Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Diego Mamani
Participant[quote=Arraya]Among those omitted: part-time workers who are looking for full-time jobs and frustrated job seekers who abandon their job search altogether.[/quote]
These two groups are rightfully omitted. Part-time workers who want to work full-time are not unemployed. The argument could be made that they are under employed, but certainly not unemployed.
Finally, people who do not work and are not looking for work are, by definition, not part of the labor force. The unemployment rate would be meaningless if those in the numerator (number of unmeployed persons) are not also counted in the denominator (the labor force).
Participant[quote=Arraya]Among those omitted: part-time workers who are looking for full-time jobs and frustrated job seekers who abandon their job search altogether.[/quote]
These two groups are rightfully omitted. Part-time workers who want to work full-time are not unemployed. The argument could be made that they are under employed, but certainly not unemployed.
Finally, people who do not work and are not looking for work are, by definition, not part of the labor force. The unemployment rate would be meaningless if those in the numerator (number of unmeployed persons) are not also counted in the denominator (the labor force).
Participant[quote=Arraya]Among those omitted: part-time workers who are looking for full-time jobs and frustrated job seekers who abandon their job search altogether.[/quote]
These two groups are rightfully omitted. Part-time workers who want to work full-time are not unemployed. The argument could be made that they are under employed, but certainly not unemployed.
Finally, people who do not work and are not looking for work are, by definition, not part of the labor force. The unemployment rate would be meaningless if those in the numerator (number of unmeployed persons) are not also counted in the denominator (the labor force).
Participant[quote=Arraya]Among those omitted: part-time workers who are looking for full-time jobs and frustrated job seekers who abandon their job search altogether.[/quote]
These two groups are rightfully omitted. Part-time workers who want to work full-time are not unemployed. The argument could be made that they are under employed, but certainly not unemployed.
Finally, people who do not work and are not looking for work are, by definition, not part of the labor force. The unemployment rate would be meaningless if those in the numerator (number of unmeployed persons) are not also counted in the denominator (the labor force).
December 17, 2009 at 12:32 PM in reply to: What do you guys think about the new Mira Mesa Prison? #494985ParticipantHey, even the San Diego Mayer (sic) attended the ceremony!!
(UCGal, the joke’s on you -or us- the OP’s account was created only minutes ago)
December 17, 2009 at 12:32 PM in reply to: What do you guys think about the new Mira Mesa Prison? #495142ParticipantHey, even the San Diego Mayer (sic) attended the ceremony!!
(UCGal, the joke’s on you -or us- the OP’s account was created only minutes ago)
December 17, 2009 at 12:32 PM in reply to: What do you guys think about the new Mira Mesa Prison? #495526ParticipantHey, even the San Diego Mayer (sic) attended the ceremony!!
(UCGal, the joke’s on you -or us- the OP’s account was created only minutes ago)
December 17, 2009 at 12:32 PM in reply to: What do you guys think about the new Mira Mesa Prison? #495612ParticipantHey, even the San Diego Mayer (sic) attended the ceremony!!
(UCGal, the joke’s on you -or us- the OP’s account was created only minutes ago)
December 17, 2009 at 12:32 PM in reply to: What do you guys think about the new Mira Mesa Prison? #495855ParticipantHey, even the San Diego Mayer (sic) attended the ceremony!!
(UCGal, the joke’s on you -or us- the OP’s account was created only minutes ago)
ParticipantActually, HOA is only $293. Isn’t 70% occupancy too low? If you price it right, and the place is decent, there’s no reason why it shouldn’t by occupied in excess of 80%-85% of the time. What I’m missing here?
An important question is what the demographics are around there. $1000-rent for a 3BD appear reasonable, but are there jobs and incomes to support it?
CA Renter Why would some landlords love a situation with low-income tenants, crime, and high turnover? The only explanation I can think of is that you get a higher rent-to-house-price ratio in bad neighborhoods, but then, it’s also more work to manage and maintain and when prices start picking up in the future, SFRs prices will go up first. Many condos don’t even qualify for FHA-backed loans.
ParticipantActually, HOA is only $293. Isn’t 70% occupancy too low? If you price it right, and the place is decent, there’s no reason why it shouldn’t by occupied in excess of 80%-85% of the time. What I’m missing here?
An important question is what the demographics are around there. $1000-rent for a 3BD appear reasonable, but are there jobs and incomes to support it?
CA Renter Why would some landlords love a situation with low-income tenants, crime, and high turnover? The only explanation I can think of is that you get a higher rent-to-house-price ratio in bad neighborhoods, but then, it’s also more work to manage and maintain and when prices start picking up in the future, SFRs prices will go up first. Many condos don’t even qualify for FHA-backed loans.
ParticipantActually, HOA is only $293. Isn’t 70% occupancy too low? If you price it right, and the place is decent, there’s no reason why it shouldn’t by occupied in excess of 80%-85% of the time. What I’m missing here?
An important question is what the demographics are around there. $1000-rent for a 3BD appear reasonable, but are there jobs and incomes to support it?
CA Renter Why would some landlords love a situation with low-income tenants, crime, and high turnover? The only explanation I can think of is that you get a higher rent-to-house-price ratio in bad neighborhoods, but then, it’s also more work to manage and maintain and when prices start picking up in the future, SFRs prices will go up first. Many condos don’t even qualify for FHA-backed loans.
ParticipantActually, HOA is only $293. Isn’t 70% occupancy too low? If you price it right, and the place is decent, there’s no reason why it shouldn’t by occupied in excess of 80%-85% of the time. What I’m missing here?
An important question is what the demographics are around there. $1000-rent for a 3BD appear reasonable, but are there jobs and incomes to support it?
CA Renter Why would some landlords love a situation with low-income tenants, crime, and high turnover? The only explanation I can think of is that you get a higher rent-to-house-price ratio in bad neighborhoods, but then, it’s also more work to manage and maintain and when prices start picking up in the future, SFRs prices will go up first. Many condos don’t even qualify for FHA-backed loans.
ParticipantActually, HOA is only $293. Isn’t 70% occupancy too low? If you price it right, and the place is decent, there’s no reason why it shouldn’t by occupied in excess of 80%-85% of the time. What I’m missing here?
An important question is what the demographics are around there. $1000-rent for a 3BD appear reasonable, but are there jobs and incomes to support it?
CA Renter Why would some landlords love a situation with low-income tenants, crime, and high turnover? The only explanation I can think of is that you get a higher rent-to-house-price ratio in bad neighborhoods, but then, it’s also more work to manage and maintain and when prices start picking up in the future, SFRs prices will go up first. Many condos don’t even qualify for FHA-backed loans.
-
AuthorPosts
