Connecting The Dots --- Global Warming And The Disappearing Male In The Work Force

I don't know if folks caught this but apparently, according to CNBC, American men have been disappearing from the workforce since the 1950s. This is exactly when greenhouse gases started to soar.

Men have been steadily disappearing from the workforce for more than half a century.
In the 1950s, nearly every man in his prime working years was in the labor force, a category that includes both those who are employed and those actively applying for jobs.

The "participation rate" for men ages 25 to 54 stood at 97.7% in early 1956, but drifted downward to a post-war record low of 88.4% at the end of 2012. (It ticked up very slightly at the start of this year to 88.6%.)

So where have all the men workers gone?

Some went into prison. Others are on disability. And still others can't find jobs and have simply given up looking.

That's a pretty dismal way to start the conversation: "some went to prison."

Later in the article:

"The proportion of guys doing nothing has risen," said Gary Burtless, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.

But those guys, I assume are employed by the Federal government....

My hunch is that somehow global warming is responsible. "They" certainly can't blame President Bush ... or can they?

****************************** 

Have you ever noticed that reporters report 97.7% instead of 98% -- it makes the reporting seem so much more credible. Having said that, it is incredible that the "participation" rate was 97.7% in early 1956. No one must have been in prison, or mentally unstable, or living at home with their parents, or physically disabled, or transgendered and confused about their sexual orientation ... whatever ... to have a participation rate of 97.7%. I think that is even higher than the participation rate in the Bakken, and that's saying a lot.

******************************

Now, speaking of percentages. I wonder if anyone caught this? Motley Fool does the same thing with percentages. From a recent article some data points:

• in May, gasoline station sales dwindled by 0.2% (month-over-month). Was the decline in sales related to the drop in gasoline prices? Dwindled by 0.2%? One SUV not stopping by would account for a decrease of 0.2%. Give me a break.
• For every 1% gain in the cost of refineries, the price of gasoline, assuming all things equal, will rise by 0.13%. So, if there's a 10% gain in cost to the refinery, gasoline will go from $3.6900 to $3.6948/gallon. On forty gallons, from $147.60 to 147.79. Give me a break. If you are doing the math, remember, it is 0.13% -- not 1.3%.  And a 10% increase in cost to the refinery would be huge. 
• Marathon Petroleum also experienced a rise in its profit margin as it rose from 7.4% in the first quarter of 2012 to 7.6%. A profit margin rising from 7.4% to 7.6%? Is that even reproducible? Statistically significant? 

That's why I would make a lousy analyst, and probably why I am a lousy investor. I round too many of my numbers.

******************************

 
Chris Matthews blames President O'Bama's poor speech on the sun. I can't make this stuff up.  President O'Bama is struggling but not because of the sun.