How has Trump done with jobs?

reality guy…you don’t keep it lively…you make it tedious with your inaccurate claims.

Yes. I know…we have a little brain numbed leftist at our own board. We TRY to treat her remarks with some respect but she, like you, exposes herself time and time again. With luck, and a little prayer, a job for you and a good dose of reality, in time you’ll change your mind. If not…you’ll be the typical old shoe leftist. Bathless and out carrying a sign for socialism well into your sixties.

And yet, you nor Sendgop haven’t pointed out ANYTHING inaccurate in this post…

Go ahead, I’ll wait…

See, and I was just saying how people have, as a group treated those you disagree with, with respect.

So why drag down the forum with that sort of childish talk?

perhaps some context here would help as I have no idea what you’re talking about.

Still have no idea what you’re taking about.

Bathless?

yeah. tedious.

Nothing then? Now who is being tedious?

STock market 29,000, employment up for all, including blacks and Hispanics. Tax refunds for many many people. Of course you won’t acknowledge any of this…so really…it IS a waste of my time.

You go ahead though…you got your little political agenda goin’ on there.

I’ll take that challenge. I supported him when he extended the Bush tax cuts during the recession. I supported him when he killed bin Laden and al Lockie (sp) who was the American who was using his language skills to recruit more terrorists from this country.

I support my country, and I support a president when he does things right. When Obama gave all of that cash to the Iranians, I slammed him. Why feed terrorism?

As for the rest of it Obama, the recovery was anemic under him. It was slow because over regulation and constant threats of new taxes. You can go to your little Democrat websites and get some more chants and graphs, but the that’s the truth.

In other words, you are fascist. That is what you advocate, government control of private property. Before long, it will morph into socialism because that economy will get so bad the "emergency” measures will be necessary. First you will socialize the medical system, then you go for the energy sector. Once you control that, you have the economy in a choke hold that will worse than the 1970s “energy crisis” which cause “stag-flation.”. Before long the government will control it all with your people in charge.

I’ve read your stuff, and that’s where you are headed. You don’t fool me for a minute.

Perhaps I should post a few my articles here. You might learn something.

The rest of what you have to say is Bernie Sanders boilerplate. Things have gotten better for Hispanics and Blacks under Trump, and many of them realize it. All the Democrats give them is welfare and rhetoric about how “oppressed” they are because bigotry.

The plain fact is you can be a loser regardless of you race. If you are lazy in school and are not prepared for anything, you on your way to failing in life. You don’t have to go college to succeed, but you have to be prepared to offer something to employers or come up with some great ideas on your own.

Already addressed this. Employment up for everyone

Why single out blacks and Hispanics?

Do you think the stock market is a good barometer of overall economic health?

If so, did you think the economy was doing well under Obama? No, but you think it’s doing well under Trump?

Try to remember that the market hit historic highs under Obama too.

And try to remember that unemployment for Whites Hispanics and blacks fell at the same rate under Obama as it did Trump, yet people like you were convicned that the economy sucked right up until Trump took office. Then you convinced yourself that everything has been wonderful since.

But where is the data?

No, I have the facts that I keep putting out and you keep ignoring offering nothing but political talking points you see on right-wing media.

I have actual data that I grab from the source.

image

As do I…But, supporting my country, as I’m sure you’re aware doesn’t mean you always agree with it’s elected leaders.

That’s not really supporting a President thouh, is it? You supported decisions he’s made, but you’re not really supporting the President.

For my part, I support the decision to use the fiscal deficit to achieve policy goals, even if I disagree with those goals, Trump is proving that deficits don’t cause economic ruin any more than gravity causes plane crashes.

I look forward to Dems using the same deficits to achieve some of their policy agenda’s and shaking my head in disbelief as people like you wait till Dems run up the debt to begin running around like chicken little telling us all how the children of the future will pay for the irresponsible deficit spending.

It was slow and steady… As if that’s a bad thing. Economic bubbles happen when the economy heats up to quickly and the foundation of the economy becomes unstable.

See that’s not what the ultra-wealthy want, they want the sharp rise and dramatic fall. They make money on both sides, they don’t care, so they have people like you convinced that 8 years of slow and steady growth is bad. Only a partisan could say that growth is bad when the other party is in power.

Is this economy bad?

I’m happy it’s doing as well as it is. I’ve pointed out in other threads that I believe that there is some underlying weakness pointing to real economic indicators, not left-wing talking-points.

LOL, no not a fascist, but if it makes you feel better to label me as a fascist, help yourself.

Did Italy or Germany under Mussolini or Hitler operate within a government with 3 co-equal branches?

No? Then no, not a fascist.

Government of, by and for the people. Is that what fascism is?

Then no, not a fascist.

Not entirely certain of what you mean here.

Do I believe in private property? Sure, do I think private property is an absolute? No of course not.

Do I think the government should control the means of production, in very limited instances, sure, but in very limited instances where profit motives collide and leverage human suffering as a method to drive profit or in other areas where private distribution is much less efficient than a government system. Take, for example, privatizing the road system or weighing in on things like weights and measures.

Please do, I’d enjoy reading them.

I wouldn’t know

First, things have been getting better for everyone since 2010 at a similar pace.

Second, there’s a lot more to “better” than just a job…

I would agree that victim culture is a real thing, but I’d also say that racism and bigotry is a real thing. The trick is figuring out how to recognize it without fostering victim culture.

That’s true, but not everyone gets the same opportunity to live up to their potential.

Every time I blow up one of your charts that in no way conclude what you claim they conclude, you leave and start another thread based on another chart or graph that does not conclude what you claim it concludes.

You are here to see if any of the propaganda that your side is selling can stick, you know it is not true because you bail the moment it is exposed and start another.

The Obama economy was great for millionaires, welfare rats and government tax eaters; it destroyed the poor and almost destroyed the middle class with a worker participation rate not seen since the Great Depression.

Trump has been working without any help from Congress and reached full employement including a complete reversal in the worker participation rate, the greatest wage increases now reside in the low to middle class work force and quite literally ANYONE who wants a job can choose from multiple options.

Tax cuts, regulation reduction, hard ball with countries who have locked out American producers from their Markets and consumer confidence based on FINALLY having a president who gives a damn about keeping his promises and doing what’s best for his country has born much fruit.

Once your terrorist loving, baby killing, America hating, government worshipping, Racist Fascist Party is crushed next November Trump will have a Congress that will really enable the lid to be nailed shut on your Parties philosophy.

I will be enjoying every moment until then since I am convinced that your side will remain insane and keep taking the bait from now until then, this will be a massacre the likes of which has never before occurred in the United States Electoral history :rofl:

1 Like

Just curious, RET, is RET some sort of shorthand for rhetoric? Because I see nothing to back up your assertions…No facts, no sources just assertions based on…?

Blown up? I think not.

That said, I’m not really defending the Obama economy, I’m merely pointing out that the Trump economy is the more the same than it is different with a few twists, like more deficit spending just to name one…

And you won’t, if you had interest you would have been following these numbers for the last 3 years instead of looking for charts that intentionally do NOT support the claims you make based on them.

I once thought it was ignorance but now that you have bolted from 3 threads after you were exposed only to start new ones with non sequitur data I now know it is intentional.

Just like the media in fact, they have squandered their credibility in the same way :slight_smile:

Look at your own “chart”. The stock market improved roughly 8,000 points in Obama’s 8 years and has improved 10,000 points (nearly 11,000) in just 3 full years under Trump’s policies.

1 Like

Only so long as what you’re spending your money on, isn’t crowding out signals in the private economy.

When Obama rose the deficit to pay for TARP and the Recovery Act, they caused micro recessions.

Equally; Japan has been going into debt to “stimulate” its economy for 30 years. The effect is a no-growth economy, for 30 years, in serious debt, teetering on the edge of collapse.

It’s important where money goes, and Government planners don’t know where money in the actual economy should go.

Also, CS? I’m also horribly bad at this, so I’m not trying to preach; but if you want to leave a lasting point, omni-slashing posts like this is more likely to get your words ignored. Try to coalesce.

1 Like

Just so you’re speaking for yourself.

1 Like

Totally agree. However, to be clear, the crowding out that occurs isn’t fiscal, it’s real.

I Googled “Micro-Recession” and I didn’t see much. There is an NYT story about “localized recession” which I suspect is what you’re alluding to. I refer to this more broadly as “market disruption”. Some disruption can be constructive or destructive. That said, I think we’re referring to the same thing or at least something similar.

Let’s address Japan.

From an MMT perspective, which you know I embrace, at least in part, Japan’s experience seems to lend some evidence to claims made by MMT"academics".

Do big deficits cause inflation? No. Japan’s inflation runs just above zero.

Do big debts cause high interest rates? No. Japan’s policy rate is about -0.10 (negative rates).

Do big debts cause bond vigilante strikes? No. Japan’s government debt is hoovered up as fast as it can be issued. (All the more true with the BOJ running QE and creating a “scarcity” in spite of the quadrillions of yen debt available.)

Moving on…

Critics of MMT counter that Japan is “proof” that big deficits kill investment and growth.

Well, it is true that Japan has been growing at just 1% per year—certainly nothing to write home about. However, investment grows at about a 2% pace but is pulled down by lack of consumption growth—which has averaged just about zero over the past few years.

From the MMT perspective, what Japan needs is a good fiscal stimulus, albeit one that is targeted. Japan has three “injections” into the economy: the fiscal deficit (which has fallen from 7% of GDP to about 5% over the past few years—still a substantial injection), the current account surplus, and private investment. But what it needs is stronger growth of domestic consumer demand—which would also stimulate investment directed to home consumption. So fiscal policy ought to be targeted to spending that would increase the economic security of Japanese households to the point that they’d increase consumer spending.

So what is Prime Minister Abe’s announced plan? To raise the sales tax to squelch consumption and reduce economic growth.

You cannot make this up.

This has been Japan’s policy for a whole generation. Any time it looks like the economy might break out of its long-term stagnation, policy makers impose austerity in an attempt to reduce the fiscal deficit and thereby throw the economy back into its permanent recession.

Clearly, this is the precise opposite to the MMT recommendation. And yet pundits proclaim Japan has been following MMT policy all these years.

The result?

Permanent stagflation.

I agree, but to suggest that capitalists know this is equally false. Furthermore, should the money go to improving the lives of citizens or generating higher profits? The two aren’t mutually inclusive.

Should decisions be made only by investors or as a process within our democracy?

I don’t claim to have the answers to these questions and I realize there are problems on both sides as I’ve defined (though I recognize there may be more choices).

I know we don’t always agree, but I appreciate your input. That said, not sure what you mean by “omni-slashing”…

Thx.

[Emphisis mine]

And yet to hear Republicans and right-wing media, you’d have thought the stock market was going the other direction, that things in the US were getting worse.

Of course, we can point to anecdotes that prove that things got worse under Obama and better under Trump and vice-versa.

The problem is two-fold.

  1. There are lots of ways to evaluate something as complex as the economy and the temptation is for each side to look only at favorable data and ignore the unfavorable.

  2. There is little if any agreement on a wide array of metrics under which each side would agree to evaluate, as a standard, to judge the success or failure of an administration’s economic policy.

Is the stock market a good indicator? 84 percent of all stocks owned by Americans belong to the wealthiest 10 percent of household, thus the success of stocks would seem to affect those at the top the most and therefore is not a good overall economic indicator.

Conversely…When looking at the bottom, 14% (corrected) of Americans make less than $18k a year. If that number decreased significantly, do you think that would be a good indicator of the health of the overall economy?

In a vacuum? Probably not. But it makes no sense, outside of any context to argue that an improvement in ether measure is bad, that said, it matters how these improvements occurred in the context of lots of other variables.

kids…ya can’t shoot em.

Boomers, ya can’t shoot them either… :crazy_face:

But your side has plans.

1 Like