"Gene Kearns" wrote in message

Average Unemployment for the US 6%
Average Unemployment for Democratic States 5.463%
Average Unemployment for Republican States 5.085%

That statistic presents a pretty strong argument to support my statement.
However, since both Democrat and Republican-controlled states *both* have
unemployment rates under 6%, and the *average* for the nation is higher than
each party's average, that means that the states in which the legislature is
split must be *significantly* higher than 6%. If that's the case, it makes
a pretty strong argument that a two-party system seems to more of a
hindrance than a help when it comes to creating jobs.

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
Jim Kelly wrote:

Unfortunately for Mr. Sells, his plight is not the result of the economy
or
politics. If it were, he could expect that his situation might be
temporary.

In the eighties CTP , or computer to plate technology, was in it's
infancy.
At that time, there was still doubts about it's viability. By the early
nineties, the system had proven itself and the larger printers were
adopting
it. Technology improved rapidly and, with accompanying price
reductions,
mid sized printers such as Tempo Graphics in Carol Stream came to
realize
that, in order to remain competitive, they would also have to make the
transition. This of course meant that job opportunities for individuals
with Mr. Sells' skills would become more and more scarce. This is the
entirely the result of technological advancement and it is an ongoing
problem for the displaced worker with the wrong set of skills. Mr.
Sells
could probably find another job in prepress but it would likely be with
a
smaller printer who could not match his previous level of compensation.
It
may also involve relocation. Extending unemployment benefits while he
waits
it out will not resolve his problem, but simply postpone the inevitable.

The moral of the story is that a persons skills are only valuable when
there
is a market for those skills. As technology changes, people must adapt
and
acquire the new skills to compete in the job market. After all, the CTP
revolution did not catch anyone in the graphic arts industry by
surprise, it
has been steadily growing for at least ten years.

Harry Krause wrote:

Out of work and full of worry
Call for renewed federal aid not likely to be heard


By Imran Vittachi
Chicago Tribune staff reporter

December 20, 2003

Cecil Sells considers himself one of the "luckier" ones, even though
he's been jobless since September, laid off from his $50,000-a-year job
as a pre-press operator in Carol Stream.

*Others have had it tougher for a lot longer. In November, the
long-term
unemployed were out of work for an average of more than 20 weeks, the
highest it has been since January 1984, according to the Bureau of
Labor
Statistics.*

Sells, 45, of Sycamore, said he is not encouraged by the Bush
administration's claims that the economy is improving.

"Maybe that's happening in some never-never land," said Sells. "But if
I
don't find a job by March, I may have to sell my house or find other
measures to feed my family."

In March, his weekly state unemployment check of $331, which goes
toward
supporting him and his wife and helps pay on his son's college loans,
will run out.

Sells was among a small group of unemployed Illinois residents who
joined leaders of anti-poverty organizations and Rep. Jan Schakowsky
(D-Ill.), to call on the Bush administration and the
Republican-controlled Congress to renew federal benefits. A lifeline
lasting 13 weeks, the benefits kick in after state support runs out,
but
the package is set to expire Sunday.

"The Grinch is back [this Christmas]," Schakowsky said at the Friday
press conference, which was sponsored by the local chapter of the
AFL-CIO at a church in the Loop.

She said President Bush, together with House Speaker Dennis Hastert and
their fellow Republicans, were now "toasting each other for this
supposed economic recovery."

*"They're ignoring the 8.7 million unemployed workers and those who are
about to lose their benefits," Schakowsky said.*

Last Christmas, Bush extended benefits into the new year. But this time
that appears unlikely; Congress has adjourned for the holidays.

"There seems to be more resistance from the Republican Congress than
last year," said Ross Eisenbrey, vice president of the Economic Policy
Center, a Washington think tank. "Without presidential intervention,
this time Congress won't renew it."

Despite encouraging reports from the Department of Labor that the
national economy may be pulling out of its morass, and that the
nationwide unemployment rate is finally dipping, the outlook for
recovery in Illinois isn't so bright.

While nationwide unemployment fell in November to 5.9 percent, it stood
at 6.7 percent in Illinois. In some pockets Downstate, the rate ranges
between 7 percent and 10 percent, said Margaret Blackshere, head of the
Chicago AFL-CIO.

Eisenbrey and others say this is no time to terminate the benefits,
known as Temporary Extended Unemployment Compensation. November's
long-term unemployment rate eclipsed the average of 15.4 weeks set in
March 2002, when the benefits took hold.

"The notion that the economy is turning around and that this is no
longer needed is just wrong," said Eisenbrey. He pointed to long-term
unemployment indicators, which in November were higher than in March
2002, when the federal benefits were introduced. "It should at least be
extended for another six months."

The White House, and the offices of Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist
(R-Tenn.) and House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas), did not
respond
Friday to requests for comment.
--
Email sent to is never read.



No, the moral of this story should be that when a worker's skills are
obsolete, that worker is helped, with a combination of unemployment and
training, to learn enough to do a new job that maintains his standard of
living.

As they do in more progressive countries. Like Norway, Sweden, Finland,
for example.

Norway's unemployment is 4.6%, Sweden's is 5.5%, and Finland's is 8.9%. I
think that this shows that there's no common denominator between
unemployment rate, and the job retraining systems that each of those
countries employs.

On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 17:31:31 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:




I've edited Harry's post for accuracy:
NOYB...is a dentist...who...moved south to Florida...and...has emerged as a
Republican conservative who knows...how the world works.


Yup, that's what I read!


John
On the 'Poco Loco' out of Deale, MD

NOYB wrote:

I've edited Harry's post for accuracy:
NOYB...is a dentist...who...moved south to Florida...and...has emerged as a
Republican conservative who knows...how the world works.





What about you?

--
Email sent to is never read.

On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 17:40:55 +0000, NOYB wrote:


"Gene Kearns" wrote in message

Average Unemployment for the US 6%
Average Unemployment for Democratic States 5.463% Average Unemployment
for Republican States 5.085%

That statistic presents a pretty strong argument to support my statement.
However, since both Democrat and Republican-controlled states *both* have
unemployment rates under 6%, and the *average* for the nation is higher
than each party's average, that means that the states in which the
legislature is split must be *significantly* higher than 6%. If that's
the case, it makes a pretty strong argument that a two-party system seems
to more of a hindrance than a help when it comes to creating jobs.


I guess it's a good thing you didn't become an engineer ;-) Hint: think
population.

"thunder" wrote in message
news
On Mon, 22 Dec 2003 17:40:55 +0000, NOYB wrote:


"Gene Kearns" wrote in message

Average Unemployment for the US 6%
Average Unemployment for Democratic States 5.463% Average Unemployment
for Republican States 5.085%

That statistic presents a pretty strong argument to support my
statement.
However, since both Democrat and Republican-controlled states *both*
have
unemployment rates under 6%, and the *average* for the nation is higher
than each party's average, that means that the states in which the
legislature is split must be *significantly* higher than 6%. If that's
the case, it makes a pretty strong argument that a two-party system
seems
to more of a hindrance than a help when it comes to creating jobs.


I guess it's a good thing you didn't become an engineer ;-) Hint: think
population.

Gene took the averages from each state according to the party that controls
the legislature, added them, and then divided by the number of states. That
method is useful for giving a general picture as to which party controls
more states with high unemployment. When he gives the "average unemployment
for the US" I assumed he was just adding the unemployment rates for each
state and dividing by 50. If that's the case, then my assertion that the
states with a split legislature must have a very high unemployment rate.

If Gene is using 6% as the national unemployment rate (rather than an
"average" of each individual state's rate), then of course population
matters. Since California and Texas have such large populations, and such
high unemployment rates, they drag the rest of the country's average up.

Part of being an engineer entails looking at something from various
viewpoints.