If unemployment has "dropped" to 8.3%, why are 849,000 *more* people unemployed?

[Openmind]

poorly phrased perhaps as it allows for misinterpretation.

but more to the point you say this




which rather clearly describes a group but then when called on it seek to narrow it to an individual. seems everyone is capable of not the best turn of phrase. moreover everyone is capable of admiting flaws.

but forget that, is it wrong to be more interested in everyone that a select group ? I believe that we are directed to love our neighbors as we love ourselves which implies all of them.

Nope. . ."I" didn't say that:

They want more Unemployed...its better for there party. After all its not like they care about poor people...

Actually Pocket said that!

 

[dogtowner]

my mistake.
but you were the one who tried to turn it from the general to the specific

 

[dogtowner]

Obviously. Although it seems that the value given to some "skillsets" are very inflated, while others are much too low (i.e., a non-degreed care taker for animals in a zoo makes more money than a child care worker! A entry level stock broker working at "producing" nothing but inflated wall market bids and instruments is paid a LOT more than a surgical nurse or an intensive care nurse with the responsibility of several human lifes every day).

starting pay stock broker $30-$40.000
median RN pay $51640 - $76570 (it is my understanding that scrub and ICU nurses make more than other RNs but this will suffice to make the point)

zoo vs childcare ? well the working conditions differ substancially and make it harder to attract people which is where the demand comes into play.

 

[Arbopa]

The Media will always distort things to make you believe Obama is changing things. Just like the editors change poll numbers just to get you to believe Obama is changing things.

It's not always the media. Both parties 'use' the numbers, including stuff they should not, and leaving out stuff... Standard practice it seems, sadly.

 

[Openmind]

starting pay stock broker $30-$40.000
median RN pay $51640 - $76570 (it is my understanding that scrub and ICU nurses make more than other RNs but this will suffice to make the point)

zoo vs childcare ? well the working conditions differ substancially and make it harder to attract people which is where the demand comes into play.

So, you compare a "starting" salary for a stock broker, with an RN. . .and you think you are denying what I said?
Now. . .look at the POTENTIAL for earning after, let's say, 5 years for both career, and the responsibility for both those positions.

The median annual wage-and-salary wages of securities, commodities, and financial services​

sales agents were $68,680 in May 2008. The middle half earned between $40,480 and $122,270.
Read more: http://www.salaryblog.org/1072/stock-broker-salary/#ixzz1lTv9LAqp

Under Creative Commons License: Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike​

In the other hand, the salaries for RN goes between about $40,000 to $78,000 (after 20 years!). . .and no bonuses!

Wrong about your zoo vs. childcare assumption as well. I wrote a lengthy paper while in college, and the reason some careers are so undervalued versus others is simpe: The "notion" that the caring career (nursing, social work, child care, teaching, etc. . .) is the "natural" state of women, so it is not really "skills." Also, because (and although women are now fully in the labor market), many people still believe that, in two income families, the woman's income is "the icing on the cake," and the man's income is the one who "put food on the table and a roof over the family's head" is still holding back women. So. . .in the case of the "zoo worker" vs. the "child care worker," the big difference is not how much more "difficult" (it isn't) or more "unpleasant" (it isn't necessarely if one choose that career and loves animals) the job is. . .it is just that caring for children is the "natural instinct of women" (supposedly!) and is not "real work," while caring for monkeys is "work!"

Thank God for Obama's bill for equal pay for equal job. . .which helps. Unfortunately, while careers are still overwhelmingly either "female" or "male" careers. . .the inequality in value assigned to those career will remain.

 

[dogtowner]

So, you compare a "starting" salary for a stock broker, with an RN. . .and you think you are denying what I said?
Now. . .look at the POTENTIAL for earning after, let's say, 5 years for both career, and the responsibility for both those positions.

you set the comparison, not me. you were mistaken.

if you want to make th4 other comparison then you need to factor in how few entry level people make it to five years in the securities business relative to the RN business. its not a lot as its rather difficult to attain and maintain the sales levels necessary.. in comparison relatively few RNs quit the nursing biz or are dismissed for failure to perform at the expected levels. this increases for the more specialized ones such as scrubs and ICU which is why they earn more.

In the other hand, the salaries for RN goes between about $40,000 to $78,000 (after 20 years!). . .and no bonuses!

nope

Wrong about your zoo vs. childcare assumption as well. I wrote a lengthy paper while in college, and the reason some careers are so undervalued versus others is simpe: The "notion" that the caring career (nursing, social work, child care, teaching, etc. . .) is the "natural" state of women, so it is not really "skills." Also, because (and although women are now fully in the labor market), many people still believe that, in two income families, the woman's income is "the icing on the cake," and the man's income is the one who "put food on the table and a roof over the family's head" is still holding back women. So. . .in the case of the "zoo worker" vs. the "child care worker," the big difference is not how much more "difficult" (it isn't) or more "unpleasant" (it isn't necessarely if one choose that career and loves animals) the job is. . .it is just that caring for children is the "natural instinct of women" (supposedly!) and is not "real work," while caring for monkeys is "work!"

Thank God for Obama's bill for equal pay for equal job. . .which helps. Unfortunately, while careers are still overwhelmingly either "female" or "male" careers. . .the inequality in value assigned to those career will remain.

hmmm lets see, cleaning up poop out of elephants vs kids. yeah really equal. it may help to like critters but playing with them is not really part of the job. many are dangerous, many are costly and the risk is just not tolerable.

you need to get out more as the views you noticed in college are pretty different today

 

[Openmind]

you set the comparison, not me. you were mistaken.

if you want to make th4 other comparison then you need to factor in how few entry level people make it to five years in the securities business relative to the RN business. its not a lot as its rather difficult to attain and maintain the sales levels necessary.. in comparison relatively few RNs quit the nursing biz or are dismissed for failure to perform at the expected levels. this increases for the more specialized ones such as scrubs and ICU which is why they earn more.





nope




hmmm lets see, cleaning up poop out of elephants vs kids. yeah really equal. it may help to like critters but playing with them is not really part of the job. many are dangerous, many are costly and the risk is just not tolerable.

you need to get out more as the views you noticed in college are pretty different today

So. . .you think that taking care of 20 kids in a nursery is easier than to pick hose animal's poo out of their cage?

You think that, assuring the safety of those kids is so much easier than assuring your own safety in a highly structure environment like a zoo?

I think you need to get out and actually spend the day being totally responsible for the safety and well being of a dozen kids that are not your own . . .for minimum wage!

And, by the way, the comparison I referred to (I can probably look for the exact reference if/when I find my paper) was between the keeper of chimpanzee in the zoo, and child care workers in a public nursery.

And. . .you are correct that I am old. However, I didn't go to college 40 years ago. . . but 15 years ago, as a re-entry student.

Have you read "the Big Short?" It might open your eyes on the "skills" of those "entry level" and even the upper level stock brokers. . .NO MATTER how you want to look at it, the conclusion (if you are honest) you will come to is that "handling fake money" is valued a LOT MORE than "being responsible for human lifes," and this is the perfect demonstration of what is wrong with "manipulated market" capitalism!

 

[Arbopa]

NO MATTER how you want to look at it, the conclusion (if you are honest) you will come to is that "handling fake money" is valued a LOT MORE than "being responsible for human lifes," and this is the perfect demonstration of what is wrong with "manipulated market" capitalism!

Playing a silly game (i.e., basketball, football, etc) is valued a lot more too. Why are you not picking on pro sports people as well?

 

[Openmind]

Playing a silly game (i.e., basketball, football, etc) is valued a lot more too. Why are you not picking on pro sports people as well?

Simply because I can't name everyone, but it is obvious that inflated "hero" syndrome is also.

So what is your point? Do you believe that anyone who is not implicitly named gets a free pass!

If that is what you believe, you are absolutely missing the meaning of this debate, and you may need to get your eyes check for myopie.

 

[dogtowner]

So. . .you think that taking care of 20 kids in a nursery is easier than to pick hose animal's poo out of their cage?

You think that, assuring the safety of those kids is so much easier than assuring your own safety in a highly structure environment like a zoo?

I think you need to get out and actually spend the day being totally responsible for the safety and well being of a dozen kids that are not your own . . .for minimum wage!

And, by the way, the comparison I referred to (I can probably look for the exact reference if/when I find my paper) was between the keeper of chimpanzee in the zoo, and child care workers in a public nursery.

And. . .you are correct that I am old. However, I didn't go to college 40 years ago. . . but 15 years ago, as a re-entry student.

Have you read "the Big Short?" It might open your eyes on the "skills" of those "entry level" and even the upper level stock brokers. . .NO MATTER how you want to look at it, the conclusion (if you are honest) you will come to is that "handling fake money" is valued a LOT MORE than "being responsible for human lifes," and this is the perfect demonstration of what is wrong with "manipulated market" capitalism!

ok so its chimpanzee handlers now, I think this woman would find that there is a hugely larger degree of difficulty managing wild animals. and if you think that both environments are not controlled you need to rethink.

so 15 years ago, same advice applies. if nothing else consider the jump in singlemotherhood.

is the demand higher for successful financial guys ? I expect it is as they are very difficult to find in comparison to successful RNs. moreover there are massively more RNs than successful brokers (or brokers at all) so much so that the expected increase in numbers is 580k vs 80k.

look, no one argues that RNs perform important work but so do brokers.

in short, don't believe everything you read. and don't assume that I have not watched little kids before, while I may be the exception to the rule, I have and without pay.

 

[Arbopa]

Simply because I can't name everyone, but it is obvious that inflated "hero" syndrome is also.

So what is your point? Do you believe that anyone who is not implicitly named gets a free pass!

If that is what you believe, you are absolutely missing the meaning of this debate, and you may need to get your eyes check for myopie.

But you can name every single money manager? As my daughter would say: Psh..

It appears that those that want to go after the wall street types, have a single minded focus, as they leave so many others out of the equation, that is my point. The myopia is not in these eyes.

 

[Openmind]

But you can name every single money manager? As my daughter would say: Psh..

It appears that those that want to go after the wall street types, have a single minded focus, as they leave so many others out of the equation, that is my point. The myopia is not in these eyes.

Silly statement!

I haven't name every Single money manager, in fact, i haven't even named one.

I made a comparison between two careers (i could have picked many other exemples to demonstrate the point).

I chose nursing and wealth management, and child care vs animal care because these are pretty obvious in demonstrating the uncanny gap in how, as a society, we value the care of people vs the care of money. And the professions that ar predominently "female" careers, versus those that are predominently "male" career.

 

[Openmind]

ok so its chimpanzee handlers now, I think this woman would find that there is a hugely larger degree of difficulty managing wild animals. and if you think that both environments are not controlled you need to rethink.

so 15 years ago, same advice applies. if nothing else consider the jump in singlemotherhood.

is the demand higher for successful financial guys ? I expect it is as they are very difficult to find in comparison to successful RNs. moreover there are massively more RNs than successful brokers (or brokers at all) so much so that the expected increase in numbers is 580k vs 80k.

look, no one argues that RNs perform important work but so do brokers.

in short, don't believe everything you read. and don't assume that I have not watched little kids before, while I may be the exception to the rule, I have and without pay.

Funny how we have lived for centuries without brokers, but have always needed nurses!

Once again, it doesn't seem to matter what I bring in for debate, the wolves read EVERYTHING I post withonly ONEfocus: How can we best deny everything she says, and prove her wrong, no matter if she has a point.

I guess i shouldn't be surprised, as this is the attitude Obama haters have learned to take with anyone who doesn't hate Obama.

A pack of wolves, who, even among those who seem to have a good, functionning mind, prefer to temporarely (i hope) shut down their ability for fair, constructive critical thinking rather than recognize even the smallest sliver of truth and reason presented by someone Who appreciates and admires the President.

And I believe we ALL had a chance to watch children. . Mostly our own or children in our family or neighborhood.

Just as most of us have managed our assets and played with on-line stock investing. . .

Do i need to remind you i was talking about career, earning a living? Making enough money to be alloed to experience that "easy" upward mobility?

 

[Arbopa]

I have an uncle that is an extreme leftist. He jumps around subjects, never sticking to one thing either. I am learning this is a common trait of the extreme left.

It's rather disappointing as it never allows for rational discussion, but then again, it's just as hard to have rational discussion with those on the extreme right.

 

[Openmind]

I have an uncle that is an extreme leftist. He jumps around subjects, never sticking to one thing either. I am learning this is a common trait of the extreme left.

It's rather disappointing as it never allows for rational discussion, but then again, it's just as hard to have rational discussion with those on the extreme right.

Correct. It isveryhard to have a rational discussion with those on the extreme right. Extremism, Left or Right is always wrong.

In the other hand, there is more danger in focusing ONLY on sliver of informations to back up minute details of a debate, rather than to look at an issue in a broader context, taking into account complexities, rather than ignoring the largest picture.

Maybe it all goes back to the fact that many conservative are someone anal in their view and don't seem to be able to stretch their consideration beyond the narrow conservative paragdime, while many progressives have the opposite tendency, to look in the future, at the big picture, and bring inmany toomany elements that may confuse the issue and seem chaotic to some.