So how do you explain the declining soup force participation rate of nettles?
Further research is called for. Please see the attached grant application.
He seems to be arguing that while women have to work to earn money even if the pay is low, for men deciding to work is a choice which they make on the basis of whether it will improve their social status.
Women's pay isn't dropping as much (or at all) for lower-paid workers, so the supply of labor from women has held constant. If it were dropping as much as for men, women would start leaving the labor force more. Why the absolute pay levels needed to keep women in the labor force are lower than those needed to keep men in the labor force is exogenous to my model.
What are these men doing, who are leaving the workforce? Just retiring?
Becoming drummers?
4- Aha, a hypothesis with a path to experiment! So Moby thinks we should reduce pay for women to see if they then also drop out at higher rates. Why do you hate women Moby?
5: retiring, re-retiring, reducing their hours, and/or turning to black economy work, I imagine. (The big assumption here is that this isn't just happening because real wages are falling, of course, as Moby says!)
I thought it was proven that the reason why more young men aren't working is the higher quality of video games. Also the number of boomer parents that did basement renovations.
10: Walking around parts of town would lead me to add "unable to earn a wage sufficient to afford housing and therefore pushed out of the labor market."
Isn't the labor economy unusually strong? I thought most of the lack of participation was the three million or so in the 59-62 age group that noped out during the pandemic.
When I went in to get some donuts on Sunday, there was an older woman who clearly had trouble walking there to pick up a doordash order she was to deliver.
I don't much like things maple flavored unless I'm having pancakes. But whatever chemical abomination is used to make "maple" on donuts is great.
I did google it but just got some incomprehensible chemistry databases.
Civilian labor force participation rates, 2019 through 2022 (Jan-Nov each year):
16-24: 55.9%, 53.9%, 55.5%, 55.5%
25-34: 82.8%, 81.4%, 81.9%, 83.2%
35-44: 83.1%, 82.3%, 82%, 83%
45-54: 81.4%, 80.6%, 80.7%, 81.1%
55-64: 65.4%, 64.7%, 64.6%, 65.1%
65+: 20.1%, 19.5%, 18.8%, 19.2%
So the youngs are working more than before! The older half, only down a little after 2022 recovery, except seniors.
https://www.seriouseats.com/sotolon-flavor-molecule
SP's being cute. The string is a way of representing a structure via text. It's called SMILES.
Atrios at Eschaton has been talking about how the usual suspects can't admit that wages have anything to do with the labor supply for a long time. I don't know if they can keep you from getting your well deserved prize or not Moby.
In the old days a woman only had to make enough money to support herself, a man had to make enough money to support a family. I remember Susan Faludi's Stiffed talked about this some.
Dave Chappelle had a bit; "If a man could fuck a woman in a cardboard box" to the effect that he wouldn't need a job. Some men might feel that a job at starvation wages doesn't do anything to improve his prospects.
22.1: Blogs are the wave of the future.
Atrios can be Wallace to my Darwin.
20: That's too short of a history. It used to be that 98% of men from 24 to 55 were working. Back when bras were shaped like cones.
Good point. I have no idea, but it would matter for this.
No one wants to work anymore. They're spending too much time on the job.
Selling feet pics is an option, but apparently toenail fungus and being a man in his fifties keep that from working for me.
20: match it with the population distribution. Gen Z is smaller than the boomers.
26: Everyone.
30: How does that add context? This is percentage participation within each age range. Unless you're looking at an all-adults figure and wondering why it's not a simple average of each, or something.
31: there may be a higher number of e.g. 65+ stepping back than 16-25, even if the percentages have rebounded. The answer is different if e.g. there are a bunch of 62 year olds who retired early when the stonks went nuts/died of COVID vs. 23 yo not working due to whatever trendy reason is postulated.
Covid-wise, it is the olds who haven't come back into the workforce. But I'm a big picture thinker looking at a trend that has pre-dated covid.
I would like to second the Hick Hypothesis.
Also, I would like to point out that anchoring effects probably matter here. Women in certain sectors and roles have always had crappy wages. If they made the choice to join the workforce regardless, that was their starting place. Current-day crappy wages are just a continuation of that reality.
But if men in lower level jobs used to have semi-decent wages, and now have the option of either crappy wages or no work, they are often still "anchored" to that previous, higher wage and they experience the new option as much more objectionable and distasteful. So for them, exiting the labor market feels much more logical.
I will also point out that there are WAY more single custodial mothers in the US than single custodial fathers. Exiting the formal labor market is a much different choice to select when there are no small humans depending on you to survive.