Tag: 25 to 54 year old men

“It’s Worse Than The Great Depression” – One In Six Prime-Aged Men Has No Job

Tyler Durden's picture
by Tyler Durden
Sep 7, 2016 11:33 AM

While Obama has repeatedly touted the sub-5.0% unemployment rate (4.9% most recently) as confirmation his “economic recovery” has been successful, what has received far less media attention has been the unprecedented surge in Americans no longer in the labor force, which as of August stood at a near-record 94.4 million.

And while the traditional response by economic apologists and the media has been that this number is the result of a demographic change in US society, with mostly older workers no longer in the labor pool, we have over the years argued that that is misleading, and that millions of prime-aged workers have fallen out as a result of drastic changes to America’s job market, coupled with structural lack of demand for legacy jobs, which has – for example – sent the number of employed waiters and bartenders to all time highs even as the number of manufacturing workers is lower than it was in December 2014.

 

Continue reading ““It’s Worse Than The Great Depression” – One In Six Prime-Aged Men Has No Job”

THE BOOMER RETIREMENT MEME IS A BIG LIE

As the labor participation rate and employment to population ratio linger near three decade lows, the mouthpieces for the establishment continue to perpetuate the Big Lie this is solely due to the retirement of Boomers. It’s their storyline and they’ll stick to it, no matter what the facts show to be the truth. Even CNBC lackeys, government apparatchiks, and Ivy League educated Keynesian economists should be able to admit that people between the ages of 25 and 54 should be working, unless they are home raising children.

In the year 2000, at the height of the first Federal Reserve induced bubble, there were 120 million Americans between the ages of 25 and 54, with 78 million of them employed full-time. That equated to a 65% full-time employment rate. By the height of the second Federal Reserve induced bubble, there were 80 million full-time employed 25 to 54 year olds out of 126 million, a 63.5% employment rate. The full-time employment rate bottomed at 57% in 2010, and still lingers below 62% as we are at the height of a third Federal Reserve induced bubble.

Chart via econimica

Over the last 16 years the percentage of 25 to 54 full-time employed Americans has fallen from 65% to 62%. I guess people are retiring much younger, if you believe the MSM storyline. Over this same time period the total full-time employment to population ratio has fallen from 53% to 48.8%. The overall labor participation rate peaked in 2000 at 67.1% and stayed steady between 66% and 67% for the next eight years. But this disguised the ongoing decline in the participation rate of men.

Continue reading “THE BOOMER RETIREMENT MEME IS A BIG LIE”

WHAT ARE THESE PEOPLE DOING?

The two charts below may explain why, despite the propaganda about low unemployment, tremendous job growth and the retirement of Boomers explaining the lower participation rate, the economy is in recession, the middle class is pissed off, and the smell of revolution is in the air. When one in four Americans in the prime working years of 25 to 54 are not working, you’ve got a problem. What are 28.9 million people in the prime of their lives doing, if they are not working for a living. Sure some women are staying home to raise their kids, but how many two parent families can afford to get by on one income these days?

Just based on the historical record of employment to population ratios, the country is short by 3 million to 5 million jobs in this key demographic category. This has nothing to do with Boomers or retirement. Any man between the ages of 25 and 54 years old who is not truly disabled should be working. If they are not, they are either a good for nothing lazy free shitter, or the complete destruction of our blue collar industries by politicians, bankers, and corporate CEOs has left men with no remaining options.

In 1970, 96% of males between the ages of 25 and 54 were participating in the workforce and 93% were employed. Today, only 88% of males between the ages of 25 and 54 are participating in the workforce and only 83% are employed. What are the 12% of males in their prime working years doing, if they’re not working? Even the female participation rate for 25 to 54 year olds is the lowest in almost a quarter century.

I believe this data is at the gist of Trump’s growing popularity. You have a portion of the 25 to 54 population not working because they choose to not work. They are essentially members of the free shit army and expect the producers to pay their way. They will vote Clinton or Sanders. Then there are middle class 25 to 54 year olds who have been laid off because their companies shipped the jobs overseas or the overwhelming tax and regulatory burdens imposed by Obama and his minions have put companies out of business resulting in more layoffs.

Men and women in the prime of their life not working get very angry and frustrated. That anger is bubbling over and the MSM and establishment politicians are shocked because their luxurious secluded lives are unaffected. They will be flabbergasted when Trump wins the presidency on this wave of anger and frustration.


 

US Workers In The Prime 25-54 Age Group Are Still 2.6 Million Short Of Recovering Post-Crisis Job Losses

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 06/07/2014 19:43 -0400

Pundits may be trying to spin this Friday’s jobs report as indicative of an ongoing recovery, emphasizing that as of May, all the jobs that were lost since December 2007 have now been recovered, or this chart…

 

However the same pundits fail to mention is that while it took the Fed some $2.7 trillion in incremental liquidity to regain all the lost jobs (and concurrently push the S&P to absolutely ridiculous record numbers), at the same time the US population, which grew by 14.8 million since December 2007, has lost a record 12.8 million people form the labor force, which remains at an all time high 92 million!

 

Further digging into the data, here are two other things you won’t hear from the permabulls: while the May job gain of 217K was respectable, breaking down the jobs by age group as shown by the household survey, shows that not only did the majority of the jobs go to the lowest paying wages for yet another month, but for Americans in their prime working years, those aged 25-54, May was a month in which some 110K workers either lost their jobs, or were moved into the oldest, 55-69 age group.

Furthermore, while the total number of jobs may have recovered its post December 2007 losses, for Americans aged 25-54, there is still a long, long time to go, with the prime US age group still over 2.6 million jobs short of recovering all of its post December-2007 losses.

Finally, continuing the qulitative breakdown of the jobs breakdown in the US, one group that has gotten the decidedly short end of the stick are stay at home dads, which according to a recent Pew research study have increased by a whopping 100% to 2 million from the 1.1 milion in 1989:

The number of fathers who do not work outside the home has risen markedly in recent years, up to 2 million in 2012. High unemployment rates around the time of the Great Recession contributed to the recent increases, but the biggest contributor to long-term growth in these “stay-at-home fathers” is the rising number of fathers who are at home primarily to care for their family.

Visually:

Bloomberg has more:

The number of fathers at home with their children reached a high of 2.2 million in 2010 in the wake of the recession, which ended in June 2009. While the figure fell to 2 million in 2012 as unemployment declined, it was still almost double the 1.1 million stay-at-home dads in 1989, according to the report.

 

Fathers account for a growing share of stay-at-home parents in the U.S., with almost a quarter of the men reporting they’re at home because they can’t find a job. Dads represented 16 percent of all parents not working outside the home in 2012, up from 10 percent in 1989, a report released today by the Pew Research Center in Washington shows. There are more than five times as many stay-at-home mothers.

 

“The share of dads specifically there to care for those at home has been growing steadily across time,” said Gretchen Livingston, the report’s lead author. “We still see a steady increase in this number.”

 

The report follows a study Pew released two months ago that showed American mothers are reversing a historical trend and increasingly staying home, a change driven by demographic, social and economic forces. The increase in stay-at-home fathers is also related to economic forces, this study found.

Don’t blame it on the economy… blame it on disabilities.

As is the case among mothers, stay-at-home fathers are less well-off financially and have lower educational attainment than their working counterparts, the report said. At-home fathers are twice as likely to lack a high school diploma as working fathers — 22 percent to 10 percent — and almost half are living in poverty compared with 8 percent who work outside the home.

 

The largest share of stay-at-home fathers — 35 percent — say they are there because of their own illness or disability, the report said. This contrasts with stay-at-home mothers, just 11 percent of whom cited those reasons.

 

And while the overall average age of working-age Americans continues to rise ever higher (with the 25-54 age group consistently depressed), one subset of Americans that is leaving the workforce are the same disenfrachised fathers, caring for their children:

Stay-at-home dads also tend to be older than such mothers, which may partially explain why so many more are ill or disabled. While 43 percent of stay-at-home fathers are 45 years or older, only 21 percent of stay-at-home mothers are in that age group.

 

About one in five stay-at-home fathers say the main reason they are there is to care for their home or family, representing a fourfold increase from 1989 when only 5 percent of them said that. Among mothers, the number is 73 percent.

It gets worse:

Stay-at-home dads get less respect, the study found. About half of Americans said children are better off if their mother is home and doesn’t hold a job, compared with just 8 percent who said that about fathers, according to a 2013 Pew survey. That finding shows Americans “still very much differentiate between a stay-at-home mom and a stay-at-home dad in terms of the value to children,” Livingston said.

Well, reverse feminism may not be particularly strong in the US, and neither is the so-called recovery. But at least demand for propaganda spin masters has never been greater, regardless of age or domestic father status.

OBAMA’S WAR ON MEN

Obama just keeps breaking records for ineptitude and creating despair. The charts below detail the huge success of his economic policies. I think even liberal morons would agree that men between the ages of 25 and 54 years old SHOULD be working. College is behind you and it is time to earn money, raise a family, save for your retirement, and become a productive part of society. When the Obama recovery began in the middle of 2009, 10% of all men between the ages of 25 and 54 were not in the labor force. That was already an outrageously high number.

Now, after 5 years of “economic recovery” spurred by massive Keynesian debt spending, zero interest rates, government handouts to Wall Street, and the introduction of free healthcare for all, 12% of all men between the ages of 25 and 54 are not in the labor force. Now that’s real progress. I bet Obama can get that figure to 14% before he leaves office with accolades from the liberal media pundits. Who needs working men anyway?

The fact that 17% of all men between the ages of 25 and 54 are not working is a shocking enough figure, but even the politically correct conservatives refuse to go one step further and examine the BLS data regarding the racial breakdown of working men. Obama is supposedly the champion of the poor and minorities. He won over 90% of the black vote in the last election. It seems that 30% of all black men between the ages of 25 and 54 years old are not working. And this doesn’t even count the black men in prison in this age bracket.

You get more of what you encourage and promote. Why are there twice as many black men as white men not working during their prime employment years? Because they don’t have to. They can live off of the working population through food stamps, Section 8 subsidies, SS disability, and the myriad of other welfare programs supported by Obama and his liberal control freak minions. Everything Obama does is a detriment to creating jobs. Every Keynesian waste of tax payer dollars has kept the market from truly recovering. Every new regulation to save the earth deters companies from hiring workers.

The rollout of his disastrous Obamacare abortion has already resulted in layoffs, small business closings, and reduced hiring by all businesses. And the worst aspects of this law haven’t even been implemented. His brilliant idea to raise the minimum wage to $10.10 would provide a real boost to the number of 25 to 54 year old men not working. He’s the gift that keeps on giving.

The consequences of men in their prime earning years not working are far reaching and dire. This puts a halt to family formation, home buying, car buying, contributions to the Social Security system, income taxes needed to pay for all that government waste, and the mental stability of men who feel worthless without a job. Throw in the massive build-up of student loan debt among young men and you have a powder-keg ready to blow. The upcoming financial crisis will be the trigger to unleash a hailstorm of anger, violence and rage. It’s uncertain who this will be unleashed upon. Hopefully, the ire is focused where it belongs on Obama and the government. The war has just begun.

“There are currently 61.1 million American men in their prime working years, age 25–54. A staggering 1 in 8 such men are not in the labor force at all, meaning they are neither working nor looking for work. This is an all-time high dating back to when records were first kept in 1955. An additional 2.9 million men are in the labor force but not employed (i.e., they would work if they could find a job). A total of 10.2 million individuals in this cohort, therefore, are not holding jobs in the U.S. economy today. There are also nearly 3 million more men in this age group not working today than there were before the recession began,” the Republicans on the Senate Budget Committee claim…

Although defenders of the current economy attribute shrinking labor force participation to the increasing pace of retirement of the Baby Boomer generation, these new statistics above confirm a trend that Barron’s recently diagnosed: ‘The ratio of those over 55 in the workforce actually ticked up’—in other words, older Americans are being forced to return to work in a poor economy to make ends meet while many younger Americans simply aren’t working at all. In short, there is an unprecedented supply of working-age Americans who do not hold jobs.” – Daniel Halper