Oh....I see an opinion piece by this reporter:

Quote:

---

Oh....I see an opinion piece by this reporter:

---

Yep, this guy. Now what exactly about his analysis do you disagree with? Why is it always the 'source' with you and never the analysis?

Ben Casselman

Chief Economics Writer at FiveThirtyEight
Greater New York City AreaNewspapers

Current
CUNY Graduate School of Journalism,
ESPN

Previous
The Wall Street Journal,
The Salem News,
The Columbia Daily Spectator

Education
Columbia University in the City of New York

There is nothing in the MIT piece that either contradicts or conflicts with these FACTS:

Quote:

---

no coincidence that the U.S. labor force participation rate — the share of the adult population that has a job or is trying to find one — hit a record high in the late 1990s, when the boomers were at the peak of their working lives.

It’s been downhill ever since. The participation rate hit a 36-year low last month, and while there are multiple reasons for the decline, the aging of the baby boom generation is a dominant factor. In 2003, 82 percent of boomers were part of the labor force; a decade later, that number has declined to 66 percent, and it will only continue to fall.

---

Note the qualifier "while there are multiple reasons for the decline....."

Doesn't that allow for 'How technology is Destroying Jobs' to be among the 'multiple reasons'?

You're a fool to dismiss 538! I'll be rubbing your nose in many of their political analyses/predictions as we move toward the nominations and the election.

Facts have a 'liberal bias' and reality is a bitch...sexist pun intended!