Announcement

**Defiant** · July 30, 2003, 16:31

About the retirement, the baby boomers are beginning to retire, so make sure you take that in accounting for your numbers, it really is weighted.

**Kidlicious** · July 30, 2003, 16:31

Originally posted by Velociryx
Oh yes! Let's count all the people who retire early, by all means!

If they are RETIRED, it means that they are no longer in the work force.

But....if it makes the argument look good, yes! Let's count them!

Maybe we can use that unemployment rate you guys quoted some months ago that counts all the folks who have started independent consulting businesses from home as "unemployed" too....and all those who are employed but are looking for better paying work. We might break 50% if we keep going!

-=Vel=-

It's just another way of measuring it. There are more people who aren't counted the traditional way that are counted this way then there ever has been. Only an idiot would simply ignore these numbers. They say something very important about the economy. It says that 17.8% of people capable of work don't work. I think that's significant to say the least, and it's more than it's been since WWII.

**Kidlicious** · July 30, 2003, 16:34

Originally posted by Defiant
Kid,
I don't think you can predict what will happen in the next five months much less the next five years, no offense meant, but there are way too many unpredictable variables you can not adjust all of them accordingly.
This is what I am really afraid of: This winter gas and electric charges are expected to rise 40% due to a shortfall on natural gas from a greater proportion of power companies using natural gas instead of oil, coal or water due to its cleanliness. That could put an extreme damper on our economy. Now the gov't knows this and they are desperately trying to bring in natural gas (frozen) on ships because to build pipelines from the north is too expensive and time consuming.
This cost come right out of our pockets and would stop essential retail spending.
I got this information from the WSJ last week.

I don't see this as a problem. There is plenty of money to be spent. The problem is people don't want to spend it. I doubt if natural gas prices will make much difference at all.

**Velociryx** · July 30, 2003, 16:35

**double post hunted down and eaten**

**Velociryx** · July 30, 2003, 16:36

Yes, it's significant, but it is false to call that number the "unemployment" number. Doing so implies that these people are looking for work and can't find it (given the fact that THAT is the definition we have historically applied to the term).

They're not working.

That does not mean that they are part of the group that is "unemployed and looking." It means that (at least in the case of those folks working from home-based businesses or who have taken an early retirement), that they don't have to report to somewhere else to work. The home-based biz owners and consultants work for themselves, and the early retirees don't have to work at all, cos they're now living off of their pension plans and investments.

Is that bad? Lumping those folks in to ratchet up the "unemployment rate" would sure make people think so.

-=Vel=-

**Kidlicious** · July 30, 2003, 16:36

Originally posted by Defiant
About the retirement, the baby boomers are beginning to retire, so make sure you take that in accounting for your numbers, it really is weighted.

The 17.8% number accounts for them. When people who are close to retirement lose their jobs they are likely to just retire when the job market sucks, but the 6.4% number doesn't count these people.

**Kidlicious** · July 30, 2003, 16:39

Originally posted by Velociryx
Yes, it's significant, but it is false to call that number the "unemployment" number. Doing so implies that these people are looking for work and can't find it (given the fact that THAT is the definition we have historically applied to the term).

They're not working.

That does not mean that they are part of the group that is "unemployed and looking." It means that (at least in the case of those folks working from home-based businesses or who have taken an early retirement), that they don't have to report to somewhere else to work. The home-based biz owners and consultants work for themselves, and the early retirees don't have to work at all, cos they're now living off of their pension plans and investments.

Is that bad? Lumping those folks in to ratchet up the "unemployment rate" would sure make people think so.

-=Vel=-

There is no real unemployment rate that we can say is exact, but this is a measure of the people who are able and willing to work at the right job.

**Defiant** · July 30, 2003, 16:39

There's plenty of money going around, you can't be serious, I just read on USA today the individual job raises are lowest since the mid-70's but costs continue to rise, understating the effect of increase in heating a home or electric could be disasterous for our economy.

**Kidlicious** · July 30, 2003, 16:41

Originally posted by Defiant
There's plenty of money going around, you can't be serious, I just read on USA today the individual job raises are lowest since the mid-70's but costs continue to rise, understating the effect of increase in heating a home or electric could be disasterous for our economy.

There is money, but the wrong people have it. You're right though. It will have some effect.

**Defiant** · July 30, 2003, 16:42

Explain the wrong people?

**Velociryx** · July 30, 2003, 16:43

There is money, but the wrong people have it....

Couldn't stay away from it, could you?

And here we go again.

Who are the right people, Kid? You? Your buddies? And lemme guess, everybody who disagrees that you are the right person to have the money must be....elitist?

I love this guy!

-=Vel=-

**Kidlicious** · July 30, 2003, 18:37

Originally posted by Defiant
Explain the wrong people?

The people who will not spend more (or less) because of small changes to their income. Generally people with large incomes and wealth.

**Kidlicious** · July 30, 2003, 18:41

Originally posted by Velociryx
There is money, but the wrong people have it....

Couldn't stay away from it, could you?

And here we go again.

Who are the right people, Kid? You? Your buddies? And lemme guess, everybody who disagrees that you are the right person to have the money must be....elitist?

I love this guy!

-=Vel=-

Yeah, because as you say, we are all losers who don't save our money.

**chequita guevara** · July 30, 2003, 18:55

Originally posted by Defiant
Take a look, then you might understand, "Bush is toast" part.

So you don't think that consumer confidence would have more to do with whether or not tha man is re-elected than whether or not factory orders are up? If consumers (who are also the voters) do not have confidence in the economy, they will not have confidence in the current government.

**chequita guevara** · July 30, 2003, 19:00

I fear for you people where there is winter. I still have an huge gas bill from my last winter in the North, thanks to the spike in heating costs. This wil probably bugger us here though, since it may raise the cost of electricty.
If it does, that's gonna put a kabash on this jobless recovery.

Announcement

US Consumer Confidence Down Again

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment