"jps" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
m...

No, the proof is in the unemployment rate. Surveyed businesses layoff
workers, yet the unemployment rate goes down. Why? Because the
unemployment rate surveys households...and that means the people in
those
households are working somewhere. Where are they working? Obviously in
businesses not tracked as closely by the payroll data (ie--small
businesses).

And I had understood the jobless rate was determined by claims made at
unemployment offices.

Are you using Fox News surveys?

Only when they're reporting statistics from BLS.

NOYB wrote:

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
news

It's a giggle to watch you grasp at any passing straw as you try to
rationalize the failures of your dumb-as-a-post president.

Grasping at straws, eh?

"Household employment is up 1.19 million so far this year, compared with the
decline of 437,000 in nonfarm payrolls."

That's a net gain for you mathematically impaired.





Uh huh. Perhaps you ought to stop sucking down so much laughing gas.
This president has lost more jobs per month than any other president
since Herbert Hoover.

"John Gaquin" wrote in message
...

"jps" wrote in message

I've heard our increased productivity is indeed due to longer hours and
reduced time off.


(sigh) Learn the words. What you've described above is "production".
Increased _production_ is due to longer hours and reduced time off.

Productivity is a rate. Units per man-hour; giga-units per year; however
you want to measure it is up to you, but it is a rate.

JG


Could also be measured by output per man hour paid.

On Sat, 06 Sep 2003 19:34:53 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...

Remember that when 5% mortgages go to 6%, the interest rate has gone up
only 1%
but the cost of money has increased by a factor of 20%....(6 being a
number
120% as large as 5).

Just when it seems that you do indeed *have* a brain, you post something
like this. If a mortgage rate goes up from 5% to 6%, the monthly payment on
a 30 year mortgage goes up by a little under 12%...not 20%.

Actually, you're *both* wrong--although you are closer with respect to the 15
year mortgage.

Joe Parsons


For a 15 year mortgage, the change is just a little bit under 7%.

"NOYB" wrote in message
m...

"jps" wrote in message
...
"NOYB" wrote in message
m...
No, actually, *you* are wrong. Productivity is a measure of total
man-hours
needed to produce a product. If someone can build 2 widgets per hour
(ie--1/2 man-hour per widget), you don't get increased productivity
numbers
by working that guy 50 hours per week, rather than 40 hours. You
increase
productivity by figuring out a way to get that guy to build 3 widgets
per
hour (1/3 man-hour per widget). Didn't you ever take a business
class?

And do you know for certain that your sources are measuring productivity
in
this manner?

My sources? My source is the BLS:
"The Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor reported
preliminary productivity data--as measured by output per hour of all
persons"

ftp://ftp.bls.gov/pub/news.release/H....08072003.news

Perhaps in academia but not in the commercial markets. Just
because it's how we were taught to think of defining productivity in
school,
that doesn't mean it's the measure being used.

You really are being pretty obtuse. The statistics are from BLS...and
there
own website tells you that they define productivity as "output per hour".


I've heard our increased productivity is indeed due to longer hours and
reduced time off.


Longer hours won't change "output per hour".


I'd like to see your sources and what measures they're really using.

Go to the www.bls.gov website!


The figures easily available to calculate these figures are number of
payroll hours and number (& dollar values) of units produced. What is *not*
easily visible is the amount of labor outsourced by buying parts with a
higher overseas labor content.

It is hard *not* to buy these sub-assemblies from an offshore source. We are
buying some of the finished sub-assemblies for less than we can buy the raw
materials for - before we add labor. At least my company redeployed the
workers instead of laying them off; many workers have not been so fortunate.
If you look at our company from the outside, we have the same number of
workers, but now we produce more finished goods. This makes domestic labor
look more productive - but it is not.

It would take a *lot* more digging to determine how much each individual
worker actually produced.

Mark Browne

Just when it seems that you do indeed *have* a brain, you post something
like this. If a mortgage rate goes up from 5% to 6%, the monthly payment on
a 30 year mortgage goes up by a little under 12%...not 20%.

Sorry, but I'm not the one who needs to see the Wizard about a brain. When
money costs 6%, it *is* 120% as expensive as when it costs 5%.

"So, why doesn't the payment go up by 20?" inquires NOYB.

Good question, Doc. It's because your monthly payment includes principal as
well as interest, and the prinicpal portion of the payment doesn't increase,
only the interest.

Actually, you're *both* wrong--although you are closer with respect to the 15
year mortgage.

Joe Parsons

Actually we're both right, that is if NOYB check his amortization chart before
typing away. We are speaking about two completely different concepts, however.

I didn't ever say the monthly payment went up 20%, just that 6% money is 120%
the cost of 5% money. Math was never my strongest subject, but I would invite
anybody to show me where 5 X 1.2 doesn't equal 6.

NOYB said I lacked a brain because the monthly payment doesn't go up 20% at the
higher rate. No, it doesn't. Part of the money paid back each month reduces the
principal balance.

I thought the guys on the right were supposed to be such financial geniuses!
I guess the tax cuts should have been the first clue. :-)

On 07 Sep 2003 01:39:32 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

Actually, you're *both* wrong--although you are closer with respect to the 15
year mortgage.

Joe Parsons

Actually we're both right, that is if NOYB check his amortization chart before
typing away. We are speaking about two completely different concepts, however.

I didn't ever say the monthly payment went up 20%, just that 6% money is 120%
the cost of 5% money. Math was never my strongest subject, but I would invite
anybody to show me where 5 X 1.2 doesn't equal 6.

Amortization is derived by a fairly complex equation. While it is true that 6%
is 120% of 5%, the cost of the money--and thus the loan--can't be viewed quite
so simply.

NOYB said I lacked a brain because the monthly payment doesn't go up 20% at the
higher rate. No, it doesn't. Part of the money paid back each month reduces the
principal balance.

Now we're back to my objections about the "political" threads in a newsgroup
that is nominally not about politics: there tends to be more than a little
polarization and ill-will generated as a result of the "discussions." The
ill-will is unnecessary, I believe.

Joe Parsons

I thought the guys on the right were supposed to be such financial geniuses!
I guess the tax cuts should have been the first clue. :-)

$100,000 mortgage at 5% for 30 years is $536.83 per month.

$100,000 mortgage at 6% for 30 years is $599.55 per month.

The mortgage payment at 6% is 11.683% more than the payment at 5%.

How am I wrong?





"Joe Parsons" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 06 Sep 2003 19:34:53 GMT, "NOYB" wrote:


"Gould 0738" wrote in message
...

Remember that when 5% mortgages go to 6%, the interest rate has gone up
only 1%
but the cost of money has increased by a factor of 20%....(6 being a
number
120% as large as 5).

Just when it seems that you do indeed *have* a brain, you post something
like this. If a mortgage rate goes up from 5% to 6%, the monthly payment
on
a 30 year mortgage goes up by a little under 12%...not 20%.

Actually, you're *both* wrong--although you are closer with respect to the
15
year mortgage.

Joe Parsons


For a 15 year mortgage, the change is just a little bit under 7%.

On 07 Sep 2003 01:33:50 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

Just when it seems that you do indeed *have* a brain, you post something
like this. If a mortgage rate goes up from 5% to 6%, the monthly payment on
a 30 year mortgage goes up by a little under 12%...not 20%.

Sorry, but I'm not the one who needs to see the Wizard about a brain. When
money costs 6%, it *is* 120% as expensive as when it costs 5%.

"So, why doesn't the payment go up by 20?" inquires NOYB.

Good question, Doc. It's because your monthly payment includes principal as
well as interest, and the prinicpal portion of the payment doesn't increase,
only the interest.

Sorry, but it doesn't work quite that way. Loans are amortized by a fairly
complex equation, and your last statement is untrue. When the interest rate
changes for the same principal balance and term, both the interest and principal
components of the payment will change.

Joe Parsons