Thu, Dec 18, 2014, 6:03 AM EST - U.S. Markets open in 3 hrs 27 mins

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Silver Wheaton Corp. Message Board

  • quailrunrd quailrunrd Jul 30, 2013 1:59 PM Flag

    So...here's my question

    Friday, we once again get slimed with the BLS "ouija board" calculation on the monthly jobs number which, of course, includes a number for the "unemployment rate". And everyone is sitting on the edge of their seats wondering if the Fed Reserve will commence that nasty tapering if too many jobs suddenly materialize.

    But we now know the jobs number includes any warm body that finds a few hours of employment during any given BLS survey week (part time worker). Additionally we know that large numbers of workers are losing full time jobs to those who are willing to take part time jobs.

    So here's my question. Why do economists expect the "average workweek" to remain at 34.5 hours per week where it has remained for months? Isn't the threat of Obamacare causing many employers to reduce their employee workweeks to below 30 hours per week? And just last month alone we saw that 240,000 full time employees were relegated to part time work.

    I'm just wondering......

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Wouldn't it be a wonderful thing if a sufficient number recognized the numeric sleight of hand for what it is, enough so that the BLS was greeted with literary razz-berries and Bronx cheers when they tried to peddle their tripe? Most of those that I communicate recognize their proclamations as nothing more than propaganda and I work to increase that number whenever I'm given fertile soil to till.

      The other issue I believe to be worthy of consideration is the declining work week, but I have a different slant. Could it be part (or even a focal point) of the program to softly destroy the American worker and thus the economy, at least the visible economy? I say that because as the work week shrinks, we should also continue to see a further and steady decline in the velocity of money, a metric that is already so anemic it scarcely gets mentioned any longer. The end result would be that the soft depression, as opposed to the harsh recessionary period we're going through, would create a situation to where a uniform pushback by the people would be very difficult to orchestrate... sort of slowly letting the air out of the balloon all the while knowing that the controllers have a death grip control on all resources.

      • 1 Reply to moses_on_wall_street
      • Moses....correctomundo! "....controllers have a death grip control on all resources".

        For one thing....part time workers can't afford to buy homes, especially since Blackstone and other hedgies are driving up prices with cash purchases of considerable housing stock. And today we found out that Blackstone is filing the paperwork to float $240 million in "rental backed" securities.... reminiscent of the securitized mortgages that were responsible for the '08 crash. And the government has the backs of these hedge funds via Subsection 8 rent subsidies, the fallback when minimum wage earners can no longer afford the rents on banker owned real estate. Nothing like providing a taxpayer safety net to the big banks taking over the communities we live in.

 
SLW
20.29+1.43(+7.58%)Dec 17 4:01 PMEST

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.