For the Mericuns

[Robert May Eng.]

Believe it or not, this gives you one of the best explanations of our current unemployment.


COSTELLO: I want to talk about the unemployment rate in America .

ABBOTT: Good Subject. Terrible Times. It's 7.8%.

COSTELLO: That many people are out of work?

ABBOTT: No, that's 14.7%.

COSTELLO: You just said 7.8%.

ABBOTT: 7.8% Unemployed.

COSTELLO: Right 7.8% out of work.

ABBOTT: No, that's 14.7%.

COSTELLO: Okay, so it's 14.7% unemployed.

ABBOTT: No, that's 7.8%.

COSTELLO: WAIT A MINUTE. Is it 7.8% or 14.7%?

ABBOTT: 7.8% are unemployed. 14.7% are out of work.

COSTELLO: If you are out of work you are unemployed.

ABBOTT: No, Congress said you can't count the "Out of Work" as the unemployed. You have to look for work to be unemployed.

COSTELLO: BUT THEY ARE OUT OF WORK!!!

ABBOTT: No, you miss his point.

COSTELLO: What point?

ABBOTT: Someone who doesn't look for work can't be counted with those who look for work. It wouldn't be fair.

COSTELLO: To whom?

ABBOTT: The unemployed.

COSTELLO: But ALL of them are out of work.

ABBOTT: No, the unemployed are actively looking for work. Those who are out of work gave up looking and if you give up, you are no longer in the ranks of the unemployed.

COSTELLO: So if you're off the unemployment roles that would count as less unemployment?

ABBOTT: Unemployment would go down. Absolutely!

COSTELLO: The unemployment just goes down because you don't look for work?

ABBOTT: Absolutely it goes down. That's how it gets to 7.8%. Otherwise it would be 14.7%.

COSTELLO: Wait, I got a question for you. That means there are two ways to bring down the unemployment number?

ABBOTT: Two ways is correct.

COSTELLO: Unemployment can go down if someone gets a job?

ABBOTT: Correct.

COSTELLO: And unemployment can also go down if you stop looking for a job?

ABBOTT: Bingo.

COSTELLO: So there are two ways to bring unemployment down, and the easier of the two is to have people stop looking for work.

ABBOTT: Now you're thinking like an Economist.

COSTELLO: I don't even know what the hell I just said!

ABBOTT: Now you're thinking like a Politician.

 

[Randy V]

Is it much different on your side of the pond?

 

[Keith]

Not really different Randy. There's several sets of figures designed to limit the bad news aspect. We have those out of work and those claiming Jobseekers Allowance (Dole). What are left are those out of work but presumably not claiming benefits, so, they don't exist!

There's a lot of people not claiming and out of work though. Why? You've got me there...So, if they're not claiming how do they know they're out of work? Possibly through PAYE tax returns (or lack of), which means they could also be self employed but not paying tax. The so called Black Economy which is huge in the UK...

Complicated...

 

[Randy V]

I hear you on the complexity of it....

What really bugs me is that the people that have exhausted all their unemployment benefits here have fallen off of the "un-employed" roles here and are no longer counted.. So while the first post here may have been a jest - it's not that far off from reality...

 

[Scott Calabro]

Who's on 1st?

 

[Randy V]

Who's on 1st?

Yes.

:lipsrsealed:

 

[Doug S.]

What really bugs me is that the people that have exhausted all their unemployment benefits here have fallen off of the "un-employed" roles here and are no longer counted.. So while the first post here may have been a jest - it's not that far off from reality...

Agreed, Randy! I have grave concerns for those who have not been able to find gainful employment, for my experience is that those individuals end up costing more for incarceration than it would have cost to provide them with some sort of training to make them more competitive in the labor force (keep in mind I worked for the Health Services Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice).

We're going to have to invest $$ into these individuals one way or the other, the only questions is what result do we desire from that $$...warehousing in our prison system or helping them become functional, contributing members of our society. We're not talking about college degrees here, folks, just some form of vocational training to help them land a job. Sure...there are such programs in the correctional industry, but they are hard to get into (don't believe for a second that the "offenders" are assigned to those programs, entry is incredibly competitive because of the limited number of programs that are available) and being in those programs does not reduce the financial drain of keeping those individuals incarcerated while they complete their sentences.

Prison population is rising much faster than the financial resources we dedicate to those training programs...so, to quote Dr. Phil..."How's that working out for you?"

Not so well...most sources of information show that poverty is the main reason out of work individuals turn to crime, which is why the incarcerated population is increasing at such an alarming rate. Education seems to be the best way to help keep those who have "...given up" out of our jails/prisons.

I'm sure not all end up in jail...it would be ludicrous to even suggest that...but it is not ludicrous to suggest that preparing a jail-bound individual for a productive life is a much better outcome than incarceration.

Now we just have to convince our politicians to belly up to the bank window and dedicate the funds...but for the most part I firmly believe that the general population would rather see those individuals "warehoused" in our prisons that out on the street. That may be a bit short sighted, but with the recidivism rate for paroled criminals being so high I really get the sense that incarceration is the only option that attracts the majority of our population.

A sad conundrum, indeed :thumbsdown:

Doug

 

[Larry L.]

deleted.
'screw up.

 

[Robert May Eng.]

deleted.
'screw up.

Kinell, Larry`s lost for words, is there a doctor in the house?

Bob

 

[Keith]

A first? :stunned:

 

[Randy V]

A first? :stunned:

Who! :thumbsup:

 

[Robert May Eng.]

You may have heard on the news about a Southern California man who
was put under 72-hour psychiatric observation when it was found he
owned 100 guns and allegedly had 100,000 rounds of ammunition stored
in his home. The house also featured a secret escape tunnel.

By Southern California standards, someone owning 100,000 rounds
is considered "mentally unstable."

In Michigan , he'd be called "The last white guy still living in Detroit .

In Arizona , he'd be called "an avid gun collector."

In Arkansas , he'd be called "a novice gun collector."

In Utah , he'd be called "moderately well prepared," but they'd probably
reserve judgment until they made sure that he had a corresponding
quantity of stored food."

In Kansas , he'd be "A guy down the road you would want to have for a friend."

In Montana , he'd be called "The neighborhood 'Go-To' guy."

In Idaho , he'd be called "a likely gubernatorial candidate."

In Georgia , he'd be called "an eligible bachelor."

In North Carolina , Virginia , W.Va. , Louisiana , Mississippi , Alabama , Missouri ,
Wisconsin, Tennessee, Kentucky, Florida and South Carolina he would be called
"a deer hunting buddy."

And in Texas : he'd just be "Bubba, who's a little short on ammo."

 

[Doug S.]

Being from Texas right now, I had to LOL!!
How true, though!

Cheers!

Doug

 

[Bob Fechter]

This from the huffing ton Post no less;

" Many of the unemployed workers have simply lost the ability and motivation to make a better life for them and take responsibility for problems they create -- if they ever learned to do it in the first place. Picking yourself up by your bootstraps is a lost skill. When you fall, it's not your fault. It's expected that someone else come to your rescue, offer you the bootstrap, hoist you up, and nurse you back to health."
Why Many Unemployed Workers Will Never Get Jobs | Ira Wolfe

 

[Keith]

That has the ring of truth about it and one reason why Governments should be aware of and have a proper strategy against the cycle of dependency.

There is an element of it here in the UK but I would say that benefit dependency is an inevitable consequence of a welfare state and the trick is to minimise the syndrome without damaging the safety net.

A key pro active strategy starts with a decent education for all.

 

[Doug S.]

This from the huffing ton Post no less;

" Many of the unemployed workers have simply lost the ability and motivation to make a better life for them and take responsibility for problems they create -- if they ever learned to do it in the first place. Picking yourself up by your bootstraps is a lost skill. When you fall, it's not your fault. It's expected that someone else come to your rescue, offer you the bootstrap, hoist you up, and nurse you back to health."
Why Many Unemployed Workers Will Never Get Jobs*|*Ira Wolfe

Agreed...to a point. With unemployment benefits and placement counselors making sure that those receiving unemployment checks are actually applying for the jobs when referrals are made there ought to be a way to stop the abuse.
I know there IS abuse because in college I had a friend who was receiving unemployment and he did everything he could to remain unemployed so that he could exhaust his benefits. He claimed it was his money, after all, because...well, it's been too many years for me to remember well, but I think he said the cost of providing unemployment benefits was deducted from his paycheck somehow. Anyway, I became unemployed and applied for benefits, went out for the job interviews for which I was referred, and when I refused to accept a position for which I had no skill set my benefits were cut off. Perhaps my friend just intentionally did things during the interviews to convince the person doing the interview that he was not the person for the job...I don't know...but I did not have the luxury of remaining unemployed until my benefits could be resumed and I just took the first job I was offered after that.
I do understand the frustration of trying to find a job, though, and failing until there seems to be no reason to continue.
It sure seems to me that those individuals who have given up SHOULD continue to be counted as unemployed, though.
I have a sincere question. Can anyone tell me with certainty how long ago the practice of not counting those who have given up in the unemployed was originated? I'm just curious who was POTUS when this practice started.
Cheers!!
Doug

 

[Doug S.]

That has the ring of truth about it and one reason why Governments should be aware of and have a proper strategy against the cycle of dependency.

A key pro active strategy starts with a decent education for all.

YAAAAY for you, Keith. That is what I have said all along!!

Cheers!!!

Doug

 

[Pete McCluskey.]

If you are able bodied,you should have to do at least a couple of days community service to get welfare, even something as simple as mowing an elderly persons grass would do.

 

[Larry L.]

^^^ +1 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Doug S.]

Agreed, wholeheartedly!!!

Cheers to you, Pete!

Doug