Why Stop at 1990 for E/P Ratio?
We have a long history. Why not see what this nation was truly use to before we decide whether the opportunity (chance?) to be employed is good, bad or indifferent? I went to the department of labor site and used their graphing for the following charts.
First 1948 to 2007 E/P Ratio.
What we see is 3 distinct groupings. 1948 to 1960 vacillation within a range of 1 point (55 to 56). Then the nation got use to an ever increasing E/P ratio from around 1960 to 2000. But, if we start with 1990, then yes, we are seeing a new level of vacillation. Thus, we have 30 years of ever greater (opportunity for) employment for our citizens changing to approaching 20 years of hit or miss. So, using the last 17 years, Brad and PGL are on safe ground. Using the full series, citizens are not seeing it so good as to their future. Have we not moved down the rankings of upward mobility?
Lets break it out male vs female, 20 years and older.
Very similar curves other than the female starting at a lower number.
The men go from a high of 86.6 to a low of 70.6 in 1983 and hovers 1 point +/- at 73 although the over all trend since 1990 has been down.
The women go from a low of 30.1 in 1948 to a high of 58.6 2000 and 2001 and did not go below 57.1 after. But even for women, since 1990 the climb has been shallower with a flattening since 1996.