What this article does not say is our US unemployment programs are being circumvented and dismantled. It does not tell us that a monthly job creation figure like 169,000 jobs created does not mean US 99% WE THE PEOPLE were hired---of course much of that hiring is our 99% global labor pool citizens. They do not receive unemployment so when they are shifted from job to job there is no sign of unemployment --ergo these figures are made to look like FULL EMPLOYMENT. Again, this problem is not created by our global 99% labor pool citizens --it is CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA and their 5% global banking pols and players.
REAL unemployment for US 99% WE THE PEOPLE is fast approaching 60-70% with large numbers of those hired being part time. Remember, part time employees face different unemployment requirements and of course we have been hearing these few decades of ROBBER BARON FRAUDS and corruption that those part time that do qualify for unemployment when released have not been receiving it----ILLEGAL AND CORRUPT----
THAT IS WHY THESE FIGURES ARE NO LONGER REAL INFORMATION.
This reporter MR SHERMAN and FORBES have known this corruption has been happening since 1990s---they are only now reporting it.
May 5, 2018 @ 05:33 AM 69,286
Sure, Unemployment Went Down - Because More People Left The Workforce
Erik Sherman , FORBES
Following unemployment numbers is a passion for those who watch the economy. However, current happy talk needs tempering with a closer look at numbers.
The announced 3.9% unemployment rate is, as news reports mentioned, a low since 2000. But percentages are expressions of ratios: how much of one thing compares to another. The unemployment rate is the ratio ofthe number of unemployed people and the total workforce, which is the sum of the employed and unemployed.
Like any ratio, there a number of ways to change the value:
- Move people out of the unemployed category into the employed while keeping the total workforce stable.
- Increase the total number of employed workers faster than the number of unemployed ones.
- Add more people into the employed category without changing anyone's actual status.
- Stop counting some in the unemployed category, making them "disappear."
A change in definitions or an arbitrary categorization of people can shift the unemployment numbers as easily as putting more people who had been unemployed to work.
As some have pointed out about this round of monthly job numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, a big factor for April was a loss of people counted as workers. When they are no longer counted, unemployment drops.
The table called Employment status of the civilian population by sex and age provides relevant data.
The number of jobs increased by 164,000 in April. But the number of unemployed dropped by 239,000 between March and April.
That is why the employment-population ratio — the percentage of all people of working age (16 and up, including people who have stopped looking for work) that are employed -- dropped from 60.4% to 60.3%. More people disappeared from the labor rolls.
The figures have improved since the financial crisis, but only so much. Here's a graph from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
An improvement from post-crash 2010 is still far from where things had been. You have to look back to October 1985 to find when the employment-population ratio was as low.
Part might be the result of divorce and the need for formerly married adults to work. Another is that women wanted a life beyond staying home to tend to children. There is also the third factor, though, of more people needing to work because of stagnant household incomes. Before then, the employment-population ratio was lower. Up to the 1970s, median wages were much stronger compared to the cost of living.
None of those factors has reversed.
Back to the present. The labor participation rate — the percentage of the entire population, working age or not — either employed or actively looking for work was 62.8%, down from 62.9% in March. Here is a similar long-term look at the labor force participation rate, with another graph from the St. Louis Fed.
This has a different and truly chilling view of the labor picture. Labor participation began declining after a high of 67.3% in mid-2000. It dropped to 66.4% in January 2007, just as the economic collapse began, and kept going. Now the country hovers at just below 63% as people have left the workforce.
Some of that is large college enrollment among Millennials, while another portion has been women leaving the workplace and baby boomer retirements (for those who don't have to keep working part-time to make ends meet even after they have reached retirement age). Whatever the reasons, we seem to have hit a new stable lower number than was the case in the previous 30 years.
More people have given up on finding work and therefore are no longer counted as either working or unemployed. That's why the unemployment rate keeps dropping. It isn't the underlying strength of the economy that reaches all levels of society. The number of jobs might be keeping rough pace with the growth of the population, but that is it. There is no broad economic cheer.
That has implications for income inequality — fewer people working means less income and wealth — as well as long-term economic stability creating pressure on social safety nets, such as they are.
All this also helps explain the low rate of wage growth that has puzzled many pundits. Growing employment should drive up wages, but increases have been lukewarm at best. As the St. Louis Fed noted in 2015, wage growth has really been related to inflation and not what would be considered real wage growth. People make more but inflation, which keeps pace or even exceeds the wage growth, eats up any extra money.
Employers don't need to provide real wage growth. Even with so many people dropping out of the labor force, there is little pressure to increase spending on wages to obtain workers. Maybe the relative unemployment numbers will finally drop so low that employers will finally be forced to pay more because there won't be enough people available. Then again, look at this St. Louis Fed graph on the unemployment rate.
Are we really going to drop to the levels of post-World War II employment? It seems unlikely. The labor participation rate at that time was close to 58%.
Unemployment as a sole measure of labor force health isn't useful. Such measures as the employment-population ratio and the labor participation rate help provide a more complete look at the economy. And the fuller picture suggests that income inequality will continue, and worsen, over the immediate future.
If you think this crazy policy to address refugee crises sounds like CARBON TRADING MARKET---you would be correct------INSTITUTE FOR NEW ECONOMIC THINKING is that ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE think tank which of course is tied to global slave trade distribution to Foreign Economic Zones overseas-----AKA ----REFUGEES. Remember, global banking/IMF create the civil unrest and civil wars that displace huge numbers of sovereign citizens and then the same global banking 1% NGOs pretend to be helping those refugees by sending them off to work in global sweat shop factories in Foreign Economic Zones around the world.
All of these people in this video are 5% global banking players---none creating policies to HELP REFUGEES. The goal is to break down the sovereign policies of nations surrounding IMMIGRATION POLICIES having been in place for several centuries.
INSTITUTE FOR NEW ECONOMIC THINKING is simply a global banking 1% economic think tank just like BROOKINGS/ASPEN/ROOSEVELT INSTITUTE---far-right wing global 1% not really THINKING. It takes little thought to lie, cheat, and steal creating a stagnant, criminal, corrupt economy as the US has been MOVING FORWARD. Corrupting US elections to install 5% global banking pols and players then letting go with massive and systemic criminal frauds and government corruptions.
So, this THINK TANK being the next round of policy voice for global banking 1% let's us know what economic policies 5% global banking pols and players will push while PRETENDING to help the poor.
The ECONOMIST is of course several decades of raging global neo-liberal economic policy filled with promotion of CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA mass unemployment in the West while US corporations moved overseas. Here they want to blame yet again SOROS---who works for the same OLD WORLD pre-Christian NERO/CATO/SENECA KINGS AND QUEENS----as do the reporters tied to ECONOMIST.
The REAL PROBLEM is this---why are our US pols being led by the NOSE by these global economic think tanks rather than building our local, domestic REAL free market small business economies?
Dambisa Moyo - Wikipedia
Dambisa Moyo (born () 2 February 1969) is a Zambian-born international economist and author who analyzes the macroeconomy and global affairs. She currently serves on the boards of Barclays Bank, the financial services group, Seagate Technology, Chevron Corporation, and Barrick Gold, the global miner.
Hmmmmmmm......remember what was FDR left social progressivism has morphed into ONE WORLD for only the global 1%
Robert Johnson - Institute for New Economic Thinking
Rob Johnson serves as President of the Institute for New Economic Thinking and a Senior Fellow and Director of the Global Finance Project for the Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt Institute in New York. Johnson is an international investor and consultant to investment funds on issues of portfolio ...
Nemat Shafik - Wikipedia
Dame Nemat Talaat Shafik, DBE (Arabic: نعمت شفيق; also known as Minouche Shafik) (born 5 February 1962) is an Egyptian-born British-American economist who served as the Deputy Governor of the Bank of England and has served as the director of the London School of Economics since September 2017.
Hmmmmm......there is a hyper-neo-liberal UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO global banking 5% player
Richard Allen Posner (/ˈpoʊznər/; born January 11, 1939) is an American jurist and economist who was a United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago from 1981 until 2017, and is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Chicago Law School. He is a leading figure in the field of law and economics, and was identified by The Journal of Legal Studies as the most cited legal scholar of the 20th century.
Institute for New Economic Thinking
May 2 at 12:37am ·
Episode 3 is here, and new voices enter the fray... let us know what you think!
Market mechanisms may be efficient, but they may also change the meaning of the goods exchanged. Should we pay children to read, or pay countries to take our share of refugees? Does having tradable refugee quotas commodify people? Introducing cash incentives or market mechanisms can serve or harm society. Sandel’s panel of students—as well as INET President Rob Johnson, LSE Director Minouche Shafik, Judge Richard Posner, and economist Dambisa Moyo—weigh in.
Believe it or not this information is tied directly to US EMPLOYMENT/UNEMPLOYMENT. We see the faces of China's national politburo ---those global banking 1% Chinese who were millionaires now billionaires after these few decades of ROBBER BARON FRAUDS by CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA. We see these national politburo names as familiar to those global 1% and their 2% filling our US Federal agencies, politicians, academics, those US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE foreign global corporate factory owners. These few decades of ROBBER BARON CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA with all that US ELECTION FRAUD created by criminal STATE AND LOCAL BOARDS OF ELECTIONS ---NOT RUSSIA------created the same CRONYISM in US government as here in China. Our US government now looks just like CHINESE POLITBURO----
So, the Chinese politburo has the same criminal and corrupt structures keeping their families in place as today's US GLOBAL BANKING 1%. The Chinese also use that 5% to the 1% Chinese global banking player to hold on to power while billions of Chinese 99% WE THE PEOPLE are left desperate, unemployed, kicked off their ancestral property, forced into enslavement in global corporate factories. The Chinese 5% to the 1% players are often the global labor pool we see coming to US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES. They have been allowed to earn more money than those 99% of Chinese but as a third world nation---not as much as our US 5% players. When we see our US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE global labor pool whether white collar professional or factory workers---they are often made to believe they are coming to better lives in US----when in fact they will be worked in US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES as they would be in China. When 5% players are no longer needed by ROBBER BARON global banking 1% they are the first shipped off as EX-PAT global labor pool.
The list is too long so GOGGLE to see Chinese national politburo and how these family names infuse our US institutions ----global banking 1% EUROPEAN KINGS AND QUEENS love global banking 1% ARABIC AND ASIAN KINGS AND QUEENS.
China’s new Politburo and Politburo Standing Committee
Cheng Li Thursday, October 26, 2017
The members of China’s Politburo and Politburo Standing Committee were revealed at the conclusion of the First Plenum of the 19th Central Committee on October 25, 2017. Below are background profiles for all 25 members of the Politburo, as well as more detailed biographies for the 7 Politburo members who also hold a seat on the all-powerful Politburo Standing Committee.
Our US national media tell us these Asian et al global labor pool are more skilled therefor getting these US jobs---while our US global banking 5% players will be shipped overseas being sold as more skilled then Asian 99% of citizens
These few decades of REAGAN/CLINTON BUSH OBAMA has been totally controlled by killing our US 3 branches of government and sovereign national governance structure by global MITRE CORPORATION ---that foreign sovereignty of MALTA----to this Chinese politburo structure---ergo, all that cronyism of US elections and political families---ergo, all that cronyism in who is those 5% to the 1% global banking players.
When US 99% WE THE PEOPLE think about US hiring to jobs and our unemployment growing---this is the goal of MOVING FORWARD CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA and as fewer and fewer jobs are made available to US 99% of citizens even those 5% players black, white, and brown freemason/Greeks will disappear.
So, MOVING FORWARD today will see US 99 %of WE THE PEOPLE be made en masse unemployed, desperate, chaos made of our local societal structures as MAOISM did in China to create this CHINESE POLITBURO filled with only China's OLD WORLD GLOBAL 1% RICH.
When US 99% WE THE PEOPLE sit watching our national media or only read national election data when all we need to do is look at Chinese politburo structure to know what RIGGED ELECTIONS will put in our US city council/Mayor---state assembly/Gov----Congress----and as US PRESIDENT. This cronyism then DRIBBLES DOWN to whom those 5% freemason/Greek players will be.
THAT IS REAGAN'S TRICKLE DOWN ECONOMICS as US job hiring MASTER PLAN.
This is how REAL LEFT social progressives know what MOVING FORWARD 99% job hiring and unemployment will look like. As we always say---those 5% global banking players black, white, and brown citizens are always under the bus after ROBBER BARON few decades.
Projecting the Next
Politburo Standing Committee
Analysis of appointments to the Politburo Standing Committee of the Chinese Communist Party shows that over the past two decades three simple rules have been followed. These rules offer a means to project appointments to the Standing Committee at the upcoming 19th Party Congress in 2017. Whether in fact the Xi leadership follows the precedents set down in past appointments or instead sets them aside offers
a key benchmark against which to assess Xi Jinping’s strength as party leader.
The Politburo Standing Committee has been the party’s key decision-making body since the beginning of the reform era in the late 1970s. Appointments to the body are routinely made at the party’s national congress, held every five years, and the subsequent first plenum of the new Central Committee appointed by the party congress. The party has never publicly explained how it makes decisions as to whom it appoints to the Politburo Standing Committee. Observers outside the party in China, Hong Kong, and elsewhere have filled this information vacuum with speculation based on presumptions of factional competition, bargaining among factional chieftains, and intense jockeying among potential candidates in the run-up to a party congress.
Close analysis of Standing Committee appointments over the past four party congresses, however, sheds different light on leadership procedures in this highly sensitive area.
Specifically, examination of Standing Committee leader retirements and appointments at the 1997 15th, 2002 16th, 2007 17th, and 2012 18th Party Congresses shows that three basic
rules have been followed:
First, retirement of both Standing Committee and regular members of the Politburo has followed a defined age limit. At the 15th Party Congress in 1997, the mandatory retirement age was, with one significant exception, 70 or older. At the 16th Congress
in 2002, the retirement age was lowered to 68 or older, and it has been rigorously followed since.
Second, with the sole exception of younger leaders promoted onto the Standing Committee in preparation to succeed as party general secretary and PRC premier, new appointments to the Standing Committee have been drawn exclusively from the pool of regular members not retiring from the full Politburo.
Third, from among the pool of eligible Politburo members, appointments to the Standing Committee have been made on the basis of age. None of these rules has been explicitly acknowledged in publicly available party documents or leader statements or in PRC official media commentary. Their existence is
instead inferred from the attributes of leaders appointed to the Politburo Standing
The appendix to this article lists all members of the Politburo Standing Committee and regular and alternate members of the full Politburo--together
with their birthdates, ages at the time of successive party congresses, as well as other data--since the 14th
Party Congress in 1992.
The existence of the First Rule--mandatory retirement of Politburo members (including those in the Standing Committee)--has been long recognized by observers. Examination of the membership of the Politburo and its
Standing Committee and their respective ages at the time of the 15th Party Congress in 1997 demonstrates that an age 70 or older retirement rule had been imposed for the first time. The single exception to this rule was the reappointment of General Secretary Jiang Zemin, who exceeded the age limit by a year, likely as a result of bargaining involved in setting it.
Inspection of Politburo appointments at the 14th Party Congress shows by contrast that no age limit existed at that time. Similarly, examination of appointments to the Politburo and its Standing Committee at the 16th
Party Congress in 2002 shows that the mandatory retirement age had been lowered from 70 to 68, without exception. As the appendix demonstrates, the age 68 or older rule was upheld thereafter at the 17th
Party Congress in 2007 and the 18th in 2012.
Though never acknowledged by the party publicly, this age criterion is known widely among Chinese observers as “(sixty-)seven up, (sixty-)eight down” (七上八下).
The Second Rule
service on the outgoing Politburo as a criterion for promotion to the incoming Standing Committee--has not been remarked on by Chinese or foreign observers, but its existence is evident upon inspection of each Standing Committee membership since 1997. With two exceptions, all leaders--30 out of 32--appointed to the Politburo Standing Committee between 1997 and 2012 were promoted from among the membership of the preceding Politburo. The two exceptions were Xi Jinping and Li Keqiang, appointed at the 17th Party Congress in 2007.
Neither had previous experience serving on the full Politburo, and they were added to prepare them to succeed Hu Jintao as party general secretary and Wen Jiabao as premier, respectively, in 2012.
The Third Rule
The Third Rule--selection of Standing Committee members according to age--emerges clearly when the leadership is assessed using the concept of generational cohorts.
The CCP constitution mandates that national party congresses convene every five years, a stipulation that the party has rigorously observed since 1982, when the current constitution was adopted at the 12th Party Congress. This regularity in convocation of party congresses means that Politburo members serve five
-year terms. This stipulation, in combination with the age 68 retirement norm, effectively creates a calculus of retirement and succession, dividing Politburo members into cohorts based on their terms of membership and the dates of their anticipated retirement. For example, according to the age 68 retirement rule, all Politburo leaders born during the years 1930 to 1934 were expected to retire at the 16th
Congress in 2002. Similarly, all Politburo leaders born
during the years 1935 to 1939 were mandated to retire at the 17th Congress in 2007, and all members born du
ring the years 1940 to 1944 were expected to retire at the 18th Party Congress.
Hong Kong and Western observers of China’s leadership politics have grown accustomed to describing CCP leaders in terms of leadership generations, even though PRC media no longer do so. The designation of “leadership generations” goes back to 1989, when, in the aftermath of the Tiananmen crisis and the removal of party chief Zhao Ziyang, Deng
Xiaoping called new General Secretary Jiang Zemin the “core leader” of the “third generation” leadership collective. He further described Mao Zedong as “core leader of the first generation leadership collective” and himself as “core leader” of the second.
Throughout his 13-year tenure as general secretary, Jiang was routinely referred to in these terms.
From the very beginning of his tenure as party chief in 2002, PRC media as a rule did not refer to Hu Jintao as “core leader” of the “fourth generation” leadership. This omission was one of several steps to reduce the stature of the party general secretary relative to his
Politburo colleagues and to reinforce collective leadership processes, a practice that has continued in the Xi period. Reference to “leadership generations” has therefore fallen out of use in PRC media, although foreign observers continue to use it.
Following that convention in referring to Hu Jintao as a fourth generation leader and Xi Jinping as a fifth-generation leader, Politburo cohorts may be grouped accordingly. Thus, because Hu served two terms as party chief, the “fourth-generation” Politburo members divide into two groups--a senior group that includes those in Hu’s five-year age cohort and a junior group that includes those who fall into the next five-
Because Xi is likely intended also to serve two five-year terms, the “fifth-generation” leadership also divides into two--a senior cohort and a junior cohort. Using this terminology, Politburo leadership generations break down as follows
We are simply looking at ONE Foreign Economic Zone nation---here is China---but all third world Foreign Economic Zones overseas whether ASIAN, ARABIC, AFRICAN, SOUTH PACIFIC all have these extreme wealth extreme poverty wages and work conditions. When our global labor pool 99% white collar professionals like DOCTORS are brought to US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES allowed to earn what is close to a US quality of life salary-----BASIC INCOME MOVING FORWARD has a goal of bringing ALL wages in US Foreign Economic Zones down to these overseas FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE levels. This will happen in only a decade or two if we DO NOT STOP MOVING FORWARD US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE status.
If doctors are earning so little of course our 99% of WE THE PEOPLE in all other job categories will earn little to nothing. This also brings to our US CITIES DEEMED FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES bad attitudes and anger from those global labor pool facing continuous exploitation from global banking 1%. Our US 99% WE THE PEOPLE getting that same frustration and anger as MOVING FORWARD kills our US domestic, local free market economy making our communities FAILED STATES.
The answer to COULD YOU EVER AFFORD IN US TO EARN SO LITTLE----that is what BASIC INCOME does in US ---builds an income structure to do just that. Now, our far-right wing global banking 1% MARXISTS wanting to sell to our 99% of US poor that bringing down those white collar professions is EQUALITY---when the goal is enslaving those 99% ----are 5% GLOBAL BANKING PLAYERS
Don't be fooled by classism------REAL left social progressives have always wanted to LIFT wages for our 99% of workers---global banking 5% players want to install EXTREME WEALTH EXTREME POVERTY MOVING FORWARD.
Countries Where Doctors Get Paid the Least
Posted on July 13, 2015 by Drpost —
In some countries, physicians make less than $800/year
According to the 2015 Medscape Physician Compensation Report, many U.S. physicians believe they are not fairly compensated for their work. Less than half of the American ophthalmologists and general surgeons surveyed believe they are fairly compensated for their work and sacrifice.
One of the most common questions from medical professionals concerned about their compensation is, “What do medical jobs pay in other parts of the world?” It is a simple question on the surface, but calculating real incomes can be complex.
There are many factors that must be included when calculating physicians’ real incomes all around the world including:
- Varying cost of living between countries
- Differences in tax rates between countries
- Differences in overhead for various medical field jobs
- Different medical field jobs have different pay rates in each country
- Different demand for medical jobs in each country
- Different forms of remuneration for different specialties and medical practices
It’s worth examining the pay rates of physicians within the OECD countries separately because these countries all have advanced medical systems. OECD stands for the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. It is an international economic organization that has 34 member countries, including the United States.
It should come as no surprise that the highest paid physicians in the world are from the Netherlands and the United States. The relatively high cost of medical services in the United States drives physician salaries. Be forewarned: if you are from the United States or the Netherlands, the lowest rates of pay that doctors receive may come as a shock to you!
Physicians with the Lowest Incomes — Relative Remuneration
One useful comparison when evaluating physicians’ incomes is looking at how much they are paid relative to other people in the economy. In the OECD, general practitioners are paid the least in the following countries:
- Hungary (1.4 times the average wage)
- Estonia (1.7 times the average wage)
- Australia (1.7 times the average wage)
- Netherlands (1.7 times the average wage)
- Finland (1.8 times the average wage)
- Slovakia (1.9 times the average wage)
Specialists in the OECD are paid the least in the following countries:
- Hungary (1.6 times the average wage)
- Norway (1.8 times the average wage)
- Slovakia (1.8 times the average wage)
- Estonia (2.1 times the average wage)
- Finland/United Kingdom (2.6 times the average wage)
The OECD report points out that even this form of comparison may not be entirely accurate because of different forms of bonuses, practice expenses, and other informal payments.
Physicians in Hungary can earn 10 times less than doctors in other OECD countries. It is common for well trained physicians to receive only 270,000 HUF or $1,000 per month in Hungary (Lestyánszky, 2015).
Other medical jobs in Hungary also have a relatively low salary including nurses and health administrators. Health workers can earn as little as 141,000 HUF or $520 per month (Lestyánszky, 2015).
In terms of all European countries (including those not in the OECD), the only countries that may have a lower wage for doctors are Romania and Bulgaria (MEDLINES – Medical Headlines, 2013).
Lowest Paid Doctors in the World
In many countries, physicians earn less than people in occupations that require less training and qualifications. In those countries, physicians are often regarded as public servants who do not need require high levels of compensation.
It should be no surprise that developing nations pay their physicians the least. In many areas of China, for example, doctors are paid about 2,524 Yuan–$406 a month (China.org.cn, 2015). To give that some perspective, a hotel receptionist in China can earn 2,507 Yuan, or about $403 USD per month.
Another country with extremely low salaries for doctors is Egypt. When physicians went on strike in 2011, they were earning $46 a month when working in a public hospital (Yahoo News, 2015). Doctors in Egypt have made some ground since then, but are still paid very poorly compared to physicians in the rest of the world.
Cuba pays physicians even less. The country also has one of the highest numbers of physicians (per capita) in the world (Data.worldbank.org, 2015). Cuba has been training thousands of doctors every year for many decades and leads the world with the lowest patient to doctor ratio, 155:1, while the U.S. trails way behind at 396:1 (Souers, 2012). With a surplus of Cuban doctors, Cuba may feel less incentive or ability to pay physicians too much. Just a few years ago, Cuban doctors received an estimated wage of between $30 and $50 per month (Newman, 2012)—arguably the lowest paid doctors in the world. However, the climate in Cuba is changing for doctors. A year ago, the most qualified Cuban physicians (with two specialties) were able to earn up to $67 per month (Associated Press, 2014).
It is always eye-opening and humbling to look at these figures. What could you ever afford with an income of $67 per month in the United States?
Here we are today in US having national media tell us about all those US CORPORATIONS moved to overseas FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES having been enfolded into OLD WORLD GLOBAL 1% KINGS AND QUEENS corporations and how enslaving those global factories and global corporate campuses are---same news as CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA. This is what will now come to US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES for our global 99% labor pool AND our US 99% WE THE PEOPLE black, white, and brown citizens whether shipped off as EX-PAT global labor pool or allowed a job in US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONES.
We KNOW Washington Post selling propaganda as news is not providing REAL wage and work condition information so we don't believe these Asian workers are even getting these wage and work condition structures. What US 99% WE THE PEOPLE allowed to GO AROUND these few decades of CLINTON/BUSH/OBAMA global slave trading distribution system of course COMES AROUND to US 99% WE THE PEOPLE black, white, and brown citizens.
THIS is what MOVING FORWARD US FOREIGN ECONOMIC ZONE job creation, wage, workplace conditions will look like no matter how much US national news ties US viewers to RUSSIA RUSSIA NORTH KOREA NUCLEAR WAR ELECTION FRAUDS-----all FAKE NEWS.
DEVOTED TO WOMEN'S ENTREPRENEURSHIP-----know what? These global 1% and 2% of women not only could care less about the 99% of women---they actually have more contempt for women then those global 1% of men
'She also spoke Tuesday in Berlin as part of a panel, alongside Queen Maxima of the Netherlands and International Monetary Fund Managing Director Christine Lagarde, devoted to women’s entrepreneurship'.
Workers endured long hours, low pay at Chinese factory used by Ivanka Trump’s clothing-maker
By Drew Harwell April 25, 2017 Email the author
Workers at a factory in China used by the company that makes clothing for Ivanka Trump’s fashion line and other brands worked nearly 60 hours a week to earn wages of little more than $62 a week, according to a factory audit released Monday.
The factory’s 80 workers knit clothes for the contractor, G-III Apparel Group, which has held the exclusive license to make the Ivanka Trump brand’s $158 dresses, $79 blouses and other clothes since 2012. The company also makes clothes for Calvin Klein, Tommy Hilfiger and other brands.
Trump has no leadership role in G-III, and the report did not give the factory’s name or location, or say whether it was working on Ivanka-brand products at the time of the inspection.
Inspectors with the Fair Labor Association, an industry monitoring group whose members include Apple and Nike, found two dozen violations of international labor standards during a two-day tour of the factory in October, saying in a report that workers faced daunting hours, high turnover, and pay near or below China’s minimum wage.
The inspection offers a rare look at the working conditions of the global manufacturing machine that helped make Trump’s fashion brand a multimillion-dollar business.
Its release also comes as the president’s daughter has sought to cast herself as both a champion of workplace issues and a defender of her father’s “buy American, hire American” agenda. Trump, whose book “Women Who Work” debuts next week, was in Germany on Tuesday for public discussions about global entrepreneurship and empowerment.
“We can add billions to the global economy by creating an enabling environment, increasing women’s labour force participation and business ownership, and improving the productivity of their work,” Trump wrote in a Financial Times essay Monday.
OH, REALLY???? DON'T YOU MEAN GETTING WOMEN IN THIRD WORLD NATIONS NOT ALLOWED TO WORK TO WORK FOR THOSE SLAVE LABOR WAGES?
Trump’s company declined to comment on the factory inspection. Messages left with G-III were not returned.
Now an official adviser to her father’s White House, Trump stepped down from her management role but retains an ownership interest in her name-brand company. Its assets were moved into a trust that is now overseen by her husband’s siblings. Trump is the sole beneficiary of the trust, which is valued at more than $50 million.
Chinese factories are by far the dominant suppliers for Ivanka clothes, though G-III also works with manufacturers across Vietnam, Bangladesh and South America. G-III factories overseas have shipped more than 110 tons of Ivanka-brand blouses, skirts, dresses and other garments to the United States since October, shipping data shows.
The clothing line licensed by President Trump’s private business is also almost entirely made in foreign factories. Trump last week signed an executive order that he said would push the government to “aggressively promote and use American-made goods and to ensure that American labor is hired to do the job.”
Workers at the G-III factory in China were required to work 57 hours a week “on a regular basis” to hit production targets, inspectors found. Though Chinese law sets the limit for overtime at 36 hours per month, workers in all of the factory’s departments exceeded that limit, working up to 82 hours of overtime a month between September 2015 and August 2016.
The factory’s workers made between 1,879 and 2,088 yuan a month, or roughly $255 to $283, which would be below minimum wage in some parts of China. The average manufacturing employee in urban China made twice as much money as the factory’s workers, or roughly 4,280 yuan a month, according to national data from 2014.
Fewer than a third of the factory’s workers were offered legally mandated coverage under China’s “social insurance” benefits, including a pension and medical, maternity, unemployment and work-related injury insurance, inspectors found. The factory also did not contribute, as legally required, to a fund designed to help workers afford housing, inspectors said.
Workers earned five days of leave a year, though a small fraction of experienced employees were eligible for more. The factory did not have a union, inspectors said, and the workers’ lone representative was a factory appointee.
Inspectors also cited the factory for a number of workplace safety concerns. It did not train loading workers on safety techniques or provide employees with equipment that could reduce injury, including lifting belts or seats with backrests.
The factory, which began operating in 1992, had also never sought an assessment of occupational disease hazards like those common among workers dealing with repetitive tasks and harsh chemicals.
Two inspectors from SMT-Global, a third-party monitoring group, inspected the factory one month before President Trump’s election victory. The Fair Labor Association then alerted G-III to the problems it had discovered — including 24 violations of standards set by the United Nations’ International Labor Organization — and asked what steps it would take in response.
The factory pledged to make some progress to improve training, assess hazards, hire more workers and reduce overtime demands. But it did not commit to increasing worker pay and at times pushed back against recommendations that could improve workplace safety.
Of occupational hazards, inspectors wrote that the “factory thinks the worker’s health is covered by social welfare and insurance policy, and working conditions such as chair and loading staff safety are not as important.”
The Washington-based Fair Labor Association was founded in 1999 by a group of nonprofits, universities and clothing companies after a series of scandals over sweatshop labor and other abuses.
The group has inspected more than 1,500 factories used by its affiliate companies, including G-III, whose contract factories in China, India and Pakistan have been inspected seven times since 2007. Factories are chosen at random for inspection, though company leaders are alerted of the audits beforehand, a Fair Labor Association spokesman said.
Other G-III factories in China have been cited for similar issues. In a 2015 Fair Labor Association audit, inspectors found that 15 percent of one factory’s workers made below minimum wage, or as little as $3.30 a day. The factory was also cited for weak safety protections, including running most of its sewing machines without needle guards and stocking its first-aid kits with only cotton swabs and Band-Aids.
Since partnering with Ivanka Trump’s company in 2012, G-III has been the sole licensor of Ivanka-brand clothing, though other firms hold contracts to make the brand’s shoes, handbags and jewelry. Trump has championed the company, saying in a 2012 statement that “G-III has distinguished itself as a trusted partner for some of the world’s finest and most visible brands.”
Global sales of Trump’s brand have boomed in the months since her father began his pursuit of the White House. Net sales for her clothing collection soared by $17.9 million in the year that ended Jan. 31, G-III data shows.
An Ivanka company executive said the brand saw some of its “best performance ever” in February, the same month President Trump’s senior adviser Kellyanne Conway told Fox News viewers to “go buy Ivanka’s stuff.” Conway was counseled by White House officials after the statement, which appeared to violate a federal rule banning public officials from endorsing private products.
Ivanka Trump sat next to German Chancellor Angela Merkel last month during a White House roundtable discussion on workforce development.
She also spoke Tuesday in Berlin as part of a panel, alongside Queen Maxima of the Netherlands and International Monetary Fund Managing Director Christine Lagarde, devoted to women’s entrepreneurship.
We KNOW this media outlet is global banking 1%---DARKMOON----but the talking points are real global banking 1%-----what always happens as global banking create those 5% players----is that they are PURGED either killed, pushed into gulags, sent away as EX-PAT overseas slave labor. History repeats itself.
We know TROTSKY, LENIN, STALIN were those same global banking 5% players back then as we see MOVING FORWARD today with GLOBAL BANKING ALT RIGHT ALT LEFT 5% freemason/Greek players. The mind of crazy as bats global 1% extreme wealth has always been to get rid of INSIDERS after ROBBER BARON looting and sacking of civilized nations is done----as today in US MOVING FORWARD.
THE MASTER PLANS CREATED IN US CITIES IN REAGAN/CLINTON ERA ----HAD THESE CAST OF CHARACTERS ALL MAPPED AND INSTALLED WITH CORRUPTED US ELECTIONS--TRUMP IS SIMPLY MOVING FORWARD ONE WORLD ONE GOVERNANCE FOR ONLY THE GLOBAL 1%.
Hmmmmm, Supreme Court Justice ROBERTS installed by BUSH-----WOW that is really foreign sovereign MALTA OLD WORLD GLOBAL 1% KINGS AND QUEENS!
'Paul Craig Roberts (born April 3, 1939) is an American economist, journalist, blogger, and former civil servant. He is best known as a journalist specializing in economic affairs from an anti-establishment, liberal conservative perspective.
He was the United States Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy under President Reagan in 1981'
Sorry-----Mr Paul Craig Roberts---not anti-establishment and not LIBERAL CONSERVATIVE whatever that means.
A Stalinist Purge In America?
Admin March 8, 2018March 8, 2018 Other Writers By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
Is America doomed to a Stalinist purge?
This year could turn out to be a defining year for the United States. It is clear that the US military/security complex and the Democratic Party aided by their media vassals intend to purge Donald Trump from the presidency. One of the open conspirators declared the other day that we have to get rid of Trump now before he wins re-election in a landslide.
It is now a known fact that Russiagate is a conspiracy of the military/security complex, Obama regime, Democratic National Committee, and presstitute media to destroy President Trump. However, the presstitutes never present this fact to the American public. Nevertheless, a majority of Americans do not believe the Democrats and the presstitutes that Trump conspired with Putin to steal the election.
One question before us is: Will Mueller and the Democrats succeed in purging Donald Trump, as Joseph Stalin succeed in purging Lenin’s Bolsheviks, including Nikolai Bukharin, who Lenin called “the golden boy of the revolution,” or will the Democratic Party and the presstitutes discredit themselves such that the country moves far to the right?
Stalin didn’t need facts and could frame-up people at will as he had absolute power. In the US the presstitute media, like Stalin, does not concern itself with facts, but the presstitutes do not have absolute power. Indeed, few people trust the presstitutes, and even fewer trust Mueller.
Many are puzzled that President Trump has not moved against his enemies as they have no evidence for their charges. Indeed, Mueller’s indictments have nothing whatsoever to do with the Russiagate accusations. Why are not Mueller, Comey, Rosenstein, and all the rest indicted for their clear and obvious crimes?
America’s future turns on the answer to this question. Is it because the Trump regime is letting the presstitutes and the Democrats destroy their credibility, or is it because Trump is weak, confused, and doesn’t know how to use the powers of his office to slay those who intend to slay him?
If it is the former, then America will move far to the right. If it is the latter, America will have had its own Stalinist purge, and the purge is likely to follow the Stalin model and to extend down to those who voted for Trump.
The failure of the integrity of the liberal/progressive/left has left the US facing two unpalatable outcomes. One is a right-wing government empowered by the left’s self-defeat. The other is the rise of the Identity Politics state in which oppression will be based on gender, race, and beliefs.
This is not the only issue that could be resolved in 2018. There are others, and the other two major ones are the economic situation and the military situation.
For a decade the central banks of the West and Japan have printed money far in excess of the increase in real goods and services. This money printing has not caused massive inflation of consumer prices. Instead it has caused inflation in financial instruments and real estate.
The high Dow Jones average is the product of this money printing. Can the central banks stop printing money and allow interest rates to rise, thus collapsing equity prices and pension funds? What would be the consequences?
Militarily, since World War II Washington has relied on its armed predominance to dictate to the world. But now the President of Russia has announced possession of what are from the US perspective super weapons that do not, as some claim, give Russia parity with the US, but give Russia immense military superiority over the US, indeed over the entire Western alliance.
Russia’s capability, which the US has no chance of matching any time soon, means that Washington’s policy of intimidation has no chance of intimidating Russia. If Washington’s policy toward Russia continues in a hostile demeanor, Russia is likely to kick Washington’s teeth out.
The cat has been belled. America is no longer “the sole superpower.” It is a second-rate power whose hubris is likely to do it in. Will it happen in 2018?
Here is our US NEW YORK TIMES selling this idea that the US unemployment rate is actually 3.9%----IT IS A MIRACLE -----AND ABSOLUTELY FAKE.
The problem for our US 99% WE THE PEOPLE and our global 99% of new immigrant workers is this: global banking 1% always find those 5% to the 1% black, white, and brown players who are sociopaths---living for today---show me the money and we'll do anything we are told citizens not caring if they are thrown under the bus-----these ROBBER BARON POLS AND PLAYERS aging out-----as global 2% are being installed in US local, state, and national elections.
Meanwhile those US 99% of WE THE PEOPLE and our 99% new immigrant labor pool who actually care about the future for our young adults children and grandchildren must WAKE UP---SHAKE THESE 5% PLAYERS out of office and stop allowing FARM TEAM GLOBAL 2% fill our people's US government.
It is absolutely unbelievable that our strongest in world history US journalism could be captured and made FAKE NEWS in only a few decades!
'The last time the unemployment rate remained below 4 percent for a sustained period was in the late 1960s'.
Unemployment Rate Hits 3.9%, a Rare Low, as Job Market Becomes More Competitive
By NATALIE KITROEFFMAY 4, 2018
The Labor Department released its April hiring and unemployment report on Friday, providing the latest snapshot of the economy.
■ The unemployment rate was 3.9 percent, the lowest rate since 2000 and a sign that the job market has become even more competitive. It had been 4.1 percent since October.
■ 164,000 jobs were added last month. Wall Street economists had expected an increase of about 193,000, according to Bloomberg.
■ The Labor Department revised the job figures for February slightly downward, but revised the numbers for March sharply upward. The result was a net increase of 30,000 jobs, compared with previous estimates.
■ Average earnings rose by 4 cents an hour last month and are up 2.6 percent over the past year.
American employers continue to find reasons to expand their payrolls. April marked the 91st consecutive month of job gains, far and away the longest streak of increases on record. The average monthly gain has declined each year since 2014, but that’s normal for an economy that’s been in recovery for such an extended period.
“We’ve continued to add jobs routinely every month for so long, and the unemployment rate we have reached is amazing,” said Catherine Barrera, chief economist of the online job site
The drop in the unemployment rate may be partly explained by a contraction in the labor force last month. Still, the jobless rate is reaching historically low levels. In the last 60 years, there has been only one sustained period where unemployment stayed below 4 percent: the late 1960s.
Ms. Barrera said it was too early to worry about whether the economy is overheating
When the jobless rate hit these levels right before the dot-com bubble burst, the labor-force participation rate was significantly higher than it is today.“It’s easy to try to analogize and say that’s what we should be preparing ourselves for right now,” Ms. Barrera said. That kind of thinking might prompt some employers to cut back on investments or hiring, which could begin to slow growth.
President Trump’s flirtation with a trade war has thrust uncertainty into the overall economic picture. The White House has offered little clarity about whether its newly imposed steel and aluminum tariffs will extend to allies like Mexico, Canada and the European Union, and it seems no closer to smoothing over economic tensions with China.
Economists say it is too soon to tell how employers may change their staffing or expansion plans in response to the tariffs on Chinese goods, or to Beijing’s retaliation. But there are signs that companies that buy metals are feeling the effects already. The Institute for Supply Management said this week that manufacturing activity grew in April at its slowest pace since last July.
Uncertainty over the price of raw materials could prompt factories to cut back from their recent hiring spree. Manufacturers added 73,000 jobs in the first quarter, much more than in the same period last year.
Wages and the Fed
Economists expect that low unemployment will lead to increasingly big pay bumps for workers as employers fight over a dwindling number of candidates. But this recovery has so far bucked that conventional wisdom.
Wages increased by 2.6 percent over the past year, not much faster than inflation. That modest uptick probably would not prompt the Federal Reserve to raise its benchmark interest rate more aggressively than it has signaled, economists said. Projections released at a Fed meeting this week suggested that officials were leaning toward a total of three rate increases this year.
“Wage growth is just not picking up as we would have expected at this point,” said Matthew Luzzetti, a senior economist at Deutsche Bank. As a result, he said, the Fed will be able “to continue moving gradually.”
One mystery of the American economy is this: How can employers can continue to raise pay so gradually, when the labor market keeps getting tighter? In the 1990s and early 2000s, the last time the job market looked like this, wages for rank-and-file workers rose at an annual rate of around 4 percent.
A host of explanations — ranging from globalization to slow gains in productivity — have been offered to explain the disconnect. Ms. Barrera says businesses may just be stuck in their ways.
“People are creatures of habit,” Ms. Barrera said. “If you have been using a strategy that has been working for you for a number of years, you aren’t going to suddenly change it.”
Who’s Been Left Out
Even though the labor force shrank over all, the report offered signs that the strong economy is coaxing some people back into the working world. A measure of unemployment that includes people who had given up looking for work hit 7.8 percent, a level not seen since 2001.
“We have realized that there were even more workers on the sidelines than we previously thought,” said Martha Gimbel, an economist at Indeed.com, a job-search site. Ms. Gimbel said that her site had seen an increase in people searching for things like “background check” and “full time,” which could indicate that the bustling job market has become irresistible for workers who might have been discouraged by a particularly bruising recession a decade ago.
For some groups, the market has been tougher. The unemployment rate for black workers, for example, has consistently hovered well above the rate for white workers, even as employers complain loudly about a labor shortage in sectors like construction and trucking. The job market has improved for black workers in recent years — they still faced a jobless rate of 6.6 percent in April, the lowest level on record. But it was still much higher than the 3.6 percent for whites.
If the numbers were reversed, “the country would be up in arms,” said Andre Perry of the Brookings Institution, whose research focuses on race and structural inequality. Differences in education or degrees don’t explain that gaping disparity, according to federal data.