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 08-02-2019, 02:04 PM
 
Location: Kansas City, MISSOURI
9,056 posts, read 2,785,732 times
Reputation: 6991

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by James Bond 007 View Post
As usual, Mircea has to mislead by citing unadjusted numbers when everyone else is talking about the seasonally adjusted numbers.

And he/she always seems to forget to include January, when his/her unadjusted numbers ALWAYS take a big hit..
Here we go:

https://www.bls.gov/webapps/legacy/cesbtab1.htm

Select "Total nonfarm" and "Not seasonally adjusted." Then at the bottom select Retrieve Data.

Total unadjusted non-farm employment:

Dec 2018: 151,203,000
Jan 2019: 148,295,000
---------------------------
A loss of 2,908,000!!

The number as of July was 151,183,000. So we're not even back to where we were 8 months ago!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-02-2019, 02:08 PM
 
5,343 posts, read 1,328,859 times
Reputation: 4153
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enigma777 View Post
Do you have any sources, or is this your opinion?
Source for what?

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.
I absolutely believe that it would be on Trump if there is a recession. Although if brought about by trade wars, it is because China believes they can wait Trump out and the tariffs will be lifted under Democrats. I believe Harris, as an example, SAID she would lift them. When you have the Democrats working against the interest of the country to line their own pockets, that's what you get.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2019, 03:19 PM
 
Location: Florida/Tennessee
2,646 posts, read 4,358,753 times
Reputation: 1485
China is going to interfere BIG time in our election in ways never imagined. They're sneaky you know and liars too. Now class, who do you think they'll be rooting for? do I need to make it multiple choice?

China is retracting and is playing games with the global economy. What they intend to do is beyond our control, but be ready and aware.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2019, 04:52 PM
 
15,757 posts, read 4,171,311 times
Reputation: 11279
One wonders why anyone even cherry picks numbers?

It's fairly evident in most parts of the USA that things are stagnant - or down. People are working for low wages and terrible benefits. More people (millions) haven't got health care insurance coverage.

Car and light truck sales are down for the years - down every month...year to year...except July when they are expected to be stable (reporting on some brands is quarterly so they don't have the figures yet)....these stagnant or down sales are despite the lowest interest rates in years.

Housing sales?
"Through June, sales of existing homes were down 2% from a year earlier, and investment in residential structures had declined for six straight quarters."

Some of you should get out more. I see a lot of people "working" in jobs that aren't paying.....car dealerships are now staffed by sales people who I wouldn't hire as a clerk at a 7-11....because they can't make any money (exception - service departments since people have to fix older cars).

It's pretty gloomy out there. And forecasts for housing prices and durable goods and other things are not great.

I think, at best, we'll see growth of these big ticket items stable.


So, effectively...what the cheerleaders here are saying is:

Manufacturing is reporting the lowest indicators in a decade...nothing is booming....BUT, people are going great, it's just that they are stashing their Billions under the mattress!

It doesn't make any sense. Use Occam's razor. That is "What seems to be....probably is". Stop reading all these numbers and trying to put them in context. The Executive Summary is that the Fed has admitted things are slow and is trying to give free money away to counter it. Debt and Deficit are increasing massively.

That's not "Great".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2019, 05:13 PM
 
Location: Bellingham, WA
909 posts, read 1,126,894 times
Reputation: 1058
There is likely some truth to that "mattress stuffing". Housing/Apartment development has ALOT on the books....it just takes so long to get through all the red tape these days. People have been seeing houses and car prices rise significantly and anyone with brains doesn't "buy while prices are high". More people are aware of another potential bubble after 2007/2008. As more units finally come online, house prices will fall and that's a good thing.
Furthermore there is a slowdown and short term pain in going through rehab from the usual way of handling, shipping, and selling all of our imported crap.....shipping, trucking, retail, a lot of things are going to be changing IF we stay on the path to better balancing our trade and increasing our domestic manufacturing base. That brings up the final question, next years election, and corporations holding up on their decisions "should be re-open three more plants in USA, or prepare to move our HQ and plants back offshore if the Dems win and abolish tariff's...reinstate higher corporate taxes? Better wait and see what happens, sit on the money."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2019, 05:25 PM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,425 posts, read 16,734,453 times
Reputation: 8931
Quote:
Originally Posted by moneill View Post
Obama is the foundation for that economy.
LOL! No he isn't! How is he "the foundation for the economy?"
The Obama economy sucked! Even Obama said, "1% GDP was the new normal."

When Trump said he would bring manufacturing back to the U.S., Obama said,
“Well, how exactly are you going to do that? What exactly are you going to do? There’s no answer to it."

"He just says, 'Well, I’m going to negotiate a better deal.' Well, what, how exactly are you going to negotiate that? What magic wand do you have? And usually the answer is, he doesn’t have an answer.”

Quote:
Originally Posted by moneill View Post
This is the longest economic recovery ever -- 10 years -- Trump has been in for 25% of that time.
This is just laughable. The "longest economic recovery ever," was the Reagan through Bush. Some include the Clinton years.

New York Times, January 17, 1990:
"We don't know whether historians will call it the Great Expansion of the 1980's or Reagan's Great Expansion, but we do know from official economic statistics that the seven year period from 1982 to 1989 was the greatest, consistent burst of economic activity ever seen in the U.S. In fact, it was the greatest economic expansion the world has ever seen - in any country, at any time."

"When you add up the record of the Reagan years, and the first year of President Bush - during which he has faithfully continued Mr. Reagan's economic policies - the conclusion is clear, inescapable and stunning. We have just witnessed America's Great Expansion."

Quote:
Originally Posted by moneill View Post
And let's be clear -- if a Democrat is chosen for President next year -- if things continue as is - -he (or she?) will be fortunate to inherit a good economy.

Obama inherited a horrible economy.

Just saying.
Actually, the Bush economy was very good until the mortgage crisis, which some had been predicting for may years. That was caused by forcing banks to make loans to people that couldn't afford them. The result was inevitable.

But the Obama "recovery" was nothing compared to what we are experiencing now, and he had absolutely NOTHING to do with it. It was because of Trump's policies, which he had promised, and the Democrats had bashed as being "for the rich" (and still are). The Obama years were sluggish at best. On the basis of expectations, the economy began to turn around after Trump's election. This has been shown graphically, and after the passage of his tax cuts, the economy began to boom.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2019, 05:29 PM
 
Location: Kansas City, MISSOURI
9,056 posts, read 2,785,732 times
Reputation: 6991
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy View Post
This is just laughable. The "longest economic recovery ever," was the Reagan through Bush. Some include the Clinton years.

New York Times, January 17, 1990:
"We don't know whether historians will call it the Great Expansion of the 1980's or Reagan's Great Expansion, but we do know from official economic statistics that the seven year period from 1982 to 1989 was the greatest, consistent burst of economic activity ever seen in the U.S. In fact, it was the greatest economic expansion the world has ever seen - in any country, at any time."

"When you add up the record of the Reagan years, and the first year of President Bush - during which he has faithfully continued Mr. Reagan's economic policies - the conclusion is clear, inescapable and stunning. We have just witnessed America's Great Expansion."
Uh, no it wasn't. You're quoting something from 1990? In case you didn't know, 29 years have elapsed since then.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._United_States

Current expansion is 121 months, so far
1990's expansion was 120 months
1960's was 106 months
Reagan-Bush was 92 months.

Not even close to being the longest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-02-2019, 06:36 PM
 
Location: Unperson Everyman Land
30,573 posts, read 20,197,655 times
Reputation: 8437
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber View Post
No, it is not. There are tens of millions of Americans out of jobs. Labor Force Participation Rate is still very bad.

We had 4% unemployment under Clinton, and kept adding 300-400K jobs per month.
You had 4% (or less) under Clinton for thirteen months (Dec 1999-Dec 2000).

Job gains averaged 172K per month during this period.

Not bad!

So far, we have had 4% (or less) for seventeen months under Trump (Mar 2018 to present).

During this seventeen month period, job growth has averaged 196K per month, and Trump added these jobs with even lower unemployment.

In fact, during the last four months, unemployment has been 3.6-3.7% and even with that, job growth averaged 159k per month.


The only month in which Clinton had UE at or below 4% and added 300-400K jobs, as you claim, was Dec 1999.

In that month, UE was 4.0% and jobs increased by 307K.

It was a one time deal and barely qualifies for your braggadocios claim.

There was no "kept adding" anything under Clinton.


This is a slam-dunk for Trump!


https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/lns14000000

https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0..._view=net_1mth
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2019, 04:53 AM
 
Location: NE Ohio
30,425 posts, read 16,734,453 times
Reputation: 8931
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Bond 007 View Post
Uh, no it wasn't. You're quoting something from 1990? In case you didn't know, 29 years have elapsed since then.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o..._United_States

Current expansion is 121 months, so far
1990's expansion was 120 months
1960's was 106 months
Reagan-Bush was 92 months.

Not even close to being the longest.
Well, it's simply a lie that the current expansion began in 2009. It didn't. What we're experiencing now began with President Trump. Obama didn't do anything to contribute to, let alone cause, the current economic boom. Obama never achieved even 3% GDP. And Markets began to soar, AFTER President Trump took office, and continue to break records.

It's only the die hard Obama sycophants (and Obama himself) that like to claim he had something to do with the current economy. Nothing could be further from the truth. If he had anything to do with it, why wasn't the economy booming in his last year, or even his last two years? He was in office for 8 long years, and the economy was basically stagnant the entire time.

But you will believe what you want, and so will the other Obama lovers. Obama was your god.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-03-2019, 10:18 AM
 
Location: Kansas City, MISSOURI
9,056 posts, read 2,785,732 times
Reputation: 6991
Did you not read the link I provided? It says:

June 2009–Ongoing

It bothers you that the expansion began under Obama, so you decide to devise your own definition of it. Talk about ODS!

In addition I already provided the following link. The entity that dates the beginnings and ends of recessions stated back in September 2010 that the recession ended June 2009.

Recession ended in June 2009: NBER
Quote:
The recession ended in June 2009, making it the longest downturn since the Great Depression of the 1930s, the National Bureau of Economic Research said on Monday.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nononsenseguy View Post
Obama never achieved even 3% GDP.
Neither has Trump!
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