Image 01 Image 03

Five years into our 20-year lost decade

Five years into our 20-year lost decade

“Decline is slow… but in the end as a nation, we are less well off and the way out becomes more difficult every year….”,_2010.jpg

A good observation from Steve Kates at the Catallacy Files in Australia, on the dismal U.S. labor force participation rate, and how Australia risks following the U.S.:

US – five years into its 20 year lost decade

The Japanese have had a twenty year lost decade following their own Keynesian stimulus….

And we could end up with the same kind of outcome if we don’t get on top of our debt and reduce unproductive spending. Decline is slow, and not everyone becomes poor, but in the end as a nation, we are less well off and the way out becomes more difficult every year….

Doug Ross provides this chart (taking into account numbers released this morning) and commentary:

Labor Force Participation Rate ao May 2014 Chart

Did you notice it?

Adjusted for seasonality, the labor force participation rate (LFR) has never increased — not once — under Obama! Normalized by month, the LFR has been on a non-stop ride to progressive Utopia (i.e., full unemployment).

This is a stunning repudiation of the Obama economic agenda. Stunning.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Karen Sacandy | June 6, 2014 at 9:40 pm

And they keep doubling down on what they’ve done.

Henry Hawkins | June 6, 2014 at 10:00 pm

The patient is still unconscious! Whack him again!

I was just thinking how very sad it was going to be for future generations with no opportunity and nothing to achieve or look forward to. Nothing to ever feel good about again.

Juba Doobai! | June 7, 2014 at 1:05 am

As long as Obama does not totally overset the Constitution and declare himself dictator for life—and against us use all those armed federal agencies and illegal aliens he’s planning to let into the armed forces against, we will recover.

America is resilient. We recovered from the Great Depression, and we will recover from the Obama-created Depression. As long as we do not abandon our faith in God, we will do well, come what may.

    randian in reply to Juba Doobai!. | June 7, 2014 at 4:33 am

    Obama doesn’t have to continue in office himself. The permanent bureaucracy will continue to implement his agenda no matter who is in office.

If only we had a Republican President, the MSM would be shouting from the rooftops the serious problems in the economy. Instead they’ll wait until we have a Rep President, then suddenly they’ll discover it — just imagine how terrible the economy would be if Romney had won.

    scooterjay in reply to MikeInCA. | June 7, 2014 at 5:13 am

    …..and beat us over the head repeatedly when we “Blame Obama”. those media traitors make me sick.

    Helen in reply to MikeInCA. | June 7, 2014 at 9:32 am

    I think if Romney had won, we would have begun to witness a true recovery. In the meantime, we’re stuck with this scenario.

What? You would return us to the days of “job-lock” where so many Americans would be required to get up every day at the crack of dawn and trudge off to an unfulfilling drudgery of your notion of “employment”?

What kind of unfeeling monster are you, Jacobson?

But seriously folks…as randian points out above, this will not change until we change it. It will require a reform…even a revolution…of our central government in which we simply cut out…root and branch…whole Federal agencies.

I would start with the EPA and the IRS. But reasonable minds could disagree…

Come up with your own lists…!!!

Obama’s agenda is to destroy America.

From the Marxist point of view, I agree that Obama is not doing as well as he would like–those numbers are all in the 60’s. My guess is that he was hoping they would all be in the 10’s by now.

Americans, on the other hand, want those numbers in the high 90’s.

Midwest Rhino | June 7, 2014 at 11:29 am

One factor (used as justification for Obama’s dull economy) in labor participation rate is the boomers that retire early. This labor force rate counts potential workers aged 16 to 64. So as boomers moved from the age 40-58 range into the current 50-68 range, there could be a higher percent (than the previous decades) that have “naturally” retired early. But that factor should be over now, as boomers are moving out of the labor force age limit of 64.

Median income for a full time worker increased 13% from 2005 through 2008, then 8% more from 2009 through 1st quarter 2014. But in “constant dollars” (inflation adjusted), the increase was 1% for the first term, then a 3% decline from 2009 through 1st quarter 2014. So full time workers are making 3% less under Obama.

To me, the biggest problem is not so visible in the above numbers. The big factor is government is spending so much, and propping up the stock market with quantitative easing, adding a trillion a year in “funny money”. That makes stock holders feel rich, and keeps capital gains taxes rolling in. But in the end the inflation eats our savings, and debt crushes US when interest rates finally return to normal (if not much higher).

We are moving constantly and now rapidly, away from enabling free enterprise, toward government manipulation and fraud in everything.

    Midwest Rhino in reply to Midwest Rhino. | June 7, 2014 at 12:07 pm

    on further review, I’m not sure exactly how they define the “labor force”. Some work past 64, not sure if they count those not seeking employment. But we know the unemployment rate is going down mostly because of the people giving up on looking.