Rising Hegemon
Last week, a hearing called by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights examined the issue, attempting to determine whether part of the reason older workers have such trouble finding work, on aggregate, is due to employer biases out of their control. The unemployment rate is a comparatively moderate 7.1 percent for workers over the age of 55 — it’s 9.7 percent nationally — as older workers are more likely to retire early or leave the workforce if they lose their jobs. But that hides the troubling reality for those who can’t afford to leave the labor force.
The unemployment rate for over-55s is at the highest level since 1948. Since the recession started, both the number of older people seeking work and the rate of unemployment for over-55s have increased more sharply than for all other demographic groups. And older workers comprise a high share of the long-term unemployed. In May, the average duration of unemployment for older job-seekers climbed to 44.2 weeks, 11 more weeks than the national average. Nearly six in ten older job-seekers have been out of work for more than six months.
A major reason "retirement" investing is encouraged and why social security is important is efficiency. It is not just that it is "NICE" to retire, it is that it is important the older generation retire to open spots for succeeding age groups. But that bias spills over in different ways, if you don't get to fit into the classic model and get fired for whatever reason in middle-age or later, before you are ready to retire YOU ARE SCREWED.
The fact that this is becoming more prevalent, is just further indication that not only is Boehner a war-mongering idiot, he has no fucking idea how the actual world is operating outside the village -- or more likely doesn't fucking care.
10 comments:
People in their late `50s are also at their lifetime earnings peak, which gives businesses extra incentive to dump them whenever the "business cycle" has denied business ever-increasing profits.
Of course, business takes no notice of the fact that a goodly part of that additional employment expense is a reflection of experience gained over decades, some of which can't be easily and quickly passed on to incoming young workers, and is part of the sum total of institutional knowledge of any organization.
However, if you're only looking at ways to get the next quarter's profits ever higher, you're going to ignore many intangibles that nevertheless have an impact on profitability.
Aren't American businesses so very lucky to have a huge military to open markets and protect profits for them? Because if they had to depend upon their own acumen, they'd probably be fucked.
"Get out there and work you selfish old farts, so we can have more of our awesome wars!!!!"
Perfect, Atta. And, you call him BONER, too! B-O-E-H-N-E-R is pronounced "Boner", no matter what Congressman Orange Tan says.
i agree with montag.and don't forget that our beloved supremes just made it much harder to prosecute age discrimination suits as well.the difficulty in getting healthcare insurance when you are older only adds to the problems faced by older folks who get kicked to the curb several years before our "safety net" kicks in. add to this that many of these folks have virtually no savings-and may well be supporting elders and/or helping young adult children and you have a recipe for utter disaster.
but not to worry, the top 5% are just fine!
besides higher overall wages due to experience, another reason us older folks are not as "employable" for our corporate overlords is health insurance costs... an older person typically has a higher medical overhead associated with age related illnesses... more medical expenses = higher insurance premiums...
it's another reason a public option but preferrably single payer is the way to go... eventually we will get there, but there will be very hard times ahead for those of us that fall through the cracks...
I haz a sad whenever Droopy Dog Boner cries. Christ, what an absolute dick.
serfs. we are serfs.
top 5% are fine?
check your figures; given the reaganization of income distribution over the last 30 years, it's more like the top 1% will be fine. The rest of us are tapped out.
All of this frugality and reluctance to spend means some not so pretty class divisions, and those who are older will be eliminated. A recipe for economic disaster and civil unrest.
that's what drives the underlying need for wars--not to whip a foreign land but to eliminate future old folks. our civilization isn't very civilized.
vox
Well, we baby boomers protested during the Vietnam war, where are we today? It is up to us again to get out there, loud and proud and protest, work for social justice and protect our children and grandchildren. We have to go back to the who gives a fuck attitude and just break the rules, challenge "authority" and lead the way. Other choice - eat cat food and die off.
Well, we baby boomers protested during the Vietnam war, where are we today?
You're in an even worse position than after the Vietnam War.
Even though you won the smaller battle of Vietnam you eventually lost the overall war when the Berlin Wall fell in 1989.
This time around, though (with Iraq) you failed to get any meaningful sized protests and you didn't have all the important TV journalists onside like you did with Walter Cronkite. Plus the internet (which didn't exist in the 70s.....unless you were CBS during the 2004 election campaign ;) ) punched huge holes in those that were attempting to impede the advance of freedom for the Iraqi people.
Post a Comment