Well, Zalco, I would hardly consider the Council on Foreign Relations to be an entirely unbiased source of geopolitical commentary about China. And I didn't have time to watch all of the video you embedded - but it wouldn't be the first youtube video telling people what they want to hear. Toward the end the narrator says something like "to the extent automation replaces labor" as though it is somehow unknowable.

Obviously China's policy about-face since that video's release means they are aware of the "problem" and in fact, long have been - no surprises there. "One child" was essentially ended in 2013. That isn't to say the one-child policy didn't have beneficial effects...the effects of it had always been debated, I remember reading that 20 years ago. Last quote I catch in skipping thru the video: "It would be foolish to predict certain social or political implications" - which seems to be what you were doing? Or actually making a statement about the present: "China's One Child Policy is biting them very badly at this point." I'm sure if I had access to every back issue of American foreign policy journals I could find plenty of 'experts' in the early 1980s saying that the one-child policy would spell utter political and economic stagnation for China...

Finally you seem to have brought it up in relation to debates about US immigration and what you characterize as 'nativist' sentiments. I don't think it's a especially apt comparison, regardless of how one chooses to debate the effects of the so-called "one child" policy. We're talking about two very, very different countries! A lot of Americans, for example, don't know that you essentially cannot immigrate to China unless you are ethnically Chinese.

An optimistic look at The Great Resignation: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/10/great-resignation-accelerating/620382/

Elmer, perhaps you ought to familiarize yourself with the Bureau of Economic Analysis who uses just those equations to calculate US GDP on a quarterly basis. They have detailed tables for current and historical estimates of the same which are used on a regular basis by the Congressional Budget Office, the Office of Management and Budget and the Federal Reserve among many other businesses, government agencies and consulting firms, brokerage firms, et al upon which policy and business decisions are made on a regular basis.

David, By any chance, have you bought some Evergrande stock lately?

From Bookwomans link The Atlantic

With people quitting and parts missing, it must kinda suck to be a boss right now. (Oh, well!)

The great resignation is not the only Great R-word overhauling the labor force.

Leisure and hospitality workers might be saying “to hell with this” on account of Americans deciding to behave like a pack of escaped zoo animals. Call it the Great Rudeness.

The author not only talks about the The Great Resignation and the Great Rudeness (think airline passengers) but also discusses The Great Reset and the Great Reshuffling - a couple of other R- words

Bookwoman - thanks for posting the article. It's an easy and quick read if you haven't looked at it yet.

"Elmer, perhaps you ought to familiarize yourself with the Bureau of Economic Analysis who uses just those equations to calculate US GDP on a quarterly basis."

While I didn't work as an economist during my career, I do have a degree in the subject ( you may have missed that above) and though some years have passed, I have some familiarity with it. Do you have a degree in Economics too?

Did you know that the numbers that are released are imputed results from data samples and not tabulated results? Do you know the difference? Do you know that numbers are released with the full knowledge by the agency (and everyone else) that they're incorrect at the first pass and will need to be corrected? Re-do's and the release of corrected numbers for a past period can happen several times. Did you know that?

I have a question for you - of the words and comments you've addressed to me in this thread, how much of your "knowledge" came from Internet searches you've done in the past few days? It appears like most of it has such a source.

More make believe, "knowlege" [sic] straight out of Wikipedia.

Elmer, if you need to attempt to make yourself feel superior by trying to disparage my knowledge of macroeconomics then go ahead. Enjoy yourself. My credentials and work experience in the field -- which I feel no need to share with you -- are substantial and won't be diminished by your ineffectual swipes.

Peace be with you.

And this:

I have a question for you - of the words and comments you've addressed to me in this thread, how much of your "knowledge" came from Internet searches you've done in the past few days? It appears like most of it has such a source.

If you review this thread, you will see that *none* of the comments I've made directly to you involved any internet searches at all. All of them were me.

I did use the internet to find charts that illustrate my points answering questions *others* have raised. I have neither the time nor the wherewithal to create my own charts so I look on line to find the ones that work...not as nice perhaps as if I'd customized them, but good enough for a casual discussion forum. So what?

The Atlantic article touched on something I've brought up here before. I'd seen coverage of a poll of American workers conducted at the end of WWII, asking whether people wanted more work/more money or less work/money and more leisure time. Government and businesses paid no attention to the results, instead going for more work/higher wages, supposedly 'to get America moving again' and to pay war debts'. Maybe this Great Resignation will result in a healthier, better balanced population. This will never happen if we a elect a government that is a slave to Big Business. Time for more 'trickle up', says I!

I read "The Great Resignation" article and got out of it...that people DID want more money. They quit to move up, or move on to a better future...they wanted a career not just a job. That does make them a slave to Big Business. We do need to elect someone who understands THAT.

Our population is "old age" heavy. There's an urgent need for more Elder care. We are not balanced. Our elders are retiring, leaving job openings they once held.

They now have robots, ie: a Roomba, to vacuum your house. Machines that harvest fruit. More robots are "coming"....which eliminates the need for low paying manual labor jobs. Everything is changing. We need to elect a person who understands the environmental issues as well as ....maybe a military background.

"We need to elect a person who understands the environmental issues as well as ....maybe a military background."

Ha! How did "environmental issues" and "military" get connected in your mind? The military doesn't care about environmental issues, and the military continues to wreak environmental havoc (I understand, because the military is not there to create a very long-term solution (centuries), but rather a short term one (years and decades).)

Well....mom and pop businesses aren't running the country. How did we NOT need to cater to BIG business? As a world power....we need a well balanced leader. An obvious observation.

We are nearing the tail end of the baby boomer retirement years. I was born in 1963 which is one year before the end of the BB range and I plan to retire at age 62 in 2025. My company is at the beginning stages of a merger/acquisition that should take another year to get regulatory approval and then another year or 2 to fully integrate the companies. I've been on the acquirer side of a few acquisitions in the past so I have a pretty good idea of what to expect. It won't be easy.

They are throwing retention bonuses at me to keep me from leaving/retiring and I am happy to accept them. I am in IT and my technical skills are outdated but I have no desire to update them at this point. There are plenty of fresh young minds that can handle the technical work load with my direction. What they are paying me for is the business experience and system knowledge that I have gained over the last 22 years at the company. I'm expecting them to offer me a nice, long severance package to go away at the end of the integration. There are several more employees in the same age range as I that have similar retirement plans. 2025 can't get here soon enough.

LoneJack that's a great position to be in. Sometimes things just fall your way. My old boss retired, decided he wanted to move across country, decided to take a job that gave him a great signing bonus plus moving expenses. After a little over one year, he decided to move back, and talked his new company into eliminating his job, thus getting a great bonus for leaving plus moving expenses!

Actually, I understand our military does concern itself with environmental issues - like sea level rise, for one - as they pertain to national security.

"My credentials and work experience in the field -- which I feel no need to share with you"

It doesn't matter but the nature of your responses rather than the content confirmed what I suspected.

"mom and pop businesses aren't running the country. How did we NOT need to cater to BIG business?"

"Cater" is a loaded word but they can't be ignored or repeatedly attacked or handicapped unreasonably either. Of course it's the large businesses that drive the economy, provide the goods and services we all want and need, and provide employment for tens of millions.

There are relatively uninformed people and conspiracy theorists at both extremes of the political spectrum.

Elmer, "the nature of your responses rather than the content confirmed what I suspected."

It's really sad when your compulsion to attack me is so great that, even though you can't disagree with the content -- in posts that weren't even addressed to you -- you feel compelled to manufacture some sort of critique based on nothing but your own supposition -- which couldn't be more wrong -- which you then confirm in your own mind based on no information. These are the kinds of arguments where I don't even have to be there. It's a game of solitaire. Enjoy yourself.

"your compulsion to attack me....."

No, this is not the case. But knowledge and understanding doesn't come from news broadcasts or internet searches on topics the person otherwise has little or no background in. As I believe you yourself have spoken about with some of the people who hear some element of disinformation or misunderstand some other tidbit, add water as if making instant coffee, and suddenly become medical experts on various pandemic public health and treatment topics.

I think some folks may need a lesson on subjective vs. objective observation and reasoning...?

And in re: the topic of this thread - I just listened to this podcast from Planet Money's Indicator, in which a point is made that I think is important. our population is aging and that includes our nation's workforce. Numbers seem to bear out that a significant number of employers used the pandemic as an excuse to unload their older workers. Also, there is proven anti-age bias in hiring - especially for women - which is misplaced. It's some info I haven't heard or seen much in the mainstream discourse these days.

Another fun fact: approx. 1/4 of older Americans do not have retirement savings.

https://www.npr.org/2021/10/08/1044613677/jobs-friday-where-are-all-the-older-workers

"Numbers seem to bear out that a significant number of employers used the pandemic as an excuse to unload their older workers."

Or: "Numbers seem to bear out that a significant number of older workers used the pandemic as an excuse to retire early".

We had a small office of 5.25 FTE people, and we lost one to an early retirement.......she loved her job in the before-times, but the stressors of the job during the pandemic (along with other family issues) pushed her into early retirement. I know that's only a 1-person anecdote, but it was also almost 20% of our personnel.

"But knowledge and understanding doesn't come from news broadcasts or internet searches on topics the person otherwise has little or no background in."

Whether or not I agree with this, I can assure you this is not the case here. But you're going to believe what you're going to believe.

In my experience, it's the people who are most insecure about themselves who feel the need to trot out their credentials all the time. The rest of us have no need to prove who we are and are happy to let our works speak for us.

IAC, I suggest that you concentrate on the content of a post. When a 5 yr old child says 2+2=4, she's not any less correct than when a theoretical mathematician says it. And a doctorate doesn't ensure someone is error-free even in their specialty.

My father was a great man. He was kind and unassuming and had a gift for making people feel comfortable in conversations. He was a natural teacher, his goal was not to win a point but to help others understand so that they could decide the point for themselves. He was a professor and M.D. and PhD and headed a cancer research hospital for years. During his entire life, I never heard him once mention his degrees or awards or job status in any conversation with anyone.

I suspect that people like your father don't need to prove themselves to others because they don't need to prove anything to themselves.

If someone had been rude and contemptuous enough to challenge or question what he knew of his own field or studies, I suspect he would have.

Elmer, I am fairly new to this Forum, Kitchen Table. You seem to create conflict and division. I'm not understanding what it is you are trying to prove.

My husband recently died, he was a MD and the Director of Psychiatry and Professor of Psychiatry at NY Medical College. Education: Boys Latin School in Boston, His undergraduate was at Brandeis University with a degree in English and American Literature. Then drafted in the the Army during the Korean conflict. After Army, Boston University Medical School, Mt. Zion in San Francisco, Metropolitan Hospital, in NY.

No one ever knew his background or his education except family or close friends. He never told people he was a doctor. He never felt the need to.

He was the most well read, intelligent person I knew. He never felt the need to prove himself. He enjoyed people, dialogue with others, listening, laughing, and truly enjoying being around people of various backgrounds. He never, ever passed judgements on anyone, that I ever heard. Most casual friendships did not even know his background and felt so comfortable being with him. No matter their background.

He married me, a poor girl from Queens, NY. My family loved being around him because he never criticized or felt the need to prove they were wrong about any topic.

He was what he was. He was content to let others have their own opinions without feeling challenged.

I hope I'm wrong about you, but you seem to feel a great need to prove yourself right and find fault in the opinions of others. I've noticed you seem to question the thoughts, opinions and feelings of others. Almost like you see each post as a challenge to win.

Hope I'm wrong,

Jane

Elmer: "If someone had been rude and contemptuous enough to challenge or question what he knew of his own field or studies, I suspect he would have."

Oh, you mean like you did to me here? Then no, your suspicion is wrong there too.

@ Toronto Vet, et al. - The Indicator makes the point that great numbers of retiring older employees is a popular belief, but studies do not support it.

If someone had been rude and contemptuous enough to challenge or question what he knew of his own field or studies, I suspect he would have.

He was involved in cancer research. Research is all about challenge, and new ideas. Peer review. Public review. When someone challenged your content, the rational response, to me, are clear explanations and if needed, more facts. In his role as head of research, he was constantly involved in helping to get grants for more research funding, and ideas had to be clear and spelled out so that anyone reading the application could understand.

One of my father's favorite sayings is that explaining one's ideas should be clear enough so that a 7 year old would understand, were a 7 year old to ask. This was no empty policy either, as he was delighted to explain science questions to us kids especially on lazy Sunday mornings with the NYT, Zabar's for breakfast, and sometimes one of his scientist friends over to visit.

I think of someone challenges what you know, the response should NEVER be to trot out your credentials. And there is never, ever, ever a call to make fun of someone's background in an effort to disparage or demean them. I think better explanations and more facts would be more helpful.

I suggest that you concentrate on the content of a post. When a 5 yr old child says 2+2=4, she's not any less correct than when a theoretical mathematician says it. And a doctorate doesn't ensure someone is error-free even in their specialty.

^ This

I think too that we should recognize that these conversations occur at a kitchen table. Each of us brings something different and interesting to the table. This is not an adversarial venue.

But knowledge and understanding doesn't come from news broadcasts or internet searches on topics the person otherwise has little or no background in.

I disagree. We are all different in our expertise, see the kitchen table comment above. But a search, especially if one finds articles with clear explanations of the type my father was wont to give, can give most of us a basic understanding enough to have a conversation about anything among ourselves, and perhaps our own specialty experiences can shine a new light and bring even more understanding.

We can, and I do, continue to respect those in any field whose education and/or experience make them clearly stand out in terms of the quality of their explanations. But those people tend to be like my father, and evoke respect rather than demand it as their due.

@carolb_w_fl_coastal_9b........I would challenge the study. ie: "I" would not show up as being retirement age.....yet I did retire. The pandemic created a hostile/harsh work environment, which I now choose to avoid, yet I'm too young to collect SS. Hence no new recipient of SS, I would not show up on a "study". The 53 year old neighbor of mine.....has law-suit money, acquired several years prior.....he quit his job now, during the pandemic & retired.

I'm trying to show how older employees DID exit the work force, during the pandemic....yet no "study" would have counted these individuals as age-related retirements. I believe Toronto_Vet was doing the same as was LoneJack. Older folks with interesting circumstances. ♥

There is no denying that many older workers have voluntarily exited the workforce during 2020/2021. The point is that they don't make up the greatest number, as many seem to assume.

Personal experience is not the best measure of the entire population across our country anyway.

Maybe there are a few exceptions but we're all strangers. There are some poseurs and that's something I'm not tolerant of. None is more obvious than the person who describes herself as a "medical professional" whose health and medical comments are so consistently off the mark as to suggest a lack of truthfulness of her claim. There are also some who do searches and then present the findings as their own. That seemed to be at work in this thread.

I don't doubt some have noticed that my comments sometimes will have an element of "my friend (or relative) who is a --------- told me-------"or "I used to work with this and ....." It's not name dropping or boasting, or an consistent need or urge to disclose elements of my personal life. It's my way of saying "I'm not making this up or reciting what I learned from a Google search, here's what I know or what someone authoritative in another field who knows about this stuff told me".

I can see in hindsight that I should have been more polite. I'm an absolutist when it comes to truth and honesty and I need to dial my reactions down sometimes. The comments I read suggested an external, not necessarily understood source that was being misrepresented. Because of the nature of what was said and how it was erroneously described. I'm sorry for that and will be more mindful of the need to not let my own feelings color the tone of my words.

I'm not necessarily saying that was done in this thread but the anonymity of internet forums provide opportunities some use to misrepresent themselves. I once saw a cartoon that I should have kept. The image was a dog typing at a PC keyboard. The caption said something like "I have a patient with the same personality disorder you describe having and it's a struggle to get her to deal with it"

Back to the topic?

Today I saw on TV two charts. One was of wages since 1980 (flat or falling save for a small uptick the last two years). One was of productivity -- huge increase over the last two years.

Maybe workers are just tired of being so productive with so little to show for it? I know some of the productivity may be due to automation, but with everyone 'on call' 24/7, a lot of people are 'working from home' even if they go into an office daily.

I'm still wondering how the 'quitters' are paying their bills.

Not a lot of money but those eligible for the IRS child tax credits are getting half the annual credit divided into monthly payments.

I think it depends on what wages for what work.

I suspect starting salaries for white collar jobs requiring a decent college degree (excluding school teachers) are WAY up over this period of time, measured in constant dollars. And go up proportionally in subsequent years. Wages for tradespersons have to be way up too.

A homeowner has a toilet that won't stop running and calls a plumber. The plumber arrives and fixes it in 15 minutes. The owner thanks him and asks "How much"? The plumber says " I have a 30 minute minimum charge so that'll be $150". The homeowner says "Are you kidding, I'm a lawyer and I can't get away with charging $300 an hour". The plumber responds "I believe you. When I was a lawyer, I couldn't charge that much either".

.

I wonder how many of the young quitters are just moving back home with Mom & Dad...

I don't imagine a lot of them are unless they have too. My daughter lost her job last year due to the pandemic. She couldn't wait to get back to work and when she did within a week or two she came down with covid 19. When she finally got back on her feet and was able to pay for the deposits and rent she moved out. She's still struggling because her job keeps cutting her hours. Been trying to talk to her about finding a different type of job, especially now.

I feel like the boomer generation was such a backlash against parents and elders that many still consider living with Mom & Dad an embarrassment - something shameful to be avoided at all costs, but before then, it was a normal thing, and plenty of other cultures do it too. Lots of young people nowadays are not so averse to living with their parents, and plenty of parents are happy about it too.

I'm a Boomer, but I love the idea of my multi-generational family living together - as long as everyone has adequate personal space. I long for it, in fact.

While anecdotes aren't data, I know of a woman whose daughter lived in the city and fled during covid and moved back home with her folks for over a year now.

"I suspect starting salaries for white collar jobs requiring a decent college degree (excluding school teachers) are WAY up over this period of time,"

It's more about education than the type of job - those with post-secondary education (including certifications and apprenticeships) have increased a lot in the last 20 years. On average.

"I wonder how many of the young quitters are just moving back home with Mom & Dad..."

That would be an interesting stat to see!

"It's more about education than the type of job"

I thought I was clear about the limited scope of my comment, it's in what you quoted.

As far as moving back home is concerned, my own experiences with kids going away to college and then becoming employed 20-somethings is that few (neither my kids nor any of their friends) left independent living as an adult to move back in with parents. I know not all are of this view.

This data is pre-pandemic which I suspect aggravated the situation.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2019/06/06/millennials-move-back-home-college/?sh=7c017c9e638a

A new survey from TD Ameritrade says that 50% of "young Millennials" plan to move back home with their parents after college....

For those moving back home, the move will not be temporary

• 50% of young Millennials who are currently enrolled in college or who intend to go to college plan to move back home after they finish college.
• 31% of young Millennials plan to move back for at least two years.
• 56% plan to move back with their parents for at least a year.
• 38% of young Millennials expect to pay rent while living with their parents (the average rent: $486 per month).
• 82% of parents say they would welcome their children moving back home after college.

Updated suggest that the pandemic has made it worse.

https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/09/04/a-majority-of-young-adults-in-the-u-s-live-with-their-parents-for-the-first-time-since-the-great-depression/

Additionally, part of it has to do with the 'big guy's' economy ...

I'm glad we have more data from internet searches to consider. Again, I thought I was clear when I said:

"my own experiences with kids going away to college and then becoming employed 20-somethings is that few (neither my kids nor any of their friends) left independent living as an adult to move back in with parents."

Yes, pre-pandemic years but my comment had to do with kids who went away to college and got a degree and a job. The chart shows a few percentage point increase at the pandemic onset but doesn't say why. Since this shows all young adults in this age bracket, not just those in college nor employed college graduates, nor just those employed before and after and living independently beforehand, I'd say it's not necessarily relevant to the conversation, if that was intended. As one example, a lot of schools suspended instruction when the pandemic began and closed residence halls. A large number of those students had no choice but to move back home and would account for a portion of the increase the chart shows. Also, some people in lower skilled and blue collar employment lost their jobs or got RIF'd as businesses closed down, they might have moved home too.

In the last few days, I saw a brief video of a segment of a presentation by Neil deG Tyson talking about how people misunderstand math and statistical data and assume things that aren't part of the analysis. There were a few worthwhile quotes in his comments but the one relevant to this was, I think, an NTSA study that lasted over several decades that found that in airplane incidents in which there had been at least one fatality, their study determined that 85% of the survivors (I think that was the number cited) had either listened to the preflight emergency exit briefing or had looked at the printed material in the seat pocket. Tyson's comment was to the effect "That's all well and good, but that's not relevant. What's more important but not knowable is, what percentage of the people who lost their lives similarly were informed by available emergency exit information? That's what would be useful to know. Implying the information supplied made a difference is not demonstrated. "

The two other quotes showoing data/math misunderstandings, which I'll mention without explanation but their meanings are obvious, were;

The TV interview of a politician who was outraged to learn that "nearly 50 percent of the schools in the system had test scores below the district's average" and

.The politician who said he had reconsidered his position on a particular issue and as a result changed his view 360 degrees.

Actually, my two posts were not addressed to your point, Elmer, but rather to Toronto Vet's comment. I found your anecdotal remark as unenlightening as my own and others on the topic as anecdotes are not data.

"82% of parents say they would welcome their children moving back home after college."

That's interesting! One friend of mine with kids who went to college specifically chose to downsize to a home that would not accommodate anyone moving back. They had a guest room for someone to crash for a night or two, but that was all they would allow. Others have been accepting, but not pleased....While they all welcomed their children, it was not a welcome out of joy.

My comment had to do with an apparent reasoning holes suggesting the inapplicability of the graph you posted.

That was inapplicability to your comment, but it added credence to the supposition that the pandemic increased the number of young adults living with parents.

Back to the OP, what are job quitters living on? You might find this article from Forbes of interest: https://www.forbes.com/sites/jackkelly/2021/10/15/youll-be-surprised-to-learn-what-the-workers-who-quit-their-jobs-in-the-great-resignation-are-doing-now/?sh=659226de367b

They suggest: a new business start up boom so people are becoming self-employed; relying on the wealth effect from the stock market and crypto currencies to make staying at home more feasible; early retirement and relying on whatever retirement benefits they can get; day trading of cryptocurrencies and NFTs.

Combine that with the number of new households not being formed as more young adults live with parents to make ends meet. Others find that when not working, other costs go down such as child care, commuting, etc. so some families are finding one income feasible.

Also keep in mind that the quit rate doesn't mean they are quitting to not work...some are quitting to work elsewhere, so they may experience an income gain.