-
🛑Hello, this board in now turned off and no new posting.
Please REGISTER at Anabolic Steroid Forums, and become a member of our NEW community! 💪 -
🔥Check Out Muscle Gelz HEAL® - A Topical Peptide Repair Formula with BPC-157 & TB-500! 🏥
Unemployment
- Thread starter Doublebase
- Start date
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2010
- Messages
- 14,048
- Reaction score
- 681
- Points
- 113
http://www.cnbc.com/id/101710406?__source=xfinity|mod&par=xfinity
Uber’s $90K salary could disrupt the taxi business
Uber cab drivers in New York are raking in near-six-figure salaries—about triple the amount their traditional taxi driver counterparts make, according to an article in The Washington Post.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, New York cab drivers make about $32,000 a year. Uber claims the average salary for its drivers in the same city is above $90,000, presumably after the company takes its 20 percent cut from the driver's total fares. That number does not account for vehicle maintenance costs and such, but it may still explain why 20,000 drivers sign up with Uber every month, according to the company.
Smartphones deserve some of the credit. UberX drivers rely on them for leads, so they do not have to drive around hoping to be in the right place at the right time for a fare.The company claims it can serve 43 percent of the U.S. population with a cab in less than five minutes. Uber also packs mechanisms into its app that allow both drivers and passengers to rate each other. The Post's Matt McFarland thinks such a simple measure may make longstanding taxi regulation schemes in some U.S. cities unnecessary.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...could-end-the-era-of-poorly-paid-cab-drivers/
Uber’s $90K salary could disrupt the taxi business
Uber cab drivers in New York are raking in near-six-figure salaries—about triple the amount their traditional taxi driver counterparts make, according to an article in The Washington Post.
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, New York cab drivers make about $32,000 a year. Uber claims the average salary for its drivers in the same city is above $90,000, presumably after the company takes its 20 percent cut from the driver's total fares. That number does not account for vehicle maintenance costs and such, but it may still explain why 20,000 drivers sign up with Uber every month, according to the company.
Smartphones deserve some of the credit. UberX drivers rely on them for leads, so they do not have to drive around hoping to be in the right place at the right time for a fare.The company claims it can serve 43 percent of the U.S. population with a cab in less than five minutes. Uber also packs mechanisms into its app that allow both drivers and passengers to rate each other. The Post's Matt McFarland thinks such a simple measure may make longstanding taxi regulation schemes in some U.S. cities unnecessary.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...could-end-the-era-of-poorly-paid-cab-drivers/
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2010
- Messages
- 14,048
- Reaction score
- 681
- Points
- 113
I had to go over a recruiter's head to her boss to get her to return my calls.
http://post.nyssa.org/nyssa-news/20...Id=1037915168&zbdom=http://nyssa1.informz.net
Signs That Recruiters Are Not Being Truthful with You
You’re applying for jobs in finance. You’re relying on recruiters to act as intermediaries and to represent you to potential employers. In most cases, recruiters are honest upstanding individuals. But even honest, upstanding individuals can be a little economical with the truth sometimes.
Want to know whether a hiring agent is being duplicitous? According to recruiters, speaking candidly and anonymously, these are the signs.
1. You call to ask about the job and the recruiter can’t give you any information at all.
In a very few cases, recruiters might advertise jobs they don’t have solely to attract resumes for their databases. All the recruiters we spoke to strenuously denied doing this, but they each suggested it’s easy to tell if a position is fabricated. “All you need to do is to call the recruiter and ask the name of the company you’ll be working for, the name of the line manager, and the size of the team,” said one recruiter. Won’t fellow recruiters be hesitant about divulging this information on the telephone though? “If you send in your CV so that they know who you are and they still won’t give you full information, you should probably question whether the job exists,” he said.
2. You apply for a job. You’re told it’s been pulled or ‘put on hold,’ but you can still see it advertised.
It’s pretty obvious that something fishy is going on when you’re told a job no longer exists but you can still see it advertised. There may be a genuinely good reason to subject you to this falsehood, however.
“The only time I ever lie to candidates is when someone applies for a job with a team they’re already working for,” says the head of one risk recruitment agency. “It can be very awkward – they might not even be aware that their team is hiring and suddenly they’ve sent in their CV. I usually say that role’s been put on hold and that we’ll let them know if something else comes up,” she adds.
3. You ask for detailed post-interview feedback and you’re told you need to work on your ‘rapport.’
If you attend a finance interview and ask for detailed feedback on your performance, don’t be surprised if you don’t get it. Banks rarely provide recruiters with feedback on candidates after interviews and recruiters are forever having to explain to candidates why they don’t know the reasons behind a rejection. Once in a while, however, banks do offer feedback and it can be unpleasantly robust.
“They’ll tell us they thought the candidate was completely awful or that he just seemed very odd,” says the head of one recruitment firm. “We’ll usually try and spin that and tell the candidate a few positives in with the negatives so that they’ve got something to build on. If a client says that someone’s odd, we’ll say something like they need to work on their rapport.”
4. You’re told that you need to make up your mind about a job offer within 24 hours because there are other very desirable candidates in the pipeline.
Much as estate agents always have other viewers interested in the property you’re looking at, recruiters always have other candidates interested in the job you’re applying for. This is especially the case if you get an offer for that job – at which point recruiters can smell their fees and will want to close the deal as soon as possible.
“It’s often quite honest to say that we have other candidates in the process who are interested in the role, but we do also push the point to encourage a candidate to make a quick decision,” says the head of one firm.
If you’re uncertain whether a role is 100% right, or whether the compensation is 100% appropriate, don’t allow a recruiter to rush you. If their client is genuinely interested in you, they should be prepared to wait for 72 hours at least.
5. You ask for a slight improvement to the compensation package you’ve been offered and you’re told this is out of the question.
In these days of the European Union’s bonus cap and of vast disparities in the way banks structure their bonuses, going for a new job is not just about negotiating higher pay – it’s about negotiating the best deal in terms of cash payments and deferrals, along with the highest conceivable salary.
Often, banks will be genuinely inflexible over compensation – particularly with regards to salaries, which tend to be fixed by position. But in some cases, recruiters will claim that banks are inflexible even when they’re not. “Recruitment is a game of psychology,” says one recruiter. “I don’t want to promise that I can negotiate a higher salary when I’m not 100% certain that this is the case. I’ll often start by saying that a higher salary is out of the question and then drop in a 10% salary increase later in the process to help close the candidate. It’s all about managing expectations.”
6. You see a job being advertised and it looks too good to be true
Finally, if you see a job being advertised and it looks too good to be true, then it probably is. Recruiters might occasionally fabricate incredibly well paid jobs simply to attract top CVs. See point one; react accordingly.
http://post.nyssa.org/nyssa-news/20...Id=1037915168&zbdom=http://nyssa1.informz.net
Signs That Recruiters Are Not Being Truthful with You
You’re applying for jobs in finance. You’re relying on recruiters to act as intermediaries and to represent you to potential employers. In most cases, recruiters are honest upstanding individuals. But even honest, upstanding individuals can be a little economical with the truth sometimes.
Want to know whether a hiring agent is being duplicitous? According to recruiters, speaking candidly and anonymously, these are the signs.
1. You call to ask about the job and the recruiter can’t give you any information at all.
In a very few cases, recruiters might advertise jobs they don’t have solely to attract resumes for their databases. All the recruiters we spoke to strenuously denied doing this, but they each suggested it’s easy to tell if a position is fabricated. “All you need to do is to call the recruiter and ask the name of the company you’ll be working for, the name of the line manager, and the size of the team,” said one recruiter. Won’t fellow recruiters be hesitant about divulging this information on the telephone though? “If you send in your CV so that they know who you are and they still won’t give you full information, you should probably question whether the job exists,” he said.
2. You apply for a job. You’re told it’s been pulled or ‘put on hold,’ but you can still see it advertised.
It’s pretty obvious that something fishy is going on when you’re told a job no longer exists but you can still see it advertised. There may be a genuinely good reason to subject you to this falsehood, however.
“The only time I ever lie to candidates is when someone applies for a job with a team they’re already working for,” says the head of one risk recruitment agency. “It can be very awkward – they might not even be aware that their team is hiring and suddenly they’ve sent in their CV. I usually say that role’s been put on hold and that we’ll let them know if something else comes up,” she adds.
3. You ask for detailed post-interview feedback and you’re told you need to work on your ‘rapport.’
If you attend a finance interview and ask for detailed feedback on your performance, don’t be surprised if you don’t get it. Banks rarely provide recruiters with feedback on candidates after interviews and recruiters are forever having to explain to candidates why they don’t know the reasons behind a rejection. Once in a while, however, banks do offer feedback and it can be unpleasantly robust.
“They’ll tell us they thought the candidate was completely awful or that he just seemed very odd,” says the head of one recruitment firm. “We’ll usually try and spin that and tell the candidate a few positives in with the negatives so that they’ve got something to build on. If a client says that someone’s odd, we’ll say something like they need to work on their rapport.”
4. You’re told that you need to make up your mind about a job offer within 24 hours because there are other very desirable candidates in the pipeline.
Much as estate agents always have other viewers interested in the property you’re looking at, recruiters always have other candidates interested in the job you’re applying for. This is especially the case if you get an offer for that job – at which point recruiters can smell their fees and will want to close the deal as soon as possible.
“It’s often quite honest to say that we have other candidates in the process who are interested in the role, but we do also push the point to encourage a candidate to make a quick decision,” says the head of one firm.
If you’re uncertain whether a role is 100% right, or whether the compensation is 100% appropriate, don’t allow a recruiter to rush you. If their client is genuinely interested in you, they should be prepared to wait for 72 hours at least.
5. You ask for a slight improvement to the compensation package you’ve been offered and you’re told this is out of the question.
In these days of the European Union’s bonus cap and of vast disparities in the way banks structure their bonuses, going for a new job is not just about negotiating higher pay – it’s about negotiating the best deal in terms of cash payments and deferrals, along with the highest conceivable salary.
Often, banks will be genuinely inflexible over compensation – particularly with regards to salaries, which tend to be fixed by position. But in some cases, recruiters will claim that banks are inflexible even when they’re not. “Recruitment is a game of psychology,” says one recruiter. “I don’t want to promise that I can negotiate a higher salary when I’m not 100% certain that this is the case. I’ll often start by saying that a higher salary is out of the question and then drop in a 10% salary increase later in the process to help close the candidate. It’s all about managing expectations.”
6. You see a job being advertised and it looks too good to be true
Finally, if you see a job being advertised and it looks too good to be true, then it probably is. Recruiters might occasionally fabricate incredibly well paid jobs simply to attract top CVs. See point one; react accordingly.
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2010
- Messages
- 14,048
- Reaction score
- 681
- Points
- 113
http://www.cnbc.com/id/101762746?__source=xfinity|mod&par=xfinity
What the jobless are—and aren't—doing to find work
The U.S. labor market has undoubtedly improved in the last five years—even if it remains tight. So what are the unemployed doing, and not doing, in order to find work?
The U.S. unemployment rate currently stands at 6.3 percent, after reaching 10 percent in October of 2009—a record high over the last 10 years.
Meanwhile, the number of long-term unemployed, or those out of work for 27 weeks or more, remains at 3.4 million people, or 34.6 percent of the jobless. And there are the millions of people who are said to have given up looking for work.
When it comes to finding employment, the Internet remains the focus of job searches, according to a new online survey from Express Employment Professionals, a full-time and part-time staffing firm.
The survey of 1,500 unemployed adults aged 18 or older who are capable of working shows that all use the Internet in some way: (click here for full results)
• 53 percent said visiting or researching online job boards.
• 44 percent said visiting a prospective company's website.
• 43 percent said posting resumes on major online job boards.
• 41 percent said entering search terms directly into a search engine.
• 33 percent said using resources at the state employment office.
• 31 percent said going to job or career fairs.
• 29 percent said visiting social networking sites.
• 28 percent said visiting or researching websites that provide resume tips.
But finding a job requires a lot more than submitting a resume online, said Bob Funk, chairman and CEO of Express. "There's a misconception that using the Internet is the only way to find work," he said.
"People really need to go out in person, beat the pavement so to speak, and make face-to-face connections," Funk added. "It's difficult to do, but it's a game-changer when it comes to finding a job."
Funk said that it's the smaller firms rather than larger companies that are doing much of the hiring, and those are the types of companies that prefer meeting a job candidate in the flesh. He emphasized the need for job seekers to network with others in the field they want to enter.
Time looking
While 90 percent of those surveyed said they are working hard to find a job, the amount of time they spend doing so varies greatly.
The survey revealed how many hours people spent looking for work in the week prior to the survey:
•14 percent said zero hours.
•22 percent said one to five hours.
•21 percent said six to 10 hours.
•21 percent said 11 to 20 hours.
•12 percent said 21 to 30 hours.
•9 percent said 31 or more hours.
Interviews hard to get
The survey also found out that interviews are hard to come by:
•46 percent reported not having gone on any job interviews in the prior month.
•Among those unemployed for more than two years, 71 percent reported not having gone on any interviews in the prior month.
•23 percent said their last interview was in 2012 or before.
Relocating? No, thanks
For many, moving to another state to find work, or getting more education, is not an answer:
•44 percent are "not at all willing" to relocate to a new city/town for a job.
•60 percent are "not at all willing" to move to another state to find work.
•64 percent have no plans to go back to school to make themselves more marketable.
•7 percent are currently enrolled in classes, and 6 percent have already attended classes or earned a new degree.
What the jobless are—and aren't—doing to find work
The U.S. labor market has undoubtedly improved in the last five years—even if it remains tight. So what are the unemployed doing, and not doing, in order to find work?
The U.S. unemployment rate currently stands at 6.3 percent, after reaching 10 percent in October of 2009—a record high over the last 10 years.
Meanwhile, the number of long-term unemployed, or those out of work for 27 weeks or more, remains at 3.4 million people, or 34.6 percent of the jobless. And there are the millions of people who are said to have given up looking for work.
When it comes to finding employment, the Internet remains the focus of job searches, according to a new online survey from Express Employment Professionals, a full-time and part-time staffing firm.
The survey of 1,500 unemployed adults aged 18 or older who are capable of working shows that all use the Internet in some way: (click here for full results)
• 53 percent said visiting or researching online job boards.
• 44 percent said visiting a prospective company's website.
• 43 percent said posting resumes on major online job boards.
• 41 percent said entering search terms directly into a search engine.
• 33 percent said using resources at the state employment office.
• 31 percent said going to job or career fairs.
• 29 percent said visiting social networking sites.
• 28 percent said visiting or researching websites that provide resume tips.
But finding a job requires a lot more than submitting a resume online, said Bob Funk, chairman and CEO of Express. "There's a misconception that using the Internet is the only way to find work," he said.
"People really need to go out in person, beat the pavement so to speak, and make face-to-face connections," Funk added. "It's difficult to do, but it's a game-changer when it comes to finding a job."
Funk said that it's the smaller firms rather than larger companies that are doing much of the hiring, and those are the types of companies that prefer meeting a job candidate in the flesh. He emphasized the need for job seekers to network with others in the field they want to enter.
Time looking
While 90 percent of those surveyed said they are working hard to find a job, the amount of time they spend doing so varies greatly.
The survey revealed how many hours people spent looking for work in the week prior to the survey:
•14 percent said zero hours.
•22 percent said one to five hours.
•21 percent said six to 10 hours.
•21 percent said 11 to 20 hours.
•12 percent said 21 to 30 hours.
•9 percent said 31 or more hours.
Interviews hard to get
The survey also found out that interviews are hard to come by:
•46 percent reported not having gone on any job interviews in the prior month.
•Among those unemployed for more than two years, 71 percent reported not having gone on any interviews in the prior month.
•23 percent said their last interview was in 2012 or before.
Relocating? No, thanks
For many, moving to another state to find work, or getting more education, is not an answer:
•44 percent are "not at all willing" to relocate to a new city/town for a job.
•60 percent are "not at all willing" to move to another state to find work.
•64 percent have no plans to go back to school to make themselves more marketable.
•7 percent are currently enrolled in classes, and 6 percent have already attended classes or earned a new degree.
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2010
- Messages
- 14,048
- Reaction score
- 681
- Points
- 113
https://www.themuse.com/advice/dear-hiring-managers-stop-rejecting-desperate-candidates
Dear Hiring Managers: Stop Rejecting "Desperate" Candidates
Kathryn recently went on a job interview and felt like she nailed it. In fact, the hiring manager started talking about start dates, so she was shocked when she spoke to the recruiter the following morning and found out that company had decided she wasn’t a “good fit.” Kathryn pushed the recruiter for additional feedback, which the recruiter reluctantly shared. Her problem? She seemed too desperate for the job.
Desperation is a big turn off for many employers. This, of course, has some logic behind it. Desperate people will take any job they are offered, and employers don’t like that. They want someone who wants this job, because otherwise, the employee is likely to leave when something better comes along.
So, avoiding the desperate means you have less of a chance of hiring someone who isn’t a good fit. But, let’s be honest here, have you ever been desperate?
I have been. It took me a while to land a job after finishing graduate school, because let’s face it, how many job openings do you see that say, “Help Wanted: Political Scientist. Must be able to discuss Nietzsche and do regression analysis.” Yep, that was me. So, was I pretty desperate by the time I finally landed a job? Yes. Am I grateful that the hiring manager didn’t say, “Gee, I can see that she’s been out of school for five months. She must be living off credit cards and noodle ramen. Let’s not hire her.” Yes.
For some reason, it’s okay for businesses to not be perfect, but not job candidates. Businesses underpay, misrepresent how flexible their schedules really are, and often have bad managers. Yet, if a job candidate comes across as someone who desperately wants to get back to work (or wants to change jobs), we reject them. Which leaves candidates who are currently unemployed (or are in bad jobs) in the weird position of having to pretend that they are fabulously wealthy and just want to get a job to get them out of the house for a bit.
Isn’t that ridiculous? People need money, and we want them to get that through working. So, before you reject someone because they want any job, consider if the job you are offering is perfect. Could you possibly be underpaying? If so, then you should be thrilled that you’ve found someone who is worth more than you can pay, even if it’s for a short time. Is your staff overworked? If so, you should be doing a happy dance that you’ve found someone who is willing to put up with your crazy demands. Do you have developmental opportunities? If not, you should be glad that you’ve found someone that wants to move forward with their career, but is willing to work for you for a time.
Additionally, keep in mind that most people are not great at job interviews and those that are great at interviewing aren’t necessarily the best at working. Someone who projects desperation may have the exact skills you need in the job. Don’t discount them because of a bad interview.
Another thing to keep in mind is that people don’t stay at jobs for 20 years any more. Your perfect candidate isn’t likely to stay that much longer than the person who took the job out of desperation.
Your first priority should be hiring someone who can do a fabulous job, and sometimes that person is desperate for a job. Don’t reject on that basis alone.
Dear Hiring Managers: Stop Rejecting "Desperate" Candidates
Kathryn recently went on a job interview and felt like she nailed it. In fact, the hiring manager started talking about start dates, so she was shocked when she spoke to the recruiter the following morning and found out that company had decided she wasn’t a “good fit.” Kathryn pushed the recruiter for additional feedback, which the recruiter reluctantly shared. Her problem? She seemed too desperate for the job.
Desperation is a big turn off for many employers. This, of course, has some logic behind it. Desperate people will take any job they are offered, and employers don’t like that. They want someone who wants this job, because otherwise, the employee is likely to leave when something better comes along.
So, avoiding the desperate means you have less of a chance of hiring someone who isn’t a good fit. But, let’s be honest here, have you ever been desperate?
I have been. It took me a while to land a job after finishing graduate school, because let’s face it, how many job openings do you see that say, “Help Wanted: Political Scientist. Must be able to discuss Nietzsche and do regression analysis.” Yep, that was me. So, was I pretty desperate by the time I finally landed a job? Yes. Am I grateful that the hiring manager didn’t say, “Gee, I can see that she’s been out of school for five months. She must be living off credit cards and noodle ramen. Let’s not hire her.” Yes.
For some reason, it’s okay for businesses to not be perfect, but not job candidates. Businesses underpay, misrepresent how flexible their schedules really are, and often have bad managers. Yet, if a job candidate comes across as someone who desperately wants to get back to work (or wants to change jobs), we reject them. Which leaves candidates who are currently unemployed (or are in bad jobs) in the weird position of having to pretend that they are fabulously wealthy and just want to get a job to get them out of the house for a bit.
Isn’t that ridiculous? People need money, and we want them to get that through working. So, before you reject someone because they want any job, consider if the job you are offering is perfect. Could you possibly be underpaying? If so, then you should be thrilled that you’ve found someone who is worth more than you can pay, even if it’s for a short time. Is your staff overworked? If so, you should be doing a happy dance that you’ve found someone who is willing to put up with your crazy demands. Do you have developmental opportunities? If not, you should be glad that you’ve found someone that wants to move forward with their career, but is willing to work for you for a time.
Additionally, keep in mind that most people are not great at job interviews and those that are great at interviewing aren’t necessarily the best at working. Someone who projects desperation may have the exact skills you need in the job. Don’t discount them because of a bad interview.
Another thing to keep in mind is that people don’t stay at jobs for 20 years any more. Your perfect candidate isn’t likely to stay that much longer than the person who took the job out of desperation.
Your first priority should be hiring someone who can do a fabulous job, and sometimes that person is desperate for a job. Don’t reject on that basis alone.
Jobs Report: U.S. Payrolls Climb 142,000, Short of Expectations
http://online.wsj.com/articles/jobs...limb-142-000-short-of-expectations-1409920448
Another pathetic jobs report......
http://online.wsj.com/articles/jobs...limb-142-000-short-of-expectations-1409920448
Another pathetic jobs report......
The last time I checked, there are about 148,000 people entering the labor market every month in the USA.
The number of jobs created (which are largely low-paying service sector cash only jobs) are not enough to keep up with the demand.
MI1972
Registered
[h=1]Record 92,269,000 Not in Labor Force; Participation Rate Matches 36-Year Low[/h]
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...-force-participation-rate-matches-36-year-low
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...-force-participation-rate-matches-36-year-low
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2010
- Messages
- 14,048
- Reaction score
- 681
- Points
- 113
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-layoffs-unemployment-jobs-economy-20140924-story.html
One-fifth of U.S. workers were laid off in past five years, study says
ne in five U.S. workers was laid off in the past five years and about 22% of those who lost their jobs still haven't found another one, according to a new survey that showed the extent Americans have struggled in the sluggish labor market since the Great Recession ended..
Those who did find work had a difficult time with their job search and the effects of unemployment, the survey by the John J. Heldrich Center for Workforce Development at Rutgers University found.
Nearly 40% said it took more than seven months to find employment and about one in five of laid-off workers said all they could find was a temporary position.
Almost half -- 46% -- of the estimated 30 million layoff victims who found new jobs said they paid less then their old ones, according to the survey of 1,153 U.S adults done over the summer.
"While job growth has been consistent, it has been insufficient to produce enough full-time jobs for everyone," the study said.
Despite a declining overall unemployment rate, the study says, long-term joblessness has remained a major problem as the U.S. economy has slowly recovered from the deep recession, which technically ended in June 2009.
The study notes that 3 million Americans in August had been unemployed for more than six months. Although that figure has been declining, it still is high.
The effects of long-term unemployment can be traumatic, the survey found.
"While a majority of Americans were affected by the Great Recession, those who had long-term periods of unemployment experienced severe, negative changes in their standard of living," the study concluded.
About one-third of those who were unable to find work for more than six months reported "a major and permanent change in their lifestyle," according to the study.
Asked to compare their salary and savings now to five years ago, 42% said they had less. That figure included 25% of respondents who said they had "a lot less."
One-fifth of U.S. workers were laid off in past five years, study says
ne in five U.S. workers was laid off in the past five years and about 22% of those who lost their jobs still haven't found another one, according to a new survey that showed the extent Americans have struggled in the sluggish labor market since the Great Recession ended..
Those who did find work had a difficult time with their job search and the effects of unemployment, the survey by the John J. Heldrich Center for Workforce Development at Rutgers University found.
Nearly 40% said it took more than seven months to find employment and about one in five of laid-off workers said all they could find was a temporary position.
Almost half -- 46% -- of the estimated 30 million layoff victims who found new jobs said they paid less then their old ones, according to the survey of 1,153 U.S adults done over the summer.
"While job growth has been consistent, it has been insufficient to produce enough full-time jobs for everyone," the study said.
Despite a declining overall unemployment rate, the study says, long-term joblessness has remained a major problem as the U.S. economy has slowly recovered from the deep recession, which technically ended in June 2009.
The study notes that 3 million Americans in August had been unemployed for more than six months. Although that figure has been declining, it still is high.
The effects of long-term unemployment can be traumatic, the survey found.
"While a majority of Americans were affected by the Great Recession, those who had long-term periods of unemployment experienced severe, negative changes in their standard of living," the study concluded.
About one-third of those who were unable to find work for more than six months reported "a major and permanent change in their lifestyle," according to the study.
Asked to compare their salary and savings now to five years ago, 42% said they had less. That figure included 25% of respondents who said they had "a lot less."
4 Of 5 Top Job Additions In September Were Low Or Minimum Wage
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-10-03/4-5-top-job-additions-september-were-low-or-minimum-wage
Labor Participation Rate Drops To 36 Year Low; Record 92.6 Million Americans Not In Labor Force
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-...low-record-926-million-americans-not-labor-fo
If the labor participation rate was the same as in 2007 as it is today the unemployment rate would be around 10%
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-10-03/4-5-top-job-additions-september-were-low-or-minimum-wage
Labor Participation Rate Drops To 36 Year Low; Record 92.6 Million Americans Not In Labor Force
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-...low-record-926-million-americans-not-labor-fo
If the labor participation rate was the same as in 2007 as it is today the unemployment rate would be around 10%
If I've said it once I've said it a thousand times the economy is plagued with the cumulative negative effects of structural changes made to the U.S economy decades ago and the complete abandonment of equitable growth policies which can be traced back the the 60's, 70's and 80's. Structural problems are extremely difficult to repair especially with a totally dysfunctional government and in terms of large firms a greedy and highly exploitative private sector.
SheriV
Registered
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2010
- Messages
- 14,048
- Reaction score
- 681
- Points
- 113
5 TED Talks to Watch Before Your Next Interview
https://www.themuse.com/advice/5-te...TED Talks to Watch Before Your Next Interview
https://www.themuse.com/advice/5-te...TED Talks to Watch Before Your Next Interview
Wasn't LAMS black jesus Blojama supposed to fix all this, nope he made it worse and after Tuesday blojama s fuk'd because the Republicas will control both houses of congress and thak GOD Harry scum reid will be gone and wont be the senate leader any more
How are republicans going to fix things?
Bowden
Elite Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2009
- Messages
- 1,798
- Reaction score
- 736
- Points
- 0
Perception on the state of the economy is biased based on political affiliation.
If a Republican were president now, probably all of the Republicans being critical about state of the economy would think that it is doing well and would be defending the president.
One thing is for sure.
I will be glad when the election is over and all of the BS political ads stop.
Bowden
Elite Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2009
- Messages
- 1,798
- Reaction score
- 736
- Points
- 0
So which Republican scum bribed through PAC donations by wealthy elites and corporate lobbyists to advance their interests would you like to see replace the Harry Reid scum that was bribed through PAC donations by wealthy elites and corporate lobbyists to advance their interests?
Harry Reid should be sniped
If you think the POTUS has that much control over the economy you really don't understand how it functions nor do you have any concept of U.S and global recession recovery history, I've explained all this stuff dozens of times. The economy was shit before 2008 and it only gets worse after every recession as they cause permanent wealth transfers upwards which means aggregate demand continually falls due to the loss of wealth and wages for the working class along with the labor market continually shifting workers into the low wage service sector. There are two economies one that serves those at the top which is always doing great, the top 5% account for 35% of personal consumption but most of this is high end luxury items which does not employ a significant number of people. The economy that serves the working class is debt lead with low wages jobs which prevent any measurable amount of wealth to be generated which dictates consumption patterns.
The economy was shit before 2008 and technically it's been in the crapper since the 60's and it's never going to get any better.
UberJedi
Registered
I'm not going to read all the pages but YOUR EMPLOYER PAYS INTO UNEMPLOYMENT ON YOUR BEHALF. You are not taking tax dollars at all. You have to bank account of sorts with the govt. that they pay you out of. Once it's gone it's gone. It is a state level thing. With some of the extensions that is federal tax dollars making up for it yes. But that is an exception. So chill out. Also in most states unless you are on a scheduled lay off you must be actively looking for work.
Amozoc
Registered
Fucking $&@&);: they take me out $650 Dlls of my check just in taxes to support lazy guys
Sent from my iPad using VPN Hot Spot Shield
Sent from my iPad using VPN Hot Spot Shield
The please explain how the current POTUS or any POTUS could negate the effects of an asset bubble burst that cost the working class to lose 40% of it's wealth which easily takes a good 10-20 years to recovery from, record household debt that peaked at 100% of GDP in 2008 which took 30 years to increase from the 50 year average of 55% in 1980, low civilian labor participation since we never recovered from the jobs lost to the minor 2001 recession, labors declining share of the national income now at the 60 year low, jobs being lost to technology and off-shored to boost profits, sluggish economic growth due to decades of inequitable economic policy, the continued de-industrialization of the country for profits and the disinvestment in the real economy which coincides with that, the continued shift of U.S workers to the low wage service sector which is a function of de-industrialization, etc, etc. etc...
LOL...if you read the financials and economic reports on economic trends over the decades you would know that bad is the new "good" economy in the U.S
That's it? You don't make very much, do you?
Amozoc
Registered
Nope Bro
Sent from my iPhone using VPN Shield
Sent from my iPhone using VPN Shield
Get your ass to school! Get a degree! In anything! Just having that piece of paper that says you spent four more years in school will open up doors for you. Especially if you have a halfway interesting story to go with it.
Bowden
Elite Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2009
- Messages
- 1,798
- Reaction score
- 736
- Points
- 0
You might have a point if many of the jobs created since the start of the 'great recession' were higher paying jobs that require a college degree, instead of low wage service sector jobs that only require a high school education.
Someone comes out of college with a huge student loan debt and then has to try and find a job to pay for that loan on top of all their living expenses.
Many people with college degrees are still living with mom and dad due to the job market and trying to pay off student loans.
Bowden
Elite Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2009
- Messages
- 1,798
- Reaction score
- 736
- Points
- 0
Income inequality...
I am certain that the new Republican congress majority will fix that problem right away.
Income inequality been increasing ever since the days of Ronald Regan, and the middle class is being converted to low wage paid tools of capitalism to trickle up the capital, but that does not mean that the new Republican congress will fail to fix it like all the former politicians did.
As soon as they kill any and all regulations that get in the way of free market business capitalism, and reform the corporate tax rates to 0, then all of the service sector corporations will convert all of their part time low wage and benefit employees in the working poor economic class to full time employees making a living wage with health insurance, instead of sending them to welfare offices so that the taxpayers can fund their low wage labor arbitrage business models that trickle up the capital to the top economic classes and fund millions/billions of dollars worth of stock buyback programs and dividend distributions that benefit wall street, investors, corporate executives and business owners in the top economic classes.
In addition there will be an explosion of high paying jobs with benefits.
LOL, HA HA HA.
Suckers.
Last edited:
Bowden
Elite Member
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2009
- Messages
- 1,798
- Reaction score
- 736
- Points
- 0
Lam,
Stop posting economic root cause analysis based on facts.
It's confusing anyone that gets their understanding of who is getting rich or getting screwed by the new economy from Fox news, CNBC or economic media published by hidden under the cover interests who are getting rich from the new economy.