If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(RealClear)   US Jobless Rate at 7% - That's good since more people are working, but it's bad because lots of jobs don't pay a living wage, but it's ok because our economy is recovering, but it's bad because people have given up on working.... I don't know anymore   (realclear.com) divider line 57
    More: Interesting, U.S. Labor Department, jobless rate, unemployment  
•       •       •

345 clicks; posted to Business » on 06 Dec 2013 at 12:47 PM (32 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



57 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-12-06 11:29:59 AM
God, can't we just take good news and accept it as good news for a change?

/Rhetorical question: Why is it, in the last 5 years, any good news to come out of the economy automatically becomes some portent of our eventual economic doom?
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-12-06 11:34:24 AM

RexTalionis: /Rhetorical question: Why is it, in the last 5 years, any good news to come out of the economy automatically becomes some portent of our eventual economic doom?


Since a black socialist fascist communist Maoist Muslim atheist became president.
 
2013-12-06 11:52:24 AM
people haven't given up on working, submitter. labor force participation is UP in this report.

/agree that wages are too low, though.
 
vpb [TotalFark]
2013-12-06 11:59:09 AM
it's funny how people can think that unemployment is the fault of laziness when there are more people looking for work than there are jobs to go around.

If there were more jobs than people willing to work wouldn't there be a labor shortage?
 
2013-12-06 12:11:02 PM

vpb: it's funny how people can think that unemployment is the fault of laziness when there are more people looking for work than there are jobs to go around.


But it IS just laziness. These shiftless ne'er-do-wells are simply wallowing glassy-eyed from one worksite to the next, expecting someone to hand them a job out of the goodness of their hearts, instead of firmly grasping themselves by the bootstraps and making bootstraps themselves!  Why, back in my day, I didn't depend on someone to hand me some bootstraps, I hunkered down and built a bootstrap factory out of nothing but sweat, blood and the toil of other laborers, so I could then grasp my own bootstraps and burn down my bootstrap factory so that others could follow in my boots!

I say harrumph to you, and good day sir!
 
2013-12-06 12:44:17 PM
Thanks Obama.
 
2013-12-06 12:55:56 PM
All I know from Conservative news sources is that all my problems are someone else's fault.
 
2013-12-06 12:56:32 PM

RexTalionis: God, can't we just take good news and accept it as good news for a change?

/Rhetorical question: Why is it, in the last 5 years, any good news to come out of the economy automatically becomes some portent of our eventual economic doom?


It has always been that way.  The economy is good then the party in control crows about it and the minority party spells doom  Always has been, always will.
 
2013-12-06 12:59:56 PM

Saiga410: RexTalionis: God, can't we just take good news and accept it as good news for a change?

/Rhetorical question: Why is it, in the last 5 years, any good news to come out of the economy automatically becomes some portent of our eventual economic doom?

It has always been that way.  The economy is good then the party in control crows about it and the minority party spells doom  Always has been, always will.


If you want to see some comedy, check out the comments under every news story about good economic news. It's amazing the way people try to spin it as bad to support their worldview.
 
2013-12-06 01:01:48 PM
The issue is UNDER-EMPLOYMENT!
 
2013-12-06 01:02:18 PM

Prophet of Loss: All I know from Conservative news sources is that all my problems are someone else's fault.


Its always those godless-America hating Libs holding me back!
 
2013-12-06 01:02:52 PM

FlashHarry: people haven't given up on working, submitter. labor force participation is UP in this report.

/agree that wages are too low, though.


The Bush Recovery has really started to make an impact on he masses. Thank him now libtardos.
 
2013-12-06 01:04:31 PM

Prophet of Loss: All I know from Conservative news sources is that all my problems are someone else's fault.


Is it the gays?  I bet it's the gays.
 
2013-12-06 01:04:40 PM

toraque: vpb: it's funny how people can think that unemployment is the fault of laziness when there are more people looking for work than there are jobs to go around.

But it IS just laziness. These shiftless ne'er-do-wells are simply wallowing glassy-eyed from one worksite to the next, expecting someone to hand them a job out of the goodness of their hearts, instead of firmly grasping themselves by the bootstraps and making bootstraps themselves!  Why, back in my day, I didn't depend on someone to hand me some bootstraps, I hunkered down and built a bootstrap factory out of nothing but sweat, blood and the toil of other laborers, so I could then grasp my own bootstraps and burn down my bootstrap factory so that others could follow in my boots!

I say harrumph to you, and good day sir!


Look, if companies don't ask for 5 years of experience for a job that actually requires 30 minute on job training they can't complain about the lack of qualified workers and can't send the job to India to save a few bucks. And then, when employees from India (which are not really employees but contractors through a vendor) do a shiatty job, it's not a compliance issue, it's a vendor issue so the penalties are deferred if a plan to remedy the issue is presented.
 
2013-12-06 01:04:54 PM

Fireproof: Saiga410: RexTalionis: God, can't we just take good news and accept it as good news for a change?

/Rhetorical question: Why is it, in the last 5 years, any good news to come out of the economy automatically becomes some portent of our eventual economic doom?

It has always been that way.  The economy is good then the party in control crows about it and the minority party spells doom  Always has been, always will.

If you want to see some comedy, check out the comments under every news story about good economic news. It's amazing the way people try to spin it as bad to support their worldview.


CNBC.com posters are the worst. All bad news is completely Obama's fault or all good news is a big lie and part of some vast Obama conspiracy.
 
2013-12-06 01:06:19 PM

Saiga410: RexTalionis: God, can't we just take good news and accept it as good news for a change?

/Rhetorical question: Why is it, in the last 5 years, any good news to come out of the economy automatically becomes some portent of our eventual economic doom?

It has always been that way.  The economy is good then the party in control crows about it and the minority party spells doom  Always has been, always will.


I am waiting for the "oh god unemployment is too low and inflation is destroying america" stories.
They are coming. Unless you think that the sky is falling and that things will get worse before they get better.
 
2013-12-06 01:07:36 PM

FlashHarry: people haven't given up on working, submitter. labor force participation is UP in this report.

/agree that wages are too low, though.


I've seen enough of these threads to know where it's going before it gets there.

/subby
//WHAR GRAFS WHAR?!?!
//I NEED U-6 FIGURES
 
2013-12-06 01:09:10 PM

vpb: RexTalionis: /Rhetorical question: Why is it, in the last 5 years, any good news to come out of the economy automatically becomes some portent of our eventual economic doom?

Since a black socialist fascist communist Maoist Muslim atheist became president.


Whose stated goal, you will recall, is for EVERYONE IN THE ENTIRE COUNTRY TO BE UNEMPLOYED.

/and yes, being employed by the government counts as being unemployed
 
2013-12-06 01:14:26 PM

RexTalionis: God, can't we just take good news and accept it as good news for a change?

/Rhetorical question: Why is it, in the last 5 years, any good news to come out of the economy automatically becomes some portent of our eventual economic doom?


Because we've been lied to for so long by the media that nothing good or bad is believed anymore.
 
2013-12-06 01:19:35 PM
The Bush recovery continues.
 
2013-12-06 01:26:39 PM

AngryDragon: The Bush recovery continues.


How long until we've completely recovered from him?  2 more years?
 
2013-12-06 01:32:00 PM

Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: AngryDragon: The Bush recovery continues.

How long until we've completely recovered from him?  2 more years?


I'm not sure we'll have fully recovered in time for the next crash. In fact, the economy will be so bad that the crash will actually improve the overall situation when it hits.
 
2013-12-06 01:36:38 PM

Dr Dreidel: Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: AngryDragon: The Bush recovery continues.

How long until we've completely recovered from him?  2 more years?

I'm not sure we'll have fully recovered in time for the next crash. In fact, the economy will be so bad that the crash will actually improve the overall situation when it hits.


The next crash should happen before too much longer once the full effect of the Fartbongocare tax starts really hurting people.  Especially those who make too much money for subsidies but not enough to pay for the tripled premiums.

Either that or it'll be the war in Asia that he's not strong enough to prevent.
 
2013-12-06 01:39:09 PM

Smeggy Smurf: Dr Dreidel: Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: AngryDragon: The Bush recovery continues.

How long until we've completely recovered from him?  2 more years?

I'm not sure we'll have fully recovered in time for the next crash. In fact, the economy will be so bad that the crash will actually improve the overall situation when it hits.

The next crash should happen before too much longer once the full effect of the Fartbongocare tax starts really hurting people.  Especially those who make too much money for subsidies but not enough to pay for the tripled premiums.

Either that or it'll be the war in Asia that he's not strong enough to prevent.


Not bad.  You didn't mention to get Benghazi in there though.
 
2013-12-06 01:40:52 PM

max_pooper: Fireproof: Saiga410: RexTalionis: God, can't we just take good news and accept it as good news for a change?

/Rhetorical question: Why is it, in the last 5 years, any good news to come out of the economy automatically becomes some portent of our eventual economic doom?

It has always been that way.  The economy is good then the party in control crows about it and the minority party spells doom  Always has been, always will.

If you want to see some comedy, check out the comments under every news story about good economic news. It's amazing the way people try to spin it as bad to support their worldview.

CNBC.com posters are the worst. All bad news is completely Obama's fault or all good news is a big lie and part of some vast Obama conspiracy.


NBC Nightly News Facebook comments usually look like:

-It's a lie by the network!
-It's a lie by the Administration!
-It's just from people who quit looking for work! (Article says otherwise)
-It's just from temp seasonal jobs! ("I don't know what 'seasonally adjusted' means!")
-It's just from socialst gubberment jobs! ("I don't know what 'private sector' means!")
 
2013-12-06 01:40:59 PM
But, But ObamaCare is the greatest job killer that ever existed. Rafael Edwardo and Fox News told me so, so it must be true.
 
2013-12-06 01:42:37 PM

Fireproof: Saiga410: RexTalionis: God, can't we just take good news and accept it as good news for a change?

/Rhetorical question: Why is it, in the last 5 years, any good news to come out of the economy automatically becomes some portent of our eventual economic doom?

It has always been that way.  The economy is good then the party in control crows about it and the minority party spells doom  Always has been, always will.

If you want to see some comedy, check out the comments under every news story about good economic news. It's amazing the way people try to spin it as bad to support their worldview because they're being paid to schill for Conservative activist groups.


FTFY

There's your underemployment problem right there. Those jobs pay crap. It's like $20 per 100 comments. Not that I would know.
 
2013-12-06 01:43:17 PM

vonmatrices: I NEED U-6 FIGURES


my favorite is when they try to compare U6 under obama with U3 under bush. fox "news" did that once.
 
2013-12-06 01:49:27 PM

vonmatrices: FlashHarry: people haven't given up on working, submitter. labor force participation is UP in this report.

/agree that wages are too low, though.

I've seen enough of these threads to know where it's going before it gets there.

/subby
//WHAR GRAFS WHAR?!?!
//I NEED U-6 FIGURES


research.stlouisfed.org
 
2013-12-06 01:52:51 PM

jankyboy: vonmatrices: FlashHarry: people haven't given up on working, submitter. labor force participation is UP in this report.

/agree that wages are too low, though.

I've seen enough of these threads to know where it's going before it gets there.

/subby
//WHAR GRAFS WHAR?!?!
//I NEED U-6 FIGURES

[research.stlouisfed.org image 630x378]


Thank you,

This means that Sarah Palin is now Pope and businesses can start paying their employees in company script again!
 
2013-12-06 02:00:19 PM

vonmatrices: This means that Sarah Palin is now Pope and businesses can start paying their employees in company script again!


What do you mean "start" and "again"?
 
2013-12-06 02:16:02 PM
Comparing unemployment rate fluctuation between President Bush and President Obama.

Bush
01/20/2001: 4.2%
01/20/2009: 7.8%
Unemployment Rate Change: 85.71% Increase

Obama
01/20/2009: 7.8%
Currently: 7.0%
Unemployment Rate Change: 10.26% Decrease


Comparing unemployment rate fluctuation when their budgets first took place

Bush
01/01/2002: 5.7%
12/31/2009: 9.9%
Unemployment Rate Change: 73.68% Increase

Obama
01/01/2010: 9.9%
Currently: 7.0%
Unemployment Rate Change: 29.29% Decrease
 
2013-12-06 02:38:08 PM

toraque: vpb: it's funny how people can think that unemployment is the fault of laziness when there are more people looking for work than there are jobs to go around.

But it IS just laziness. These shiftless ne'er-do-wells are simply wallowing glassy-eyed from one worksite to the next, expecting someone to hand them a job out of the goodness of their hearts, instead of firmly grasping themselves by the bootstraps and making bootstraps themselves!  Why, back in my day, I didn't depend on someone to hand me some bootstraps, I hunkered down and built a bootstrap factory out of nothing but sweat, blood and the toil of other laborers, so I could then grasp my own bootstraps and burn down my bootstrap factory so that others could follow in my boots!

I say harrumph to you, and good day sir!


Humor aside, that is actually an interesting observation.  Since jobs are what allow us to support ourselves, we view them as a good thing.  This develops demand, which is cleverly capitalized on by those who need to consume our labor.  What should be a demand situation for us (our labor being a thing we sell to those who demand it), is reversed; we are encouraged to feel lucky that some beneficent owner-class person has decided to gift us with what we need - an occupation.

I don't even have words for how screwed up that is, or how deeply it undermines the foundations of this country, let alone basic human dignity.

Listen up, 1%-ers.  YOU NEED US, not the other way around.  No matter how many robots you have, no matter how much you outsource, you need us as customers and you need us to do the things no robot can yet do (never mind caring for the robots...).  Without us, your golden goose gets mighty constipated indeed.  Think about that before you keep cramming ex-lax down its throat and screaming at it to shiat faster...
 
2013-12-06 02:38:22 PM
I'm ready for the day when unemployment ceases to be seen as an economic disease, but rather a healthy function of an advanced technological society.     100% unemployment is what we've been incrementally striving towards ever since the invention of the wheel.   In most of the first world there is more than enough food and housing for everyone, we just refuse to distribute it out because we feel the need to keep up the appearance of scarcity, even if it's artificial scarcity
 
2013-12-06 03:05:51 PM

InmanRoshi: I'm ready for the day when unemployment ceases to be seen as an economic disease, but rather a healthy function of an advanced technological society.     100% unemployment is what we've been incrementally striving towards ever since the invention of the wheel.   In most of the first world there is more than enough food and housing for everyone, we just refuse to distribute it out because we feel the need to keep up the appearance of scarcity, even if it's artificial scarcity


Yup. We eventually have to get to a post-currency society. I have no clue how though.
 
2013-12-06 03:12:11 PM

Peki: InmanRoshi: I'm ready for the day when unemployment ceases to be seen as an economic disease, but rather a healthy function of an advanced technological society.     100% unemployment is what we've been incrementally striving towards ever since the invention of the wheel.   In most of the first world there is more than enough food and housing for everyone, we just refuse to distribute it out because we feel the need to keep up the appearance of scarcity, even if it's artificial scarcity

Yup. We eventually have to get to a post-currency society. I have no clue how though.


The issue I see with that is that there will always be someone who needs to farm the crops, or if that process is automated, repair the machines that farm the crops.  And how about transportation and logistics - even if the movement is fully automated, will someone need to check the routes, or review a computerized chart of supply and demand to ensure that goods are going the right way?

If there is at least one job to be done, then that one person will want a reward for doing it.  As long as one person has more than another person, through work, rewards or otherwise, someone else is going to complain that they want it too, or that they deserve it, or are more qualified, etc.

I guess there could be a point where we automate the automation, but then, will humanity just become academics, poets, artists and athletes?  And even then there will be inequalities.

I agree that we need to move away from a scarcity based economy, but that is a big freaking "how".
 
2013-12-06 03:35:32 PM
This "news" is not that great due to "seasonal" jobs during these holidays.
 
2013-12-06 03:37:01 PM
It's good. It's the same god damn metric used for years with the same shortcomings. Pointing out the shortcomings we knew for years doesn't make positive trend void.
 
2013-12-06 03:45:01 PM

RoLleRKoaSTeR: This "news" is not that great due to "seasonal" jobs during these holidays.


The rate is seasonally adjusted.   Otherwise there would be huge spikes of unemployment in January ever year (there isn't).
 
2013-12-06 03:53:01 PM

RoLleRKoaSTeR: This "news" is not that great due to "seasonal" jobs during these holidays.


The very first sentence FTFA... The US jobless rate fell to 7 percent in November, a five-year low.

I was not aware we have a five-year long holiday in the US.
 
2013-12-06 04:05:09 PM

vonmatrices: Peki: InmanRoshi: I'm ready for the day when unemployment ceases to be seen as an economic disease, but rather a healthy function of an advanced technological society.     100% unemployment is what we've been incrementally striving towards ever since the invention of the wheel.   In most of the first world there is more than enough food and housing for everyone, we just refuse to distribute it out because we feel the need to keep up the appearance of scarcity, even if it's artificial scarcity

Yup. We eventually have to get to a post-currency society. I have no clue how though.

The issue I see with that is that there will always be someone who needs to farm the crops, or if that process is automated, repair the machines that farm the crops.  And how about transportation and logistics - even if the movement is fully automated, will someone need to check the routes, or review a computerized chart of supply and demand to ensure that goods are going the right way?

If there is at least one job to be done, then that one person will want a reward for doing it.  As long as one person has more than another person, through work, rewards or otherwise, someone else is going to complain that they want it too, or that they deserve it, or are more qualified, etc.

I guess there could be a point where we automate the automation, but then, will humanity just become academics, poets, artists and athletes?  And even then there will be inequalities.

I agree that we need to move away from a scarcity based economy, but that is a big freaking "how".


MEH
People have been arguing this for a long time.
It is a wonderful fiction. And something to strive or move towards as an unreachable goal, but there will always be scarcity in a thriving society.

Take any common commodity and you get pretty much the same answer.

Blue Jeans. Crappy Sears brand vs Levis. Functionally the same, but differing quality.
Wine. Crappy jug wine vs everything else, including 2 buck chuck. Functionally the same.

There will always be less of the higher quality and competition for the better product.

Communist countries were/are invariably corrupt about how they distribute commodities.
The good vodka was given to the leaders, the crappy vodka to the peasants. 

As soon as I know that I can get better vodka by ... giving something that I have to the people with the better vodka, I will always do so. 

TOSS in services like doctors. Until Watson takes over the world, we will have doctors.
Why the fark would anyone spend years in med school and years studying specialties if the reward is "just helping others"?  Why the fark would you work that hard for no additional gain? Sure Dr without borders, etc etc, but in the end, why? Why work harder than you need to for no gain?

This was shown to be true in every single communist country. China was starving until they started letting the farmers keep some of the surplus. China became a food exporting country almost over night.
 
2013-12-06 04:12:32 PM

hugram: RoLleRKoaSTeR: This "news" is not that great due to "seasonal" jobs during these holidays.

The very first sentence FTFA... The US jobless rate fell to 7 percent in November, a five-year low.

I was not aware we have a five-year long holiday in the US.


Dont get me started.
Unemployment numbers are available in two flavors: seasonally adjusted and unadjusted.
They are used for different things.
Unadjusted numbers are used to talk about how many people are working today.
Seasonally adjusted are used to compare this month to all the other months, on what would be an equal basis if there werent things like holidays.
 
2013-12-06 04:23:47 PM

RexTalionis: God, can't we just take good news and accept it as good news for a change?

/Rhetorical question: Why is it, in the last 5 years, any good news to come out of the economy automatically becomes some portent of our eventual economic doom?


Rhetorical answer:  Because business news in this country is for and by the oligarchs and presents only their case on most every issue.
 
2013-12-06 04:29:15 PM

vonmatrices: //I NEED U-6 FIGURES


I need U-100.000 figures
 
2013-12-06 04:31:06 PM

namatad: vonmatrices: Peki: InmanRoshi: I'm ready for the day when unemployment ceases to be seen as an economic disease, but rather a healthy function of an advanced technological society.     100% unemployment is what we've been incrementally striving towards ever since the invention of the wheel.   In most of the first world there is more than enough food and housing for everyone, we just refuse to distribute it out because we feel the need to keep up the appearance of scarcity, even if it's artificial scarcity

Yup. We eventually have to get to a post-currency society. I have no clue how though.

The issue I see with that is that there will always be someone who needs to farm the crops, or if that process is automated, repair the machines that farm the crops.  And how about transportation and logistics - even if the movement is fully automated, will someone need to check the routes, or review a computerized chart of supply and demand to ensure that goods are going the right way?

If there is at least one job to be done, then that one person will want a reward for doing it.  As long as one person has more than another person, through work, rewards or otherwise, someone else is going to complain that they want it too, or that they deserve it, or are more qualified, etc.

I guess there could be a point where we automate the automation, but then, will humanity just become academics, poets, artists and athletes?  And even then there will be inequalities.

I agree that we need to move away from a scarcity based economy, but that is a big freaking "how".

MEH
People have been arguing this for a long time.
It is a wonderful fiction. And something to strive or move towards as an unreachable goal, but there will always be scarcity in a thriving society.

Take any common commodity and you get pretty much the same answer.

Blue Jeans. Crappy Sears brand vs Levis. Functionally the same, but differing quality.
Wine. Crappy jug wine vs everything else, including 2 buck chuck. Functiona ...


No argument.  I agree.

The real question is what at what level will society tolerate people living at (healthcare, welfare, housing, etc), and what is too much, or not enough, to allow people at very least a minimum standard of living.

With increasing productivity and automation, it should follow that less man hours should be required to sustain the population, and more man hours can go toward more service, academic, and entertainment/art type work.  Of course, the population as well is also increasing.....

THIS IS COMPLICATED AND I ONLY TOOK ECON 101 and 102!  AHHHHHHHHHHH
 
2013-12-06 04:37:54 PM

namatad: vonmatrices: Peki: InmanRoshi: I'm ready for the day when unemployment ceases to be seen as an economic disease, but rather a healthy function of an advanced technological society.     100% unemployment is what we've been incrementally striving towards ever since the invention of the wheel.   In most of the first world there is more than enough food and housing for everyone, we just refuse to distribute it out because we feel the need to keep up the appearance of scarcity, even if it's artificial scarcity

Yup. We eventually have to get to a post-currency society. I have no clue how though.

The issue I see with that is that there will always be someone who needs to farm the crops, or if that process is automated, repair the machines that farm the crops.  And how about transportation and logistics - even if the movement is fully automated, will someone need to check the routes, or review a computerized chart of supply and demand to ensure that goods are going the right way?

If there is at least one job to be done, then that one person will want a reward for doing it.  As long as one person has more than another person, through work, rewards or otherwise, someone else is going to complain that they want it too, or that they deserve it, or are more qualified, etc.

I guess there could be a point where we automate the automation, but then, will humanity just become academics, poets, artists and athletes?  And even then there will be inequalities.

I agree that we need to move away from a scarcity based economy, but that is a big freaking "how".

MEH
People have been arguing this for a long time.
It is a wonderful fiction. And something to strive or move towards as an unreachable goal, but there will always be scarcity in a thriving society.

Take any common commodity and you get pretty much the same answer.

Blue Jeans. Crappy Sears brand vs Levis. Functionally the same, but differing quality.
Wine. Crappy jug wine vs everything else, including 2 buck chuck. Functiona ...


 We've only been playing this current game of industrialized capitalism a very small time in human history, and already we've seen that it's not self sustainable either.  No less than 5 years ago the world governments had to step in to prevent the whole house of cards from tumbling down.    Sure, there will always be the need for some critical jobs, and they'll always been compensated accordingly,but how is society going to survive with 70 or 80% of all service and manufacturing jobs have been automated?    What's the critical mass of unemployment and wealth distribution society will have to reach before the paradigm changes?   How long is society as a whole going to buy into the paradigm of "I got to find an owner to give my labor to in exchange for a wage, or else I'll live in destitute poverty" whenever a) The owners don't need their labor and b) Thanks to economies of scale, they don't need that much wage to live very comfortably.

I do agree that for the immediate foreseeable future the world will be ruled by bullshiat artist, advertisers and marketers who will have to convince people that the Levi's and the vodka are worth working for.    Just as Pepsi and Coke have had to convinced people to buy their bottled municipal water for 20000% more than getting it from tap by putting a picture of a mountain  glacier on it.      When the ownership class can't scare people with the old threats starvation and destitution, they'll have to find some new way to incentivize.  Or else people won't consume, and if they don't consume then the inventory sits on the shelf and collects dust.  But that's artificial scarcity, not true scarcity, and so far it hasn't yet proven that it's going to sustain a socio-economic model for humanity for 100 years, much less a 1000.
 
2013-12-06 04:59:25 PM

vonmatrices: namatad: vonmatrices: Peki: InmanRoshi: I'm ready for the day when unemployment ceases to be seen as an economic disease, but rather a healthy function of an advanced technological society.     100% unemployment is what we've been incrementally striving towards ever since the invention of the wheel.   In most of the first world there is more than enough food and housing for everyone, we just refuse to distribute it out because we feel the need to keep up the appearance of scarcity, even if it's artificial scarcity

Yup. We eventually have to get to a post-currency society. I have no clue how though.

The issue I see with that is that there will always be someone who needs to farm the crops, or if that process is automated, repair the machines that farm the crops.  And how about transportation and logistics - even if the movement is fully automated, will someone need to check the routes, or review a computerized chart of supply and demand to ensure that goods are going the right way?

If there is at least one job to be done, then that one person will want a reward for doing it.  As long as one person has more than another person, through work, rewards or otherwise, someone else is going to complain that they want it too, or that they deserve it, or are more qualified, etc.

I guess there could be a point where we automate the automation, but then, will humanity just become academics, poets, artists and athletes?  And even then there will be inequalities.

I agree that we need to move away from a scarcity based economy, but that is a big freaking "how".

MEH
People have been arguing this for a long time.
It is a wonderful fiction. And something to strive or move towards as an unreachable goal, but there will always be scarcity in a thriving society.

Take any common commodity and you get pretty much the same answer.

Blue Jeans. Crappy Sears brand vs Levis. Functionally the same, but differing quality.
Wine. Crappy jug wine vs everything else, including 2 buck chuck. ...


I didn't even get to Econ 102. What I did is hit up my professor for Econ 101the first day he explained the supply and demand curve and asked: "So what happens when companies cut costs to the bone and they have no way to increase profits any further?"

He spent the next 15 minutes trying to convince me to change my major. It was 2004 though, so I didn't have the benefit of hindsight.
 
2013-12-06 06:27:01 PM
FTFA:

The data showed the number of unemployed Americans fell by 365,000 to 10.9 million, and total employment numbers surged.
But these gains were mostly due to the return to the rolls of full-time work by hundreds of thousands of government workers laid off temporarily in the first half of October due to Washington budget politics, which saw many of them recorded as out of work, according to the Labor Department.


As to the issue in general, people in prison aren't counted as Unemployed, though imprisoning poor men -- especially blacks and Latinos -- has been since 1866 a major economic strategy; homeless bums who gave up looking for work years ago don't count as Unemployed either; neither do folks like me who opted out on some kind of disability because the mostly likely other options were getting locked up or living on the street, or cycling between those two as so many do.

So this official "unemployment rate" is bullshiat. My wild ass guess is that at least 25% of the potential workforce don't have "real" jobs, and that half of those who count as Unemployed manage to somehow live by their own efforts via odd jobs, prostitution, theft and/or selling contraband (looted copper, pain pills, etc.).

Consider that by the Protestant ethic, as well as "keeping the economy going," someone who burglarizes three houses a week is behaving more commendably than a spare-changer eating charity baloney.

Under this economic system it's simply impossible for everybody who's able to work to have a living-wage job. There ain't enough jobs to go around in the first place, and employing more than a bare minimum cuts into the profits unless you can make them all work for chump change.

Furthermore many of those who are working are incompetent ninnies who got hired for non-professional reasons, like connections or tits, but don't tell my comrades in the Socialist Party USA that I posted this or they might frown at me.

And I swear I had something intelligent to say but it seems to have gotten rinsed away by bourbon. Oh well.
 
2013-12-06 06:53:34 PM
I am curious as to the sources for error in that estimate as the jobs numbers the past few months, while not horrible, were hardly good enough to put such a big dent in the unemployment.

I wonder if the sharp rise in those classified as disabled had something to do with it? I guess if you start collecting full disability, you are no longer unemployed
 
2013-12-06 06:56:43 PM
TheOtherGuy:

What should be a demand situation for us (our labor being a thing we sell to those who demand it), is reversed; we are encouraged to feel lucky that some beneficent owner-class person has decided to gift us with what we need - an occupation.

I don't even have words for how screwed up that is, or how deeply it undermines the foundations of this country, let alone basic human dignity.


YES.
 
Displayed 50 of 57 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report