Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (861812)	6/2/2015 3:54:55 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1578092

The RealClearMarkets article that forms the heart of Tim's post doesn't cite any sources, making it a little suspect. More so when you look at sourced information. For example, unemployment rates for the 16-24 demographic. It is very high for 16-17 year olds, but it is dropping. By age 25 it is down close to the average. bls.gov So that isn't an issue. The BLS considers the current unemployment rate to be at full employment. If your and Tim's thesis were accurate, the labor participation rate should be climbing. It isn't. Just the opposite, although not as quickly. Which does indicate that dropping out of the labor market was a factor, however small. It probably isn't one any more. data.bls.gov Now, what is happening is that the percentage of the population that the 16-24 cohort represents is shrinking. And the older ones are growing. Even in the past, the rate of growth in the population of seniors (ages 65 and older) exceeded the rate of growth in the populations of younger cohorts. In the U.S., the population of seniors more than tripled, from 13 million in 1950 to 40.8 million in 2010, a total gain of 213%. The percentage increase was greater than the increase in the population of 15- to 64-year- olds (105%) and the increase in the population of children younger than 15 (45%). pewglobal.org So it is a structural thing. If this concerns you, back immigration amnesty. That would solve the problem since they are younger and have more children.

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (861812)	6/29/2015 11:36:45 AM
From: TimF	Respond to of 1578092

Also 3). Indeed, over the 2008–11 period, we find that only one-quarter of the 1.8 percentage point decline in actual LFPR for 16–79 year olds can be attributed to demographic factors. chicagofed.org The decline continued after the recession but less of it was due to economic factors that's why more recent estimates have been more like one half was due to demographic factors rather then one quarter. The point is that while retirements are clearly a significant part of the decline 1 - They don't' even come close to explaining all of it. 2 - Even the part that is from retirements is hardly non-problematic. That portion represents negative demographics for ongoing US economic growth. ----------- Retirements account for nearly half of the fall in the participation rate, a White House report shows. usnews.com So even the White House's data shows about half from factors other then the baby boomers retiring. and I'm not sure that adjusts for the fact that the participation rate among the elderly had grown, meaning more of the decline would have to be from younger people leaving or not getting jobs. usnews.com