Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15952
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 03 Feb 2018, 5:12 am

He used "we". Which includes himself. He didn't talk about it as part of a prevailing trend, but in the context only of "since the last election".

Also, the latest figures show black unemployment has risen https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... nt-january
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3035
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 03 Feb 2018, 6:26 am

President Trump addresses the Nation...

Trump: "My fellow Americans Rocket Man aka Double Chin aka the Krazy Korean has gone too far. My military advisers have informed me...that North Korea poses a clear and present danger ...of sometime in the future posing a threat to our great country. Therefore as my sacred duty to protect this country...and ensure Republicans hold control of the Senate in 2018 so I cannot be impeached--though there is no Russian collusion and everyone knows that except Robert Mueller--I have ordered a 'limited strike' on North Korea."

Trump: "Where was I...Ah yes, I ordered a limited strike. When I say limited strike we're hoping to keep casualties down to a few million or so. This is one way to reduce immigration..."

Trump: "Our very brave military have dealt a devastating blow to the North Korean regime. They no longer have any capability of launching missiles against our soil. As for our South Korean ally...the overcrowding in Seoul is now a thing of the past. This is good news...

Trump: "So our strike is successful and you can sleep well tonight. Please remember to vote Republican as a way of supporting the flag while we are involved in a pretextual war. As you know, Republicans have a long track of starting unnecessary wars as opposed to the wimpy democrats. Who else can you trust to safeguard the country against imaginary threats?"

Trump: "In closing...I just want to say "God bless our troops, our country, and Trump, Inc. thank you!"

Across town...

Mueller: "Give me a break! A Wag the Dog strike? What a cliche!"
Mueller Team Lawyer: "Does he think that is going to stop us? We're going to find the Lost Donald, Jr. emails!"
Mueller: "I was looking forward to a long interrogation of Hope Hicks to find those emails!"
Mueller Team Lawyer: "I'll bet you were! Hope Hicks is hot!"
Mueller: " Now we must be professional here...but in her case I'll make an exception!"
Mueller Team Lawyer: "Yes, sir!"
Mueller: "Hmm...what is that bright light in the sky?"
Mueller Team Lawyer (looks out the window): "Uh, I think that is a missile, sir:"
Mueller: "Well, I suppose that is one way to end an investigation..."
Mueller Team Lawyer: "Couldn't Trump be right... once.?"
Mueller: "Apparently not. At least my investigation will end with a bang!"

Ka-boom!!!!!!
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4781
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 04 Feb 2018, 6:43 am

danivon wrote:He used "we". Which includes himself. He didn't talk about it as part of a prevailing trend, but in the context only of "since the last election".

Also, the latest figures show black unemployment has risen https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... nt-january


I know we all have a tendency to site information that supports our viewpoint, but I would be awfully cautious about posting 1 month numbers. Along with other seasonality issues, January weather has been brutal in the northeast and Midwest.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15952
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 04 Feb 2018, 8:55 am

Ray Jay wrote:
danivon wrote:He used "we". Which includes himself. He didn't talk about it as part of a prevailing trend, but in the context only of "since the last election".

Also, the latest figures show black unemployment has risen https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... nt-january


I know we all have a tendency to site information that supports our viewpoint, but I would be awfully cautious about posting 1 month numbers. Along with other seasonality issues, January weather has been brutal in the northeast and Midwest.
Well, yes. January could be a blip. But then again, so could December.

We can also see from the trends that the numbers have been falling since 2011, and the rate of improvement seems unchanged, if not a little slower than in the period 2014-2016. https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000006

So what have "we" (Trump and whoever he included in that) done to make any actual difference to the prevailing trend?
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4781
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 04 Feb 2018, 10:55 am

danivon wrote:
Ray Jay wrote:
danivon wrote:He used "we". Which includes himself. He didn't talk about it as part of a prevailing trend, but in the context only of "since the last election".

Also, the latest figures show black unemployment has risen https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... nt-january


I know we all have a tendency to site information that supports our viewpoint, but I would be awfully cautious about posting 1 month numbers. Along with other seasonality issues, January weather has been brutal in the northeast and Midwest.
Well, yes. January could be a blip. But then again, so could December.

We can also see from the trends that the numbers have been falling since 2011, and the rate of improvement seems unchanged, if not a little slower than in the period 2014-2016. https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000006

So what have "we" (Trump and whoever he included in that) done to make any actual difference to the prevailing trend?


We seem to be going in circles. Regulatory relief has been s a huge contributor to improving labor's situation.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 15952
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 12 Feb 2018, 4:02 am

Ray Jay wrote:
We seem to be going in circles. Regulatory relief has been s a huge contributor to improving labor's situation.
That is an assertion. Where is the evidence? And could it not just have been a result of the continual economic growth since the end of the 2008-9 recession?
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4781
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 12 Feb 2018, 7:34 am

danivon wrote:
Ray Jay wrote:
We seem to be going in circles. Regulatory relief has been s a huge contributor to improving labor's situation.
That is an assertion. Where is the evidence? And could it not just have been a result of the continual economic growth since the end of the 2008-9 recession?


Here's a good summary. https://www.uschamber.com/series/your-c ... story-2017

The Obama growth during his last couple of years was slower than the economic growth we experienced in 2017. I'm not sure how to mathematically prove these things, but I have posted examples on the tax forum pages.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3035
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 12 Feb 2018, 7:55 am

The economy grew by 2.6% and 2.9% in 2014 and 2015 under Obama before slowing down in 2016 and rebounding a bit to 2.3% in 2017. And the growth was 2.6% in the fourth quarter of 2017. What's the big difference?

It's just funny when we were pretty close to the desired 3 percent growth rate under Obama in 2014 and 2015 and then....we're supposed to celebrate that Trump has given us a 2.3% growth rate?
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4781
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 12 Feb 2018, 12:49 pm

freeman3 wrote:The economy grew by 2.6% and 2.9% in 2014 and 2015 under Obama before slowing down in 2016 and rebounding a bit to 2.3% in 2017. And the growth was 2.6% in the fourth quarter of 2017. What's the big difference?

It's just funny when we were pretty close to the desired 3 percent growth rate under Obama in 2014 and 2015 and then....we're supposed to celebrate that Trump has given us a 2.3% growth rate?


I wouldn't make Trump responsible for 1st quarter 2017 anymore than I would make Obama responsible for 1st quarter 2009. (In fact, we had negative growth in every quarter of 2009 and Democrats were quick to blame that on FUPA.) Here are the quarterly rates since 2011:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/188 ... in-the-us/

Since 4th quarter 2014 during the Obama years we had only 1 quarter that exceeded 3% growth. Those last 10 quarters the economy averaged 1.8% growth per quarter. For the 3 Trump quarters we have averaged 3% growth. Danivon's assertion that 2nd thru 4th quarter growth could just be a function of momentum from the Obama recovery doesn't pass the smell test because one does not accelerate from momentum.

If you look at economic growth during the Obama years. http://www.multpl.com/us-real-gdp-growt ... le/by-year, and even exclude 2009 because of the extenuating circumstances, average annual growth was about 2.1% per annum. That's by squinting as much as possible in favor of Obama by ignoring 2009. We are now at 3%. It may go well, although there are certainly risks, some of which are caused by trump himself.

You may not care about a .9% growth differential per year, but since there are 125 million working people in the US, that translates to over 1 million more wage earners per year. That's more than the margin that shifts elections here, so I advocate that all Democrats worry themselves about these things.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3035
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 12 Feb 2018, 1:59 pm

Why wouldn't you credit Trump for the first quarter on 2017, if business was responding positively to his presidency? Do you really that cutting some regs jump-started the economy? Businesses can't respond that quickly, it takes time to come up with new business plans, to develop new projects. If you cut a lot of regulations this year...maybe in the coming years it will have a positive impact.

Two can play the cherry-picking game. Over five quarters from 2nd quarter 2014 to 2nd quarter 2015 (that's only 18 months before Trump came to power)under Obama the economy averaged 3.54% growth. Trump over the last three quarters has averaged 2.97%--not even close to the RECENT growth spurt under Obama. Most likely the reason for a rebound under Trump has nothing to do with him, but was just the economy meandering as it has done so since 2009.

Trump will have (maybe will have...) several years to show his policies have changed the economy in fundamental ways. Right now, it's too soon and pretty hard to credit him for an economic recovery that took place prior to his budget being passed...
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21061
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 12 Feb 2018, 2:21 pm

freeman3 wrote:Why wouldn't you credit Trump for the first quarter on 2017, if business was responding positively to his presidency? Do you really that cutting some regs jump-started the economy? Businesses can't respond that quickly, it takes time to come up with new business plans, to develop new projects. If you cut a lot of regulations this year...maybe in the coming years it will have a positive impact.

Two can play the cherry-picking game. Over five quarters from 2nd quarter 2014 to 2nd quarter 2015 (that's only 18 months before Trump came to power)under Obama the economy averaged 3.54% growth. Trump over the last three quarters has averaged 2.97%--not even close to the RECENT growth spurt under Obama. Most likely the reason for a rebound under Trump has nothing to do with him, but was just the economy meandering as it has done so since 2009.

Trump will have (maybe will have...) several years to show his policies have changed the economy in fundamental ways. Right now, it's too soon and pretty hard to credit him for an economic recovery that took place prior to his budget being passed...


Sorry, Obama was terrible.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2013/07 ... s-history/

And http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/05/news/ec ... index.html

"Now look, we have the worst revival of an economy since the Great Depression," Trump said in the first debate. His running mate Mike Pence mentioned it in the vice presidential debate Tuesday night.
Trump is right if you look solely at the average rate of growth during this rebound versus prior ones.
"In terms of the average pace of GDP growth, this is the slowest expansion on record," says Lakshman Achuthan, co-founder of the Economic Cycle Research Institute.
The U.S. economy has only grown 2% a year since it bottomed out in June 2009. That's far below the typical growth in rosy times of over 4% a year that the U.S. has experienced since World War II. It's even below the rather sluggish rebound during President George W. Bush's tenure of 2.7%.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3035
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 12 Feb 2018, 2:52 pm

The economy averaged 2.1 percent growth (2001-2008)under Bush, who massively stimulated the economy with tax cuts and military and other spending and cheap money (and created huge deficits that we're still paying for)...and then crashed it. Our economy is what they call a more mature economy and takes huge changes to change its fundamental trajectory which is to keeping chugging along at a stable 2% growth rate. Obama coming out of a Financial Crisis, avoiding any recessions, and keeping the deficit from going crazy (and not bring allowed/able to stimulate the economy much with tax cuts/spending)and still keeping that 2% (2.2% from 2010-2016) growth rate...did pretty good. Bush II was horrible--getting 2% growth and causing huge deficits and causing a Financial Crisis.

Trump started off with a 2.3% growth, just edging Obama's rate (I didn't count 2009 for Obama's because clearly he should not be accountable for that--if Bush's 2001 is subtracted he has a 2.27 growth rate). Trump beat Obama by .1%--Wahoo!
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21061
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 12 Feb 2018, 3:58 pm

freeman3 wrote:The economy averaged 2.1 percent growth (2001-2008)under Bush, who massively stimulated the economy with tax cuts and military and other spending and cheap money (and created huge deficits that we're still paying for)...and then crashed it.


Bush did not crash the economy any more than Clinton inflated it.

Our economy is what they call a more mature economy and takes huge changes to change its fundamental trajectory which is to keeping chugging along at a stable 2% growth rate. Obama coming out of a Financial Crisis, avoiding any recessions, and keeping the deficit from going crazy (and not bring allowed/able to stimulate the economy much with tax cuts/spending)and still keeping that 2% (2.2% from 2010-2016) growth rate...did pretty good. Bush II was horrible--getting 2% growth and causing huge deficits and causing a Financial Crisis.


Right. Bush was the one who forced banks to make loans to people who couldn't afford them. It's like he was, I dunno, bank dictator or something.

You're just making stuff up, then repeating it.

Trump started off with a 2.3% growth, just edging Obama's rate (I didn't count 2009 for Obama's because clearly he should not be accountable for that--if Bush's 2001 is subtracted he has a 2.27 growth rate). Trump beat Obama by .1%--Wahoo![


It's early.
User avatar
Adjutant
 
Posts: 3035
Joined: 17 May 2013, 3:32 pm

Post 12 Feb 2018, 10:15 pm

Goldman Sachs was ground zero. And no one forced them to make loans. The main components of the Financial Crisis were: (1) Investment banks putting up securities composed of high-risk loans, (2) ratings agencies rating these securities as being safe, allowing banks fo put their money into these loans because they were safe, and (3)AIG insuring these securities because they were supposdly safe. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were a small component of the crisis, though It is is understandable why Republicans would to blame them. Their share of loans went dramatically downward after 2006,, two years before the crisis hit. Greed, not government, caused the Financial Crisis.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 21061
Joined: 15 Jun 2002, 6:53 am

Post 13 Feb 2018, 6:31 am

freeman3 wrote:Goldman Sachs was ground zero. And no one forced them to make loans. The main components of the Financial Crisis were: (1) Investment banks putting up securities composed of high-risk loans, (2) ratings agencies rating these securities as being safe, allowing banks fo put their money into these loans because they were safe, and (3)AIG insuring these securities because they were supposdly safe. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were a small component of the crisis, though It is is understandable why Republicans would to blame them. Their share of loans went dramatically downward after 2006,, two years before the crisis hit. Greed, not government, caused the Financial Crisis.


Oh, okay.

Well, at least it’s not Bush’s fault. So, stop blaming him.