"Carter" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 09:11:22 -0400, Carter wrote:
"jakdedert" wrote in message
news
Add to that the fact that lack of access to quality health care
is in itself a major cause of poverty. In addition, paying for a
single health issue has caused many formerly solvent individuals
and families to slip below the poverty level.
William Sommerwerck wrote:
A _major_ cause? I don't think so.
Carter wrote:
Maybe we are just playing semantics with the word "major", but I would
respectfully suggest you look up the number of people in the last 10 to
15 years that have been 'rightsized', 'downsized' or otherwise lost
their job and benefits. It is in the *millions*. Do you think that is
"major"?
flipper wrote:
You're presuming they don't find another job.
Many do, but -generally- speaking, the 'new' jobs pay significantly less
and typically have few or no benefits. I'm sorry to rain on your parade,
but it is a matter of record that a large portion of the good
manufacturing jobs (read 'well-paying') have gone overseas and that the
replacement jobs, if they can be found, are at a much lower salary with
significantly less benefits. Actual government statistics show that the
number of people without health care is sharply up and salaries are down.
I would encourage you to look it up.
In the 'good ole days' before 'downsizing' 5.25% unemployment was
considered *full* employment but nowadays it's touted as a 'disaster'.
An interesting point, but numbers notwithstanding, you seem to be implying
the economy is in fine shape. I sincerely hope you are correct.
It bears noting that even if the percentages were the same, the actual
number of people out of work is significantly higher. Our population has
nearly doubled since 1960. Average of working age people runs around 55% or
so... close enough for a little elementary math, anyway.
1960 - ~99,000,000 working age adults makes ~5,200,000 unemployed @ 5.25%
2006 - ~165,000,000 working age adults makes ~8,700,000 unemployed @ 5.25%
Numbers are rounded.