And as for the willingness of universities to cough up the numbers, I imagine that legislation to make their release a condition of receiving federal research dollars would go a long way towards chaging their mind.
The federal agency insuring bank deposits learned that it can't afford to ignore the blogs following its seizure this month of IndyMac Bank, the largest bank failure since the 1980s.
"The blogs were a bit out of control," Sheila Bair, chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., told the San Francisco Business Times after a speech in San Francisco this week.
That's putting it mildly. Following the FDIC's takeover of IndyMac on July 11, widely followed blogs were speculating on bank runs on some of California's largest banks based on nothing more than people waiting for their branch to open or large deposits moving between financial institutions.
The FDIC plans to pay closer attention to the blogosphere in the future.
"We're very mindful of the media coverage and blogs in controlling misinformation. All I can say is were going to continue to stay on top of it," Bair said. "The misinformation that came out over the weekend fed a lot of depositors' fears."
IndyMac couldn't have possibly failed because of incompetence. It had to have been those darn bloggers like you, Robert! Shame on you! ;-)
I think Borjas is partially correct when observing the historical data. Disability, Social Security, OSHA have changed the equation, back when men where the primary providers, men simply worked themselves to death, or were killed on the job.
Also, welfare may have become more socially acceptable through the generations, however welfare is no longer available to able bodied single men. I don't think that these reasons address the more recent decline in men's employment.
The inclusion of prisoners appears to be incorrect???
Perhaps the following definition of the Civilian noninstitutional population hasn't been updated? This is the second comment reference to the incarcerated as being included in the population survey.
Alternately, when using the Labor Force Participation Rate, NILF (not in the labor force) and discouraged workers are not included. "Labor Force" strictly is defined as the employed plus the unemployed (U-3).
Civilian noninstitutional population (Current Population Survey):
Included are persons 16 years of age and older residing in the 50 States and the District of Columbia who are not inmates of institutions (for example, penal and mental facilities, homes for the aged), and who are not on active duty in the Armed Forces.
Labor force (Current Population Survey)
The labor force includes all persons classified as employed or unemployed in accordance with the definitions contained in this glossary.
There are certainly a lot of Congress representatives who just might be willing to do that if asked.
Personally, I don't think universities will be so willing or quick to give it up. I'm wondering if those statistics are available through some sort of public disclosure.
Well, it looks like Ford is going to retool some plants but focus on the Focus.
The problem is currently it gets about 24/35 mpg. Don't they get it? People want 50 mpg or better, why can't they get it together to make such a thing? The technology is often 40 years old! Where are the hybrid plug-ins?
Ford goes on and on about environment, yet beyond pumping hydrogen hype, where is the R&D into alternative vehicles, fuel efficient vehicles? They have a SUV which gets 34 MPH highway, which I believe is the best of any larger vehicles, why don't they expand on that?
That would be another excellent blog post topic. How other nations create incentives or have programs to build up industries in comparison to the United States.
" say borderline, because there is only one sure way to make that a reality, and it is something conservatives and the current Republican Party would never do. That is subsidization of these start ups either monetarily or other means."
Isn't this pretty much what the Europeans did to create Airbus? propped up the troubled remains of the european aerospace industry and subsidize the heck out of it?
Too much of US industry's management today only know how to chop, cut, close, downsize and outsource.
There is virtually no creating innovating, building going on.
Surely old technologies die or change, but without anything new on the horizon to take its place its a strategy that leads to long term decline and death of industry.
The growing economies of the world are doing it by building infrastrucure and manufacturing base, something we are rapidly forgetting how to do
US industry is setting itself up to failure - and the primary culprit is short term thinking and the need to please Wall Street rather than build up mainstreet
More evidence of economic distress in China, from Bloomberg:
China, the world's biggest coal user, ordered a cap on prices of the fuel to help power producers cope with costs as the country battles a sixth year of electricity shortages. Power companies' shares climbed.
....
Asian coal prices have more than doubled this year on rising electricity demand .... "The price curbs may reduce imports and discourage smaller companies from boosting output, worsening the supply shortage,'' David Fang, a director of information at the China Coal Transport and Distribution Association, said by mobile phone from Beijing today....
China's power plants have been losing money because of rising coal prices and government controls on electricity tariffs....
This damn "President" has essentially turned back the clocks on us. I remember that sense of crisis roaming about the country. The nation was in a recession and folks knew that we had gone too far this time. But, as you mentioned, we got lucky and dodged a bullet. Only this time, it seems, the villain in the form of George W. Bush is carrying two pistols this time.
on management. I do know GM does spend a lot on R&D but I also know they have been offshore outsourcing in droves. While GM is busy closing plants, Toyota is investing in R&D in the US and building a plant.
Yeah, my Borjas textbook is 2nd edition, which means the graphs are quite dated. I still think his explanation is bogus. ;)
Does Roberts have detailed analysis? I've just read his opinion pieces which are more overview on how the United States is being sold down the river vs. more of the Academic like analysis stuff. He's an economist so obviously he could wipe out the details.
I recall one recent EP poster who noticed that the BLS has made adjustments/revisions all the way back to 2002. Again, I'm just pulling the current stuff from BLS.
Paul Craig Roberts has done a lot of work on the McJobs coming in and the skilled/manufacturing going offshore, but let's look at the population growth for a moment.
The Census in 2005 places 14 and 15 year olds at 8,549,000. To find the number of 15 year olds, divide by 2 = 4,274,500.
The CDC places annual deaths at about 2.4 million, which puts domestic growth at 2,137,500 for 2005.
On an annual basis the only recent times we've lost jobs is 1991 abd 2002.
Here's an anomally, if I avoid the Bush "population controls" by using Dec. to Dec. instead of the annual the employment growth numbers look a lot different.
There is a lot of stuff on this site. Of course since I'm admin, people can just use the email and ask, no biggie.
I started thinking about US auto manufacturers and I think it might be an exceptional case of how outsourcing is really bad and it's bad because it's death by spreadsheet. They look at their company by 3rd party sourcers, spread sheets and think, "oh, if something is profitable, we'll just acquire it" versus actually innovate, have R&D in house and set the market direction. I mean even now they could bring back those box cars that got 45, 50mpg with technology that is over 40 years old and instead we have ads now (all of the auto manufacturers) trying to present 23MPG and so forth as now "fuel efficient" (cough, cough). They are exceedingly mismanaged. Managed by spreadsheet instead of innovation, future strategy and product.
and Sherrod Brown spring to mind.
And as for the willingness of universities to cough up the numbers, I imagine that legislation to make their release a condition of receiving federal research dollars would go a long way towards chaging their mind.
This is classic stuff
IndyMac couldn't have possibly failed because of incompetence. It had to have been those darn bloggers like you, Robert! Shame on you! ;-)
I think Borjas is partially correct when observing the historical data. Disability, Social Security, OSHA have changed the equation, back when men where the primary providers, men simply worked themselves to death, or were killed on the job.
Also, welfare may have become more socially acceptable through the generations, however welfare is no longer available to able bodied single men. I don't think that these reasons address the more recent decline in men's employment.
The inclusion of prisoners appears to be incorrect???
Perhaps the following definition of the Civilian noninstitutional population hasn't been updated? This is the second comment reference to the incarcerated as being included in the population survey.
Alternately, when using the Labor Force Participation Rate, NILF (not in the labor force) and discouraged workers are not included. "Labor Force" strictly is defined as the employed plus the unemployed (U-3).
Civilian noninstitutional population (Current Population Survey):
Included are persons 16 years of age and older residing in the 50 States and the District of Columbia who are not inmates of institutions (for example, penal and mental facilities, homes for the aged), and who are not on active duty in the Armed Forces.
Labor force (Current Population Survey)
The labor force includes all persons classified as employed or unemployed in accordance with the definitions contained in this glossary.
Surprise, surprise, girls are equal to boys in Mathematics aptitude.
Advanced
Math study finds girls are just as good as boys .
There are certainly a lot of Congress representatives who just might be willing to do that if asked.
Personally, I don't think universities will be so willing or quick to give it up. I'm wondering if those statistics are available through some sort of public disclosure.
would be if a member of Congress could write to schools receiving federal research funds asking for the disclosure of that information.
I think that the extent to which foreign nationals are favored over Americans would shock people.
Bloomberg reports. Uh, tell us something we don't know.
Well, it looks like Ford is going to retool some plants but focus on the Focus.
The problem is currently it gets about 24/35 mpg. Don't they get it? People want 50 mpg or better, why can't they get it together to make such a thing? The technology is often 40 years old! Where are the hybrid plug-ins?
Ford goes on and on about environment, yet beyond pumping hydrogen hype, where is the R&D into alternative vehicles, fuel efficient vehicles? They have a SUV which gets 34 MPH highway, which I believe is the best of any larger vehicles, why don't they expand on that?
that the Borjas text uses the labor participation rate, while this uses the employment to population rate.
The labor participation excludes the institutionalized population, aka prisoners and the like.
That would be another excellent blog post topic. How other nations create incentives or have programs to build up industries in comparison to the United States.
" say borderline, because there is only one sure way to make that a reality, and it is something conservatives and the current Republican Party would never do. That is subsidization of these start ups either monetarily or other means."
Isn't this pretty much what the Europeans did to create Airbus? propped up the troubled remains of the european aerospace industry and subsidize the heck out of it?
Pretty well spot on.
Too much of US industry's management today only know how to chop, cut, close, downsize and outsource.
There is virtually no creating innovating, building going on.
Surely old technologies die or change, but without anything new on the horizon to take its place its a strategy that leads to long term decline and death of industry.
The growing economies of the world are doing it by building infrastrucure and manufacturing base, something we are rapidly forgetting how to do
US industry is setting itself up to failure - and the primary culprit is short term thinking and the need to please Wall Street rather than build up mainstreet
More evidence of economic distress in China, from Bloomberg:
This damn "President" has essentially turned back the clocks on us. I remember that sense of crisis roaming about the country. The nation was in a recession and folks knew that we had gone too far this time. But, as you mentioned, we got lucky and dodged a bullet. Only this time, it seems, the villain in the form of George W. Bush is carrying two pistols this time.
I heard they were predicting the end in 2012, but this wasn't what I had in mind. Those Mayans, who'd a thought they were fiscal hawks, eh?
on management. I do know GM does spend a lot on R&D but I also know they have been offshore outsourcing in droves. While GM is busy closing plants, Toyota is investing in R&D in the US and building a plant.
Yeah, my Borjas textbook is 2nd edition, which means the graphs are quite dated. I still think his explanation is bogus. ;)
Does Roberts have detailed analysis? I've just read his opinion pieces which are more overview on how the United States is being sold down the river vs. more of the Academic like analysis stuff. He's an economist so obviously he could wipe out the details.
In a way, they had become inefficient and badly run like an old mill in the former USSR!
Robert,
I recall one recent EP poster who noticed that the BLS has made adjustments/revisions all the way back to 2002.
Again, I'm just pulling the current stuff from BLS.
Paul Craig Roberts has done a lot of work on the McJobs coming in and the skilled/manufacturing going offshore, but let's look at the population growth for a moment.
The Census in 2005 places 14 and 15 year olds at 8,549,000.
To find the number of 15 year olds, divide by 2 = 4,274,500.
The CDC places annual deaths at about 2.4 million, which puts domestic growth at 2,137,500 for 2005.
Census:
http://www.census.gov/population/socdemo/school/cps2005/tab01-01.xls
CDC Deaths:
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr55/nvsr55_19.pdf
So population growth from our kids is roughly about 2.1 million per year. Now let's look at the jobs we've created for them.
Growth in employment is taken from the BLS publication:
Series Id: LNU02000000
Not Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Unadj) Employment Level
Labor force status: Employed
1990 = 1,451,000
1991 = (1,075,000)
1992 = 774,000
1993 = 1,767,000
1994 = 2,801,000
1995 = 1,840,000
1996 = 1,808,000
1997 = 2,850,000
1998 = 1,905,000
1999 = 2,025,000
2000 = 3,403,000
2001 = 42,000
2002 = (448,000)
2003 = 1,251,000
2004 = 1,516,000
2005 = 2,478,000
2006 = 2,697,000
2007 = 1,620,000
On an annual basis the only recent times we've lost jobs is 1991 abd 2002.
Here's an anomally, if I avoid the Bush "population controls" by using Dec. to Dec. instead of the annual the employment growth numbers look a lot different.
1990 = 412,000
1991 = (715,000)
1992 = 1,595,000
1993 = 2,588,000
1994 = 3,151,000
1995 = 407,000
1996 = 2,767,000
1997 = 2,882,000
1998 = 1,947,000
1999 = 1,964,000
2000 = 3,150,000
2001 = (1,577,000)
2002 = 330,000
2003 = 1,957,000
2004 = 1,722,000
2005 = 2,640,000
2006 = 3,163,000
2007 = 253,000
In any case, it's very rare that employment has surpassed domestic population growth.
I'm going to sleep on this one and revisit in the morning.
There is a lot of stuff on this site. Of course since I'm admin, people can just use the email and ask, no biggie.
I started thinking about US auto manufacturers and I think it might be an exceptional case of how outsourcing is really bad and it's bad because it's death by spreadsheet. They look at their company by 3rd party sourcers, spread sheets and think, "oh, if something is profitable, we'll just acquire it" versus actually innovate, have R&D in house and set the market direction. I mean even now they could bring back those box cars that got 45, 50mpg with technology that is over 40 years old and instead we have ads now (all of the auto manufacturers) trying to present 23MPG and so forth as now "fuel efficient" (cough, cough). They are exceedingly mismanaged. Managed by spreadsheet instead of innovation, future strategy and product.
Pages