ONLY 47% OF ADULTS HAVE FULL-TIME JOB...

[T.P.]

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/07/05/only-47-americans-have-full-time-job

AND

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/54-months-record-stretch-75-unemployment-continues

[cookiedough]

doesn't surprise me one bit actually expected that number to be even higher at least around here.  There are like 20 part time jobs no benefits to every 1 full time job with benefits.  Employers are too tight with their money (or lack thereof) and can get away with it very easily since so many people (like 1 in 10) are without jobs, pretty sad economy and has been for several years now.

[Jess from VA]

Only 47% with full time work........... and 47% on G benefits of one kind or another (and I don't think that includes SS).

And this is all on the FED!

[rocketray]

that is what the FED wants you know...like all banks they want debt....endless warfare  endless welfare  it is all borrowed     but it is borrowed counterfeit      try on "you tube"  fractional reserve banking"   then look up the 1792 coinage act....

[98valk]

"but together,
we will change this country and we will change the world."
October 27, 2008
Canton, Ohio
http://www.reobama.com/SpeechesOct2708.htm

its funny that Bush senior was smashed by the media when he talked about a new one world order.

[Cotton Mouth]

I'm in the 47%, the minority.  What government benefits am I eligible for?

[Robert]

The real numbers that still dont reflect the part time positions people are taking and accepting lower wages just to get by. This is from the government site but probably low.
2012    May 2013    June 2013    June 2012    Feb. 2013    Mar. 2013 Apr. 2013 May 2013 June 2013

U-1 Persons unemployed 15 weeks or longer, as a percent of the civilian labor force
   4.5    4.1    3.9    4.6    4.2    4.1    4.1    4.1    4.0

U-2 Job losers and persons who completed temporary jobs, as a percent of the civilian labor force
   4.4    3.7    3.8    4.6    4.2    4.1    4.1    3.9    3.9

U-3 Total unemployed, as a percent of the civilian labor force (official unemployment rate)
   8.4    7.3    7.8    8.2    7.7    7.6    7.5    7.6    7.6

U-4 Total unemployed plus discouraged workers, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus discouraged workers
   8.9    7.7    8.4    8.7    8.3    8.1    8.0    8.0    8.2

U-5 Total unemployed, plus discouraged workers, plus all other persons marginally attached to the labor force, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force
   9.9    8.5    9.3    9.6    9.2    8.9    8.9    8.8    9.1

U-6 Total unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force
   15.1    13.4    14.6    14.8    14.3    13.8    13.9    13.8    14.3

[musclehead]

I'm in the 47%, the minority.  What government benefits am I eligible for?

you sir are elgible to pay taxes, it's not really a benefit though 

[Quiet Thunder]

.... supporting the 53% of the looters, the looters will either find work to survive or not.

In the not so distant past, the down on their luck families would turn to their churches. The family would get a place to sleep, get their bellies full, BUT the father would be out the VERY NEXT DAY finding a job. And this wouldn't last long. They would get help as long as they were helping them selves.  Now mother government will provide them with 99 weeks of un-employment then, after that runs out, apply for disability and live for ever on the government teat.

When you OWE someone, you become their SLAVE.  I guess I'm a FREE MAN!

It's time to go GULT!!!

[Patrick]

I'm in the 47%, the minority.  What government benefits am I eligible for?

you sir are elgible to pay taxes, it's not really a benefit though 

Well, we're becoming Greece. We're pretty close. People in Greece don't pay taxes, the country runs on cash businesses. And the government see's no reason to pursue the payment of taxes from anyone. So, what the heck, when we get there, we won't have to pay any either.

[Cotton Mouth]

I'm in the 47%, the minority.  What government benefits am I eligible for?

you sir are elgible to pay taxes, it's not really a benefit though  

I cancelled our landline phone service after really looking at the bill one day. We paid over $6.00 a month in B.S. taxes, fees, etc.  A portion of that went to fund the "Obama phone" freebie cell phone program (I think it was actually started by the last Bush, but has since gotten outta control), and that was the straw that broke the camels back for me.

[The Anvil]

So, you're citing a couple of hard-right news sources as proof of this? Oh yeah, no chance at all that they'll be biased. 

[alph]

is that the same 47% that WON'T vote for Romney?

i'm confused? 

[MP]

So, you're citing a couple of hard-right news sources as proof of this? Oh yeah, no chance at all that they'll be biased. 

And, it is all over various news sources Monday morning! Comes from gov't stats.

Why do you always attack the source?  If it comes from anyone but your left wing loon networks, it is biased right and wrong?

[musclehead]

So, you're citing a couple of hard-right news sources as proof of this? Oh yeah, no chance at all that they'll be biased. 

according to this chart the current population/labor force on this graph shows about a 58% to 59% working. it doesn't break it down by part time/ full time.

http://data.bls.gov/pdq/SurveyOutputServlet

there was a significant uptick in part time workers in the last jobs report, to 8.2 million

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/empsit.pdf

so my calculations somewhere around 50% full timers not as far off as you might think.

[alph]

so, what the government needs to do is lower the requirement of a "full time" job down to 30 hours, that way the numbers look better.  (I myself would LOVE to only have to work 30 hours a week since I live well within my means)

during the great depression the average work week consisted of 36 hours, that way a company could have four - 6 hour shifts per day, employing 25% more people per week.  Kellogg's cereal company was the last to stop that practice in the '90's.

[Serk]

Here's a radical idea - stop playing with the unemployment percentage. Instead of playing games so that if someone's been unemployed longer than X amount of time, they're no longer considered unemployed, etc, just choose some hard criteria, such as % of the population 18 and over not working 40 hours or more a week = the unemployment rate.

Would look really ugly for a while, but once we got used the real numbers, at least they'd be the REAL numbers.

[Jess from VA]

Here's a radical idea - stop playing with the unemployment percentage. Instead of playing games so that if someone's been unemployed longer than X amount of time, they're no longer considered unemployed, etc, just choose some hard criteria, such as % of the population 18 and over not working 40 hours or more a week = the unemployment rate.

Would look really ugly for a while, but once we got used the real numbers, at least they'd be the REAL numbers.

 

Of course these are not the only lying numbers constantly coming out of DC.

[Patrick]

Here's a radical idea - stop playing with the unemployment percentage. Instead of playing games so that if someone's been unemployed longer than X amount of time, they're no longer considered unemployed, etc, just choose some hard criteria, such as % of the population 18 and over not working 40 hours or more a week = the unemployment rate.

Would look really ugly for a while, but once we got used the real numbers, at least they'd be the REAL numbers.

Can't do that. Your politicians need us, errr, the liberals to think they are doing a great job with their best welfare in mind. They juggle and manipulate the figures to their advantage and feed it to their liberal news friends. They gobble it up and just pass it on because they are too stupid to find or believe the facts. The real unemployment figures are about double what has or is being reported and has been for quite some time.

[czuch]

DailyJobCuts.com
All you need to know, and more.
We're bein hosed.

No connection Hoser,, sorry.

[.]

Obviously, we need to get serious about cutting taxes on the rich. How in the world can the "job creators" create jobs when they live with the uncertainty that their taxes could go back to the levels they suffered under back in the 1950s. We've only assessed record low taxes on the nation's richest since George W. Bush was in office and 14 years is simply not enough time to inspire any sort of confidence in these barons of capitalism that they'll never have to pay taxes again-not with the memory of Dwight D. Eisenhower and the curse of an ever expanding middle class out there raising families, buying homes, saving money, and building the greatest economic powerhouse the world has ever seen hanging over their heads.

[G-Man]

Obviously, we need to get serious about cutting taxes on the rich. How in the world can the "job creators" create jobs when they live with the uncertainty that their taxes could go back to the levels they suffered under back in the 1950s. We've only assessed record low taxes on the nation's richest since George W. Bush was in office and 14 years is simply not enough time to inspire any sort of confidence in these barons of capitalism that they'll never have to pay taxes again-not with the memory of Dwight D. Eisenhower and the curse of an ever expanding middle class out there raising families, buying homes, saving money, and building the greatest economic powerhouse the world has ever seen hanging over their heads.

OK, so their taxes get raised, we can fund the gov't for 8 additional days now, and the country is better how?  There is no budget, no reform of ANY kind, but only sad promises of a decrease in the rise of spending (I like that one, a decrease in the rise.  This one fooled the brilliant college students during occupy a city park month). 

I too, this morning on the radio, heard that the number of American's receiving public assistance is higher than the number of American's that work.  I didn't hear the figures, but this thread seems to be supporting what I had heard.  So, how can a society sustain itself that spends more than it makes.  Will the additional 8 days of gov't funding pull it off? 

I don't know about your neck of the woods, but here in lower Westchester County in NY, there are empty stores everywhere. Places where there used to be pizza stores, dry cleaners, restaurants, hobby stores, a Carvel, etc.  All closed.  THESE ARE THE JOB CREATERS.  The guy doing well enough to open another dry cleaner who can hire 5 people.  The guy who opens a Pizza store who can hire 8 people, or a restaurant who can hire 25 people.  These are the ones who are stagnant and even moving backwards in today's business economy.  These are the folks in fear of higher taxes and how much Obamacare is realy gonna cost, or how much unemployment insurance per employee is gonna cost.  The billionaires don't pay taxes, they never did and never will. 

[The Anvil]

So, you're citing a couple of hard-right news sources as proof of this? Oh yeah, no chance at all that they'll be biased. 

And, it is all over various news sources Monday morning! Comes from gov't stats.

Why do you always attack the source?  If it comes from anyone but your left wing loon networks, it is biased right and wrong?

When was the last time I quoted ANY news source, left wing or otherwise? 

No "news source" is by default wrong. Even some of these fringe websites like The Blaze get something right once in a while (blind squirrel, stopped clock... yadda, yadda) But it's a bit suspect when someone just picks this stuff up from nothing BUT fringe sites. It makes me wonder what they're ingesting.

[.]

Obviously, we need to get serious about cutting taxes on the rich. How in the world can the "job creators" create jobs when they live with the uncertainty that their taxes could go back to the levels they suffered under back in the 1950s. We've only assessed record low taxes on the nation's richest since George W. Bush was in office and 14 years is simply not enough time to inspire any sort of confidence in these barons of capitalism that they'll never have to pay taxes again-not with the memory of Dwight D. Eisenhower and the curse of an ever expanding middle class out there raising families, buying homes, saving money, and building the greatest economic powerhouse the world has ever seen hanging over their heads.

OK, so their taxes get raised, we can fund the gov't for 8 additional days now, and the country is better how?  There is no budget, no reform of ANY kind, but only sad promises of a decrease in the rise of spending (I like that one, a decrease in the rise.  This one fooled the brilliant college students during occupy a city park month). 

I too, this morning on the radio, heard that the number of American's receiving public assistance is higher than the number of American's that work.  I didn't hear the figures, but this thread seems to be supporting what I had heard.  So, how can a society sustain itself that spends more than it makes.  Will the additional 8 days of gov't funding pull it off? 

I don't know about your neck of the woods, but here in lower Westchester County in NY, there are empty stores everywhere. Places where there used to be pizza stores, dry cleaners, restaurants, hobby stores, a Carvel, etc.  All closed.  THESE ARE THE JOB CREATERS.  The guy doing well enough to open another dry cleaner who can hire 5 people.  The guy who opens a Pizza store who can hire 8 people, or a restaurant who can hire 25 people.  These are the ones who are stagnant and even moving backwards in today's business economy.  These are the folks in fear of higher taxes and how much Obamacare is realy gonna cost, or how much unemployment insurance per employee is gonna cost.  The billionaires don't pay taxes, they never did and never will. 

G-Man, you have some good points but the folks you mentioned are not the ones paying a lower tax rate than their secretaries, their drivers, or their lawn service workers. However, when you say raising taxes on the rich will only fund the government for an additional eight days the obvious question is who would be taxed by how much to gain this additional eight days? Or do we do nothing (which, incidentally, is exactly what we are doing) because no one thing will fix the overall problem and since the political will is lacking to fix even one problem then tackling the solutions in their entirety is out of the question?

I'm not claiming to know the answer. I don't. But I do know that those people receiving government assistance aren't all there because they are lazy and want to suck off the fat of the land, but the craze to cut benefits for the poor along with taxes for the rich while paying for wars in countries that pose no threat to our security and spying on Americans simply because the technology to do so exists is going to send us straight down the tubes. And quickly.

If it can just hold together until I get ready to retire then I won't worry too much about it anymore. All I'll be trying to do is figure out the cheapest way to get the Phat Gurl down to Central America without driving her through Mexico and from that point on I'll be sitting on the beach sipping adult beverages laced with generous amounts of tequila and watching the world go by.

[Fudd]

These 11 States now have More People on Welfare than they do Employed!
Last month, the Senate Budget Committee reports that in fiscal year 2012, between food stamps, housing support, child care, Medicaid and other benefits, the average U.S. Household below the poverty line received $168.00 a day in government support. What's the problem with that much support? Well, the median household income in America is just over $50,000,which averages out to $137.13 a day. To put it another way, being on welfare now pays the equivalent of $30.00 an hour for a 40-hour week, while the average job pays $20.00 an hour.

[G-Man]

Obviously, we need to get serious about cutting taxes on the rich. How in the world can the "job creators" create jobs when they live with the uncertainty that their taxes could go back to the levels they suffered under back in the 1950s. We've only assessed record low taxes on the nation's richest since George W. Bush was in office and 14 years is simply not enough time to inspire any sort of confidence in these barons of capitalism that they'll never have to pay taxes again-not with the memory of Dwight D. Eisenhower and the curse of an ever expanding middle class out there raising families, buying homes, saving money, and building the greatest economic powerhouse the world has ever seen hanging over their heads.

OK, so their taxes get raised, we can fund the gov't for 8 additional days now, and the country is better how?  There is no budget, no reform of ANY kind, but only sad promises of a decrease in the rise of spending (I like that one, a decrease in the rise.  This one fooled the brilliant college students during occupy a city park month). 

I too, this morning on the radio, heard that the number of American's receiving public assistance is higher than the number of American's that work.  I didn't hear the figures, but this thread seems to be supporting what I had heard.  So, how can a society sustain itself that spends more than it makes.  Will the additional 8 days of gov't funding pull it off? 

I don't know about your neck of the woods, but here in lower Westchester County in NY, there are empty stores everywhere. Places where there used to be pizza stores, dry cleaners, restaurants, hobby stores, a Carvel, etc.  All closed.  THESE ARE THE JOB CREATERS.  The guy doing well enough to open another dry cleaner who can hire 5 people.  The guy who opens a Pizza store who can hire 8 people, or a restaurant who can hire 25 people.  These are the ones who are stagnant and even moving backwards in today's business economy.  These are the folks in fear of higher taxes and how much Obamacare is realy gonna cost, or how much unemployment insurance per employee is gonna cost.  The billionaires don't pay taxes, they never did and never will. 

G-Man, you have some good points but the folks you mentioned are not the ones paying a lower tax rate than their secretaries, their drivers, or their lawn service workers. Yup, there are hundreds maybe a few thousand of these folks.  And raising their rates won't do athing because they don't pay taxes in the first place.  They never did and never will.  This is reality.However, when you say raising taxes on the rich will only fund the government for an additional eight days the obvious question is who would be taxed by how much to gain this additional eight days? Or do we do nothing (which, incidentally, is exactly what we are doing) because no one thing will fix the overall problem and since the political will is lacking to fix even one problem then tackling the solutions in their entirety is out of the question?  Again, taxing more will only decrease what small business can create.  The guy being cheuffered isn't the job creater.  He's the money maker for a corporation.  The guy who wants to open another bagel store is the job creater.

I'm not claiming to know the answer. I don't. But I do know that those people receiving government assistance aren't all there because they are lazy and want to suck off the fat of the land, Nobody said ALL.  But when the number on assistance exceeds the number employed, there's a HUGE problem and OBVIOUSLY throwing money at it is only making it WORSE.  Trillions spent on the war against poverty and the numbers are flat.  I know, spend more  but the craze to cut benefits for the poor along with taxes for the rich while paying for wars in countries that pose no threat to our security and spying on Americans simply because the technology to do so exists is going to send us straight down the tubes. And quickly.  I agree there.  No more humanitarian wars, no more aide to countries that allow terrorist a home, No aide to countries who's leaders express hate for us. 

If it can just hold together until I get ready to retire then I won't worry too much about it anymore. All I'll be trying to do is figure out the cheapest way to get the Phat Gurl down to Central America without driving her through Mexico Heard this morning on the radio that 70% of Mexicans are overweight, just an FYI adds nothing to the conversation and from that point on I'll be sitting on the beach sipping adult beverages laced with generous amounts of tequila and watching the world go by.

[3fan4life]

If it can just hold together until I get ready to retire then I won't worry too much about it anymore. All I'll be trying to do is figure out the cheapest way to get the Phat Gurl down to Central America without driving her through Mexico and from that point on I'll be sitting on the beach sipping adult beverages laced with generous amounts of tequila and watching the world go by.

Let me in on the details when you get that worked out.

It sounds like a good plan to me. 

[.]

G-Man, please understand, I use the term "job-creators" very facetiously. During the last election we were bombarded with the idea that tax cuts for the wealthy were vital because the top money people are "job-creators" and they need more money to funnel back into the economy that they would not have if their taxes were raised.

The guy trying to keep his bagel shop open is the real job-creator but he gets hit with the same tax rates as you and me. He simply doesn't make enough money to qualify for the real mother lode of government welfare programs and because he can't contribute enough to anyone's political campaign to buy the influence that would bring his tax rates down, he is invisible. If he wants to materialize in front of the policymakers in this country he will need at least a couple hundred million more bucks in the bank. The pizza shop owner, the bagel shop owner, the lady who owns the laundromat down the street, they are not only the main job creators but they and their employees (along with the employees of the upper echelon who work for paycheck just like most of us) are subsidizing the corporate welfare right alongside the food stamp program.

Let me note that rich people are no more or less evil than anyone else. They have money and that doesn't make them bad, it only makes them rich. Quite a few of them are quite decent. But people, being human, generally bow to human nature and human nature drives most of us to look out for ourselves and our own first. It is that drive that allows most of us to empathize with those who are close to us by ties of blood, friendship, and economic level, and to tune out the rest as background noise. What doesn't work well for us at all is that the political class has discovered that they can retire much better off of the largesse of the rich if they curry sufficient favor through economic policies that benefit them. They can benefit the middle class all they want and the best they'll ever get is a thank you because even when times were really good the middle class didn't have a lot of leftover cash sitting around with which to buy Congressmen.

[G-Man]

G-Man, please understand, I use the term "job-creators" very facetiously. During the last election we were bombarded with the idea that tax cuts for the wealthy were vital because the top money people are "job-creators" and they need more money to funnel back into the economy that they would not have if their taxes were raised.

The guy trying to keep his bagel shop open is the real job-creator but he gets hit with the same tax rates as you and me. He simply doesn't make enough money to qualify for the real mother lode of government welfare programs and because he can't contribute enough to anyone's political campaign to buy the influence that would bring his tax rates down, he is invisible. If he wants to materialize in front of the policymakers in this country he will need at least a couple hundred million more bucks in the bank. The pizza shop owner, the bagel shop owner, the lady who owns the laundromat down the street, they are not only the main job creators but they and their employees (along with the employees of the upper echelon who work for paycheck just like most of us) are subsidizing the corporate welfare right alongside the food stamp program.

Let me note that rich people are no more or less evil than anyone else. They have money and that doesn't make them bad, it only makes them rich. Quite a few of them are quite decent. But people, being human, generally bow to human nature and human nature drives most of us to look out for ourselves and our own first. It is that drive that allows most of us to empathize with those who are close to us by ties of blood, friendship, and economic level, and to tune out the rest as background noise. What doesn't work well for us at all is that the political class has discovered that they can retire much better off of the largesse of the rich if they curry sufficient favor through economic policies that benefit them. They can benefit the middle class all they want and the best they'll ever get is a thank you because even when times were really good the middle class didn't have a lot of leftover cash sitting around with which to buy Congressmen.

According to the IRS, on its website, anyone making $388,350 or more is in the 35% tax bracket.  During the election, you did hear one side saying that if you tax the top earners, yadda, yadda,....that's because anyone making more that $388,350 is grouped into "the top" earner's slot and they wanted to protect these guys, not buffet or Imelt.  You can't tax the billionaires without taxing the pizza store owner.  THAT's what you're missing here.  The talking points about the rich paying less that their secretaries is silly.  The billionares don't draw incomes.  Never did, never will.  So, when you say tax the rich, you are stifling small business owners.  THAT'S the take home message.  

Small business has created 3/4 of the new jobs from the mid 90's through 2007.  (I just fact checked this with a few sites).  After 2008, you're guess is as good as mine.