’s Could Boost GDP And Lower Unemployment
http://www.forbes.com/sites/maggiemcgrath/2016/07/29/moodys-where-trumps-economic-policies-might-spark-recession-clintons-could-boost-gdp-and-lower-unemployment/#4011f0a32348
Economists Who’ve Advised Presidents Are No Fans of Donald Trump
In a WSJ survey, no former members of the White House Council of Economic Advisers—spanning eight presidents—openly support Mr. Trump
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2016/08/25/economists-whove-advised-presidents-are-no-fans-of-donald-trump/
Why a conservative economist says Trump could make America ‘the North Korea of economics’
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/05/06/how-trump-could-make-america-the-north-korea-of-economics/
Another Economist Says Trump Presidency Would Lead to Recession in U.S.
Gregory Daco of Oxford Economics claims that Donald Trump’s policies would send the U.S. economy into recession by end of 2017.
https://www.thestreet.com/story/13624715/1/another-economist-says-trump-presidency-would-lead-to-recession-in-u-s.html
It’s also important to note that Trump lacks the support of any living former president, and has been condemned by the last two heads of the CIA.
People who know how to do this job say Trump can’t do it. Trump himself has proven he can’t do it with his erratic behavior, contradictory and offensive statements, and economic and international ignorance (he didn’t know what Brexit was, or that Russia had already invaded Ukraine, or what the nuclear triad was, or….). Most people are listening to the experts. The few Americans still supporting Trump aren’t needed to defeat him, but they should start thinking about what they want their grandchildren to remember about how they reacted in this important moment.
“People who know how to do this job say Trump can’t do it.”
Well, hasn’t Trump all but promised what’s-his-name, “you will run the country while I be bloviator-in-chief.”
The thing is … in America, the President does not run the country … just ask the O-man.
It’s wildly nihilistic, I know, but I’m panting to
see them saddled with it.
I heard an economist say today we’re in a “soft recession.” The Federal Reserve Bank will print another $3 trillion before the election. The stock market improved today because of the news that interest rates will not be going up as some had projected, because our economy is still not improving. So the rich will keep pumping their money into stocks where they can make more with a little higher risk.
But, the bad news is we are past due for another recession and since we’ve never really recovered from the last one in 2008 this one will be worse than the Great Depression. The Feds are holding it off with their QEs until after the November election. The next president is going to be left with one mell of a hess from Obama. Maybe Hillary should win to deal with it. She’ll have a very hard time blaming it on his failed policies since she was a major part of them.
If she inherits it she will only make matters worse. I wouldn’t wish that on anyone, not even the most radical Democrat!