What 0% unemployment looks like

Pack93z
Select Member Topic Starter

12 years ago

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- What if every person who wanted a job had one?
The entire United States may never be able to reach a 0% unemployment rate. But on a smaller scale, it's not entirely unheard of.

Simply put, 0% unemployment can occur when everyone who is looking for a job has one. It can happen in niche markets when there are more openings than there are workers to fill them.
Such was the case with Monaco. According to the CIA, the country had a 0% unemployment rate in 2005. The tiny nation -- which is smaller than a square mile -- has to import workers from neighboring France in order to fill the demand for service jobs at the local upscale casinos and hotels.

.....

What should the unemployment rate be?
The U.S. job market currently has 8.1% unemployment. While almost everyone agrees that's too high, zero unemployment wouldn't be a good thing either.

Would zero unemployment really be bad for the economy as a whole?

"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"

Wanna join the discussion?! Login to your PACKERSHOME forum account or Register a new forum account

Since69
Registered

12 years ago

Of course not. How could it be? Having to hire people from other countries to fill our job openings? Oh, the horror!

Oh, wait...

Zero2Cool
Elite Member

12 years ago

Of course not. How could it be? Having to hire people from other countries to fill our job openings? Oh, the horror!

Oh, wait...

Originally Posted by: Since69

I thought the US already outsourced jobs and it was said it HELPS the US economy more to have jobs outsourced than to have them filled domestically?

Pack93z
Select Member Topic Starter

12 years ago

Of course not. How could it be? Having to hire people from other countries to fill our job openings? Oh, the horror!

Oh, wait...

Originally Posted by: Since69

We already have that in the form of day laborers and illegal aliens and we are running high unemployment rates... correct?

We already are shipping jobs out of the states because of wage rates. So that would be an sustainable argument based on the present condition of the economy and the discount chain consumer mentality.

Assumption would be with zero unemployment employers would be short of prospective employees to hire, so you are correct they would have to fill that some how. One possibility would be to hire from outside this labor pool.

But another would be to hire away from other employers via wage and benefit package.

Another option is to increase the pay rates and duties of current employees to carry the extra load. Kind of like the last couple of years of being an employee, only with pay increases. :)

The production costs would increase.. but to me the question would be would those increases outpace the consumer dollar spending with everyone having stable employment and discretionary dollars to spend on the goods?

Other examples of the impact like:

Would the residual benefits of zero unemployment like reduces crime rates factor in. Basing the assumption on everyone working a job would naturally create less time or reason to commit crimes. Thus reducing things like the judicial system and its employee counts thus transferring those labor hours into more direct production of physical goods in place of human services.

Honestly, this is a paradox that will never be realized in any sustainable nature.. just throwing it to the discussion points to see the ideas.

I do think that it might be detrimental to the economy as a whole.. but would it be any worse than today's unemployment numbers?

"The oranges are dry; the apples are mealy; and the papayas... I don't know what's going on with the papayas!"

zombieslayer
Registered

12 years ago

I'd rather err on the side of 0% unemployment.

We bring in illegals because Americans want to be able to eat and pay rent. God forbid. The horror! That's way too much to ask.

Americans WILL do any job, but we're not willing to live 10 people to a house. And that's a GOOD thing.

I've been a foreign exchange student in one 3rd world country and spent some time in another. Both times, I got parasites. I've seen lepers. I've seen dead bodies on the street. For all you who think we should be more like the 3rd world, I hope really bad things happen to you. Seriously. This shit pisses me off.

Nobody here of course. You're all good people. But there are plenty of people out there who have NO sympathy for the American worker.

Being unemployed sucks. Being homeless sucks even worse. Living in a car sucks. Living in a hotel with meth freak neighbors who keep you awake all night while you have to wake up early and look for work the next morning sucks.

I'm tired of all the coldness directed at the American worker. We want too much? Really?

If you actually check the work I've done, it's pretty freaking impressive. I've met some pretty hard workers in my lifetime. Yes, I've met lazy ones too who should have been fired. But overall, America is a VERY productive country and if anything, we work too much. Compare our inventions with any other country and guess what? We SMOKE them all. Every. Single. Fucking. Year.

OK, I'm done ranting now. Proud to be an American worker. I'll end it with that.

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

dhazer
Veteran Member

12 years ago

What should the unemployment rate be?
The U.S. job market currently has 8.1% unemployment. While almost everyone agrees that's too high, zero unemployment wouldn't be a good thing either.

Well the 8.1% unemployment is BS, I can bet it's actually higher than that. They get these figures by paying unemployment to. What about all those people that ran out of their 2 years worth of not working. We will never see 0% unemployment.

Just Imagine this for the next 6-9 years. What a ride it will be 🙂 (PS, Zero should charge for this)

zombieslayer
Registered

12 years ago

Originally Posted by: dhazer

If you include people who have fallen off the stats, last time I checked (which isn't more than a month ago), it was over 15%.

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

wpr
Preferred Member

12 years ago

I think Germany (West Germany)back in the 70's and early 80's was close. They had imported a lot of workers from Yugoslavia and other places to do the more menial work. When the global economy turned down they laid those workers off first and sent them home.

zombieslayer
Registered

12 years ago

Originally Posted by: wpr

And why can't we do the same thing here?

My man Donald Driver

(thanks to Pack93z for the pic)
2010 will be seen as the beginning of the new Packers dynasty. 🇹🇹 🇲🇲 🇦🇷

Porforis
Veteran Member

12 years ago

#10

And why can't we do the same thing here?

Originally Posted by: zombieslayer

Conservatives don't want to piss off their base and liberals realize that paying ex-illegals minimum wage would be a silver bullet to the heart of our werewolf economy.

Important Information:

The PACKERSHOME uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. More Details Close

Fan Shout

beast (5m) : If we win tonight the game is still relative in terms of 5th, 6th or 7th seed... win and it's 5th or 6th, lose and it's 6th or 7th

beast (6m) : Mucky, I thought the ad revenue went to the broadcasting companies or the NFL, at least not directly

Zero2Cool (16m) : I think the revenue share is moot, isn't it? That's the CBA an Salary Cap handling that.

bboystyle (28m) : i mean game becomes irrelevant if we win tonight. Just a game where we are trying to play spoilers to Vikings chance at the #1 seed

Mucky Tundra (37m) : beast, I would guess ad revenue from more eyes watching tv

Zero2Cool (57m) : I would think it would hurt the home team because people would have to cancel last minute maybe? i dunno

beast (1h) : I agree that it's BS for fans planning on going to the game. But how does it bring in more money? I'm guessing indirectly?

packerfanoutwest (1h) : bs on flexing the game....they do it for the $$league$$, not the hometown fans

Zero2Cool (2h) : I see what you did there Mucky

Zero2Cool (2h) : dammit. 3:25pm

Zero2Cool (2h) : Packers Vikings flexed to 3:35pm

Mucky Tundra (2h) : Upon receiving the news about Luke Musgrave, I immediately fell to the ground

Mucky Tundra (2h) : Yeah baby!

Zero2Cool (2h) : LUKE MUSGRAVE PLAYING TONIGHT~!~~~~WOWHOAAOHAOAA yah

Zero2Cool (3h) : I wanna kill new QB's ... blitz the crap out of them.

beast (3h) : Barry seemed to get too conservative against new QBs, Hafley doesn't have that issue

Zero2Cool (4h) : However, we seem to struggle vs new QB's

Zero2Cool (4h) : Should be moot point, cuz Packers should win tonight.

packerfanoutwest (4h) : ok I stand corrected

Zero2Cool (4h) : Ok, yes, you are right. I see that now how they get 7th

Zero2Cool (4h) : 5th - Packers win out, Vikings lose out. Maybe?

beast (4h) : Saying no to the 6th lock.

beast (4h) : No, with the Commanders beating the Eagles, Packers could have a good chance of 6th or 7th unless the win out

Zero2Cool (5h) : I think if Packers win, they are locked 6th with chance for 5th.

beast (5h) : But it doesn't matter, as the Packers win surely win one of their remaining games

beast (5h) : This is not complex, just someone doesn't want to believe reality

beast (5h) : We already have told you... if Packers lose all their games (they won't, but if they did), and Buccaneers and Falcons win all theirs

Zero2Cool (5h) : I posted it in that Packers and 1 seed thread

Zero2Cool (5h) : I literally just said it.

packerfanoutwest (5h) : show us a scenario where Pack don't get in? bet you can't

Zero2Cool (5h) : Falcons, Buccaneers would need to win final two games.

Zero2Cool (5h) : Yes, if they win one of three, they are lock. If they lose out, they can be eliminated.

packerfanoutwest (5h) : as I just said,,gtheyh are in no matter what

Zero2Cool (5h) : Packers should get in. I just hope it's not 7th seed. Feels dirty.

packerfanoutwest (5h) : If packers lose out, no matter what, they are in

packerfanoutwest (5h) : both teams can not male the playoffs....falcon hold the tie breaker

packerfanoutwest (5h) : if bucs win out they win their division

beast (5h) : Fine, Buccaneers and Falcons can get ahead of us

packerfanoutwest (5h) : falcons are already ahead of us

beast (5h) : Packers will get in

beast (5h) : If Packers lose the rest of their games and Falcons win the rest of theirs, they could pass us... but not gonna happen

packerfanoutwest (5h) : they still are in the playoffs

packerfanoutwest (5h) : If Packers lose the remaining games,,,,at 10-7

Zero2Cool (7h) : We can say it. We don't play.

Mucky Tundra (8h) : But to say they are in is looking past the Saints

Mucky Tundra (8h) : That said, their odds are very favorable with a >99% chance of making the playoffs entering this week's games

Mucky Tundra (8h) : Packers are not in and have not clinched a playoff spot.

buckeyepackfan (9h) : Packers are in, they need to keep winning to improve their seed#.

Mucky Tundra (18h) : Getting help would have been nice, but helping ourselves should always be the plan

beast (18h) : Too bad Seahawks couldn't beat Vikings

Please sign in to use Fan Shout

2024 Packers Schedule

Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM

Eagles

29 - 34

Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM

COLTS

16 - 10

Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM

Titans

30 - 14

Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM

VIKINGS

29 - 31

Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM

Rams

24 - 19

Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM

CARDINALS

34 - 13

Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM

TEXANS

24 - 22

Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM

Jaguars

30 - 27

Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM

LIONS

14 - 24

Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM

Bears

20 - 19

Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM

49ERS

38 - 10

Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM

DOLPHINS

30 - 17

Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM

Lions

31 - 34

Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM

Seahawks

30 - 13

Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM

SAINTS

Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM

Vikings

Saturday, Jan 4 @ 11:00 PM

BEARS