Category Archives: Economy

Amnesty puts nail in coffin of US jobs, 75 percent of Obama jobs went to Hispanics Latinos, Percent of white Americans working plummeted since 2006, S.744 hurts the American worker

Amnesty puts nail in coffin of US jobs, 75 percent of Obama jobs went to Hispanics Latinos, Percent of white Americans working plummeted since 2006, S.744 hurts the American worker

“75 percent of the Obama jobs added since Jan. 2009 went to Hispanics and Latinos.”…Citizen Wells February 11, 2015

“Over the last six months, of the net job creation, 97 percent of that is part-time work,”…Keith Hall, former BLS chief

“11.4%: What the U.S. unemployment rate would be if labor force participation were back to January 2008 levels.” …James Pethokoukis, American Enterprise Institute, June 2013

“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984″

 

 

From Citizen Wells February 11, 2015.

“75 percent of Obama jobs added since Jan. 2009 have gone to Hispanics and Latinos.

Don’t take my word for it.

Look it up on the BLS website.

Of the total of 6,049,000 more Americans employed since January 2006, 4,511,000 was for Hispanics and Latinos.

Why is this not being reported?”

“From the Center for Immigration Studies June 2014.”

“Government data show that since 2000 all of the net gain in the number of working-age (16 to 65) people holding a job has gone to immigrants (legal and illegal). This is remarkable given that native-born Americans accounted for two-thirds of the growth in the total working-age population. Though there has been some recovery from the Great Recession, there were still fewer working-age natives holding a job in the first quarter of 2014 than in 2000, while the number of immigrants with a job was 5.7 million above the 2000 level.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2015/02/11/75-percent-of-obama-jobs-added-go-to-hispanic-latinos-many-low-paying-part-time-jobs-bls-reveals-6-049-million-jobs-added-since-jan-2009-no-white-american-jobs-added-since-2006-obama-lies-why-amn/

Remember that 4 percent lower percent of the population employed that I clarified for Goldman Sachs chief economist Jan Hatzius?

You know, that baby boomers have nothing to do with the drop.

10 million fewer white Americans were in the labor force in Jan. 2015 than Jan. 2006.

From Five Thirty Eight.

“But the wounds of the recession are far from fully healed. Total payrolls remain more than 400,000 below their prior peak due to deep cuts in the number of government workers, especially at the state and local level. And the adult population (16 years and older) has grown by 14 million since the recession began, meaning the U.S. job market is nowhere close to fully recovered on a per-capita basis. The long-term unemployment crisis drags on, the legacy of what is by some measures the slowest recovery since World War II.”

http://fivethirtyeight.com/datalab/back-to-where-we-started/

From Fair US.

“S.744 does not prioritize the American worker at a time when 22 million Americans are unemployed or underemployed. Instead, S.744 hurts the American worker:

29. S.744 doubles legal immigration within a decade after enactment—and triples it if you include the 12 million amnestied illegal aliens. This is the equivalent of adding the population of Canada – nearly 34 million people, virtually all of whom will need jobs—in a decade. Moreover, this estimate relates to legal permanent residents only, not temporary workers. (See FAIR’s estimate by category of admission)

30. S.744 increases the number of guest workers by 50 percent over the decade after enactment. (See FAIR’s estimate by category of admission)

31. S.744 creates a new unskilled guest worker program, through a new W visa, to bring in up to 200,000 additional workers each year. (Sec. 4703, p. 834)

32. S.744 triples the number of so-called skilled (H-1B) guest workers who may enter the U.S. annually. (Sec. 4101, p. 674)

33. S.744 also grants work authorization to the spouses of H-1B and W visa holders.

34. S.744 exempts immigrants (green card holders) with advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering and math, also referred to as STEM fields, from the cap on employment-based immigration. This will dramatically increase competition for Americans entering or working in those fields. (Sec. 2307, p. 315-16)”

http://www.fairus.org/DocServer/amnesty_2013_debate/Top_Reasons_to_Oppose_the_Gang_of_Eight_Amnesty_Bill_rev-6-6-13.pdf

From Breitbart today.

“SENATE GOP LEADERS PREPARE TO CAVE ON AMNESTY”

“The House of Representatives has passed a bill that would fund the Department of Homeland Security except for President Obama’s executive amnesty program. Now, the Senate is stonewalling, with Democrats voting repeatedly not to take up the bill, insisting instead that Republicans pass a bill funding the executive amnesty along with the rest of the DHS.

Which means that we’re nearing Republican surrender.”

http://www.breitbart.com/immigration/2015/02/13/senate-gop-leaders-prepare-to-cave-on-amnesty/

 

 

 

 

75 percent of Obama jobs added go to Hispanic Latinos, Many low paying part time jobs, BLS reveals 6.049 million jobs added since Jan 2009, No white American jobs added since 2006, Obama lies, Why Amnesty Bill must be defeated

75 percent of Obama jobs added go to Hispanic Latinos, Many low paying part time jobs, BLS reveals 6.049 million jobs added since Jan 2009, No white American jobs added since 2006, Obama lies, Why Amnesty Bill must be defeated

“75 percent of the Obama jobs added since Jan. 2009 went to Hispanics and Latinos.”…Citizen Wells February 11, 2015

“Over the last six months, of the net job creation, 97 percent of that is part-time work,”…Keith Hall, former BLS chief

“11.4%: What the U.S. unemployment rate would be if labor force participation were back to January 2008 levels.” …James Pethokoukis, American Enterprise Institute, June 2013

“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984″

 

 

 

75 percent of Obama jobs added since Jan. 2009 have gone to Hispanics and Latinos.

Don’t take my word for it.

Look it up on the BLS website.

Of the total of 6,049,000 more Americans employed since January 2006, 4,511,000 was for Hispanics and Latinos.

Why is this not being reported?

The Wall Street Journal reported on December 5, 2014.

“The economy has 5.7 million more jobs today than when Mr. Obama took office in January of 2009. That puts his total job creation ahead of presidents John Kennedy,Gerald Ford, and George H.W. Bush, who each served one term or less. It also puts him well ahead of President George W. Bush, whose final year in office also comprised the beginning to the longest and deepest recession since the Great Depression.”

“The labor market is clearly improving, but due in large part to the terrible economy when Mr. Obama took office, his presidency will probably be unable to catch up with those who presided during job booms.”

Read more:

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2014/12/05/in-ranking-presidents-by-job-creation-obama-still-lags/

Why is the WSJ making excuses for Obama?

They mention the fact that congress is more responsible but fail to mention that the Democrats took control of both houses in Jan. 2007 and that is when the economy began going downhill.

Why doesn’t the WSJ mention that 75 % of the jobs added went to Hispanics and Latinos?

HispanicLaborParticipation

Here is a good article about the growth in the Hispanic workforce.

From the Center for Immigration Studies June 2014.

“Government data show that since 2000 all of the net gain in the number of working-age (16 to 65) people holding a job has gone to immigrants (legal and illegal). This is remarkable given that native-born Americans accounted for two-thirds of the growth in the total working-age population. Though there has been some recovery from the Great Recession, there were still fewer working-age natives holding a job in the first quarter of 2014 than in 2000, while the number of immigrants with a job was 5.7 million above the 2000 level.”

Read more:

http://cis.org/all-employment-growth-since-2000-went-to-immigrants

From the CEO of Gallup.

 

 

 

BLS percent of population working reveals Hispanic growth, Whites getting screwed, No white job gains in 8 years, Dr. Ada Fisher NC GOP on immigration hurting Blacks, 26 percent hispanic job growth

BLS percent of population working reveals Hispanic growth, Whites getting screwed, No white job gains in 8 years, Dr. Ada Fisher NC GOP on immigration hurting Blacks, 26 percent hispanic job growth

“Since 2006, the Hispanic/Latino employed number has skyrocketed 26 percent.”…Citizen Wells

“Over the last six months, of the net job creation, 97 percent of that is part-time work,”…Keith Hall, former BLS chief

“11.4%: What the U.S. unemployment rate would be if labor force participation were back to January 2008 levels.” …James Pethokoukis, American Enterprise Institute, June 2013

“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984″

 

 

What I am about to report to you comes straight from the US Labor Department BLS.

I do not make up numbers and I endeavor to report the facts.

A big lie is being repeated.

The impact of baby boomers on employment.

The baby boomers have zero impact on the percent of population employed.

Zero!

The mainstream media, including CNBC has done their best to protect Obama and obfuscate the employment  situation.

Last Friday, after the January jobs data was released, Chief Economist at Goldman Sachs Jan Hatzius was interviewed.

Mr. Hatzius referred to the 4 percent drop in the percent of population working since 2006.

He stated that the baby boomers could account for 2 percent of that.

I carried on an email exchange with Jan Hatzius over the weekend.

He stayed with his 2 percent assertion but did state that we need jobs.

From Citizen Wells February 9, 2015.

“The problem is clearly not baby boomers.

The problem is that the Obama administration has been focusing on trying to recover jobs lost during the recession.

What is not being addressed or reported is the number of new workers being added.

Each year since 2006 we have added a net average of approx. 1.5 million workers over age 16.

Each year we have added approx 3.9 new 16 year olds.

Each year we have averaged approx 2.4 million deaths.

That nets to 1.5 million.

That totals approx. 12 million new workers since 2006.

And God only knows how many new illegal alien workers we have.

Choose your own number.

This easily explains the drop in the percent of population working.

I would bet it is even worse.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2015/02/09/drop-in-percent-of-population-working-easily-explained-not-baby-boomers-1-5-million-net-new-working-age-each-year-illegal-immigrants-not-enough-jobs-added-trying-to-replace-jobs-lost-not-keeping/

It is worse!

Since 2006, the Hispanic/Latino employed number has skyrocketed 26 percent!

The black employed number has jumped 10 percent.

Are you ready?

The white employed number has not increased!

In fact it has dropped slightly.

There were 118,148 employed in January 2006.

There were 118,035 employed in January 2015.

From the Citizen Wells article above we learn that approx. 12 million people were added to the labor force via the net of the population becoming 16 and those dying each year.

Approx 1.5 million were added each year excluding immigration.

This accounts for much of the drop in the percent of population working since 2006.

It also adds credence to the following.

From the Center for Immigration Studies August 2014.

“An analysis of government data by the Center for Immigration Studies shows that, since 2000, all of the net increase in the number of working-age (16 to 65) people holding a job in North Carolina has gone to immigrants (legal and illegal).
This is the case even though the native-born accounted for 61 percent of growth in the state’s total working-age population.”

Read more:

http://cis.org/all-north-carolina-employment-growth-since-2000-went-to-immigrants

The NC percent of population employed dropped 8.6 percent since 2000!!!

Dr. Ada Fisher is a retired physician and Republican National Committeewoman from NC.

Yesterday by “chance” for the second time in several months, I caught her interview on “Black Issues Forum” on UNC TV.

The timing could not have been better.

Dr. Fisher is for legal immigration and against illegals entering our country.

She warns about the impact of illegal immigrants on black employment.

Watch the interview.

http://video.unctv.org/video/2365372335/

The biggest problems with employment are:

Not enough jobs.

Not enough full time jobs.

Not enough quality jobs.

Illegal immigrants.

Government and media lies.

Once again, I urge you to listen.

 

 

 

 

 

Drop in percent of population working easily explained, Not baby boomers, 1.5 million net new working age each year, Illegal immigrants, Not enough jobs added, Trying to replace jobs lost not keeping up with growth

Drop in percent of population working easily explained, Not baby boomers, 1.5 million net new working age each year, Illegal immigrants, Not enough jobs added, Trying to replace jobs lost not keeping up with growth

“What we are addressing is simple.
The percent of people employed in 2006 vs now.
It does not matter what the mix of age groups employed is.
The problem is that there are not enough jobs now of the right type to give the same ratio as in 2006.”…Citizen Wells email to economist Jan Hatzius

“Over the last six months, of the net job creation, 97 percent of that is part-time work,”…Keith Hall, former BLS chief

“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984″

 

This is a follow up to ongoing reports at Citizen Wells about the real jobs situation and remarks recently made Goldman Sachs chief economist Jan Hatzius on CNBC and in email exchanges with me this past weekend.

Jan Hatzius stated of the 4 percent drop in the percent of population working since 2006 that 2 percent is attributable to baby boomers.

I responded that was incorrect.

I stand by that assertion.

From Citizen Wells February 8, 2015.

“Following the January jobs report, Goldman’s chief economist Jan Hatzius appeared on CNBC but instead of joining Steve Liesman in singing the praises of the “strong” the report (which apparently missed the memo about  the  crude collapse), he decided to do something totally different and instead emphasize the two series that none other than Zero Hedge has been emphasizing for years as the clearest indication of what is really happening with the US labor market: namely the recession-level civilian employment to population ratio and the paltry annual increase in average hourly earnings.

This is what Hatzius said (2:40 into the clip):

The employment to population ratio is still 4% below where it was in 2006. You can explain 2% of that with the aging of the population that still leaves quite a lot of room potentially, and the wage numbers are telling us we are just not that close, although we are getting closer.””

“I sent the following email to  Jan Hatzius.

I have not yet received a response.

Hi.
I have a math, computer science & business background.
I am also one of the baby boomers.
You recently appeared on CNBC & stated:

The employment to population ratio is still 4% below where it was in 2006. You can explain 2% of that with the aging of the population that still leaves quite a lot of room potentially, and the wage numbers are telling us we are just not that close, although we are getting closer.”

Would you elaborate on:

“You can explain 2% of that with the aging of the population”

I am preparing an article

and want to be accurate.

Thanks

Wells

“Jan Hatzius did respond in less than 24 hours and we debated via email the validity of his statement:

“You can explain 2% of that with the aging of the population”

I will not present the entire exchange unless he requests it.

Here are our ending remarks.”

“Mine:”

“Apples and oranges.
The studies that you quote are projections done in 2006, not historical analysis.
I am not questioning the projections.
They are projections probably done by competent people using the best data available.
But they are projections, not history, done before probably the biggest anomaly in recorded US job history.

What we are addressing is simple.
The percent of people employed in 2006 vs now.
It does not matter what the mix of age groups employed is.
The problem is that there are not enough jobs now of the right type to give the same ratio as in 2006.
The problem is exacerbated by too many part time jobs which yield a result of too many people working multiple jobs.
Thanks
Wells”
Jan Hatzius:

“It is also true that there are not enough jobs. That’s why I said population aging accounts for 2 of the 4 percentage points of decline, not for the entire decline.
Best regards,
Jan””

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2015/02/08/economist-jan-hatzius-baby-boomer-impact-debate-with-citizen-wells-drop-in-percent-of-population-working-email-debate-both-agree-not-enough-jobs-2-percent-allegation-in-cnbc-interview/

The problem is clearly not baby boomers.

The problem is that the Obama administration has been focusing on trying to recover jobs lost during the recession.

What is not being addressed or reported is the number of new workers being added.

Each year since 2006 we have added a net average of approx. 1.5 million workers over age 16.

Each year we have added approx 3.9 new 16 year olds.

Each year we have averaged approx 2.4 million deaths.

That nets to 1.5 million.

That totals approx. 12 million new workers since 2006.

And God only knows how many new illegal alien workers we have.

Choose your own number.

This easily explains the drop in the percent of population working.

I would bet it is even worse.

Once again, the Gallup CEO tells it like it is.

 

Economist Jan Hatzius baby boomer impact debate with Citizen Wells, Drop in percent of population working, Email debate, Both agree not enough jobs, 2 percent allegation in CNBC interview

Economist Jan Hatzius baby boomer impact debate with Citizen Wells, Drop in percent of population working, Email debate, Both agree not enough jobs, 2 percent allegation in CNBC interview

“The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”…Karl Marx

“Over the last six months, of the net job creation, 97 percent of that is part-time work,”…Keith Hall, former BLS chief

“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984″

 

 

Goldman Sachs chief economist Jan Hatzius was interviewed on CNBC on Friday, February 6, 2015 after the January jobs report.

From Citizen Wells February 7, 2015.

From Zero Hedge February 6, 2015.

“Following the January jobs report, Goldman’s chief economist Jan Hatzius appeared on CNBC but instead of joining Steve Liesman in singing the praises of the “strong” the report (which apparently missed the memo about  the  crude collapse), he decided to do something totally different and instead emphasize the two series that none other than Zero Hedge has been emphasizing for years as the clearest indication of what is really happening with the US labor market: namely the recession-level civilian employment to population ratio and the paltry annual increase in average hourly earnings.

This is what Hatzius said (2:40 into the clip):

The employment to population ratio is still 4% below where it was in 2006. You can explain 2% of that with the aging of the population that still leaves quite a lot of room potentially, and the wage numbers are telling us we are just not that close, although we are getting closer.””

Read more:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-06/why-goldman-suddenly-banging-table-scariest-chart-jobs-report

I sent the following email to  Jan Hatzius.

I have not yet received a response.

Hi.
I have a math, computer science & business background.
I am also one of the baby boomers.
You recently appeared on CNBC & stated:

The employment to population ratio is still 4% below where it was in 2006. You can explain 2% of that with the aging of the population that still leaves quite a lot of room potentially, and the wage numbers are telling us we are just not that close, although we are getting closer.”

Would you elaborate on:

“You can explain 2% of that with the aging of the population”

I am preparing an article

and want to be accurate.

Thanks

Wells

 

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2015/02/07/cnbc-jobs-lies-goldman-sachs-economist-jan-hatzius-interview-baby-boomer-impact-lie-nbc-leading-way-in-orwellian-media-lies-citizen-wells-email-to-hatzius-for-clarification/

Jan Hatzius did respond in less than 24 hours and we debated via email the validity of his statement:

“You can explain 2% of that with the aging of the population”

I will not present the entire exchange unless he requests it.

Here are our ending remarks.

Mine:

“Thanks for your response.

I have no wish to be unkind to you.
However, I consider it a “sacred” duty to report the truth, facts.
For what it is worth, I have much German ancestry and was baptized and raised in the Lutheran Church.
I even worked as VP of Administration for a German company in the US circa 1983.

Apples and oranges.
The studies that you quote are projections done in 2006, not historical analysis.
I am not questioning the projections.
They are projections probably done by competent people using the best data available.
But they are projections, not history, done before probably the biggest anomaly in recorded US job history.

What we are addressing is simple.
The percent of people employed in 2006 vs now.
It does not matter what the mix of age groups employed is.
The problem is that there are not enough jobs now of the right type to give the same ratio as in 2006.
The problem is exacerbated by too many part time jobs which yield a result of too many people working multiple jobs.
Thanks
Wells”
Jan Hatzius:

“It is also true that there are not enough jobs. That’s why I said population aging accounts for 2 of the 4 percentage points of decline, not for the entire decline.
Best regards,
Jan”

I would like to thank Jan Hatzius again. He did not have to respond.

I will leave it to the reader to decide who is right.

However, I found an article that may provide insight.

From Fortune November 6, 2012.

“Obama’s best friend at Goldman Sachs”

“To be sure, the German-born Hatzius hasn’t publicly stated that he supports the President. But his analysis, which is widely read in financial circles, has long jibed with the monetary and fiscal policies embraced by Democrats. In numerous notes published over the last few years, Hatzius has advocated stimulus spending and called for more quantitative easing, renouncing efforts to slash the deficit as premature.”

“Hatzius’ views have endeared him to the likes of liberal economist Paul Krugman, who has mentioned the Goldmanite nearly a dozen times in his New York Timesblog. Krugman has repeatedly referred to Hatzius’ group as “excellent,” calling the economist a “very calm, measured guy.” Back in 2009, he noted that Hatzius’ analysis was “spot on.””

“Hatzius sounded warnings about the housing market as early as 2005, when he published a report that asked “Bubble Trouble? Probably Yes.” In December of 2007, the economics writer Ben Stein criticized Hatzius in the New York Times for his gloomy prognostications, accusing the economist of fear-mongering in order to support Goldman’s bearish position.

Stein (incorrectly) mocked Hatzius for his view that the subprime mortgage crisis could spin out of control, hampering lending and slowing growth. “He is also postulating,” Stein wrote, “that lenders would have to retrench so deeply that lending would stall and growth would falter — an event that, again, has not happened on any scale in the postwar world, except when planned by the central bank.” (The piece, available here, is worth reading for its comedic value alone).”

Read more:

http://fortune.com/2012/11/06/obamas-best-friend-at-goldman-sachs/

Further remarks from Citizen Wells:

“The reason that we have a 4 percent drop in the p of p, percent of population, working is that we do not enough jobs and
good full time jobs to maintain the same ratio.

The problem is exacerbated by too many part time jobs which yield a result of too many people working multiple jobs.

In 2006 we knew how the population was growing in terms of births and deaths with some anticipated immigration.

We did not know that the economy was going to collapse and that Obama would permit a flow of illegals to enter our country
and workforce. We also did not know that much of the job growth was going to be in part time and lower wage positions.

Regarding baby boomers and their impact on the job market.

This is being tossed about indiscriminately without justification.

We are on the leading edge of baby boomers reaching the traditional retirement age of 65.

Most of the baby boomers, which include those born up to 1964, have not reached retirement age yet.

Some people retire before that age but in recent years there has been a trend of retiring later.

Older workers generally have a more beneficial impact on the p of p ratio. Those retiring generally are retiring from a
full time job. Many of those who continue to work are in one part time job.

This yields a one to one scenario of one person to one job.

Younger people are having a more detrimental impact on the p of p ratio.

Because so many of the jobs being created are part time and/or lower wage jobs, the younger folks are working 2 or more of
these jobs.

This is hurting the ratio.

Also, unlike what you are being led to believe, there are far more of the younger people.

Let’s take the example of those turning 65 in 2014, born in 1949 and those turning 22 in 2014, born in 1992. I chose age
22 to account for college even though some of them entered the work force earlier, if they could find a job.

There were 3.56 million people born in the US in 1949. 85 % or 3.026 million are alive.

There were 4.08 million people born in 1992. Probably at least 4 million still alive.

Let’s assume that all of the people who turned 65 retired.

That is still a net gain of about a million in the workforce.

I mentioned above that in 2006 we did not know that Obama would allow so many illegal immigrants into the US.

Recently I reported about the even bigger drop in the p of p ratio in NC.

From Citizen Wells February 3, 2015.

“The plummet of the labor force participation rate in NC, other states and the US is big news and should be more widely
reported.

The percentage of the population working is also important and in some ways more significant.

Since the big news today was the lowest so called initial claims number in 15 years let’s go back to January 2000 and
compare the employment to population percent from then to now.

US
Jan 2000 64.6

Dec 2014 59.2

That’s a plummet of 5.4 percent!

NC
Jan 2000 65.1

Dec 2014 56.5

That’s a plummet of 8.6 percent !!!”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2015/02/03/5-6-percent-unemployment-rate-big-lie-gallups-jim-clifton-white-house-wall-street-and-media-lies-30-million-americans-out-of-work-or-severely-underemployed-percent-of-population-working-plummets/

From the Center for Immigration Studies August 2014.

“An analysis of government data by the Center for Immigration Studies shows that, since 2000, all of the net increase in the number of working-age (16 to 65) people holding a job in North Carolina has gone to immigrants (legal and illegal).
This is the case even though the native-born accounted for 61 percent of growth in the state’s total working-age population.”

Read more:

http://cis.org/all-north-carolina-employment-growth-since-2000-went-to-immigrants

In conclusion, the answer is simple.

We do not have enough good jobs to maintain the same ratio of people working that we had in 2006.

The CEO of Gallup tells it like it is.

 

 

 

 

CNBC jobs lies, Goldman Sachs economist Jan Hatzius interview, Baby boomer impact lie, NBC leading way in Orwellian media lies?, Citizen Wells email to Hatzius for clarification

CNBC jobs lies, Goldman Sachs economist Jan Hatzius interview, Baby boomer impact lie, NBC leading way in Orwellian media lies?, Citizen Wells email to Hatzius for clarification

“People 55 to 64 years old, the first forget-about-retirement generation, are staying in the labor force to an ever greater degree. In 1992, only 56.2% were still in the labor force, in 2012, 64.5% were. Similar for older folks. The participation rate for people 65 to 74 years old jumped from 16.3% to 26.8%. Reality is this: fewer people can afford to retire.”…Zero Hedge January 8, 2014

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it”…Joseph Goebbels

“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984″

 

 

Was anyone paying attention surprised when Brian Williams of NBC was caught in a lie?

No!

It is what we have come to expect from the mainstream media.

The mantra of the left.

The end justifies the means.

Just yesterday Goldman’s chief economist Jan Hatzius appeared on CNBC.

From Zero Hedge February 6, 2015.

“Following the January jobs report, Goldman’s chief economist Jan Hatzius appeared on CNBC but instead of joining Steve Liesman in singing the praises of the “strong” the report (which apparently missed the memo about  the  crude collapse), he decided to do something totally different and instead emphasize the two series that none other than Zero Hedge has been emphasizing for years as the clearest indication of what is really happening with the US labor market: namely the recession-level civilian employment to population ratio and the paltry annual increase in average hourly earnings.

This is what Hatzius said (2:40 into the clip):

The employment to population ratio is still 4% below where it was in 2006. You can explain 2% of that with the aging of the population that still leaves quite a lot of room potentially, and the wage numbers are telling us we are just not that close, although we are getting closer.””

Read more:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-02-06/why-goldman-suddenly-banging-table-scariest-chart-jobs-report

I sent the following email to  Jan Hatzius.

I have not yet received a response.

Hi.
I have a math, computer science & business background.
I am also one of the baby boomers.
You recently appeared on CNBC & stated:

The employment to population ratio is still 4% below where it was in 2006. You can explain 2% of that with the aging of the population that still leaves quite a lot of room potentially, and the wage numbers are telling us we are just not that close, although we are getting closer.”

Would you elaborate on:

“You can explain 2% of that with the aging of the population”

I am preparing an article

 and want to be accurate.

Thanks

Wells

 

Many in the mainstream media have incorrectly attributed the large drop in the percentage of the population employed to baby boomers. I awarded the Washington Post Orwells for their misleading report.

From Citizen Wells January 20, 2015.

I am going to make this real simple.

Let’s ignore immigrants increasing our work force for the moment.

The baby boomer generation is known for it’s size. However, due to the growth in the US, recent generations are even larger.

Let’s take the example of those turning 65 in 2014, born in 1949 and those turning 22 in 2014, born in 1992. I chose age 22 to account for college even though some of them entered the work force earlier, if they could find a job.

There were  3.56 million people born in the US in 1949. 85 % or 3.026 million are alive.

There were 4.08 million people born in 1992. Probably at least 4 million still alive.

Let’ assume that all of the people who turn 65 next year retire.

That is still a net gain of about a million potential workers.

As we all know, all of those people do not stop working unless they cannot find a job.

From the CBO.

“The resulting rise in the projected rates of labor force participation for older people is noteworthy. For men ages 62 to 64, CBO projects that the rate of labor force participation will rise from about 52 percent in 2012 to about 55 percent in 2022. For men ages 65 to 69, the projected rate rises from about 37 percent in 2012 to about 41 percent in 2022. The changes for women are similar: The projected rate of labor force participation for women ages 62 to 64 rises from about 44 percent to about 48 percent, and for women ages 65 to 69, the projected rate increases from about 28 percent to about 32 percent. In 2022, the FRA will be 67 only for people age 62 or younger in that year. As that group ages and the FRA gradually becomes 67 for all older people, CBO projects that the labor force participation rate for older people will continue to increase, although at a slower pace.”

http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43834

That’s right. You read it correctly.

Men ages 62 to 64:  rate of labor force participation  about 52 percent in 2012.

Men ages 65 to 69:   37 percent in 2012.

Once again I am compelled to award the Washington Post 4 Orwells.

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2013/11/09/washington-post-lies-about-baby-boomer-impact-on-labor-force-participation-rate-more-young-people-enter-job-market-than-retire-older-folks-continue-working-intentional-lie-sloppy-reporting-or-cove/

Zero Hedge nails it again.

“A few days ago we disproved, in what we hoped would be the last time, any insinuation that the collapse in the labor force is due to demographics (a topic we had covered before) when we showed that it was just 10 short years ago that the Bureau of Labor Statistics itself was forecasting an increase in the overall participation rate – here we assume logically that America’s demographic profile was known to its labor market experts in 2004 – only to slowly at first, then very fast, revise it ever lower… and still it was unable to catch up to the unfolding gruesome reality.

Yet somehow, so called finance experts, econ PhDs, central planners and other ivory tower dwellers still refuse to let this topic go, and continue to reference the participation rate and demographics in the same sentence. So to truly end any speculation that the plunge in the labor force is due to “old people”, defined as workers 55 and over, retiring, here is a chart (which in an update of a post we didfirst in October 2012 and it took the rest of the media world only 14 months to catch up) of the cumulative job gains broken down by “young”, or those 16-54, vs “old”, those 55 and over.

Spot something wierd?

It seems that the “old” age worker group – that which is supposed to be bleeding workers to retirement – has had zero job losses since the start of the Depression in December 2007, while it was the “younger” workers who according to the BLS’ Household Survey, have hit the labor cliff and seen their number collapse, dropping as much a 6 million, and only slowly rising, with another 3.5 million jobs left to catch up before pre-recession levels are met.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2014/01/20/labor-force-participation-collapse-from-younger-dropouts-not-retirees-zero-hedge-nails-it-more-younger-people-born-to-replace-older-labor-force-should-be-increasing-not-decreasing/

I would love to hear Mr. Hatzius’ explanation for the baby boomers affecting the percent of population working by 2 percent.

 

 

NC Governor Pat McCrory speech on employment misleading, Big unemployment rate lie, Greensboro News Record article, Record numbers leave labor force, Percent of population working plummets, Immigrants get NC jobs

NC Governor Pat McCrory speech on employment misleading, Big unemployment rate lie, Greensboro News Record article, Record numbers leave labor force, Percent of population working plummets, Immigrants get NC jobs

“There’s no other way to say this. The official unemployment rate, which cruelly overlooks the suffering of the long-term and often permanently unemployed as well as the depressingly underemployed, amounts to a Big Lie.”…Gallup CEO Jim Clifton 

“11.4%: What the U.S. unemployment rate would be if labor force participation were back to January 2008 levels.” …James Pethokoukis, American Enterprise Institute, June 2013

“Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows.”…George Orwell, “1984″

 

 

I am not a fan of modern day political parties.

I detest the modern day Democrat Party and for good reason.

Governor Pat McCrory inherited a mess created by the Obama camp and Democrats in NC. A horrible economic and jobs situation.

McCrory is a likeable fellow and I believe that the Republicans controlling government in NC will try to fix the mess.

That does not excuse him from making misleading statements about the jobs situation here.

From the State Of the State speech February 4, 2015.

“As I said, two years ago, our unemployment rate was the fifth highest in the nation. So we all rolled up our sleeves, made the tough decisions, and as of today, the private sector has created nearly 200,000 new jobs. We went from the 5th highest in unemployment to the 23rd lowest, and now we’re even beating South Carolina. Despite this tremendous accomplishment there are still a lot of communities, small businesses, and individuals that are hurting, and there is still much work to be done. Therefore, my administration’s focus will be on five areas that have the greatest impact on our people. ”

Read more:

http://www.governor.state.nc.us/newsroom/press-releases/20150204/transcript-2015-state-state-address

Much of the drop in the unemployment rate in NC came from people dropping out of the labor force.

From Citizen Wells December 21, 2014.

“Despite what you may have read from the low information mainstream media, baby boomers retiring are not the cause of the drop in the labor force in NC or US.

Do the math or read prior articles at Citizen Wells.

Lack of jobs is the problem.

From May of 2008 to November of 2014, the  labor force participation rate plummeted 5 percent in NC. The unemployment rate is the same.”

https://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2014/12/21/nc-labor-force-participation-rate-plummets-5-percent-from-may-2008-to-november-2014-unemployment-rate-same-baby-boomers-retiring-not-cause-of-labor-force-drop-lack-of-jobs-causes-younger-people-to/

The Greensboro News Record may be reporting the facts about jobs because the Republicans are in power.

Greensboro News Record February 5, 2015.

“The unemployment rate in the Greensboro-High Point metro area decreased to 5.3 percent in December 2014, compared with 6.9 percent in December 2013, according to a report from the N.C. Department of Commerce.”

““The state’s labor force shrunk 0.2 percent in November, losing 13,534 people. Over the past year, the labor force has shrunk 0.7 percent, for a reduction of 31,665 people.

A shrinking labor force will drive down the unemployment rate because fewer people are looking for work.”

“Guilford County’s unemployment rate also dropped to 5.3 percent in December 2014 from 6.9 percent a year earlier.

Rockingham County’s rate fell to 5.9 percent from 7.6 per­cent a year earlier.

And Randolph County’s rate dropped to 4.8 percent from 6.4 percent a year earlier.

But the encouraging numbers doesn’t necessarily mean many more people are working. The number of people who are actually working in those counties has improved very slowly or decreased during the same period, suggesting that many people have stopped looking for work altogether.

In Guilford County, 234,645 people were working in December 2014, compared with 233,313 a year earlier. This is part of an ongoing — but painfully slow — trend. The current figure, for example, is not a dramatic improvement from the December 2008 figure of 229,813.

In Rockingham County, 38,865 people were working in December 2014, compared with 38,645 the previous December.

And in Randolph County, 66,626 people were working in December, compared with 66,247 in December 2013. The county’s total employment has not fully recovered since December 2008, when 68,593 were working.”

Read more:

http://www.news-record.com/business/local_business/december-jobless-rate-down-from-a-year-earlier/article_670a1dc0-ace1-11e4-8f66-ffd39786c2ba.html

It gets worse folks.

From the Center for Immigration Studies August 2014.

“An analysis of government data by the Center for Immigration Studies shows that, since 2000, all of the net increase in the number of working-age (16 to 65) people holding a job in North Carolina has gone to immigrants (legal and illegal). This is the case even though the native-born accounted for 61 percent of growth in the state’s total working-age population.”

Read more:

http://cis.org/all-north-carolina-employment-growth-since-2000-went-to-immigrants

The US Labor Dept. will release the “unemployment rate” and jobs added for January tomorrow.

Expect more lies.