Record number of women NOT in the labor force

Currycel

Normie
Joined
Jun 30, 2015
Messages
1,535
Reputation
2
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/08/07/record-56209000-women-not-in-labor-force/

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]According to the BLS, 56,209,000 women aged 16 and older were not participating in the workforce in July, besting April’s record of 56,167,000 women who were neither employed nor had made a specific effort to find work in the four weeks prior.

July’s figures represented an uptick of 124,000 over June’s level of 56,085,000 women who were out of the workforce.

The civilian labor force also shrank for women last month from 73,547,000 in June to 73,528,000 in July. The labor force participation rate for women, meanwhile, remained the same at 56.7 percent.

Of those women considered to be in the workforce, 69,638,000 had a job and 3,891,000 were unemployed. The unemployment rate for women was 5.3 percent in July, up slightly from June’s 5.2 percent.

The month of July also saw a record 93,770,000 Americans not participating in the labor force.

While the labor participation rate remains at the lowest it has been since the late 1970s, the overall unemployment rate remained at 5.3 percent and nonfarm payroll jobs increased by 215,000.[/font]

[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I wonder why that is? Could it be that they are the receivers of most entitlement programs? Naw it's men and their gender discrimination. That has to be it. Right guys???[/font]
 

alien

Chad
Rotters
Joined
Jun 29, 2015
Messages
4,851
Reputation
738
@CurryCel
Labour Force Participation rates for men are at all-time lows bro. They haven't been that low since the 1940s/1950s.
Overall Labour Force participation rates haven't been this low since 1977. The economy sucks a nigger cock.

Honestly Labour Force Participation doesn't even need to be that high. Back in the day, 1 income was enough to support a family of 4-6 no problem. Nowadays you need 2 incomes to support a family. WTF is up with that?
 

alien

Chad
Rotters
Joined
Jun 29, 2015
Messages
4,851
Reputation
738
Nearly one-third of men 20+ (31.8%) don't even have a job. This is a historically low number. Over a third (34.6%) of men 16+ don't have a job. Nearly three-quarters of men 16-19 (72.7%) don't have a job. :giggle:

And yet Seniors (65+) are more likely to have jobs than ever before. But less working age adults (16-64) than ever before are employed. Young people in particular are either lazy as fuck or useless to employers (too low-value to even get paid minimum wage. Employers would rather hire Juan the illegal immigrant).

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.t01.htm

Employment-Population Ratio (seasonly-adjusted)

Note: Adults 65+ tend to be retired.
Men 20+: 68.2%
Women 20+:[font=tahoma,arial,sans-serif] 55.3%[/font]

Men 16+: 65.4%
Women 16+: 53.7%

Men 16-19: 27.3%
Women 16-19: 28.9%

Teenagers and college students don't even bother getting a part-time job while they study these days. Not even during the summer (this is July 2015 BLS Data). Because their parents will buy them everything.

Why should I even be guilty about being NEET at this point? Everybody is doing it. :giggle:

And for most students (not all), college is really just a 4-5 year, sometimes 6 year excuse to party, do drugs, hook up and delay adulthood. Most jobs don't actually require a University/College education.

The overall employment rate may be lower for women. But that's because a number of women stay at home while hubby works. That's nothing new. What is new however is the fact that the employment rate for men is at historically low levels. And the overall employment rate is at the lowest levels since the late 1970s
 
Top