151
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 01 Aug 2023
151 points (74.1% liked)
Memes
45746 readers
1556 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Does anyone else fear the economic impact that student loans are going to have once they are resumed? I am really not looking forward to another recession.
We are in a recession though, have you seen what the working class is going through for the past three years?
That's what I'm saying. We've been barely skirting by but it's been doable. Once student loans kick in, that's the spark going from embers to an inferno.
who the fuck is jimmy dore
you talk a lot, so what's your deal?
No we're not, and we haven't been. The media and CEOs have been fearmongering about "a recession" for years now and it's never been close to happening.
Unemployment is near record lows. Wages are rising.
What's been killing the working class recently has been inflation, and nothing else. Which sucks, but is getting better.
Hot Take: I'm looking forward to it for one reason only: Maybe social networks will be fun and bearable again without the constant bombardment of political "ideas." Maybe all those people who haven't been working will go back to work and stop ruining the internet.
You realize unemployment in the US is near pre pandemic levels and as low as its been since the 60s?
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/unemployment-rate
Unemployment numbers are always disingenuous because they only count people who are looking for employment. People who leave the voluntarily leave the workforce aren't included.
That's a poor argument as you're trying to say that this time we should compare apples to oranges. It's also an argument you could use any time you disagree, essentially waiving the facts. Sorry, but no. Disingenuousness requires intent, the unemployment numbers are measured the same way year in and year out. If you want to argue that the number of people leaving the workforce skewed the numbers this badly, you'd need to show your work, not just attempt to disregard the actual data.
You should learn a bit about how they intentionally figure these numbers in their favor... Kind of how they change how inflation is calculated ever so often to make it look like inflation isn't as bad as it is. There are jobs but there are more people permanently exiting the workforce and that doesn't get factored into unemployment. It's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of fact. https://www.statista.com/statistics/191734/us-civilian-labor-force-participation-rate-since-1990/#:~:text=This%20graph%20shows%20the%20civilian,participated%20in%20the%20job%20market.
Since 2000, the rate of eligible workers in the workforce has decreased from 67% to current 62%.
Yeah, and there are numerous factors at play. You've mentioned people exiting the workforce as if the whole thing had sinister undertones, (almost like the baby boomers retired) but not companies shuttering due to COVID, jobs being outsourced, jobs going part-time to avoid paying out benefits, jobs that disappeared due to automation or AI...the remote work boom, people who chose to go back to school during COVID, retire early, or stay home rather than risk dying. They still measure unemployment how they always have, I am neither fooled nor in need of learning here. There's an entire argument that the unemployment rate is actually too low right now, contributing to inflation. https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/07/perspectives/inflation-jobs-recession-rubenstein/index.html
Then there's this Forbes article that talks about the unemployment rate including labor participation rate but includes this bit about the boomers: "This trend was apparent during the 2010s, a decade with a strong economy that saw labor force participation fall from 64.4% to 63.6% as the percentage of the population 65 or older rose from 13.1% to 16.5%." The point is that it's possible for the participation rate to fall even though the economy is strong due to demographics.
The overall point is that you can't just stare at one number and get a complete picture whether it's participation rate or unemployment but that doesn't mean they're "intentionally figuring these numbers in their favor" They paint a rosy picture from accurate statistics and look on the bright side like every administration because consumer confidence is an important indication of a strong economy as well, and it's good leadership, to be honest. "Lies, damn lies, and statistics" is still a valid point but either party would be touting their low unemployment numbers, as they should. The economy literally gets stronger the more you convince people it's stronger. The full picture is way more complicated than the unemployment rate, but that does not at all map to "the unemployment rate is doctored." or even "misleading." The unemployment rate is what it is...it's the narrative that's fudged, not the numbers.
If you think folks only had one bill (school loans) so had no reason to work until it comes back, you're kind of out of touch. Unemployment is fairly low and it's not because people aren't looking for work.
Rabble rabble! No one wants to work these days and pull themselves up by their bootstraps! Never mind that is literally impossible, so actually a perfect apt metaphor! Instead, they just want to spend time online ruining it for ME! Rabble rabble!
Hot take: you are astroturfing for the rich people.
What you're experiencing is "summer internet". All the children on social media, not the adults with loan debt.