- Joined
- Oct 19, 2014
- Messages
- 15,008
- Reaction score
- 5,279
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Other
Enh. I'd say don't bother. Yer anecdotal ramblings aren't worth much of anything.
First hand accounts are the best source of information.
Supply-side economics.
Did I make a big deal of anything? I'd say no. Tbh, I feel yer seriously challenged when it comes to expressing yerself coherently. You don't seem to have any idea how yer "speech" will be interpreted by others.
First hand accounts are the best source of information.
If your "no problem" reply was so, then why make a point of it?
Not on an anonymous online debate forum.
At times, but it depends on the source.
Not on an anonymous online debate forum.
I can give my first hand accounts and let everyone make up their mind what they believe.
These illegals are a menace and a serious danger to everyone they work for.
Trust me they are not licensed and do not know what they are doing.
Protect yourself and always ask for a license and make sure a permit is pulled for any major work. Otherwise you may not wake up one day thanks to substandard construction which does kill people every day. These illegal aliens are notorious for not following the codes. Most don't even know the codes.
What racism?
>>you cant point to an Obama policy that improved the economy
I did — the ARRA. What happened that you couldn't read that?
>>the GDP was on average the lowest of any president.
False. As of the end of Q2, he had the same average annual growth rate as 43 — 1.76%. With things picking up in the second half of last year (3.5% in Q3 and the consensus for Q4 now above two percent), he will now edge out Bubba's well-intentioned but misguided successor.
That depends on what kind of math you use.
??
What evidence do you have that recent hires are any more overqualified than those in the past? Here's what a business survey in MN found a few months ago:
More than three-fourths of surveyed firms report a "good match" between the education level of their employees and that which is required for their jobs. Very few firms think their workers are overqualified for their jobs, and 16 percent of firms believe their employees are underqualified. (source)
Let's remember that there's more to employment than yer level of compensation. And as more and more people acquire higher levels of education, the labor market will become increasingly characterised by overqualified workers until the economy can adapt to provide appropriate employment opportunities.
The percentage who had completed an associate’s or higher degree increased from 33 percent in 1995 to 46 percent in 2015. Similarly, the percentage who had completed a bachelor’s or higher degree increased from 25 percent in 1995 to 36 percent in 2015, and the percentage who had completed a master’s or higher degree increased from 5 percent in 1995 to 9 percent in 2015. (source)
How quickly will the blessed private sector respond to this development? We'll see. And in the meantime, let's hope Frumpy can succeed in the RW effort to eliminate the federal Department of Education. Otherwise, we'll continue to be faced with facts that can easily get in the way of convenient truthiness.
>>There's no accounting for the folks that just drop out of the job market altogether in frustration.
False. Sad that you have such concern for yer fellow Americans while remaining ignorant of the way the labor market is analysed by the gubmint.
>>The economy and job market is crap. That's largely why Trump won. Capiche?
Too many voters don't know what the eff is going on around them. That's why the lying, defrauding Pig got elected. Get it?
>>liberals will gladly and unashamedly take credit for this recent boom since the election
Ya mean the fifteen million full-time, private-sector jobs paying average wages added since Dec 2009?
>>despite knowing the truth that it's a repudiation of them altogether.
It's very important to distinguish between "truthy" and "truth." Try working on that.
>>If liberal ways worked, they wouldn't have only 28 percent of the legistlative positions and governorships in the country right now.
Any source for that statistic? Did ya get it from the lying RW media hate machine? There's no doubt we're in the minority. We'll just continue to work hard to help people get their head out of their ass.
The number has never been agreed. And just wanting a job without doing anything about it has never been part of the equation. There are 159,640,000 people doing something about work. 7,529,000 are unsuccessful.In the past (pre Obama) 6% or lower unemployment meant everyone who wanted a job had one or was short term between jobs.
Millions? Can you provide any evidence at all that there are millions who specifically "gave up" looking (as opposed to never having looked, stopped looking for some other reason, or are unable to work)? 94% of those not working and not looking for work don't want a job. https://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea38.htmThe millions of Americans unemployed so long they have given up looking and are no longer counted is the biggest single reason for today’s 4some% U3 unemployment.
Obamacare turning single full time jobs into mulit part time jobs is not job creation.
A point? So unless something is a problem, it doesn't make sense to comment on it? And when I do comment on it, I'm somehow making a "big deal" out of it?
>>By any measure, an unnecessary statement by it's own point.
"By its own point"? I don't know what you mean, but I assume yer continuing this nonsense about me somehow overreacting to yer rather strangely worded enquiries where you ask, "Isn't x true?" and "Doesn't y indicate z?," and then say you haven't expressed any belief in x or z.
>>Argue the points of the subject at hand.
I have. I've asked for evidence that immigration increases unemployment and/or lowers wages.
>>Go ahead and granulate.
What does that mean here? Yer not suggesting that I should go all to pieces, are you? ☺
>>You are straying from a subject where we are most likely in greatest agreement.
So do you agree that there doesn't seem to be any evidence indicating that immigration increases unemployment and/or lowers wages?
>>and argue for what, I don't know.
Oh, I argue in my sleep. I argue with myself all the time, and I see to it that I always win!
>>Come back to the questions at hand.
It seems to me we got sidetracked when you started asking why I was assuming you have views that logically follow from statements you made.
>>I really don't think there is much argument there.
Sounds good.
I've posted my name, but I suppose no one's interested in my wonderful collection of anecdotal evidence. E.g., did you know that coonhounds are God's greatest creation and that life is really just one &^^%#$^&* after another?
Yeah, not so much.The millions of Americans unemployed so long they have given up looking and are no longer counted is the biggest single reason for today’s 4some% U3 unemployment.
Yeah, not so much. Or, y'know, not at all.The fact is the American worker has done nothing but suffer because of Obama.
Yeah, thing is? That didn't happen.Obamacare turning single full time jobs into mulit part time jobs is not job creation.
Yes, we all know about the BLS "statistics" that say the unemployment rate is "very low".
But why is Sears and K-Mart -- cheap-price stores -- closing so many stores if there are supposedly so many employed Americans with money to spend?
And why is Macy's -- medium-price stores -- closing so many of their stores now if there are supposedly so many employed Americans with money to spend?
And, of course, why is the left so adamant that the minimum wage be raised and shored up, you know, the minimum wage, the wage paid to part-time considerably less than 40-hours/week employees?
Could it be that the vast majority of the new jobs under Obama paid considerably less money than the old job the person previously had?
Could it be that the vast majority of the new jobs under Obama were .. wait for it .. .. part-time jobs?
Hmmmm ...
The Ratio of Part-Time Employed Remains High, But Improving - dshort - Advisor Perspectives
This chart proves that the 'recovery' was a part time one.
Even now, despite MASSIVE government stimulus with huge deficits, billions in QE and ZIRP...the economy still has a ratio of part time to full time that is FAR worse than the norms before the Great Recession.
This is what Krugmanites do not understand...stimuli does NOT build long term, solid jobs. It builds short term, temp/part time jobs because it invites short term thinking as the economy becomes completely dependant on government stimulation.
THis should be obvious to them. BUt it is not.
Instead, they ignore the data they do not like, peddle out the BLS, government controlled/manipulated data that even the Fed no longer values. And they learn nothing.
If you do not have an open mind about the economy, you learn nothing and are doomed to continue the same mistakes.
'Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.'
Albert Einstein
I don't believe you are reading the chart correctly.... it is a bit of an odd chart. But, if you look, full time employment is now 82% compared to 83% at the start of the recession. I would say that is full recovery.
BTW.... a keysesian stimulus is just that, a stimulus. It is analogous of a spark plug to an engine, it does not build long term things, it merely restores confidence to the economy so that the private sector is willing to invest.
That chart does not mean what you think it means.
The Ratio of Part-Time Employed Remains High, But Improving - dshort - Advisor Perspectives
This chart proves that the 'recovery' was a part time one.
That's not right either.Even now, despite MASSIVE government stimulus with huge deficits, billions in QE and ZIRP...the economy still has a ratio of part time to full time that is FAR worse than the norms before the Great Recession.
Yeah, thing is? Keynesian stimulus isn't supposed to directly create permanent jobs.This is what Krugmanites do not understand...stimuli does NOT build long term, solid jobs.
And what data is Krugman ignoring? Can you cite the articles he's written where he ignores data?Instead, they ignore the data they do not like, peddle out the BLS, government controlled/manipulated data that even the Fed no longer values. And they learn nothing.
Oh, the irony...Even now, they will look atthe about chart and instead of learning from it, they will probably try and find some way to either discredit it, ignore it or trundle out some meaningless statistic that they think counters it.
81.7% is nowhere near 83%??? I'd say it's very near.I do not think you read what I typed.
a) please look at the chart...full time to part time employment - despite 8+ years of MASSIVE government/Fed stimulus - even now is still nowhere near the ratio norm before the Great Recession.
81.93 to 81.68 is hardly "getting worse." It's been bouncing up and down a little...nothing significant.Plus, if you look closely, the ratio is getting worse lately - which suggests the ratio is as good as it is going to get under this 'recovery system'.
I can give my first hand accounts and let everyone make up their mind what they believe. These illegals are a menace and a serious danger to everyone they work for. Trust me they are not licensed and do not know what they are doing. Protect yourself and always ask for a license and make sure a permit is pulled for any major work. Otherwise you may not wake up one day thanks to substandard construction which does kill people every day. These illegal aliens are notorious for not following the codes. Most don't even know the codes.
I do not think you read what I typed.
a) please look at the chart...full time to part time employment - despite 8+ years of MASSIVE government/Fed stimulus - even now is still nowhere near the ratio norm before the Great Recession. Plus, if you look closely, the ratio is getting worse lately - which suggests the ratio is as good as it is going to get under this 'recovery system'.
b) I said nothing of Keynes or Keynesianism. I said 'Krugmanites'.
If you really look at the chart, the economy behaved exactly as you would expect in a recession: people lose their jobs, they take part time work until the economy firms up, as it firms up, full time jobs become available again. That is exactly what is shows.
What is misleading about the chart is that it really makes a big deal out of a couple of percentage points. It shows only a 3% swing from pre-recession through recession and post recession. Frankly, I would have expected a bigger swing. What the chart does show is a recovery and thus does not make your point. Try again.
Paul Krugman is a keynesian.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/06/06/why-am-i-a-keynesian/
Substantially all of america's top economist says the stimulus worked.
And btw, this 'recovery' came with record stimulus. Massive government deficits, record QE and ZIRP for years.And still the economy 'recovered' at an INCREDIBLY slow pace.
Yet, look at the 1920/21 Depression? It as FAR worse than the 'Great Recession' and yet the American economy recovered from it in less then four years. How? By balancing the budget, lowering taxes and generally letting the economy fix itself.
Government stimulus does not increase recovery speed...it retards it.
Of course, that concept seems to be - no offense - completely over your head.
Congressional Budget Office defends stimulus - The Washington Post
Did the stimulus work? A review of the nine best studies on the subject - The Washington Post
Economists agree: Stimulus created nearly 3 million jobs - USATODAY.com
http://www.economy.com/mark-zandi/documents/end-of-great-recession.pdf
http://www.igmchicago.org/igm-economic-experts-panel/poll-results?SurveyID=SV_cw5O9LNJL1oz4Xi
http://economics.mit.edu/files/7102
http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-mh-stimulus-worked-20140228-story.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/23/opinion/sunday/what-the-stimulus-accomplished.html?_r=0
So, unless you sport a PhD in Economics from a top school, you really have some work to do to make a point other than the stimulus worked.
I don't know about you, but I tend to find the subject "These people" is usually followed by a bigoted remark.
The number has never been agreed. And just wanting a job without doing anything about it has never been part of the equation. There are 159,640,000 people doing something about work. 7,529,000 are unsuccessful.
Millions? Can you provide any evidence at all that there are millions who specifically "gave up" looking (as opposed to never having looked, stopped looking for some other reason, or are unable to work)? 94% of those not working and not looking for work don't want a job. https://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea38.htm
You just made my point, most of that 94% have been unemployed so long they pretty much cant work and are fully adjusted to living on welfare.
Where on earth did you get that idea? There's no way to get that out of anything I wrote or posted. There are 50 million disabled, 65 and older or both, 14 million full time students age 16-24. and then add in the stay home moms (about 8-9 million), and a few million other non-working spouses. Do you need the links to back those up?You just made my point, most of that 94% have been unemployed so long they pretty much cant work and are fully adjusted to living on welfare.
If you cannot see what is right in front of your face, that is your problem, not mine.
LOL...and most economists - especially Keynesians - completely miscalled both the dot.com crashes and the housing crash (including the Fed, btw). I am a nobody and I completely liquidated my portfolio in late summer '07 because it was ridiculously obvious to me (and had been for years) that the market was a mess and ripe to fall. Many others saw as I did.
Most economists are macroeconomic ignoramuses. If they were SO great at calling the markets, they would be billionaires, not economists desperately trying to get face time on CNBC.
The Fed have more Ph. D's. in economics than almost anyone - and they COMPLETELY missed the housing crash...even their own minutes prove it.
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/22/business/federal-reserve-2008-transcripts.html
You cannot learn how to be a great investor in university (I went to university for economics and learned NOTHING that has helped me in the real world) - you either understand human instincts and can keep an open mind about facts/data...or you can't. The Fed has proven time and again that it can't.
Economics is about emotions...not theories.
Clearly, you do not understand the chart or Krugmanism and seem to have closed minds on both.
I generally do not waste my time on closed minded people.
We are done here.
Good day.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?