Jump to content

Recommended Posts

If POTUS Trump is successful in boosting the US economic situation, bringing millions of jobs back to the United States & finally getting rid of illegal immigration once & for all: in the likelihood of Trump winning reelection in 2020, will he able to get double digits against whoever the Dems put up ?

 

A.) YES: he needs between 56 to 60% in reelection

 

B.) NO: the country is too divided

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Blue Dogs said:

If POTUS Trump is successful in boosting the US economic situation, bringing millions of jobs back to the United States & finally getting rid of illegal immigration once & for all: in the likelihood of Trump winning reelection in 2020, will he able to get double digits against whoever the Dems put up ?

 

A.) YES: he needs between 56 to 60% in reelection

 

B.) NO: the country is too divided

 

Can someone more knowledgeable explain to me why our economy was perceived to be in such bad shape at the end of the Obama administration compared to where it was when he started? I find this completely baffling, 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sunstar said:

 

Can someone more knowledgeable explain to me why our economy was perceived to be in such bad shape at the end of the Obama administration compared to where it was when he started? I find this completely baffling, 

You can take the various partisan sources for what they are worth.  However, a google search on "Obama real wages" surfaces many articles across the spectrum of legitimacy.  In my view the "economy" isn't about the economy but rather about real wages for real people.  Since 2008, did they rise?  You can do your own research and sort through your own data and sift the partisan mud to reach your own conclusions.  Many would say that real wages fell under Obama and that led to Trump.  Many others would say that statement is untrue.  After research, you may agree or not, but I think that talk of real wages for " real" people is central to the discussion (not the economy broadly).  Voters vote with their pocketbook.  And I personally believe that they voted for Trump because their pocketbooks, in real dollars, are smaller after 8 years of Obama.  But, I am not smart enough to prove it.  I can only try to synthesis what I read (much of which is contradictory).

 

here is one place to start:

 

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-10/inconvenient-jobs-revisions-obama

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I've heard one of the main arguments is the labor participation rate has fallen, which they view as a more accurate economic barometer versus unemployment.

 

They say the unemployment rate doesn't include unemployed people who have simply stopped looking for work because there isn’t any.

 

That may be part of the reason why they stopped looking. It could also be baby boomers retiring. I don’t know, but I’m sure it’s a multitude of reasons. But which is/are the dominant ones?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, UtterlyUrban said:

You can take the various partisan sources for what they are worth.  However, a google search on "Obama real wages" surfaces many articles across the spectrum of legitimacy.  In my view the "economy" isn't about the economy but rather about real wages for real people.  Since 2008, did they rise?  You can do your own research and sort through your own data and sift the partisan mud to reach your own conclusions.  Many would say that real wages fell under Obama and that led to Trump.  Many others would say that statement is untrue.  After research, you may agree or not, but I think that talk of real wages for " real" people is central to the discussion (not the economy broadly).  Voters vote with their pocketbook.  And I personally believe that they voted for Trump because their pocketbooks, in real dollars, are smaller after 8 years of Obama.  But, I am not smart enough to prove it.  I can only try to synthesis what I read (much of which is contradictory).

 

here is one place to start:

 

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-10/inconvenient-jobs-revisions-obama

 

 

 

Interesting article. I tend to ignore initial BLS statistics until the publish their revisions, which makes you wonder why they didn't wait until they had a better grasp of the data in the first place. On the other hand, I'm not sure how to take an article written by Tyler Durden :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...