U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old Yesterday, 11:26 AM
 
Location: Kansas City, MISSOURI
9,027 posts, read 2,775,218 times
Reputation: 6972

Advertisements

The recession began in December 2007, almost a year before Obama was even elected.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Yesterday, 11:33 AM
 
Location: North Carolina
3,404 posts, read 3,016,140 times
Reputation: 3122
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
164K jobs is a good number to you?

It's a pathetic number.

In the meanwhile, the DOW is more or less where is was 20 months ago. No gains.
I think, as is the usual, you are allowing your hate to dictate your comments on these numbers. 164k is an excellent number, especially when we are talking about an economy that continues to roll along with unemployment numbers below 4%. I also find it amusing that you chose to discuss the DOW at 20 months ago. Perhaps you should have added 12 more months and discussed the change since Inauguration Day 2017. You know, the day when Donald Trump took office and the DOW closed at 19,827.25. But then, it would have been a lot harder to poo poo the numbers then huh?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:40 AM
 
23,471 posts, read 12,423,721 times
Reputation: 7453
Obama's average job growth 222,000K, Trump's 191,000K.

BUT you know what -- that's okay -- for Trump to take office when there were on average 222,000K months being added each month...it isn't too bad to be adding 191,000K jobs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:41 AM
 
Location: Kansas City, MISSOURI
9,027 posts, read 2,775,218 times
Reputation: 6972
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reads2MUCH View Post
I think, as is the usual, you are allowing your hate to dictate your comments on these numbers. 164k is an excellent number, especially when we are talking about an economy that continues to roll along with unemployment numbers below 4%. I also find it amusing that you chose to discuss the DOW at 20 months ago. Perhaps you should have added 12 more months and discussed the change since Inauguration Day 2017. You know, the day when Donald Trump took office and the DOW closed at 19,827.25. But then, it would have been a lot harder to poo poo the numbers then huh?
Here is the same person who predicted:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reads2MUCH View Post
Current GDP growth under the new administration has been 3.1% in 2017. In comparison, 1.6% in 2016.
We should check back in around this time in 2018. I'm going to predict we'll be up around 4% by then, not floundering around the 2% zone as we were for all of Obama's years as president.

PS. In 2009, Obama's first year, we had a whopping -2.8% growth. No, that's not a typo. It was a negative number. Obama's best year saw 2.6% growth, but if you averaged them all out it hangs around 2%. And that's if you leave out the negative 2009 growth. And I did because I would never try to hold a new president responsible for everything he is inheriting. Everyone needs a little time to get things rolling like they want them too. The problem was, the following years just weren't that much better.
It's half a year past your prediction date, and guess what? We haven't gotten remotely close to 4% yearly GDP growth. Instead we've still bee floundering around that 2% GDP growth you complained was typical under Obama.

So I hope you understand if we don't take your observations that seriously.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:44 AM
 
Location: Kansas City, MISSOURI
9,027 posts, read 2,775,218 times
Reputation: 6972
Here is annual GDP growth under Trump:

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/A191RL1Q225SBEA

2017: 2.8%
2018: 2.5%
With this year so far 3.1% and 2.1%, quarterly.

Under Obama we saw annual GDP everything from 0.3% to 2.9%.

Trump is no different than Obama.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:52 AM
 
Location: Salisbury,NC
10,716 posts, read 4,461,536 times
Reputation: 4738
One of the warning numbers is hours worked in a week down to 40.2.

No overtime means less money. If lucky enough to have gotten that 3%/ hr. raise yet you lose the extra hours 3% means squat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:58 AM
 
Location: Florida/Tennessee
2,616 posts, read 4,351,643 times
Reputation: 1440
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enigma777 View Post
And if a recession hits, will Trump and the cult also claim credit for that? Or will Trump blame others and make excuses about it?

I'll bet he already has the blame game in place.
Recessions come and go. It will happen sooner than later, since the law of averages are against the current cycle. Dems are hoping for it.... right? Seems you already have the blame in place, so there's that.

Our economy, as well as the global economy has ebbs and flows. Our growth has slowed but the global economy is stalled and China is retracting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 12:04 PM
 
Location: Florida/Tennessee
2,616 posts, read 4,351,643 times
Reputation: 1440
Quote:
Originally Posted by moneill View Post
Obama's average job growth 222,000K, Trump's 191,000K.

BUT you know what -- that's okay -- for Trump to take office when there were on average 222,000K months being added each month...it isn't too bad to be adding 191,000K jobs.
Get back on track took more than 10 years since 2006-07. We are almost there. The good news is wages for the least skilled. That alone is apolitical good news ... right?

Number of full-time employees in the United States from 1990 to 2018 (in millions)
https://www.statista.com/statistics/...sa-since-1990/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 12:05 PM
 
Location: Boston
8,148 posts, read 2,364,893 times
Reputation: 5810
basking in the glow of the glow of the Trump economy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 12:08 PM
 
Location: Florida
63,381 posts, read 34,537,694 times
Reputation: 10567
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reads2MUCH View Post
I think, as is the usual, you are allowing your hate to dictate your comments on these numbers. 164k is an excellent number, especially when we are talking about an economy that continues to roll along with unemployment numbers below 4%.
Its a terrible number no matter how you spin it. Tens of millions of Americans dont have a job and you celebrate such poor numbers. When Clinton was president we were adding 300-400K jobs per month during 'full employment' and while US population was 80 million smaller than now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top