Free Markets, Free People

Poverty at 50 year high, labor participation at 36 year low – we need more low wage workers!

It simply doesn’t make sense in any sort of context that says the job of the President of the United States is to look after the welfare of the country’s citizens:

The official U.S. unemployment rate has indeed fallen steadily during the past few years, but the economic recovery has created the fewest jobs relative to the previous employment peak of any prior recovery. The labor-force participation rate recently touched a 36-year low of 62.7%. The number of Americans not in the labor force set a record high of 92.6 million in September. Part-time work and long-term unemployment are still well above levels from before the financial crisis.

Worse, middle-class incomes continue to fall during the recovery, losing even more ground than during the December 2007 to June 2009 recession. The number in poverty has also continued to soar, to about 50 million Americans. That is the highest level in the more than 50 years that the U.S. Census has been tracking poverty. Income inequality has risen more in the past few years than at any recent time.

The true indicator of the actual unemployment rate is the labor participation rate. It is at a 36 year low. The fudged numbers used by the US government hides the actual depth of joblessness problem. And, frankly, it’s a “buyers market” in the labor market. Lots of labor competition for few jobs. That’s one reason you don’t see incomes rising and you do see underemployed Americans.

So let’s introduce about 5 million illegal workers from other countries and enable them to compete in an already depressed labor market and while we’re at it, let’s agitate for a raise in the minimum wage.

Mind blown.  How do you square that sort of action with your oath of office if you’re the President of the United States?

Idiot-in-chief.

~McQ

Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

12 Responses to Poverty at 50 year high, labor participation at 36 year low – we need more low wage workers!

  • That is, of course, the bottom line: to whom does our federal government owe its loyalty? To Americans who are struggling in the evolving world economy, made worse by the current administration’s inept economic policies? Or to citizens of Mexico, Honduras and other nations, who already have a home but–understandably!–would prefer to take their chances in the U.S.? It seems obvious to me that the President of the United States owes a fiduciary duty, not to human beings generally, wherever they may reside and of whatever country they already are citizens, but rather to Americans.

    But that is not how Barack Obama sees it. Worse, he is willing to act in an obviously unconstitutional manner, not to benefit Americans, but to benefit citizens of other countries. It is hard to imagine a worse betrayal of his oath of office.
    —John Hinderaker

    Well, yes.

    It becomes perfectly rational if you frame it in terms of Cloward-Piven.

  • What the heck? The current social welfare system creates quite a disincentive to work. Now we can support more with this system.

    • I really have a problem understanding … how is this good for the African-American community in this country ?
      Just because a reportedly Black President calls for something doesn’t make it good for them.
      Likewise, the AFL-CIO President was out there lauding this too … how is this good for union workers ?
      This always seem to go back to the fact that it will help Democrats, which in turn will help Black politicians and union bosses … the African-American community and union workers be damned.

  • Labor dumping in general I’ve begun to believe the big picture, an extension of illegal immigration encouragement from both sides. Unemployment breeds government dependance (Democrats) and low Wages and a more servile workforce (Republicans).

    • Look at what Labour did in England. They didn’t like the electorate so they imported a new, one, and “rubbed it in” their opponents faces.

      They’d better pray that the worst response here is the rise of a BNP or UKIP style party….

  • … Pretty sure the “Oath of Office” carries very little weight with our Post-American Caesar.

    Words are just a means-to-an-end with these people — you might call them “verbal tokens”. Arguments aren’t won or lost based on rational discussion, or discernment of truth, or demonstrated precedent; in our brave new world, whoever throws enough high-value verbal tokens into the debate is declared “The Winnah”!!

  • perhaps Dale knows this off the top of his head. But, it doesn’t this combination of low Lloyds employment and poverty happen every time there’s a Democrat in power?

  • He’s just putting Bertolt Brecht’s quote into practice. “would it not be simpler if the government simply dissolved the people and elected another?”

    Apparently, the Smartest Man in the Room (TM) doesn’t understand irony.

  • Amnesty is going to people who are already here, probably already working, and who probably could have gotten a green card if they expended a lot of effort. So I’m not sure they really will displace many current workers.

    That said, any new flow that comes in to take advantage of this would displace workers to some extent.

    My biggest beef with this action is that Obama said he would not use EO’s and that he did right after an election.

    Now, if the GOP wanted to be smart, they would use this opportunity to send border security stand alone bills to Obama.

    When he vetos them for not including immigration reform, look all puzzled and say “but Obama already did that. So what’s his beef now?”

    • Amnesty is going to people who are already here, probably already working, and who probably could have gotten a green card if they expended a lot of effort.

      Please support that set of ASSumptions, because NOBODY here illegally should be able to get a green card.

    • Why have any laws at all? If you can break them with impunity?

      • YOU sir may NOT break them at all, in any way, shape, size, or form, let alone with impunity!

        That power remains the province of the Boy King, Barack the 1st, and his authorized various czars, functionaries, ministers, bailiffs, sheriffs, skulkers, skulduggers, underlings and interns from Cincinnati, until such time as he must needs pretend he is unaware he so authorized and ordered them to do so.

        Those laws are to keep us in line, and protect us from the bad peepulls with their drugs, illegally copied copyrighted symbol underpants, unboiled milk and jee-haad.