More workers joined the federal government's disability program in June than got new jobs, according to two new government reports, a clear indicator of how bleak the nation's jobs picture is after three full years of economic recovery.

The economy created just 80,000 jobs in June, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Friday. But that same month, 85,000 workers left the workforce entirely to enroll in the Social Security Disability Insurance program, according to the Social Security Administration.

The disability ranks have outpaced job growth throughout President Obama's economic recovery. While the economy has created 2.6 million jobs since June 2009, fully 3.1 million workers signed up for disability benefits.

"The economic recovery is clearly stuck in quicksand as job creation remains anemic and layoff announcements soar," said Todd Schoenberger, managing principal at The BlackBay Group.

rickyp wrote:This analysis from the Economic Policy Institute’s Josh Bivens and Heidi Shierholz that assesses just how much of the gap between where the US is, and full employment is attributable to cuts in government jobs.
http://www.epi.org/blog/years-recovery- ... rity-hurt/

The answer? Over 20%, or about 2.3 million jobs. Half of those jobs would be in the private sector.

Their analysis counts four effects from government job cuts. One is just direct job losses; that’s the 600,000 public jobs lost, almost all at the state and local levels. But as they note, that’s only the beginning.
During normal times, public sector jobs grow gradually with the population, so there’s another chunk of missing job growth in addition to public sector jobs lost. There’s also the jobs lost because all those public sector employees normally use stuff that they have to buy, and also buy stuff because they’re employed. And they also count in jobs lost thanks to the multiplier effects of transfer payments, which is certainly a real thing although not as closely connected to jobs.

So, its the austerity at State and Municipal levels that is particularly contributive to the slowed recovery. Meaning that the end of the Stimulus and the subsequent purging of teachers, cops, firemen and other state and local employees stalled the recovery. In other words, by following the policies proposed by republicans the economy has stalled.
(Granted continuing the Stimulus, particularly without dropping txation on the high end earners, the deficit would be larger - though not dollar for dolllar as the improved economic engine would generate higher revenues)

Look, the public sector lost 4,000 jobs last month. 4,000

rickyp wrote:The Economic Policy Institute, a nonprofit Washington D.C. think tank, was created in 1986 to broaden the discussion about economic policy to include the interests of low- and middle-income workers.

Do you have a problem with that Fate? Why?

Fate

Look, the public sector lost 4,000 jobs last month. 4,000

And how many over the last 3 years?

The austerity program has meant that public jobs have been cut. In order to create jobs, jobs have been cut. It's self defeating.

The beginning of austerity (the end of the Stimulus) is a shadow over what was attempted in Europe, and there the austerity ended the recovery. Completely.

Austerity will be important at some point...in order to manage the deficit and debt problems. But if you shut down the economy with austerity any chance of growing out of it, is killed .

Doctor Fate wrote:We still have toll-takers sitting in booths in MA.

danivon wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:We still have toll-takers sitting in booths in MA.

So what's the alternative? remove the tolls, spend a lot of money on automation (that won't collect all tolls)m or reduce the numbers to increase queues?

You get annoyed at an extra 15-30 minutes in airport security (not that this would make it the most time consuming part of the journey or most liable to delays)!

Doctor Fate wrote:The most annoying thing is not the delay at the airport. The most annoying thing is the stupidity with which the operation is run. They are overstaffed, under-skilled, and not looking for actually dangerous persons. No 7 year old nor 70 year-old has yet to try an act of terrorism. They have searched serving members of Congress, retired Secretaries of State, and all manner of foolishness. How about doing some profiling, a la El Al? In other words, do something intelligent instead of just "doing something?"

danivon wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:The most annoying thing is not the delay at the airport. The most annoying thing is the stupidity with which the operation is run. They are overstaffed, under-skilled, and not looking for actually dangerous persons. No 7 year old nor 70 year-old has yet to try an act of terrorism. They have searched serving members of Congress, retired Secretaries of State, and all manner of foolishness. How about doing some profiling, a la El Al? In other words, do something intelligent instead of just "doing something?"

It's not about the person, it's about what they are carrying as well. A 7 / 70 year old may not be a terrorist, but that doesn't mean they can't be an unwitting mule for a criminal. Or that terrorists won't figure out 'profiling'.

Political leaders continue to peddle the snake oil that we can spend our way back to prosperity.

The Obama administration has pushed government's share of GDP past 40%, the highest ever without a major war. Europeans are grousing about austerity, seeing crippling debt not as a comeuppance but as an obstacle to the spending needed to revive a moribund economy.

In the 1930s, with the world in the Great Depression's death grip, British economist John Maynard Keynes argued that massive government spending would boost demand and put the unemployed back to work. Over the next eight decades, Keynesian stimulus became the standard remedy for weak economies — even though it has never worked.

To test the efficacy of Keynesian policies, we looked at the annual changes in U.S. government spending as a share of gross domestic product from 1901 to 2011, measured relative to the growth trend of 1.76%. Then we determined whether the higher spending had lowered unemployment rates (see chart above).

Many Americans believe President Franklin D. Roosevelt's Keynesian conversion beat back the Great Depression. It's pure myth. In the 1930s, the United States doubled government outlays relative to GDP. The unemployment rate didn't fall; instead, it jumped from 3.2% in 1929 to 25.2% in 1933 — an outcome contrary to Keynes' doctrine. . .

In short, unemployment fell not because of government spending but because of government conscription — hardly a good way to cure joblessness or evidence of a Keynesian miracle.

At all other times during this 110-year sweep of U.S. history, government spending and unemployment rates have moved in the same direction. In the 1920s, both trended downward. The Depression decade saw them rise in tandem.

Doctor Fate wrote:1. El Al. How do they do it? Answer: faster, better, and less intrusively.

danivon wrote:

Doctor Fate wrote:1. El Al. How do they do it? Answer: faster, better, and less intrusively.

But not cheaply: about 10 times as much per passenger as the US spends.

And they use more people, too, which was one of your complained about the TSA (in your 'genius' plan to line them up along the US-Mexican border)

Doctor Fate wrote:The answer is "yes," I would pay 10X as much to have it done better.

The border quip was about how useless the current TSA is. Have you flown to the States since they took root? Horrendous. Their answer to every blip on the screen is to force us to remove more clothing.