Unemployment rate numbers are based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics Household Survey Data, not Census.
Unemployment rates of various kinds of collected. For example, the BLS collects the labor force participation rate (62.8%), the employment-population ratio (60.1%), persons marginally attached to the labor force (1.6 million), the number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes referred to as involuntary part-time workers, 5.3 million) and discouraged workers not currently looking for work because they believe no jobs are available for them (514,000).
The total number of jobs is from the Bureau of Labor Statistics Establishment Survey Data of employers.
No net loss of jobs, but some low wage workers lost their jobs (or at least hours). And I suspect that the people who lost their jobs are more likely to be younger, less experienced, racial minorities, and in poverty than those who replaced them.
The minimum wage is a horribly targeted anti-poverty program. Better to have more EITC, or frankly, anything else that directly addresses people in poverty.
FEW countries would see a tax requiring some businesses to file over 1,000 returns a year as an improvement. But India might. A nationwide Goods and Services Tax (GST) is set to come into force on July 1st. It will replace such a tangle of national and local levies and duties that even the prospect of 37 annual filings (three a month plus an annual return) for each of India's 29 states in which a business operates is a relief by comparison.
To be clear, for those making $19 per hour or less "total payroll fell for such jobs, implying that the minimum wage ordinance lowered low-wage employeesâ(TM) earnings by an average of $125 per month in 2016."
The paper states "we conclude that the second wage increase to $13 reduced hours worked in low-wage jobs by around 9 percent, while hourly wages in such jobs increased by around 3 percent."
The paper's definition of "low-wage" is up to $19 per hour, so not all of the "low-wage" workers received a legally required raise due to the higher minimum wage.
India needs economic growth for its poor people. Building infrastructure is not a bad idea, but the economy for the common people is still largely hampered by over-regulation. IT has been a source of growth because it only needs some people showing up to an office. If you have to actually get land for a factory, get a loan for it, get the permits to make something, make something, and sell it for a profit despite the weird taxes between state borders, it is much harder.
India ranks #143 on the Index of Economic Freedom, way behind China at 111. Moreover, India's direction is down in the Index, as opposed to China which is moving up.
[India's] Growth is not deeply rooted in policies that preserve economic freedom. Progress on market-oriented reforms has been uneven. The state maintains an extensive presence in many areas through public-sector enterprises. A restrictive and burdensome regulatory environment discourages the entrepreneurship that could provide broader private-sector growth.
They could have a small(er) floating platform towed behind the recovery ship with a less vibrating uplink, and send video over a fiber between the two.
.. and soulless slaves, all! Just end the H1B already.
Many H1B's seek liberation from samsara through moksha so that they do actually lose the oneness of their soul through its unification with the universal transcendent self of Brahman.
Thats exactly the kind of housing Bay Area residents don't want.
Which is why Bay Area housing is crazy expensive.
The Federal Government should take over Moffet and Alameda air stations and make them high-density mixed-used Federal Districts without Bay Area NIMBYism.
Thanks to Prop 13 (circa 1978...), the average permit & planning fee cost to build a single family unit of housing in the Bay Area exceeds $140,000.
Thanks to NIBMYS, you are unlikely to be able to build anything anywhere in Silicon Valley! (Unless of course you are Google or Apple and basically bribe the city)
Moffet Field is about 2,200 acres, or 3.4 square miles. If it was rebuilt with the population density of the inner core of Shanghai (~120,000 people per square mile), it could house 400,000 people, along with offices, restaurants, etc.
"A 2013 Department of Agriculture report, for instance, found that, in 2001, farms of 1,000 acres or more accounted for 5.6 percent of all farms and controlled 46.8 percent of all cropland. In 2011, those large farms still represented 5.6 percent of all farms, but now they controlled 53.7 percent of cropland." (source).
So it is true that "small farms" (i.e. under 1,000 acres) "operate nearly half of farmland", but that number is going down quickly.
A "family farm" can still be a farm of over 1,000 acres. Kind of like the Trump "family business".
What is a "farm"? "any place from which $1,000 or more of agricultural products were produced and sold, or normally would have been sold, during the reference year." So it includes land that could, theoretically, produce agricultural income, even if the owners never had any intention of donning a pair of overalls. These aren't the farms of the poor; they're the yards of the upper-middle-class.
This assumes that the Trump Administration doesn't pull out of the 2009 Copenhagen Accord, where the US promised to reduce emissions by 17% compared to 2005 (which I actually think the US has achieved thanks to natural gas replacing coal burning).
This article from January 2017 says: "Comcast Corp. reported better-than-expected financial results and added cable TV customers in the fourth quarter, culminating a strong year in which it added net video customers for the first time in a decade...In the fourth quarter, net income rose to $2.3 billion, or 95 cents a share, up from about $2 billion, or 79 cents a share, a year ago. Revenue grew 9.2% to $21 billion."
Be careful to not just look at CO2 from energy - CO2 from cement production is also important (though typically smaller than energy-related emissions).
Slashdot Mirror
Unemployment rate numbers are based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics Household Survey Data, not Census.
Unemployment rates of various kinds of collected. For example, the BLS collects the labor force participation rate (62.8%), the employment-population ratio (60.1%), persons marginally attached to the labor force (1.6 million), the number of persons employed part time for economic reasons (sometimes referred to as involuntary part-time workers, 5.3 million) and discouraged workers not currently looking for work because they believe no jobs are available for them (514,000).
The total number of jobs is from the Bureau of Labor Statistics Establishment Survey Data of employers.
See the Employment Situation Summary.
The EITC is a good idea! You know who supported the largest expansion of the EITC? Reagan did in 1986
Yep, Trump is no Reagan!
Zero impact. No net loss of jobs.
No net loss of jobs, but some low wage workers lost their jobs (or at least hours). And I suspect that the people who lost their jobs are more likely to be younger, less experienced, racial minorities, and in poverty than those who replaced them.
The minimum wage is a horribly targeted anti-poverty program. Better to have more EITC, or frankly, anything else that directly addresses people in poverty.
The Economist said it best...
FEW countries would see a tax requiring some businesses to file over 1,000 returns a year as an improvement. But India might. A nationwide Goods and Services Tax (GST) is set to come into force on July 1st. It will replace such a tangle of national and local levies and duties that even the prospect of 37 annual filings (three a month plus an annual return) for each of India's 29 states in which a business operates is a relief by comparison.
So hey, Modi got something done!
To be clear, for those making $19 per hour or less "total payroll fell for such jobs, implying that the minimum wage ordinance lowered low-wage employeesâ(TM) earnings by an average of $125 per month in 2016."
The paper states "we conclude that the second wage increase to $13 reduced hours worked in low-wage jobs by around 9 percent, while hourly wages in such jobs increased by around 3 percent."
The paper's definition of "low-wage" is up to $19 per hour, so not all of the "low-wage" workers received a legally required raise due to the higher minimum wage.
India needs economic growth for its poor people. Building infrastructure is not a bad idea, but the economy for the common people is still largely hampered by over-regulation. IT has been a source of growth because it only needs some people showing up to an office. If you have to actually get land for a factory, get a loan for it, get the permits to make something, make something, and sell it for a profit despite the weird taxes between state borders, it is much harder.
India ranks #143 on the Index of Economic Freedom, way behind China at 111. Moreover, India's direction is down in the Index, as opposed to China which is moving up.
[India's] Growth is not deeply rooted in policies that preserve economic freedom. Progress on market-oriented reforms has been uneven. The state maintains an extensive presence in many areas through public-sector enterprises. A restrictive and burdensome regulatory environment discourages the entrepreneurship that could provide broader private-sector growth.
They could have a small(er) floating platform towed behind the recovery ship with a less vibrating uplink, and send video over a fiber between the two.
I was surprised by the number of Teslas I saw on the Shanghai highways the last time I was there!
.. and soulless slaves, all! Just end the H1B already.
Many H1B's seek liberation from samsara through moksha so that they do actually lose the oneness of their soul through its unification with the universal transcendent self of Brahman.
the cost of food in this country has been steadily rising even as most other costs have stagnated or declined.
in 1960, 18% of per capita income was spent on food in the US. Today, it is 10%, and the selection of food is far larger.
Inflation-adjusted food prices are lower now than in 1980. There was a rise from 2002-2010, but the trend has returned to downward since then.
Or people can move to Vienna, which is 90 minutes away.
Or move to the UK - quick before Brexit!
Thats exactly the kind of housing Bay Area residents don't want.
Which is why Bay Area housing is crazy expensive.
The Federal Government should take over Moffet and Alameda air stations and make them high-density mixed-used Federal Districts without Bay Area NIMBYism.
Thanks to Prop 13 (circa 1978...), the average permit & planning fee cost to build a single family unit of housing in the Bay Area exceeds $140,000.
Thanks to NIBMYS, you are unlikely to be able to build anything anywhere in Silicon Valley! (Unless of course you are Google or Apple and basically bribe the city)
Moffet Field is about 2,200 acres, or 3.4 square miles. If it was rebuilt with the population density of the inner core of Shanghai (~120,000 people per square mile), it could house 400,000 people, along with offices, restaurants, etc.
Isn't making Google pay for this traffic a violation of Net Neutrality?
Mark my words, Brexit will eventually be walked back...EU will be OK with that.
"A 2013 Department of Agriculture report, for instance, found that, in 2001, farms of 1,000 acres or more accounted for 5.6 percent of all farms and controlled 46.8 percent of all cropland. In 2011, those large farms still represented 5.6 percent of all farms, but now they controlled 53.7 percent of cropland." (source).
So it is true that "small farms" (i.e. under 1,000 acres) "operate nearly half of farmland", but that number is going down quickly.
A "family farm" can still be a farm of over 1,000 acres. Kind of like the Trump "family business".
What is a "farm"? "any place from which $1,000 or more of agricultural products were produced and sold, or normally would have been sold, during the reference year." So it includes land that could, theoretically, produce agricultural income, even if the owners never had any intention of donning a pair of overalls. These aren't the farms of the poor; they're the yards of the upper-middle-class.
Australia has much larger coverage "holes", compare Telstra Australia coverage with Verizon US coverage.
And there also is no legal requirement under California law that employers provide severance pay to an employee upon termination of employment.
This assumes that the Trump Administration doesn't pull out of the 2009 Copenhagen Accord, where the US promised to reduce emissions by 17% compared to 2005 (which I actually think the US has achieved thanks to natural gas replacing coal burning).
This article from January 2017 says: "Comcast Corp. reported better-than-expected financial results and added cable TV customers in the fourth quarter, culminating a strong year in which it added net video customers for the first time in a decade...In the fourth quarter, net income rose to $2.3 billion, or 95 cents a share, up from about $2 billion, or 79 cents a share, a year ago. Revenue grew 9.2% to $21 billion."
The President said 0.2 C, not 0.6-1.1 C.
Regardless of how you feel about CO2 concentrations affecting the climate, CO2 concentrations do drive ocean acidity.
It may be true that the US has been the largest contributor to long term CO2 emissions, however since 2005, China has been emitting more CO2 than the US, and much more.
Be careful to not just look at CO2 from energy - CO2 from cement production is also important (though typically smaller than energy-related emissions).