CNN Poll - US Economy Best Ranking In Nearly 20 Years

[El Castor]

"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

[islander]

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

Hmmm. That would be comparing the economy to that at the end of the
Clinton administration which was also setting records for a good
economy. What happened since then? Gosh, there was the GW Bush
administration including the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Fortunately the Obama administration was able to recover from that
disaster and set us on the path to a healthy economy.

[me]

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

Hmmm. That would be comparing the economy to that at the end of the
Clinton administration which was also setting records for a good
economy. What happened since then? Gosh, there was the GW Bush
administration including the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Fortunately the Obama administration was able to recover from that
disaster and set us on the path to a healthy economy.

The Fed manipulates the economy. Presidents and Congress are almost irrelevant.


“Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes the laws.”
~ Mayer Amschel Rothschild

[El Castor]

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

Hmmm. That would be comparing the economy to that at the end of the
Clinton administration which was also setting records for a good
economy. What happened since then? Gosh, there was the GW Bush
administration including the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Fortunately the Obama administration was able to recover from that
disaster and set us on the path to a healthy economy.

Which was exceeded by Donald Trump.

"Black and Hispanic unemployment is at a record low"
"There have never been more Black and Hispanic Americans in the
workforce, Friday’s Labor Department job report showed.
The jobless rate for Hispanics hit a record low of 3.9% in September,
while African Americans maintained its lowest rate ever, 5.5%."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/04/black-and-hispanic-unemployment-is-at-a-record-low.html

"Americans' Positive Views on the Economy Could Earn Trump a Boost in
2020, New Poll Suggests
By Blake Dodge On 12/20/19 at 4:56 PM EST"
https://www.newsweek.com/best-economy-scores-since-2001-could-earn-trump-boost-2020-new-poll-cnn-1478567

[islander]

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

Hmmm. That would be comparing the economy to that at the end of the
Clinton administration which was also setting records for a good
economy. What happened since then? Gosh, there was the GW Bush
administration including the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Fortunately the Obama administration was able to recover from that
disaster and set us on the path to a healthy economy.

Which was exceeded by Donald Trump.
"Black and Hispanic unemployment is at a record low"
"There have never been more Black and Hispanic Americans in the
workforce, Friday’s Labor Department job report showed.
The jobless rate for Hispanics hit a record low of 3.9% in September,
while African Americans maintained its lowest rate ever, 5.5%."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/04/black-and-hispanic-unemployment-is-at-a-record-low.html
"Americans' Positive Views on the Economy Could Earn Trump a Boost in
2020, New Poll Suggests
By Blake Dodge On 12/20/19 at 4:56 PM EST"
https://www.newsweek.com/best-economy-scores-since-2001-could-earn-trump-boost-2020-new-poll-cnn-1478567

And where is the optimism about the Labor Force Participation Rate?
Still stuck around 63%.

[El Castor]

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

Hmmm. That would be comparing the economy to that at the end of the
Clinton administration which was also setting records for a good
economy. What happened since then? Gosh, there was the GW Bush
administration including the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Fortunately the Obama administration was able to recover from that
disaster and set us on the path to a healthy economy.

Which was exceeded by Donald Trump.
"Black and Hispanic unemployment is at a record low"
"There have never been more Black and Hispanic Americans in the
workforce, Friday’s Labor Department job report showed.
The jobless rate for Hispanics hit a record low of 3.9% in September,
while African Americans maintained its lowest rate ever, 5.5%."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/04/black-and-hispanic-unemployment-is-at-a-record-low.html
"Americans' Positive Views on the Economy Could Earn Trump a Boost in
2020, New Poll Suggests
By Blake Dodge On 12/20/19 at 4:56 PM EST"
https://www.newsweek.com/best-economy-scores-since-2001-could-earn-trump-boost-2020-new-poll-cnn-1478567

And where is the optimism about the Labor Force Participation Rate?
Still stuck around 63%.

The work force is aging, and retiring. There have been numerous
reports over the course of the Trump administration of more job
openings than unemployed. Face it, Trumps policies have been good for
the economy, and prosperity in general, which is the central reason I
am a conservative.

"The U.S. has 1 million more job openings than unemployed workers
March 15, 2019"
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-u-s-has-1-million-more-job-openings-than-unemployed-workers/

"There are now more job openings than workers to fill them
June 5, 2018"
"For the first time in at least 20 years, there are now more job
openings than there are people looking for work.
The ratio of unemployed workers to job openings dropped below one in
April for the first time since the Labor Department started collecting
data in 2000, the agency reported Tuesday."
https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/05/news/economy/job-openings-unemployed-workers/index.html

[islander]

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

Hmmm. That would be comparing the economy to that at the end of the
Clinton administration which was also setting records for a good
economy. What happened since then? Gosh, there was the GW Bush
administration including the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Fortunately the Obama administration was able to recover from that
disaster and set us on the path to a healthy economy.

Which was exceeded by Donald Trump.
"Black and Hispanic unemployment is at a record low"
"There have never been more Black and Hispanic Americans in the
workforce, Friday’s Labor Department job report showed.
The jobless rate for Hispanics hit a record low of 3.9% in September,
while African Americans maintained its lowest rate ever, 5.5%."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/04/black-and-hispanic-unemployment-is-at-a-record-low.html
"Americans' Positive Views on the Economy Could Earn Trump a Boost in
2020, New Poll Suggests
By Blake Dodge On 12/20/19 at 4:56 PM EST"
https://www.newsweek.com/best-economy-scores-since-2001-could-earn-trump-boost-2020-new-poll-cnn-1478567

And where is the optimism about the Labor Force Participation Rate?
Still stuck around 63%.

The work force is aging, and retiring. There have been numerous
reports over the course of the Trump administration of more job
openings than unemployed. Face it, Trumps policies have been good for
the economy, and prosperity in general, which is the central reason I
am a conservative.
"The U.S. has 1 million more job openings than unemployed workers
March 15, 2019"
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-u-s-has-1-million-more-job-openings-than-unemployed-workers/
"There are now more job openings than workers to fill them
June 5, 2018"
"For the first time in at least 20 years, there are now more job
openings than there are people looking for work.
The ratio of unemployed workers to job openings dropped below one in
April for the first time since the Labor Department started collecting
data in 2000, the agency reported Tuesday."
https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/05/news/economy/job-openings-unemployed-workers/index.html

There are a number of problems with your citations on unemployment.
First of all, it is an average number which does not reflect the skewed
distributions upon which it is based. (The U-3 unemployment rate is
essentially unemployed/labor force.) The biggest problem with this is
that it counts temporary, part-time, along with full time jobs in
determining the labor force part of that equation. But, as I'm sure you
realize, it does not count disabled or discouraged workers who have
dropped out of the labor force. This results in what is described as an
overly optimistic figure that does not accurately represent unemployment.

There are actually six definitions of unemployment and the most
comprehensive published by the BLS is U-6 which takes these factors into
effect. You can find a good discussion of this at:
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/unemploymentrate.asp

If we are looking for actual health of the households of working
families, you should look at median household income. This basically is
a measure of how income results in benefit to the household and factors
out the variables of temporary, part-time and other factors for people
who are loosely attached to the workforce. Here, the numbers are not so
rosy.

With the Trump weakening of the ACA and tougher Medicaid requirements, a
picture of stagnant household income is revealed even tho poverty
declined. The change from 2017 to 2018 was only up 0.9% even with
adjustment for inflation. That is not statistically significant
especially when compared with 5.2% in 2015, 3.2% in 2016 and 1.8% in
2017. This is even more striking if we look at the household income in
the primarily Republican south - 0.3%! The bottom line is that
households are not seeing the same gains that were measured during the
last years of the Obama administration.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/09/10/median-household-income-stagnant-last-year-poverty-fell/2271025001/

But, there is more: Our population is increasing at a rate of about
200,000 per month. But, job growth averaged 180,000 for most of 2019
compared with an average monthly gain of 223,000 in 2018 according to
BLS report for Nov 2019. It appears that the bloom is off the Trump
economic rose.

[El Castor]

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

Hmmm. That would be comparing the economy to that at the end of the
Clinton administration which was also setting records for a good
economy. What happened since then? Gosh, there was the GW Bush
administration including the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Fortunately the Obama administration was able to recover from that
disaster and set us on the path to a healthy economy.

Which was exceeded by Donald Trump.
"Black and Hispanic unemployment is at a record low"
"There have never been more Black and Hispanic Americans in the
workforce, Friday’s Labor Department job report showed.
The jobless rate for Hispanics hit a record low of 3.9% in September,
while African Americans maintained its lowest rate ever, 5.5%."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/04/black-and-hispanic-unemployment-is-at-a-record-low.html
"Americans' Positive Views on the Economy Could Earn Trump a Boost in
2020, New Poll Suggests
By Blake Dodge On 12/20/19 at 4:56 PM EST"
https://www.newsweek.com/best-economy-scores-since-2001-could-earn-trump-boost-2020-new-poll-cnn-1478567

And where is the optimism about the Labor Force Participation Rate?
Still stuck around 63%.

The work force is aging, and retiring. There have been numerous
reports over the course of the Trump administration of more job
openings than unemployed. Face it, Trumps policies have been good for
the economy, and prosperity in general, which is the central reason I
am a conservative.
"The U.S. has 1 million more job openings than unemployed workers
March 15, 2019"
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-u-s-has-1-million-more-job-openings-than-unemployed-workers/
"There are now more job openings than workers to fill them
June 5, 2018"
"For the first time in at least 20 years, there are now more job
openings than there are people looking for work.
The ratio of unemployed workers to job openings dropped below one in
April for the first time since the Labor Department started collecting
data in 2000, the agency reported Tuesday."
https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/05/news/economy/job-openings-unemployed-workers/index.html

There are a number of problems with your citations on unemployment.
First of all, it is an average number which does not reflect the skewed
distributions upon which it is based. (The U-3 unemployment rate is
essentially unemployed/labor force.) The biggest problem with this is
that it counts temporary, part-time, along with full time jobs in
determining the labor force part of that equation. But, as I'm sure you
realize, it does not count disabled or discouraged workers who have
dropped out of the labor force. This results in what is described as an
overly optimistic figure that does not accurately represent unemployment.
There are actually six definitions of unemployment and the most
comprehensive published by the BLS is U-6 which takes these factors into
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/unemploymentrate.asp
If we are looking for actual health of the households of working
families, you should look at median household income. This basically is
a measure of how income results in benefit to the household and factors
out the variables of temporary, part-time and other factors for people
who are loosely attached to the workforce. Here, the numbers are not so
rosy.
With the Trump weakening of the ACA and tougher Medicaid requirements, a
picture of stagnant household income is revealed even tho poverty
declined. The change from 2017 to 2018 was only up 0.9% even with
adjustment for inflation. That is not statistically significant
especially when compared with 5.2% in 2015, 3.2% in 2016 and 1.8% in
2017. This is even more striking if we look at the household income in
the primarily Republican south - 0.3%! The bottom line is that
households are not seeing the same gains that were measured during the
last years of the Obama administration.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/09/10/median-household-income-stagnant-last-year-poverty-fell/2271025001/
But, there is more: Our population is increasing at a rate of about
200,000 per month. But, job growth averaged 180,000 for most of 2019
compared with an average monthly gain of 223,000 in 2018 according to
BLS report for Nov 2019. It appears that the bloom is off the Trump
economic rose.

Please let me sum up in one sentence ...

The Left is desperate to find a way, any way, to denigrate the Trump
economy, and above all else is praying for a deep debilitating
recession, or better yet, depression.

[islander]

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

Hmmm. That would be comparing the economy to that at the end of the
Clinton administration which was also setting records for a good
economy. What happened since then? Gosh, there was the GW Bush
administration including the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Fortunately the Obama administration was able to recover from that
disaster and set us on the path to a healthy economy.

Which was exceeded by Donald Trump.
"Black and Hispanic unemployment is at a record low"
"There have never been more Black and Hispanic Americans in the
workforce, Friday’s Labor Department job report showed.
The jobless rate for Hispanics hit a record low of 3.9% in September,
while African Americans maintained its lowest rate ever, 5.5%."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/04/black-and-hispanic-unemployment-is-at-a-record-low.html
"Americans' Positive Views on the Economy Could Earn Trump a Boost in
2020, New Poll Suggests
By Blake Dodge On 12/20/19 at 4:56 PM EST"
https://www.newsweek.com/best-economy-scores-since-2001-could-earn-trump-boost-2020-new-poll-cnn-1478567

And where is the optimism about the Labor Force Participation Rate?
Still stuck around 63%.

The work force is aging, and retiring. There have been numerous
reports over the course of the Trump administration of more job
openings than unemployed. Face it, Trumps policies have been good for
the economy, and prosperity in general, which is the central reason I
am a conservative.
"The U.S. has 1 million more job openings than unemployed workers
March 15, 2019"
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-u-s-has-1-million-more-job-openings-than-unemployed-workers/
"There are now more job openings than workers to fill them
June 5, 2018"
"For the first time in at least 20 years, there are now more job
openings than there are people looking for work.
The ratio of unemployed workers to job openings dropped below one in
April for the first time since the Labor Department started collecting
data in 2000, the agency reported Tuesday."
https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/05/news/economy/job-openings-unemployed-workers/index.html

There are a number of problems with your citations on unemployment.
First of all, it is an average number which does not reflect the skewed
distributions upon which it is based. (The U-3 unemployment rate is
essentially unemployed/labor force.) The biggest problem with this is
that it counts temporary, part-time, along with full time jobs in
determining the labor force part of that equation. But, as I'm sure you
realize, it does not count disabled or discouraged workers who have
dropped out of the labor force. This results in what is described as an
overly optimistic figure that does not accurately represent unemployment.
There are actually six definitions of unemployment and the most
comprehensive published by the BLS is U-6 which takes these factors into
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/unemploymentrate.asp
If we are looking for actual health of the households of working
families, you should look at median household income. This basically is
a measure of how income results in benefit to the household and factors
out the variables of temporary, part-time and other factors for people
who are loosely attached to the workforce. Here, the numbers are not so
rosy.
With the Trump weakening of the ACA and tougher Medicaid requirements, a
picture of stagnant household income is revealed even tho poverty
declined. The change from 2017 to 2018 was only up 0.9% even with
adjustment for inflation. That is not statistically significant
especially when compared with 5.2% in 2015, 3.2% in 2016 and 1.8% in
2017. This is even more striking if we look at the household income in
the primarily Republican south - 0.3%! The bottom line is that
households are not seeing the same gains that were measured during the
last years of the Obama administration.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/09/10/median-household-income-stagnant-last-year-poverty-fell/2271025001/
But, there is more: Our population is increasing at a rate of about
200,000 per month. But, job growth averaged 180,000 for most of 2019
compared with an average monthly gain of 223,000 in 2018 according to
BLS report for Nov 2019. It appears that the bloom is off the Trump
economic rose.

Please let me sum up in one sentence ...
The Left is desperate to find a way, any way, to denigrate the Trump
economy, and above all else is praying for a deep debilitating
recession, or better yet, depression.

That would be silly and non-productive. The Left is justifiably
concerned about the damage that Trump is doing and it would be foolish
to ignore the data. By ignoring the data, you are engaging in
confirmation bias to support your political opinions. Better, don't you
think, to look at the data and be open to understanding the trends?

[El Castor]

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

Hmmm. That would be comparing the economy to that at the end of the
Clinton administration which was also setting records for a good
economy. What happened since then? Gosh, there was the GW Bush
administration including the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Fortunately the Obama administration was able to recover from that
disaster and set us on the path to a healthy economy.

Which was exceeded by Donald Trump.
"Black and Hispanic unemployment is at a record low"
"There have never been more Black and Hispanic Americans in the
workforce, Friday’s Labor Department job report showed.
The jobless rate for Hispanics hit a record low of 3.9% in September,
while African Americans maintained its lowest rate ever, 5.5%."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/04/black-and-hispanic-unemployment-is-at-a-record-low.html
"Americans' Positive Views on the Economy Could Earn Trump a Boost in
2020, New Poll Suggests
By Blake Dodge On 12/20/19 at 4:56 PM EST"
https://www.newsweek.com/best-economy-scores-since-2001-could-earn-trump-boost-2020-new-poll-cnn-1478567

And where is the optimism about the Labor Force Participation Rate?
Still stuck around 63%.

The work force is aging, and retiring. There have been numerous
reports over the course of the Trump administration of more job
openings than unemployed. Face it, Trumps policies have been good for
the economy, and prosperity in general, which is the central reason I
am a conservative.
"The U.S. has 1 million more job openings than unemployed workers
March 15, 2019"
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-u-s-has-1-million-more-job-openings-than-unemployed-workers/
"There are now more job openings than workers to fill them
June 5, 2018"
"For the first time in at least 20 years, there are now more job
openings than there are people looking for work.
The ratio of unemployed workers to job openings dropped below one in
April for the first time since the Labor Department started collecting
data in 2000, the agency reported Tuesday."
https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/05/news/economy/job-openings-unemployed-workers/index.html

There are a number of problems with your citations on unemployment.
First of all, it is an average number which does not reflect the skewed
distributions upon which it is based. (The U-3 unemployment rate is
essentially unemployed/labor force.) The biggest problem with this is
that it counts temporary, part-time, along with full time jobs in
determining the labor force part of that equation. But, as I'm sure you
realize, it does not count disabled or discouraged workers who have
dropped out of the labor force. This results in what is described as an
overly optimistic figure that does not accurately represent unemployment.
There are actually six definitions of unemployment and the most
comprehensive published by the BLS is U-6 which takes these factors into
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/unemploymentrate.asp
If we are looking for actual health of the households of working
families, you should look at median household income. This basically is
a measure of how income results in benefit to the household and factors
out the variables of temporary, part-time and other factors for people
who are loosely attached to the workforce. Here, the numbers are not so
rosy.
With the Trump weakening of the ACA and tougher Medicaid requirements, a
picture of stagnant household income is revealed even tho poverty
declined. The change from 2017 to 2018 was only up 0.9% even with
adjustment for inflation. That is not statistically significant
especially when compared with 5.2% in 2015, 3.2% in 2016 and 1.8% in
2017. This is even more striking if we look at the household income in
the primarily Republican south - 0.3%! The bottom line is that
households are not seeing the same gains that were measured during the
last years of the Obama administration.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/09/10/median-household-income-stagnant-last-year-poverty-fell/2271025001/
But, there is more: Our population is increasing at a rate of about
200,000 per month. But, job growth averaged 180,000 for most of 2019
compared with an average monthly gain of 223,000 in 2018 according to
BLS report for Nov 2019. It appears that the bloom is off the Trump
economic rose.

Please let me sum up in one sentence ...
The Left is desperate to find a way, any way, to denigrate the Trump
economy, and above all else is praying for a deep debilitating
recession, or better yet, depression.

That would be silly and non-productive. The Left is justifiably
concerned about the damage that Trump is doing and it would be foolish
to ignore the data. By ignoring the data, you are engaging in
confirmation bias to support your political opinions. Better, don't you
think, to look at the data and be open to understanding the trends?

Remember, I majored in economics and spent my working years in and
around finance, was licensed to sell some pretty obscure instruments,
and sat through countless briefings by a bank economist. Of one thing
I am certain, given the incentive a dark cloud can always be found. I
will stick with unemployment numbers, GDP, and the DOW/S&P. The
numbers I have quoted have a great deal of meaning for me, and when I
said that the Left is praying for a recession, I meant it, and you
know it's true. A strong economy will keep Trump in office doing the
things that got us where we are. A recession is what the left wing of
your party needs to gain power and unleash its brand of socialism.

[islander]

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

Hmmm. That would be comparing the economy to that at the end of the
Clinton administration which was also setting records for a good
economy. What happened since then? Gosh, there was the GW Bush
administration including the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Fortunately the Obama administration was able to recover from that
disaster and set us on the path to a healthy economy.

Which was exceeded by Donald Trump.
"Black and Hispanic unemployment is at a record low"
"There have never been more Black and Hispanic Americans in the
workforce, Friday’s Labor Department job report showed.
The jobless rate for Hispanics hit a record low of 3.9% in September,
while African Americans maintained its lowest rate ever, 5.5%."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/04/black-and-hispanic-unemployment-is-at-a-record-low.html
"Americans' Positive Views on the Economy Could Earn Trump a Boost in
2020, New Poll Suggests
By Blake Dodge On 12/20/19 at 4:56 PM EST"
https://www.newsweek.com/best-economy-scores-since-2001-could-earn-trump-boost-2020-new-poll-cnn-1478567

And where is the optimism about the Labor Force Participation Rate?
Still stuck around 63%.

The work force is aging, and retiring. There have been numerous
reports over the course of the Trump administration of more job
openings than unemployed. Face it, Trumps policies have been good for
the economy, and prosperity in general, which is the central reason I
am a conservative.
"The U.S. has 1 million more job openings than unemployed workers
March 15, 2019"
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-u-s-has-1-million-more-job-openings-than-unemployed-workers/
"There are now more job openings than workers to fill them
June 5, 2018"
"For the first time in at least 20 years, there are now more job
openings than there are people looking for work.
The ratio of unemployed workers to job openings dropped below one in
April for the first time since the Labor Department started collecting
data in 2000, the agency reported Tuesday."
https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/05/news/economy/job-openings-unemployed-workers/index.html

There are a number of problems with your citations on unemployment.
First of all, it is an average number which does not reflect the skewed
distributions upon which it is based. (The U-3 unemployment rate is
essentially unemployed/labor force.) The biggest problem with this is
that it counts temporary, part-time, along with full time jobs in
determining the labor force part of that equation. But, as I'm sure you
realize, it does not count disabled or discouraged workers who have
dropped out of the labor force. This results in what is described as an
overly optimistic figure that does not accurately represent unemployment.
There are actually six definitions of unemployment and the most
comprehensive published by the BLS is U-6 which takes these factors into
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/unemploymentrate.asp
If we are looking for actual health of the households of working
families, you should look at median household income. This basically is
a measure of how income results in benefit to the household and factors
out the variables of temporary, part-time and other factors for people
who are loosely attached to the workforce. Here, the numbers are not so
rosy.
With the Trump weakening of the ACA and tougher Medicaid requirements, a
picture of stagnant household income is revealed even tho poverty
declined. The change from 2017 to 2018 was only up 0.9% even with
adjustment for inflation. That is not statistically significant
especially when compared with 5.2% in 2015, 3.2% in 2016 and 1.8% in
2017. This is even more striking if we look at the household income in
the primarily Republican south - 0.3%! The bottom line is that
households are not seeing the same gains that were measured during the
last years of the Obama administration.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/09/10/median-household-income-stagnant-last-year-poverty-fell/2271025001/
But, there is more: Our population is increasing at a rate of about
200,000 per month. But, job growth averaged 180,000 for most of 2019
compared with an average monthly gain of 223,000 in 2018 according to
BLS report for Nov 2019. It appears that the bloom is off the Trump
economic rose.

Please let me sum up in one sentence ...
The Left is desperate to find a way, any way, to denigrate the Trump
economy, and above all else is praying for a deep debilitating
recession, or better yet, depression.

That would be silly and non-productive. The Left is justifiably
concerned about the damage that Trump is doing and it would be foolish
to ignore the data. By ignoring the data, you are engaging in
confirmation bias to support your political opinions. Better, don't you
think, to look at the data and be open to understanding the trends?

Remember, I majored in economics and spent my working years in and
around finance, was licensed to sell some pretty obscure instruments,
and sat through countless briefings by a bank economist. Of one thing
I am certain, given the incentive a dark cloud can always be found. I
will stick with unemployment numbers, GDP, and the DOW/S&P. The
numbers I have quoted have a great deal of meaning for me, and when I
said that the Left is praying for a recession, I meant it, and you
know it's true. A strong economy will keep Trump in office doing the
things that got us where we are. A recession is what the left wing of
your party needs to gain power and unleash its brand of socialism.

GDP looks like pretty much straight line growth since 2009. Given that
Trump supposedly poured a lot of money into the economy with his tax
cut, what is there to brag about? That he didn't screw up the recovery
from the mess that GW Bush gave us?

You might want to consider the declining household income. People are
getting tired of promises by Trump that aren't delivered. Most of the
people in the country are still having trouble making ends meet.

[El Castor]

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

Hmmm. That would be comparing the economy to that at the end of the
Clinton administration which was also setting records for a good
economy. What happened since then? Gosh, there was the GW Bush
administration including the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Fortunately the Obama administration was able to recover from that
disaster and set us on the path to a healthy economy.

Which was exceeded by Donald Trump.
"Black and Hispanic unemployment is at a record low"
"There have never been more Black and Hispanic Americans in the
workforce, Friday’s Labor Department job report showed.
The jobless rate for Hispanics hit a record low of 3.9% in September,
while African Americans maintained its lowest rate ever, 5.5%."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/04/black-and-hispanic-unemployment-is-at-a-record-low.html
"Americans' Positive Views on the Economy Could Earn Trump a Boost in
2020, New Poll Suggests
By Blake Dodge On 12/20/19 at 4:56 PM EST"
https://www.newsweek.com/best-economy-scores-since-2001-could-earn-trump-boost-2020-new-poll-cnn-1478567

And where is the optimism about the Labor Force Participation Rate?
Still stuck around 63%.

The work force is aging, and retiring. There have been numerous
reports over the course of the Trump administration of more job
openings than unemployed. Face it, Trumps policies have been good for
the economy, and prosperity in general, which is the central reason I
am a conservative.
"The U.S. has 1 million more job openings than unemployed workers
March 15, 2019"
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-u-s-has-1-million-more-job-openings-than-unemployed-workers/
"There are now more job openings than workers to fill them
June 5, 2018"
"For the first time in at least 20 years, there are now more job
openings than there are people looking for work.
The ratio of unemployed workers to job openings dropped below one in
April for the first time since the Labor Department started collecting
data in 2000, the agency reported Tuesday."
https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/05/news/economy/job-openings-unemployed-workers/index.html

There are a number of problems with your citations on unemployment.
First of all, it is an average number which does not reflect the skewed
distributions upon which it is based. (The U-3 unemployment rate is
essentially unemployed/labor force.) The biggest problem with this is
that it counts temporary, part-time, along with full time jobs in
determining the labor force part of that equation. But, as I'm sure you
realize, it does not count disabled or discouraged workers who have
dropped out of the labor force. This results in what is described as an
overly optimistic figure that does not accurately represent unemployment.
There are actually six definitions of unemployment and the most
comprehensive published by the BLS is U-6 which takes these factors into
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/unemploymentrate.asp
If we are looking for actual health of the households of working
families, you should look at median household income. This basically is
a measure of how income results in benefit to the household and factors
out the variables of temporary, part-time and other factors for people
who are loosely attached to the workforce. Here, the numbers are not so
rosy.
With the Trump weakening of the ACA and tougher Medicaid requirements, a
picture of stagnant household income is revealed even tho poverty
declined. The change from 2017 to 2018 was only up 0.9% even with
adjustment for inflation. That is not statistically significant
especially when compared with 5.2% in 2015, 3.2% in 2016 and 1.8% in
2017. This is even more striking if we look at the household income in
the primarily Republican south - 0.3%! The bottom line is that
households are not seeing the same gains that were measured during the
last years of the Obama administration.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/09/10/median-household-income-stagnant-last-year-poverty-fell/2271025001/
But, there is more: Our population is increasing at a rate of about
200,000 per month. But, job growth averaged 180,000 for most of 2019
compared with an average monthly gain of 223,000 in 2018 according to
BLS report for Nov 2019. It appears that the bloom is off the Trump
economic rose.

Please let me sum up in one sentence ...
The Left is desperate to find a way, any way, to denigrate the Trump
economy, and above all else is praying for a deep debilitating
recession, or better yet, depression.

That would be silly and non-productive. The Left is justifiably
concerned about the damage that Trump is doing and it would be foolish
to ignore the data. By ignoring the data, you are engaging in
confirmation bias to support your political opinions. Better, don't you
think, to look at the data and be open to understanding the trends?

Remember, I majored in economics and spent my working years in and
around finance, was licensed to sell some pretty obscure instruments,
and sat through countless briefings by a bank economist. Of one thing
I am certain, given the incentive a dark cloud can always be found. I
will stick with unemployment numbers, GDP, and the DOW/S&P. The
numbers I have quoted have a great deal of meaning for me, and when I
said that the Left is praying for a recession, I meant it, and you
know it's true. A strong economy will keep Trump in office doing the
things that got us where we are. A recession is what the left wing of
your party needs to gain power and unleash its brand of socialism.

GDP looks like pretty much straight line growth since 2009. Given that
Trump supposedly poured a lot of money into the economy with his tax
cut, what is there to brag about? That he didn't screw up the recovery
from the mess that GW Bush gave us?
You might want to consider the declining household income. People are
getting tired of promises by Trump that aren't delivered. Most of the
people in the country are still having trouble making ends meet.

"President Trump’s critics can’t deny that the economy is doing well,
so instead they insist all the benefits have gone to the rich and
large corporations. “America’s middle class is under attack,” Sen.
Elizabeth Warren asserted in her presidential campaign announcement
last December. The latest data from the Census Bureau monthly surveys
tell a different story. Real median household income—the amount earned
by those in the very middle—hit $65,084 (in 2019 dollars) for the 12
months ending in July. That’s the highest level ever and a gain of
$4,144, or 6.8%, since Mr. Trump took office. By comparison, during 7½
years under President Obama—starting from the end of the recession in
June 2009 through January 2017—the median household income rose by
only about $1,000."
"https://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps-middle-class-economic-progress-11569786435"

[islander]

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

Hmmm. That would be comparing the economy to that at the end of the
Clinton administration which was also setting records for a good
economy. What happened since then? Gosh, there was the GW Bush
administration including the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Fortunately the Obama administration was able to recover from that
disaster and set us on the path to a healthy economy.

Which was exceeded by Donald Trump.
"Black and Hispanic unemployment is at a record low"
"There have never been more Black and Hispanic Americans in the
workforce, Friday’s Labor Department job report showed.
The jobless rate for Hispanics hit a record low of 3.9% in September,
while African Americans maintained its lowest rate ever, 5.5%."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/04/black-and-hispanic-unemployment-is-at-a-record-low.html
"Americans' Positive Views on the Economy Could Earn Trump a Boost in
2020, New Poll Suggests
By Blake Dodge On 12/20/19 at 4:56 PM EST"
https://www.newsweek.com/best-economy-scores-since-2001-could-earn-trump-boost-2020-new-poll-cnn-1478567

And where is the optimism about the Labor Force Participation Rate?
Still stuck around 63%.

The work force is aging, and retiring. There have been numerous
reports over the course of the Trump administration of more job
openings than unemployed. Face it, Trumps policies have been good for
the economy, and prosperity in general, which is the central reason I
am a conservative.
"The U.S. has 1 million more job openings than unemployed workers
March 15, 2019"
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-u-s-has-1-million-more-job-openings-than-unemployed-workers/
"There are now more job openings than workers to fill them
June 5, 2018"
"For the first time in at least 20 years, there are now more job
openings than there are people looking for work.
The ratio of unemployed workers to job openings dropped below one in
April for the first time since the Labor Department started collecting
data in 2000, the agency reported Tuesday."
https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/05/news/economy/job-openings-unemployed-workers/index.html

There are a number of problems with your citations on unemployment.
First of all, it is an average number which does not reflect the skewed
distributions upon which it is based. (The U-3 unemployment rate is
essentially unemployed/labor force.) The biggest problem with this is
that it counts temporary, part-time, along with full time jobs in
determining the labor force part of that equation. But, as I'm sure you
realize, it does not count disabled or discouraged workers who have
dropped out of the labor force. This results in what is described as an
overly optimistic figure that does not accurately represent unemployment.
There are actually six definitions of unemployment and the most
comprehensive published by the BLS is U-6 which takes these factors into
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/unemploymentrate.asp
If we are looking for actual health of the households of working
families, you should look at median household income. This basically is
a measure of how income results in benefit to the household and factors
out the variables of temporary, part-time and other factors for people
who are loosely attached to the workforce. Here, the numbers are not so
rosy.
With the Trump weakening of the ACA and tougher Medicaid requirements, a
picture of stagnant household income is revealed even tho poverty
declined. The change from 2017 to 2018 was only up 0.9% even with
adjustment for inflation. That is not statistically significant
especially when compared with 5.2% in 2015, 3.2% in 2016 and 1.8% in
2017. This is even more striking if we look at the household income in
the primarily Republican south - 0.3%! The bottom line is that
households are not seeing the same gains that were measured during the
last years of the Obama administration.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/09/10/median-household-income-stagnant-last-year-poverty-fell/2271025001/
But, there is more: Our population is increasing at a rate of about
200,000 per month. But, job growth averaged 180,000 for most of 2019
compared with an average monthly gain of 223,000 in 2018 according to
BLS report for Nov 2019. It appears that the bloom is off the Trump
economic rose.

Please let me sum up in one sentence ...
The Left is desperate to find a way, any way, to denigrate the Trump
economy, and above all else is praying for a deep debilitating
recession, or better yet, depression.

That would be silly and non-productive. The Left is justifiably
concerned about the damage that Trump is doing and it would be foolish
to ignore the data. By ignoring the data, you are engaging in
confirmation bias to support your political opinions. Better, don't you
think, to look at the data and be open to understanding the trends?

Remember, I majored in economics and spent my working years in and
around finance, was licensed to sell some pretty obscure instruments,
and sat through countless briefings by a bank economist. Of one thing
I am certain, given the incentive a dark cloud can always be found. I
will stick with unemployment numbers, GDP, and the DOW/S&P. The
numbers I have quoted have a great deal of meaning for me, and when I
said that the Left is praying for a recession, I meant it, and you
know it's true. A strong economy will keep Trump in office doing the
things that got us where we are. A recession is what the left wing of
your party needs to gain power and unleash its brand of socialism.

GDP looks like pretty much straight line growth since 2009. Given that
Trump supposedly poured a lot of money into the economy with his tax
cut, what is there to brag about? That he didn't screw up the recovery
from the mess that GW Bush gave us?
You might want to consider the declining household income. People are
getting tired of promises by Trump that aren't delivered. Most of the
people in the country are still having trouble making ends meet.

"President Trump’s critics can’t deny that the economy is doing well,
so instead they insist all the benefits have gone to the rich and
large corporations. “America’s middle class is under attack,” Sen.
Elizabeth Warren asserted in her presidential campaign announcement
last December. The latest data from the Census Bureau monthly surveys
tell a different story. Real median household income—the amount earned
by those in the very middle—hit $65,084 (in 2019 dollars) for the 12
months ending in July. That’s the highest level ever and a gain of
$4,144, or 6.8%, since Mr. Trump took office. By comparison, during 7½
years under President Obama—starting from the end of the recession in
June 2009 through January 2017—the median household income rose by
only about $1,000."
"https://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps-middle-class-economic-progress-11569786435"

A good example of how to lie with statistics and the WSJ should know
better. Household income is pretty noisy data and using a single number
to calculate gain is susceptible to end point bias (similar to end point
fallacy error).

While the US Census publishes monthly data, they refrain from drawing
conclusions from a single data point. Organizations like Sentier
Research which is widely quoted by conservative media are not so
careful. As nearly as I can tell, the $65,084 figure came from a July
2019 report by them and is cited as coming from the CPS monthly report.
To their credit, they only compare that number to 2000, but not the
dates that the WSJ picked.

The latest 3 year averages of CPS data are published by the US Census to
avoid end point bias. If you look at three year averages of median
figures, you will see that for the period 2016-2018 the gain was 1.74%,
for 2015-2017 was 3.30%, for 2014-2016 was 2.25% and for 2013-2015 was
4.01%. Since figures are not out yet, numbers from the US Monthly
Census are not available to compute 2017-2019. So, the most that we can
say is that Trump's figures are down as of the end of 2018.
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h08b.xls

Secondly, even tho the WSJ cites median figures (to their credit), it is
revealing to look at gain over three years using mean figures for the
quintile breakdown of household income over 3 year averages. These are
easily computed from:
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h03ar.xls
The results for 2016-2018 are:

Lowest Fifth 6.43%
Second Fifth 8.08%
Third Fifth 7.48%
Fourth Fifth 6.72%
Fifth Fifth 9.33%
Top 5% 11.05%

Clearly the top household incomes are benefiting the most and the poor
are doing the worst.

[El Castor]

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

Hmmm. That would be comparing the economy to that at the end of the
Clinton administration which was also setting records for a good
economy. What happened since then? Gosh, there was the GW Bush
administration including the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Fortunately the Obama administration was able to recover from that
disaster and set us on the path to a healthy economy.

Which was exceeded by Donald Trump.
"Black and Hispanic unemployment is at a record low"
"There have never been more Black and Hispanic Americans in the
workforce, Friday’s Labor Department job report showed.
The jobless rate for Hispanics hit a record low of 3.9% in September,
while African Americans maintained its lowest rate ever, 5.5%."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/04/black-and-hispanic-unemployment-is-at-a-record-low.html
"Americans' Positive Views on the Economy Could Earn Trump a Boost in
2020, New Poll Suggests
By Blake Dodge On 12/20/19 at 4:56 PM EST"
https://www.newsweek.com/best-economy-scores-since-2001-could-earn-trump-boost-2020-new-poll-cnn-1478567

And where is the optimism about the Labor Force Participation Rate?
Still stuck around 63%.

The work force is aging, and retiring. There have been numerous
reports over the course of the Trump administration of more job
openings than unemployed. Face it, Trumps policies have been good for
the economy, and prosperity in general, which is the central reason I
am a conservative.
"The U.S. has 1 million more job openings than unemployed workers
March 15, 2019"
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-u-s-has-1-million-more-job-openings-than-unemployed-workers/
"There are now more job openings than workers to fill them
June 5, 2018"
"For the first time in at least 20 years, there are now more job
openings than there are people looking for work.
The ratio of unemployed workers to job openings dropped below one in
April for the first time since the Labor Department started collecting
data in 2000, the agency reported Tuesday."
https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/05/news/economy/job-openings-unemployed-workers/index.html

There are a number of problems with your citations on unemployment.
First of all, it is an average number which does not reflect the skewed
distributions upon which it is based. (The U-3 unemployment rate is
essentially unemployed/labor force.) The biggest problem with this is
that it counts temporary, part-time, along with full time jobs in
determining the labor force part of that equation. But, as I'm sure you
realize, it does not count disabled or discouraged workers who have
dropped out of the labor force. This results in what is described as an
overly optimistic figure that does not accurately represent unemployment.
There are actually six definitions of unemployment and the most
comprehensive published by the BLS is U-6 which takes these factors into
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/unemploymentrate.asp
If we are looking for actual health of the households of working
families, you should look at median household income. This basically is
a measure of how income results in benefit to the household and factors
out the variables of temporary, part-time and other factors for people
who are loosely attached to the workforce. Here, the numbers are not so
rosy.
With the Trump weakening of the ACA and tougher Medicaid requirements, a
picture of stagnant household income is revealed even tho poverty
declined. The change from 2017 to 2018 was only up 0.9% even with
adjustment for inflation. That is not statistically significant
especially when compared with 5.2% in 2015, 3.2% in 2016 and 1.8% in
2017. This is even more striking if we look at the household income in
the primarily Republican south - 0.3%! The bottom line is that
households are not seeing the same gains that were measured during the
last years of the Obama administration.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/09/10/median-household-income-stagnant-last-year-poverty-fell/2271025001/
But, there is more: Our population is increasing at a rate of about
200,000 per month. But, job growth averaged 180,000 for most of 2019
compared with an average monthly gain of 223,000 in 2018 according to
BLS report for Nov 2019. It appears that the bloom is off the Trump
economic rose.

Please let me sum up in one sentence ...
The Left is desperate to find a way, any way, to denigrate the Trump
economy, and above all else is praying for a deep debilitating
recession, or better yet, depression.

That would be silly and non-productive. The Left is justifiably
concerned about the damage that Trump is doing and it would be foolish
to ignore the data. By ignoring the data, you are engaging in
confirmation bias to support your political opinions. Better, don't you
think, to look at the data and be open to understanding the trends?

Remember, I majored in economics and spent my working years in and
around finance, was licensed to sell some pretty obscure instruments,
and sat through countless briefings by a bank economist. Of one thing
I am certain, given the incentive a dark cloud can always be found. I
will stick with unemployment numbers, GDP, and the DOW/S&P. The
numbers I have quoted have a great deal of meaning for me, and when I
said that the Left is praying for a recession, I meant it, and you
know it's true. A strong economy will keep Trump in office doing the
things that got us where we are. A recession is what the left wing of
your party needs to gain power and unleash its brand of socialism.

GDP looks like pretty much straight line growth since 2009. Given that
Trump supposedly poured a lot of money into the economy with his tax
cut, what is there to brag about? That he didn't screw up the recovery
from the mess that GW Bush gave us?
You might want to consider the declining household income. People are
getting tired of promises by Trump that aren't delivered. Most of the
people in the country are still having trouble making ends meet.

"President Trump’s critics can’t deny that the economy is doing well,
so instead they insist all the benefits have gone to the rich and
large corporations. “America’s middle class is under attack,” Sen.
Elizabeth Warren asserted in her presidential campaign announcement
last December. The latest data from the Census Bureau monthly surveys
tell a different story. Real median household income—the amount earned
by those in the very middle—hit $65,084 (in 2019 dollars) for the 12
months ending in July. That’s the highest level ever and a gain of
$4,144, or 6.8%, since Mr. Trump took office. By comparison, during 7½
years under President Obama—starting from the end of the recession in
June 2009 through January 2017—the median household income rose by
only about $1,000."
"https://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps-middle-class-economic-progress-11569786435"

A good example of how to lie with statistics and the WSJ should know
better. Household income is pretty noisy data and using a single number
to calculate gain is susceptible to end point bias (similar to end point
fallacy error).
While the US Census publishes monthly data, they refrain from drawing
conclusions from a single data point. Organizations like Sentier
Research which is widely quoted by conservative media are not so
careful. As nearly as I can tell, the $65,084 figure came from a July
2019 report by them and is cited as coming from the CPS monthly report.
To their credit, they only compare that number to 2000, but not the
dates that the WSJ picked.
The latest 3 year averages of CPS data are published by the US Census to
avoid end point bias. If you look at three year averages of median
figures, you will see that for the period 2016-2018 the gain was 1.74%,
for 2015-2017 was 3.30%, for 2014-2016 was 2.25% and for 2013-2015 was
4.01%. Since figures are not out yet, numbers from the US Monthly
Census are not available to compute 2017-2019. So, the most that we can
say is that Trump's figures are down as of the end of 2018.
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h08b.xls
Secondly, even tho the WSJ cites median figures (to their credit), it is
revealing to look at gain over three years using mean figures for the
quintile breakdown of household income over 3 year averages. These are
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h03ar.xls
Lowest Fifth 6.43%
Second Fifth 8.08%
Third Fifth 7.48%
Fourth Fifth 6.72%
Fifth Fifth 9.33%
Top 5% 11.05%
Clearly the top household incomes are benefiting the most and the poor
are doing the worst.

And Back & Hispanic unemployment is at an all time low.

[islander]

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

Hmmm. That would be comparing the economy to that at the end of the
Clinton administration which was also setting records for a good
economy. What happened since then? Gosh, there was the GW Bush
administration including the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Fortunately the Obama administration was able to recover from that
disaster and set us on the path to a healthy economy.

Which was exceeded by Donald Trump.
"Black and Hispanic unemployment is at a record low"
"There have never been more Black and Hispanic Americans in the
workforce, Friday’s Labor Department job report showed.
The jobless rate for Hispanics hit a record low of 3.9% in September,
while African Americans maintained its lowest rate ever, 5.5%."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/04/black-and-hispanic-unemployment-is-at-a-record-low.html
"Americans' Positive Views on the Economy Could Earn Trump a Boost in
2020, New Poll Suggests
By Blake Dodge On 12/20/19 at 4:56 PM EST"
https://www.newsweek.com/best-economy-scores-since-2001-could-earn-trump-boost-2020-new-poll-cnn-1478567

And where is the optimism about the Labor Force Participation Rate?
Still stuck around 63%.

The work force is aging, and retiring. There have been numerous
reports over the course of the Trump administration of more job
openings than unemployed. Face it, Trumps policies have been good for
the economy, and prosperity in general, which is the central reason I
am a conservative.
"The U.S. has 1 million more job openings than unemployed workers
March 15, 2019"
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-u-s-has-1-million-more-job-openings-than-unemployed-workers/
"There are now more job openings than workers to fill them
June 5, 2018"
"For the first time in at least 20 years, there are now more job
openings than there are people looking for work.
The ratio of unemployed workers to job openings dropped below one in
April for the first time since the Labor Department started collecting
data in 2000, the agency reported Tuesday."
https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/05/news/economy/job-openings-unemployed-workers/index.html

There are a number of problems with your citations on unemployment.
First of all, it is an average number which does not reflect the skewed
distributions upon which it is based. (The U-3 unemployment rate is
essentially unemployed/labor force.) The biggest problem with this is
that it counts temporary, part-time, along with full time jobs in
determining the labor force part of that equation. But, as I'm sure you
realize, it does not count disabled or discouraged workers who have
dropped out of the labor force. This results in what is described as an
overly optimistic figure that does not accurately represent unemployment.
There are actually six definitions of unemployment and the most
comprehensive published by the BLS is U-6 which takes these factors into
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/unemploymentrate.asp
If we are looking for actual health of the households of working
families, you should look at median household income. This basically is
a measure of how income results in benefit to the household and factors
out the variables of temporary, part-time and other factors for people
who are loosely attached to the workforce. Here, the numbers are not so
rosy.
With the Trump weakening of the ACA and tougher Medicaid requirements, a
picture of stagnant household income is revealed even tho poverty
declined. The change from 2017 to 2018 was only up 0.9% even with
adjustment for inflation. That is not statistically significant
especially when compared with 5.2% in 2015, 3.2% in 2016 and 1.8% in
2017. This is even more striking if we look at the household income in
the primarily Republican south - 0.3%! The bottom line is that
households are not seeing the same gains that were measured during the
last years of the Obama administration.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/09/10/median-household-income-stagnant-last-year-poverty-fell/2271025001/
But, there is more: Our population is increasing at a rate of about
200,000 per month. But, job growth averaged 180,000 for most of 2019
compared with an average monthly gain of 223,000 in 2018 according to
BLS report for Nov 2019. It appears that the bloom is off the Trump
economic rose.

Please let me sum up in one sentence ...
The Left is desperate to find a way, any way, to denigrate the Trump
economy, and above all else is praying for a deep debilitating
recession, or better yet, depression.

That would be silly and non-productive. The Left is justifiably
concerned about the damage that Trump is doing and it would be foolish
to ignore the data. By ignoring the data, you are engaging in
confirmation bias to support your political opinions. Better, don't you
think, to look at the data and be open to understanding the trends?

Remember, I majored in economics and spent my working years in and
around finance, was licensed to sell some pretty obscure instruments,
and sat through countless briefings by a bank economist. Of one thing
I am certain, given the incentive a dark cloud can always be found. I
will stick with unemployment numbers, GDP, and the DOW/S&P. The
numbers I have quoted have a great deal of meaning for me, and when I
said that the Left is praying for a recession, I meant it, and you
know it's true. A strong economy will keep Trump in office doing the
things that got us where we are. A recession is what the left wing of
your party needs to gain power and unleash its brand of socialism.

GDP looks like pretty much straight line growth since 2009. Given that
Trump supposedly poured a lot of money into the economy with his tax
cut, what is there to brag about? That he didn't screw up the recovery
from the mess that GW Bush gave us?
You might want to consider the declining household income. People are
getting tired of promises by Trump that aren't delivered. Most of the
people in the country are still having trouble making ends meet.

"President Trump’s critics can’t deny that the economy is doing well,
so instead they insist all the benefits have gone to the rich and
large corporations. “America’s middle class is under attack,” Sen.
Elizabeth Warren asserted in her presidential campaign announcement
last December. The latest data from the Census Bureau monthly surveys
tell a different story. Real median household income—the amount earned
by those in the very middle—hit $65,084 (in 2019 dollars) for the 12
months ending in July. That’s the highest level ever and a gain of
$4,144, or 6.8%, since Mr. Trump took office. By comparison, during 7½
years under President Obama—starting from the end of the recession in
June 2009 through January 2017—the median household income rose by
only about $1,000."
"https://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps-middle-class-economic-progress-11569786435"

A good example of how to lie with statistics and the WSJ should know
better. Household income is pretty noisy data and using a single number
to calculate gain is susceptible to end point bias (similar to end point
fallacy error).
While the US Census publishes monthly data, they refrain from drawing
conclusions from a single data point. Organizations like Sentier
Research which is widely quoted by conservative media are not so
careful. As nearly as I can tell, the $65,084 figure came from a July
2019 report by them and is cited as coming from the CPS monthly report.
To their credit, they only compare that number to 2000, but not the
dates that the WSJ picked.
The latest 3 year averages of CPS data are published by the US Census to
avoid end point bias. If you look at three year averages of median
figures, you will see that for the period 2016-2018 the gain was 1.74%,
for 2015-2017 was 3.30%, for 2014-2016 was 2.25% and for 2013-2015 was
4.01%. Since figures are not out yet, numbers from the US Monthly
Census are not available to compute 2017-2019. So, the most that we can
say is that Trump's figures are down as of the end of 2018.
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h08b.xls
Secondly, even tho the WSJ cites median figures (to their credit), it is
revealing to look at gain over three years using mean figures for the
quintile breakdown of household income over 3 year averages. These are
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h03ar.xls
Lowest Fifth 6.43%
Second Fifth 8.08%
Third Fifth 7.48%
Fourth Fifth 6.72%
Fifth Fifth 9.33%
Top 5% 11.05%
Clearly the top household incomes are benefiting the most and the poor
are doing the worst.

And Back & Hispanic unemployment is at an all time low.

Are you attempting to say that household income is not an important
indicator of a healthy economy? Do you deny that the downward trend in
household income isn't an issue of concern?

But, let's look more closely at 3 year moving averages for Black and
Hispanic household incomes:
For Black households, income is down from 2015-2017 5.96% to 2016-2018
4.46%.
For Hispanic households, income is down from 2015-2017 2.43% to
2016-2018 1.17%.
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h16.xls

How do you explain the downward trend in household income in the context
of your claim for unemployment rates?

[El Castor]

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

Hmmm. That would be comparing the economy to that at the end of the
Clinton administration which was also setting records for a good
economy. What happened since then? Gosh, there was the GW Bush
administration including the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Fortunately the Obama administration was able to recover from that
disaster and set us on the path to a healthy economy.

Which was exceeded by Donald Trump.
"Black and Hispanic unemployment is at a record low"
"There have never been more Black and Hispanic Americans in the
workforce, Friday’s Labor Department job report showed.
The jobless rate for Hispanics hit a record low of 3.9% in September,
while African Americans maintained its lowest rate ever, 5.5%."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/04/black-and-hispanic-unemployment-is-at-a-record-low.html
"Americans' Positive Views on the Economy Could Earn Trump a Boost in
2020, New Poll Suggests
By Blake Dodge On 12/20/19 at 4:56 PM EST"
https://www.newsweek.com/best-economy-scores-since-2001-could-earn-trump-boost-2020-new-poll-cnn-1478567

And where is the optimism about the Labor Force Participation Rate?
Still stuck around 63%.

The work force is aging, and retiring. There have been numerous
reports over the course of the Trump administration of more job
openings than unemployed. Face it, Trumps policies have been good for
the economy, and prosperity in general, which is the central reason I
am a conservative.
"The U.S. has 1 million more job openings than unemployed workers
March 15, 2019"
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-u-s-has-1-million-more-job-openings-than-unemployed-workers/
"There are now more job openings than workers to fill them
June 5, 2018"
"For the first time in at least 20 years, there are now more job
openings than there are people looking for work.
The ratio of unemployed workers to job openings dropped below one in
April for the first time since the Labor Department started collecting
data in 2000, the agency reported Tuesday."
https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/05/news/economy/job-openings-unemployed-workers/index.html

There are a number of problems with your citations on unemployment.
First of all, it is an average number which does not reflect the skewed
distributions upon which it is based. (The U-3 unemployment rate is
essentially unemployed/labor force.) The biggest problem with this is
that it counts temporary, part-time, along with full time jobs in
determining the labor force part of that equation. But, as I'm sure you
realize, it does not count disabled or discouraged workers who have
dropped out of the labor force. This results in what is described as an
overly optimistic figure that does not accurately represent unemployment.
There are actually six definitions of unemployment and the most
comprehensive published by the BLS is U-6 which takes these factors into
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/unemploymentrate.asp
If we are looking for actual health of the households of working
families, you should look at median household income. This basically is
a measure of how income results in benefit to the household and factors
out the variables of temporary, part-time and other factors for people
who are loosely attached to the workforce. Here, the numbers are not so
rosy.
With the Trump weakening of the ACA and tougher Medicaid requirements, a
picture of stagnant household income is revealed even tho poverty
declined. The change from 2017 to 2018 was only up 0.9% even with
adjustment for inflation. That is not statistically significant
especially when compared with 5.2% in 2015, 3.2% in 2016 and 1.8% in
2017. This is even more striking if we look at the household income in
the primarily Republican south - 0.3%! The bottom line is that
households are not seeing the same gains that were measured during the
last years of the Obama administration.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/09/10/median-household-income-stagnant-last-year-poverty-fell/2271025001/
But, there is more: Our population is increasing at a rate of about
200,000 per month. But, job growth averaged 180,000 for most of 2019
compared with an average monthly gain of 223,000 in 2018 according to
BLS report for Nov 2019. It appears that the bloom is off the Trump
economic rose.

Please let me sum up in one sentence ...
The Left is desperate to find a way, any way, to denigrate the Trump
economy, and above all else is praying for a deep debilitating
recession, or better yet, depression.

That would be silly and non-productive. The Left is justifiably
concerned about the damage that Trump is doing and it would be foolish
to ignore the data. By ignoring the data, you are engaging in
confirmation bias to support your political opinions. Better, don't you
think, to look at the data and be open to understanding the trends?

Remember, I majored in economics and spent my working years in and
around finance, was licensed to sell some pretty obscure instruments,
and sat through countless briefings by a bank economist. Of one thing
I am certain, given the incentive a dark cloud can always be found. I
will stick with unemployment numbers, GDP, and the DOW/S&P. The
numbers I have quoted have a great deal of meaning for me, and when I
said that the Left is praying for a recession, I meant it, and you
know it's true. A strong economy will keep Trump in office doing the
things that got us where we are. A recession is what the left wing of
your party needs to gain power and unleash its brand of socialism.

GDP looks like pretty much straight line growth since 2009. Given that
Trump supposedly poured a lot of money into the economy with his tax
cut, what is there to brag about? That he didn't screw up the recovery
from the mess that GW Bush gave us?
You might want to consider the declining household income. People are
getting tired of promises by Trump that aren't delivered. Most of the
people in the country are still having trouble making ends meet.

"President Trump’s critics can’t deny that the economy is doing well,
so instead they insist all the benefits have gone to the rich and
large corporations. “America’s middle class is under attack,” Sen.
Elizabeth Warren asserted in her presidential campaign announcement
last December. The latest data from the Census Bureau monthly surveys
tell a different story. Real median household income—the amount earned
by those in the very middle—hit $65,084 (in 2019 dollars) for the 12
months ending in July. That’s the highest level ever and a gain of
$4,144, or 6.8%, since Mr. Trump took office. By comparison, during 7½
years under President Obama—starting from the end of the recession in
June 2009 through January 2017—the median household income rose by
only about $1,000."
"https://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps-middle-class-economic-progress-11569786435"

A good example of how to lie with statistics and the WSJ should know
better. Household income is pretty noisy data and using a single number
to calculate gain is susceptible to end point bias (similar to end point
fallacy error).
While the US Census publishes monthly data, they refrain from drawing
conclusions from a single data point. Organizations like Sentier
Research which is widely quoted by conservative media are not so
careful. As nearly as I can tell, the $65,084 figure came from a July
2019 report by them and is cited as coming from the CPS monthly report.
To their credit, they only compare that number to 2000, but not the
dates that the WSJ picked.
The latest 3 year averages of CPS data are published by the US Census to
avoid end point bias. If you look at three year averages of median
figures, you will see that for the period 2016-2018 the gain was 1.74%,
for 2015-2017 was 3.30%, for 2014-2016 was 2.25% and for 2013-2015 was
4.01%. Since figures are not out yet, numbers from the US Monthly
Census are not available to compute 2017-2019. So, the most that we can
say is that Trump's figures are down as of the end of 2018.
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h08b.xls
Secondly, even tho the WSJ cites median figures (to their credit), it is
revealing to look at gain over three years using mean figures for the
quintile breakdown of household income over 3 year averages. These are
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h03ar.xls
Lowest Fifth 6.43%
Second Fifth 8.08%
Third Fifth 7.48%
Fourth Fifth 6.72%
Fifth Fifth 9.33%
Top 5% 11.05%
Clearly the top household incomes are benefiting the most and the poor
are doing the worst.

And Back & Hispanic unemployment is at an all time low.

Are you attempting to say that household income is not an important
indicator of a healthy economy? Do you deny that the downward trend in
household income isn't an issue of concern?
But, let's look more closely at 3 year moving averages for Black and
For Black households, income is down from 2015-2017 5.96% to 2016-2018
4.46%.
For Hispanic households, income is down from 2015-2017 2.43% to
2016-2018 1.17%.
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h16.xls
How do you explain the downward trend in household income in the context
of your claim for unemployment rates?

"Bad News For Dems: Household Income Hits All-Time High Under Trump …
And He's Getting Credit For It "
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/household-income-trump-economy-optimism/

"Black household income is rising across the United States"
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2019/10/03/black-household-income-is-rising-across-the-united-states/

"Rising Rates for Minority Homeownership"
https://dsnews.com/daily-dose/11-19-2019/increase-reported-for-minority-homeownership

"Nov 2019: Rise in jobs sparks rise in optimism for people with
disabilities"
https://eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2019-12/kf-nn2120619.php

"Disposable Personal Income in the United States increased to 16702.70
USD Billion in November from 16615 USD Billion in October of 2019.
Disposable Personal Income in the United States averaged 5415.47 USD
Billion from 1959 until 2019, reaching an all time high of 16702.70
USD Billion in November of 2019 and a record low of 351.54 USD Billion
in January of 1959."
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/disposable-personal-income

[islander]

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

Hmmm. That would be comparing the economy to that at the end of the
Clinton administration which was also setting records for a good
economy. What happened since then? Gosh, there was the GW Bush
administration including the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Fortunately the Obama administration was able to recover from that
disaster and set us on the path to a healthy economy.

Which was exceeded by Donald Trump.
"Black and Hispanic unemployment is at a record low"
"There have never been more Black and Hispanic Americans in the
workforce, Friday’s Labor Department job report showed.
The jobless rate for Hispanics hit a record low of 3.9% in September,
while African Americans maintained its lowest rate ever, 5.5%."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/04/black-and-hispanic-unemployment-is-at-a-record-low.html
"Americans' Positive Views on the Economy Could Earn Trump a Boost in
2020, New Poll Suggests
By Blake Dodge On 12/20/19 at 4:56 PM EST"
https://www.newsweek.com/best-economy-scores-since-2001-could-earn-trump-boost-2020-new-poll-cnn-1478567

And where is the optimism about the Labor Force Participation Rate?
Still stuck around 63%.

The work force is aging, and retiring. There have been numerous
reports over the course of the Trump administration of more job
openings than unemployed. Face it, Trumps policies have been good for
the economy, and prosperity in general, which is the central reason I
am a conservative.
"The U.S. has 1 million more job openings than unemployed workers
March 15, 2019"
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-u-s-has-1-million-more-job-openings-than-unemployed-workers/
"There are now more job openings than workers to fill them
June 5, 2018"
"For the first time in at least 20 years, there are now more job
openings than there are people looking for work.
The ratio of unemployed workers to job openings dropped below one in
April for the first time since the Labor Department started collecting
data in 2000, the agency reported Tuesday."
https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/05/news/economy/job-openings-unemployed-workers/index.html

There are a number of problems with your citations on unemployment.
First of all, it is an average number which does not reflect the skewed
distributions upon which it is based. (The U-3 unemployment rate is
essentially unemployed/labor force.) The biggest problem with this is
that it counts temporary, part-time, along with full time jobs in
determining the labor force part of that equation. But, as I'm sure you
realize, it does not count disabled or discouraged workers who have
dropped out of the labor force. This results in what is described as an
overly optimistic figure that does not accurately represent unemployment.
There are actually six definitions of unemployment and the most
comprehensive published by the BLS is U-6 which takes these factors into
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/unemploymentrate.asp
If we are looking for actual health of the households of working
families, you should look at median household income. This basically is
a measure of how income results in benefit to the household and factors
out the variables of temporary, part-time and other factors for people
who are loosely attached to the workforce. Here, the numbers are not so
rosy.
With the Trump weakening of the ACA and tougher Medicaid requirements, a
picture of stagnant household income is revealed even tho poverty
declined. The change from 2017 to 2018 was only up 0.9% even with
adjustment for inflation. That is not statistically significant
especially when compared with 5.2% in 2015, 3.2% in 2016 and 1.8% in
2017. This is even more striking if we look at the household income in
the primarily Republican south - 0.3%! The bottom line is that
households are not seeing the same gains that were measured during the
last years of the Obama administration.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/09/10/median-household-income-stagnant-last-year-poverty-fell/2271025001/
But, there is more: Our population is increasing at a rate of about
200,000 per month. But, job growth averaged 180,000 for most of 2019
compared with an average monthly gain of 223,000 in 2018 according to
BLS report for Nov 2019. It appears that the bloom is off the Trump
economic rose.

Please let me sum up in one sentence ...
The Left is desperate to find a way, any way, to denigrate the Trump
economy, and above all else is praying for a deep debilitating
recession, or better yet, depression.

That would be silly and non-productive. The Left is justifiably
concerned about the damage that Trump is doing and it would be foolish
to ignore the data. By ignoring the data, you are engaging in
confirmation bias to support your political opinions. Better, don't you
think, to look at the data and be open to understanding the trends?

Remember, I majored in economics and spent my working years in and
around finance, was licensed to sell some pretty obscure instruments,
and sat through countless briefings by a bank economist. Of one thing
I am certain, given the incentive a dark cloud can always be found. I
will stick with unemployment numbers, GDP, and the DOW/S&P. The
numbers I have quoted have a great deal of meaning for me, and when I
said that the Left is praying for a recession, I meant it, and you
know it's true. A strong economy will keep Trump in office doing the
things that got us where we are. A recession is what the left wing of
your party needs to gain power and unleash its brand of socialism.

GDP looks like pretty much straight line growth since 2009. Given that
Trump supposedly poured a lot of money into the economy with his tax
cut, what is there to brag about? That he didn't screw up the recovery
from the mess that GW Bush gave us?
You might want to consider the declining household income. People are
getting tired of promises by Trump that aren't delivered. Most of the
people in the country are still having trouble making ends meet.

"President Trump’s critics can’t deny that the economy is doing well,
so instead they insist all the benefits have gone to the rich and
large corporations. “America’s middle class is under attack,” Sen.
Elizabeth Warren asserted in her presidential campaign announcement
last December. The latest data from the Census Bureau monthly surveys
tell a different story. Real median household income—the amount earned
by those in the very middle—hit $65,084 (in 2019 dollars) for the 12
months ending in July. That’s the highest level ever and a gain of
$4,144, or 6.8%, since Mr. Trump took office. By comparison, during 7½
years under President Obama—starting from the end of the recession in
June 2009 through January 2017—the median household income rose by
only about $1,000."
"https://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps-middle-class-economic-progress-11569786435"

A good example of how to lie with statistics and the WSJ should know
better. Household income is pretty noisy data and using a single number
to calculate gain is susceptible to end point bias (similar to end point
fallacy error).
While the US Census publishes monthly data, they refrain from drawing
conclusions from a single data point. Organizations like Sentier
Research which is widely quoted by conservative media are not so
careful. As nearly as I can tell, the $65,084 figure came from a July
2019 report by them and is cited as coming from the CPS monthly report.
To their credit, they only compare that number to 2000, but not the
dates that the WSJ picked.
The latest 3 year averages of CPS data are published by the US Census to
avoid end point bias. If you look at three year averages of median
figures, you will see that for the period 2016-2018 the gain was 1.74%,
for 2015-2017 was 3.30%, for 2014-2016 was 2.25% and for 2013-2015 was
4.01%. Since figures are not out yet, numbers from the US Monthly
Census are not available to compute 2017-2019. So, the most that we can
say is that Trump's figures are down as of the end of 2018.
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h08b.xls
Secondly, even tho the WSJ cites median figures (to their credit), it is
revealing to look at gain over three years using mean figures for the
quintile breakdown of household income over 3 year averages. These are
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h03ar.xls
Lowest Fifth 6.43%
Second Fifth 8.08%
Third Fifth 7.48%
Fourth Fifth 6.72%
Fifth Fifth 9.33%
Top 5% 11.05%
Clearly the top household incomes are benefiting the most and the poor
are doing the worst.

And Back & Hispanic unemployment is at an all time low.

Are you attempting to say that household income is not an important
indicator of a healthy economy? Do you deny that the downward trend in
household income isn't an issue of concern?
But, let's look more closely at 3 year moving averages for Black and
For Black households, income is down from 2015-2017 5.96% to 2016-2018
4.46%.
For Hispanic households, income is down from 2015-2017 2.43% to
2016-2018 1.17%.
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h16.xls
How do you explain the downward trend in household income in the context
of your claim for unemployment rates?

"Bad News For Dems: Household Income Hits All-Time High Under Trump …
And He's Getting Credit For It "
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/household-income-trump-economy-optimism/
"Black household income is rising across the United States"
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2019/10/03/black-household-income-is-rising-across-the-united-states/
"Rising Rates for Minority Homeownership"
https://dsnews.com/daily-dose/11-19-2019/increase-reported-for-minority-homeownership
"Nov 2019: Rise in jobs sparks rise in optimism for people with
disabilities"
https://eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2019-12/kf-nn2120619.php
"Disposable Personal Income in the United States increased to 16702.70
USD Billion in November from 16615 USD Billion in October of 2019.
Disposable Personal Income in the United States averaged 5415.47 USD
Billion from 1959 until 2019, reaching an all time high of 16702.70
USD Billion in November of 2019 and a record low of 351.54 USD Billion
in January of 1959."
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/disposable-personal-income

You are still trying to avoid the declining household income, not only
for the population in general, but even worse for Blacks and Hispanics.
Yes, it is still increasing, but at a slowing rate.

So now you want to change the topic to disposable personal income. Are
you now admitting that demand side economics are at work? If so,
perhaps you should look at the rate of increase in the personal
consumption expenditures. The rate of improvement during the first
three years of the Trump administration is almost identical to the Obama
years - not really anything to crow about - at least that is what the
Republicans complained about the Obama recovery being so slow. In fact,
the only dip in the rate over the past 10 years happened in Dec 2018 -
Feb 2019. The market also declined. 2018 is said to have ended in a thud.

[El Castor]

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

Hmmm. That would be comparing the economy to that at the end of the
Clinton administration which was also setting records for a good
economy. What happened since then? Gosh, there was the GW Bush
administration including the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Fortunately the Obama administration was able to recover from that
disaster and set us on the path to a healthy economy.

Which was exceeded by Donald Trump.
"Black and Hispanic unemployment is at a record low"
"There have never been more Black and Hispanic Americans in the
workforce, Friday’s Labor Department job report showed.
The jobless rate for Hispanics hit a record low of 3.9% in September,
while African Americans maintained its lowest rate ever, 5.5%."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/04/black-and-hispanic-unemployment-is-at-a-record-low.html
"Americans' Positive Views on the Economy Could Earn Trump a Boost in
2020, New Poll Suggests
By Blake Dodge On 12/20/19 at 4:56 PM EST"
https://www.newsweek.com/best-economy-scores-since-2001-could-earn-trump-boost-2020-new-poll-cnn-1478567

And where is the optimism about the Labor Force Participation Rate?
Still stuck around 63%.

The work force is aging, and retiring. There have been numerous
reports over the course of the Trump administration of more job
openings than unemployed. Face it, Trumps policies have been good for
the economy, and prosperity in general, which is the central reason I
am a conservative.
"The U.S. has 1 million more job openings than unemployed workers
March 15, 2019"
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-u-s-has-1-million-more-job-openings-than-unemployed-workers/
"There are now more job openings than workers to fill them
June 5, 2018"
"For the first time in at least 20 years, there are now more job
openings than there are people looking for work.
The ratio of unemployed workers to job openings dropped below one in
April for the first time since the Labor Department started collecting
data in 2000, the agency reported Tuesday."
https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/05/news/economy/job-openings-unemployed-workers/index.html

There are a number of problems with your citations on unemployment.
First of all, it is an average number which does not reflect the skewed
distributions upon which it is based. (The U-3 unemployment rate is
essentially unemployed/labor force.) The biggest problem with this is
that it counts temporary, part-time, along with full time jobs in
determining the labor force part of that equation. But, as I'm sure you
realize, it does not count disabled or discouraged workers who have
dropped out of the labor force. This results in what is described as an
overly optimistic figure that does not accurately represent unemployment.
There are actually six definitions of unemployment and the most
comprehensive published by the BLS is U-6 which takes these factors into
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/unemploymentrate.asp
If we are looking for actual health of the households of working
families, you should look at median household income. This basically is
a measure of how income results in benefit to the household and factors
out the variables of temporary, part-time and other factors for people
who are loosely attached to the workforce. Here, the numbers are not so
rosy.
With the Trump weakening of the ACA and tougher Medicaid requirements, a
picture of stagnant household income is revealed even tho poverty
declined. The change from 2017 to 2018 was only up 0.9% even with
adjustment for inflation. That is not statistically significant
especially when compared with 5.2% in 2015, 3.2% in 2016 and 1.8% in
2017. This is even more striking if we look at the household income in
the primarily Republican south - 0.3%! The bottom line is that
households are not seeing the same gains that were measured during the
last years of the Obama administration.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/09/10/median-household-income-stagnant-last-year-poverty-fell/2271025001/
But, there is more: Our population is increasing at a rate of about
200,000 per month. But, job growth averaged 180,000 for most of 2019
compared with an average monthly gain of 223,000 in 2018 according to
BLS report for Nov 2019. It appears that the bloom is off the Trump
economic rose.

Please let me sum up in one sentence ...
The Left is desperate to find a way, any way, to denigrate the Trump
economy, and above all else is praying for a deep debilitating
recession, or better yet, depression.

That would be silly and non-productive. The Left is justifiably
concerned about the damage that Trump is doing and it would be foolish
to ignore the data. By ignoring the data, you are engaging in
confirmation bias to support your political opinions. Better, don't you
think, to look at the data and be open to understanding the trends?

Remember, I majored in economics and spent my working years in and
around finance, was licensed to sell some pretty obscure instruments,
and sat through countless briefings by a bank economist. Of one thing
I am certain, given the incentive a dark cloud can always be found. I
will stick with unemployment numbers, GDP, and the DOW/S&P. The
numbers I have quoted have a great deal of meaning for me, and when I
said that the Left is praying for a recession, I meant it, and you
know it's true. A strong economy will keep Trump in office doing the
things that got us where we are. A recession is what the left wing of
your party needs to gain power and unleash its brand of socialism.

GDP looks like pretty much straight line growth since 2009. Given that
Trump supposedly poured a lot of money into the economy with his tax
cut, what is there to brag about? That he didn't screw up the recovery
from the mess that GW Bush gave us?
You might want to consider the declining household income. People are
getting tired of promises by Trump that aren't delivered. Most of the
people in the country are still having trouble making ends meet.

"President Trump’s critics can’t deny that the economy is doing well,
so instead they insist all the benefits have gone to the rich and
large corporations. “America’s middle class is under attack,” Sen.
Elizabeth Warren asserted in her presidential campaign announcement
last December. The latest data from the Census Bureau monthly surveys
tell a different story. Real median household income—the amount earned
by those in the very middle—hit $65,084 (in 2019 dollars) for the 12
months ending in July. That’s the highest level ever and a gain of
$4,144, or 6.8%, since Mr. Trump took office. By comparison, during 7½
years under President Obama—starting from the end of the recession in
June 2009 through January 2017—the median household income rose by
only about $1,000."
"https://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps-middle-class-economic-progress-11569786435"

A good example of how to lie with statistics and the WSJ should know
better. Household income is pretty noisy data and using a single number
to calculate gain is susceptible to end point bias (similar to end point
fallacy error).
While the US Census publishes monthly data, they refrain from drawing
conclusions from a single data point. Organizations like Sentier
Research which is widely quoted by conservative media are not so
careful. As nearly as I can tell, the $65,084 figure came from a July
2019 report by them and is cited as coming from the CPS monthly report.
To their credit, they only compare that number to 2000, but not the
dates that the WSJ picked.
The latest 3 year averages of CPS data are published by the US Census to
avoid end point bias. If you look at three year averages of median
figures, you will see that for the period 2016-2018 the gain was 1.74%,
for 2015-2017 was 3.30%, for 2014-2016 was 2.25% and for 2013-2015 was
4.01%. Since figures are not out yet, numbers from the US Monthly
Census are not available to compute 2017-2019. So, the most that we can
say is that Trump's figures are down as of the end of 2018.
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h08b.xls
Secondly, even tho the WSJ cites median figures (to their credit), it is
revealing to look at gain over three years using mean figures for the
quintile breakdown of household income over 3 year averages. These are
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h03ar.xls
Lowest Fifth 6.43%
Second Fifth 8.08%
Third Fifth 7.48%
Fourth Fifth 6.72%
Fifth Fifth 9.33%
Top 5% 11.05%
Clearly the top household incomes are benefiting the most and the poor
are doing the worst.

And Back & Hispanic unemployment is at an all time low.

Are you attempting to say that household income is not an important
indicator of a healthy economy? Do you deny that the downward trend in
household income isn't an issue of concern?
But, let's look more closely at 3 year moving averages for Black and
For Black households, income is down from 2015-2017 5.96% to 2016-2018
4.46%.
For Hispanic households, income is down from 2015-2017 2.43% to
2016-2018 1.17%.
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h16.xls
How do you explain the downward trend in household income in the context
of your claim for unemployment rates?

"Bad News For Dems: Household Income Hits All-Time High Under Trump …
And He's Getting Credit For It "
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/household-income-trump-economy-optimism/
"Black household income is rising across the United States"
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2019/10/03/black-household-income-is-rising-across-the-united-states/
"Rising Rates for Minority Homeownership"
https://dsnews.com/daily-dose/11-19-2019/increase-reported-for-minority-homeownership
"Nov 2019: Rise in jobs sparks rise in optimism for people with
disabilities"
https://eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2019-12/kf-nn2120619.php
"Disposable Personal Income in the United States increased to 16702.70
USD Billion in November from 16615 USD Billion in October of 2019.
Disposable Personal Income in the United States averaged 5415.47 USD
Billion from 1959 until 2019, reaching an all time high of 16702.70
USD Billion in November of 2019 and a record low of 351.54 USD Billion
in January of 1959."
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/disposable-personal-income

You are still trying to avoid the declining household income, not only
for the population in general, but even worse for Blacks and Hispanics.
Yes, it is still increasing, but at a slowing rate.
So now you want to change the topic to disposable personal income. Are
you now admitting that demand side economics are at work? If so,
perhaps you should look at the rate of increase in the personal
consumption expenditures. The rate of improvement during the first
three years of the Trump administration is almost identical to the Obama
years - not really anything to crow about - at least that is what the
Republicans complained about the Obama recovery being so slow. In fact,
the only dip in the rate over the past 10 years happened in Dec 2018 -
Feb 2019. The market also declined. 2018 is said to have ended in a thud.

OK -- I accept that you will never accept or admit that Trump in
particular, or conservatives in general, have ever, or will ever, be
of benefit to the people of the United States. I waste my time and
yours trying to convince you otherwise. The only material fact is that
in a little less than a year a poll will be taken of US voters. What
they decide will frustrate one of us, but I doubt it will change your
mind or mine. So, got any good recipes for salmon?

[islander]

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

Hmmm. That would be comparing the economy to that at the end of the
Clinton administration which was also setting records for a good
economy. What happened since then? Gosh, there was the GW Bush
administration including the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Fortunately the Obama administration was able to recover from that
disaster and set us on the path to a healthy economy.

Which was exceeded by Donald Trump.
"Black and Hispanic unemployment is at a record low"
"There have never been more Black and Hispanic Americans in the
workforce, Friday’s Labor Department job report showed.
The jobless rate for Hispanics hit a record low of 3.9% in September,
while African Americans maintained its lowest rate ever, 5.5%."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/04/black-and-hispanic-unemployment-is-at-a-record-low.html
"Americans' Positive Views on the Economy Could Earn Trump a Boost in
2020, New Poll Suggests
By Blake Dodge On 12/20/19 at 4:56 PM EST"
https://www.newsweek.com/best-economy-scores-since-2001-could-earn-trump-boost-2020-new-poll-cnn-1478567

And where is the optimism about the Labor Force Participation Rate?
Still stuck around 63%.

The work force is aging, and retiring. There have been numerous
reports over the course of the Trump administration of more job
openings than unemployed. Face it, Trumps policies have been good for
the economy, and prosperity in general, which is the central reason I
am a conservative.
"The U.S. has 1 million more job openings than unemployed workers
March 15, 2019"
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-u-s-has-1-million-more-job-openings-than-unemployed-workers/
"There are now more job openings than workers to fill them
June 5, 2018"
"For the first time in at least 20 years, there are now more job
openings than there are people looking for work.
The ratio of unemployed workers to job openings dropped below one in
April for the first time since the Labor Department started collecting
data in 2000, the agency reported Tuesday."
https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/05/news/economy/job-openings-unemployed-workers/index.html

There are a number of problems with your citations on unemployment.
First of all, it is an average number which does not reflect the skewed
distributions upon which it is based. (The U-3 unemployment rate is
essentially unemployed/labor force.) The biggest problem with this is
that it counts temporary, part-time, along with full time jobs in
determining the labor force part of that equation. But, as I'm sure you
realize, it does not count disabled or discouraged workers who have
dropped out of the labor force. This results in what is described as an
overly optimistic figure that does not accurately represent unemployment.
There are actually six definitions of unemployment and the most
comprehensive published by the BLS is U-6 which takes these factors into
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/unemploymentrate.asp
If we are looking for actual health of the households of working
families, you should look at median household income. This basically is
a measure of how income results in benefit to the household and factors
out the variables of temporary, part-time and other factors for people
who are loosely attached to the workforce. Here, the numbers are not so
rosy.
With the Trump weakening of the ACA and tougher Medicaid requirements, a
picture of stagnant household income is revealed even tho poverty
declined. The change from 2017 to 2018 was only up 0.9% even with
adjustment for inflation. That is not statistically significant
especially when compared with 5.2% in 2015, 3.2% in 2016 and 1.8% in
2017. This is even more striking if we look at the household income in
the primarily Republican south - 0.3%! The bottom line is that
households are not seeing the same gains that were measured during the
last years of the Obama administration.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/09/10/median-household-income-stagnant-last-year-poverty-fell/2271025001/
But, there is more: Our population is increasing at a rate of about
200,000 per month. But, job growth averaged 180,000 for most of 2019
compared with an average monthly gain of 223,000 in 2018 according to
BLS report for Nov 2019. It appears that the bloom is off the Trump
economic rose.

Please let me sum up in one sentence ...
The Left is desperate to find a way, any way, to denigrate the Trump
economy, and above all else is praying for a deep debilitating
recession, or better yet, depression.

That would be silly and non-productive. The Left is justifiably
concerned about the damage that Trump is doing and it would be foolish
to ignore the data. By ignoring the data, you are engaging in
confirmation bias to support your political opinions. Better, don't you
think, to look at the data and be open to understanding the trends?

Remember, I majored in economics and spent my working years in and
around finance, was licensed to sell some pretty obscure instruments,
and sat through countless briefings by a bank economist. Of one thing
I am certain, given the incentive a dark cloud can always be found. I
will stick with unemployment numbers, GDP, and the DOW/S&P. The
numbers I have quoted have a great deal of meaning for me, and when I
said that the Left is praying for a recession, I meant it, and you
know it's true. A strong economy will keep Trump in office doing the
things that got us where we are. A recession is what the left wing of
your party needs to gain power and unleash its brand of socialism.

GDP looks like pretty much straight line growth since 2009. Given that
Trump supposedly poured a lot of money into the economy with his tax
cut, what is there to brag about? That he didn't screw up the recovery
from the mess that GW Bush gave us?
You might want to consider the declining household income. People are
getting tired of promises by Trump that aren't delivered. Most of the
people in the country are still having trouble making ends meet.

"President Trump’s critics can’t deny that the economy is doing well,
so instead they insist all the benefits have gone to the rich and
large corporations. “America’s middle class is under attack,” Sen.
Elizabeth Warren asserted in her presidential campaign announcement
last December. The latest data from the Census Bureau monthly surveys
tell a different story. Real median household income—the amount earned
by those in the very middle—hit $65,084 (in 2019 dollars) for the 12
months ending in July. That’s the highest level ever and a gain of
$4,144, or 6.8%, since Mr. Trump took office. By comparison, during 7½
years under President Obama—starting from the end of the recession in
June 2009 through January 2017—the median household income rose by
only about $1,000."
"https://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps-middle-class-economic-progress-11569786435"

A good example of how to lie with statistics and the WSJ should know
better. Household income is pretty noisy data and using a single number
to calculate gain is susceptible to end point bias (similar to end point
fallacy error).
While the US Census publishes monthly data, they refrain from drawing
conclusions from a single data point. Organizations like Sentier
Research which is widely quoted by conservative media are not so
careful. As nearly as I can tell, the $65,084 figure came from a July
2019 report by them and is cited as coming from the CPS monthly report.
To their credit, they only compare that number to 2000, but not the
dates that the WSJ picked.
The latest 3 year averages of CPS data are published by the US Census to
avoid end point bias. If you look at three year averages of median
figures, you will see that for the period 2016-2018 the gain was 1.74%,
for 2015-2017 was 3.30%, for 2014-2016 was 2.25% and for 2013-2015 was
4.01%. Since figures are not out yet, numbers from the US Monthly
Census are not available to compute 2017-2019. So, the most that we can
say is that Trump's figures are down as of the end of 2018.
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h08b.xls
Secondly, even tho the WSJ cites median figures (to their credit), it is
revealing to look at gain over three years using mean figures for the
quintile breakdown of household income over 3 year averages. These are
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h03ar.xls
Lowest Fifth 6.43%
Second Fifth 8.08%
Third Fifth 7.48%
Fourth Fifth 6.72%
Fifth Fifth 9.33%
Top 5% 11.05%
Clearly the top household incomes are benefiting the most and the poor
are doing the worst.

And Back & Hispanic unemployment is at an all time low.

Are you attempting to say that household income is not an important
indicator of a healthy economy? Do you deny that the downward trend in
household income isn't an issue of concern?
But, let's look more closely at 3 year moving averages for Black and
For Black households, income is down from 2015-2017 5.96% to 2016-2018
4.46%.
For Hispanic households, income is down from 2015-2017 2.43% to
2016-2018 1.17%.
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h16.xls
How do you explain the downward trend in household income in the context
of your claim for unemployment rates?

"Bad News For Dems: Household Income Hits All-Time High Under Trump …
And He's Getting Credit For It "
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/household-income-trump-economy-optimism/
"Black household income is rising across the United States"
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2019/10/03/black-household-income-is-rising-across-the-united-states/
"Rising Rates for Minority Homeownership"
https://dsnews.com/daily-dose/11-19-2019/increase-reported-for-minority-homeownership
"Nov 2019: Rise in jobs sparks rise in optimism for people with
disabilities"
https://eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2019-12/kf-nn2120619.php
"Disposable Personal Income in the United States increased to 16702.70
USD Billion in November from 16615 USD Billion in October of 2019.
Disposable Personal Income in the United States averaged 5415.47 USD
Billion from 1959 until 2019, reaching an all time high of 16702.70
USD Billion in November of 2019 and a record low of 351.54 USD Billion
in January of 1959."
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/disposable-personal-income

You are still trying to avoid the declining household income, not only
for the population in general, but even worse for Blacks and Hispanics.
Yes, it is still increasing, but at a slowing rate.
So now you want to change the topic to disposable personal income. Are
you now admitting that demand side economics are at work? If so,
perhaps you should look at the rate of increase in the personal
consumption expenditures. The rate of improvement during the first
three years of the Trump administration is almost identical to the Obama
years - not really anything to crow about - at least that is what the
Republicans complained about the Obama recovery being so slow. In fact,
the only dip in the rate over the past 10 years happened in Dec 2018 -
Feb 2019. The market also declined. 2018 is said to have ended in a thud.

OK -- I accept that you will never accept or admit that Trump in
particular, or conservatives in general, have ever, or will ever, be
of benefit to the people of the United States. I waste my time and
yours trying to convince you otherwise. The only material fact is that
in a little less than a year a poll will be taken of US voters. What
they decide will frustrate one of us, but I doubt it will change your
mind or mine. So, got any good recipes for salmon?

On the contrary, I have often quoted a woman who said something to the
effect that if we had only conservatives, we would never make progress
and if we only had liberals we would perpetually be in chaos. We need
both. Unfortunately, Trump is not a conservative. He is a bungling
narcissist who is corrupt to the core. Where are the real conservatives
when we need them?

As to salmon, I usually rely on a simple recipe. Lemon juice, seasoning
salt and capers. Bake at 400 degrees for a time dependent on thickness.
About 20 min for a 1" steak or fillet. I try to catch it when it is
still moist, but not raw.

[El Castor]

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

Hmmm. That would be comparing the economy to that at the end of the
Clinton administration which was also setting records for a good
economy. What happened since then? Gosh, there was the GW Bush
administration including the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Fortunately the Obama administration was able to recover from that
disaster and set us on the path to a healthy economy.

Which was exceeded by Donald Trump.
"Black and Hispanic unemployment is at a record low"
"There have never been more Black and Hispanic Americans in the
workforce, Friday’s Labor Department job report showed.
The jobless rate for Hispanics hit a record low of 3.9% in September,
while African Americans maintained its lowest rate ever, 5.5%."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/04/black-and-hispanic-unemployment-is-at-a-record-low.html
"Americans' Positive Views on the Economy Could Earn Trump a Boost in
2020, New Poll Suggests
By Blake Dodge On 12/20/19 at 4:56 PM EST"
https://www.newsweek.com/best-economy-scores-since-2001-could-earn-trump-boost-2020-new-poll-cnn-1478567

And where is the optimism about the Labor Force Participation Rate?
Still stuck around 63%.

The work force is aging, and retiring. There have been numerous
reports over the course of the Trump administration of more job
openings than unemployed. Face it, Trumps policies have been good for
the economy, and prosperity in general, which is the central reason I
am a conservative.
"The U.S. has 1 million more job openings than unemployed workers
March 15, 2019"
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-u-s-has-1-million-more-job-openings-than-unemployed-workers/
"There are now more job openings than workers to fill them
June 5, 2018"
"For the first time in at least 20 years, there are now more job
openings than there are people looking for work.
The ratio of unemployed workers to job openings dropped below one in
April for the first time since the Labor Department started collecting
data in 2000, the agency reported Tuesday."
https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/05/news/economy/job-openings-unemployed-workers/index.html

There are a number of problems with your citations on unemployment.
First of all, it is an average number which does not reflect the skewed
distributions upon which it is based. (The U-3 unemployment rate is
essentially unemployed/labor force.) The biggest problem with this is
that it counts temporary, part-time, along with full time jobs in
determining the labor force part of that equation. But, as I'm sure you
realize, it does not count disabled or discouraged workers who have
dropped out of the labor force. This results in what is described as an
overly optimistic figure that does not accurately represent unemployment.
There are actually six definitions of unemployment and the most
comprehensive published by the BLS is U-6 which takes these factors into
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/unemploymentrate.asp
If we are looking for actual health of the households of working
families, you should look at median household income. This basically is
a measure of how income results in benefit to the household and factors
out the variables of temporary, part-time and other factors for people
who are loosely attached to the workforce. Here, the numbers are not so
rosy.
With the Trump weakening of the ACA and tougher Medicaid requirements, a
picture of stagnant household income is revealed even tho poverty
declined. The change from 2017 to 2018 was only up 0.9% even with
adjustment for inflation. That is not statistically significant
especially when compared with 5.2% in 2015, 3.2% in 2016 and 1.8% in
2017. This is even more striking if we look at the household income in
the primarily Republican south - 0.3%! The bottom line is that
households are not seeing the same gains that were measured during the
last years of the Obama administration.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/09/10/median-household-income-stagnant-last-year-poverty-fell/2271025001/
But, there is more: Our population is increasing at a rate of about
200,000 per month. But, job growth averaged 180,000 for most of 2019
compared with an average monthly gain of 223,000 in 2018 according to
BLS report for Nov 2019. It appears that the bloom is off the Trump
economic rose.

Please let me sum up in one sentence ...
The Left is desperate to find a way, any way, to denigrate the Trump
economy, and above all else is praying for a deep debilitating
recession, or better yet, depression.

That would be silly and non-productive. The Left is justifiably
concerned about the damage that Trump is doing and it would be foolish
to ignore the data. By ignoring the data, you are engaging in
confirmation bias to support your political opinions. Better, don't you
think, to look at the data and be open to understanding the trends?

Remember, I majored in economics and spent my working years in and
around finance, was licensed to sell some pretty obscure instruments,
and sat through countless briefings by a bank economist. Of one thing
I am certain, given the incentive a dark cloud can always be found. I
will stick with unemployment numbers, GDP, and the DOW/S&P. The
numbers I have quoted have a great deal of meaning for me, and when I
said that the Left is praying for a recession, I meant it, and you
know it's true. A strong economy will keep Trump in office doing the
things that got us where we are. A recession is what the left wing of
your party needs to gain power and unleash its brand of socialism.

GDP looks like pretty much straight line growth since 2009. Given that
Trump supposedly poured a lot of money into the economy with his tax
cut, what is there to brag about? That he didn't screw up the recovery
from the mess that GW Bush gave us?
You might want to consider the declining household income. People are
getting tired of promises by Trump that aren't delivered. Most of the
people in the country are still having trouble making ends meet.

"President Trump’s critics can’t deny that the economy is doing well,
so instead they insist all the benefits have gone to the rich and
large corporations. “America’s middle class is under attack,” Sen.
Elizabeth Warren asserted in her presidential campaign announcement
last December. The latest data from the Census Bureau monthly surveys
tell a different story. Real median household income—the amount earned
by those in the very middle—hit $65,084 (in 2019 dollars) for the 12
months ending in July. That’s the highest level ever and a gain of
$4,144, or 6.8%, since Mr. Trump took office. By comparison, during 7½
years under President Obama—starting from the end of the recession in
June 2009 through January 2017—the median household income rose by
only about $1,000."
"https://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps-middle-class-economic-progress-11569786435"

A good example of how to lie with statistics and the WSJ should know
better. Household income is pretty noisy data and using a single number
to calculate gain is susceptible to end point bias (similar to end point
fallacy error).
While the US Census publishes monthly data, they refrain from drawing
conclusions from a single data point. Organizations like Sentier
Research which is widely quoted by conservative media are not so
careful. As nearly as I can tell, the $65,084 figure came from a July
2019 report by them and is cited as coming from the CPS monthly report.
To their credit, they only compare that number to 2000, but not the
dates that the WSJ picked.
The latest 3 year averages of CPS data are published by the US Census to
avoid end point bias. If you look at three year averages of median
figures, you will see that for the period 2016-2018 the gain was 1.74%,
for 2015-2017 was 3.30%, for 2014-2016 was 2.25% and for 2013-2015 was
4.01%. Since figures are not out yet, numbers from the US Monthly
Census are not available to compute 2017-2019. So, the most that we can
say is that Trump's figures are down as of the end of 2018.
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h08b.xls
Secondly, even tho the WSJ cites median figures (to their credit), it is
revealing to look at gain over three years using mean figures for the
quintile breakdown of household income over 3 year averages. These are
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h03ar.xls
Lowest Fifth 6.43%
Second Fifth 8.08%
Third Fifth 7.48%
Fourth Fifth 6.72%
Fifth Fifth 9.33%
Top 5% 11.05%
Clearly the top household incomes are benefiting the most and the poor
are doing the worst.

And Back & Hispanic unemployment is at an all time low.

Are you attempting to say that household income is not an important
indicator of a healthy economy? Do you deny that the downward trend in
household income isn't an issue of concern?
But, let's look more closely at 3 year moving averages for Black and
For Black households, income is down from 2015-2017 5.96% to 2016-2018
4.46%.
For Hispanic households, income is down from 2015-2017 2.43% to
2016-2018 1.17%.
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h16.xls
How do you explain the downward trend in household income in the context
of your claim for unemployment rates?

"Bad News For Dems: Household Income Hits All-Time High Under Trump …
And He's Getting Credit For It "
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/household-income-trump-economy-optimism/
"Black household income is rising across the United States"
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2019/10/03/black-household-income-is-rising-across-the-united-states/
"Rising Rates for Minority Homeownership"
https://dsnews.com/daily-dose/11-19-2019/increase-reported-for-minority-homeownership
"Nov 2019: Rise in jobs sparks rise in optimism for people with
disabilities"
https://eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2019-12/kf-nn2120619.php
"Disposable Personal Income in the United States increased to 16702.70
USD Billion in November from 16615 USD Billion in October of 2019.
Disposable Personal Income in the United States averaged 5415.47 USD
Billion from 1959 until 2019, reaching an all time high of 16702.70
USD Billion in November of 2019 and a record low of 351.54 USD Billion
in January of 1959."
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/disposable-personal-income

You are still trying to avoid the declining household income, not only
for the population in general, but even worse for Blacks and Hispanics.
Yes, it is still increasing, but at a slowing rate.
So now you want to change the topic to disposable personal income. Are
you now admitting that demand side economics are at work? If so,
perhaps you should look at the rate of increase in the personal
consumption expenditures. The rate of improvement during the first
three years of the Trump administration is almost identical to the Obama
years - not really anything to crow about - at least that is what the
Republicans complained about the Obama recovery being so slow. In fact,
the only dip in the rate over the past 10 years happened in Dec 2018 -
Feb 2019. The market also declined. 2018 is said to have ended in a thud.

OK -- I accept that you will never accept or admit that Trump in
particular, or conservatives in general, have ever, or will ever, be
of benefit to the people of the United States. I waste my time and
yours trying to convince you otherwise. The only material fact is that
in a little less than a year a poll will be taken of US voters. What
they decide will frustrate one of us, but I doubt it will change your
mind or mine. So, got any good recipes for salmon?

On the contrary, I have often quoted a woman who said something to the
effect that if we had only conservatives, we would never make progress
and if we only had liberals we would perpetually be in chaos. We need
both. Unfortunately, Trump is not a conservative. He is a bungling
narcissist who is corrupt to the core. Where are the real conservatives
when we need them?

There is no more a definition of conservative than there is for
liberal, but if Trump is not a conservative he will do until one comes
along. Granted, he is a loud mouth, and I suppose, a narcissist, but I
am more concerned with what he does than his annoying personality, and
i can't see the corrupt part. The corporate tax reform was long
overdue, as was an at least partially successful attempt to control
the border and immigration, reduce regulation, encourage domestic
energy production, the long overdue light he is shining on unfair
trade practices, getting the troops out of Syria, his support of
Israel, and who could not be delighted with the increase in Black
employment?

Post by islander
As to salmon, I usually rely on a simple recipe. Lemon juice, seasoning
salt and capers. Bake at 400 degrees for a time dependent on thickness.
About 20 min for a 1" steak or fillet. I try to catch it when it is
still moist, but not raw.

About the same here, although I haven't tried capers. On another food
topic I just found an interesting gadget on sale in a local store, an
omelet maker. I picked one up on a whim, and by golly it really does
the job, and is extremely easy to use. Here it is on Amazon.
https://www.amazon.com/Lekue-Omelette-Maker-Model-3402700R10U008/dp/B00BB64RA6/ref=sr_1_9?keywords=omelette%2Bmaker&qid=1577434045&sr=8-9&th=1

[islander]

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

Hmmm. That would be comparing the economy to that at the end of the
Clinton administration which was also setting records for a good
economy. What happened since then? Gosh, there was the GW Bush
administration including the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Fortunately the Obama administration was able to recover from that
disaster and set us on the path to a healthy economy.

Which was exceeded by Donald Trump.
"Black and Hispanic unemployment is at a record low"
"There have never been more Black and Hispanic Americans in the
workforce, Friday’s Labor Department job report showed.
The jobless rate for Hispanics hit a record low of 3.9% in September,
while African Americans maintained its lowest rate ever, 5.5%."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/04/black-and-hispanic-unemployment-is-at-a-record-low.html
"Americans' Positive Views on the Economy Could Earn Trump a Boost in
2020, New Poll Suggests
By Blake Dodge On 12/20/19 at 4:56 PM EST"
https://www.newsweek.com/best-economy-scores-since-2001-could-earn-trump-boost-2020-new-poll-cnn-1478567

And where is the optimism about the Labor Force Participation Rate?
Still stuck around 63%.

The work force is aging, and retiring. There have been numerous
reports over the course of the Trump administration of more job
openings than unemployed. Face it, Trumps policies have been good for
the economy, and prosperity in general, which is the central reason I
am a conservative.
"The U.S. has 1 million more job openings than unemployed workers
March 15, 2019"
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-u-s-has-1-million-more-job-openings-than-unemployed-workers/
"There are now more job openings than workers to fill them
June 5, 2018"
"For the first time in at least 20 years, there are now more job
openings than there are people looking for work.
The ratio of unemployed workers to job openings dropped below one in
April for the first time since the Labor Department started collecting
data in 2000, the agency reported Tuesday."
https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/05/news/economy/job-openings-unemployed-workers/index.html

There are a number of problems with your citations on unemployment.
First of all, it is an average number which does not reflect the skewed
distributions upon which it is based. (The U-3 unemployment rate is
essentially unemployed/labor force.) The biggest problem with this is
that it counts temporary, part-time, along with full time jobs in
determining the labor force part of that equation. But, as I'm sure you
realize, it does not count disabled or discouraged workers who have
dropped out of the labor force. This results in what is described as an
overly optimistic figure that does not accurately represent unemployment.
There are actually six definitions of unemployment and the most
comprehensive published by the BLS is U-6 which takes these factors into
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/unemploymentrate.asp
If we are looking for actual health of the households of working
families, you should look at median household income. This basically is
a measure of how income results in benefit to the household and factors
out the variables of temporary, part-time and other factors for people
who are loosely attached to the workforce. Here, the numbers are not so
rosy.
With the Trump weakening of the ACA and tougher Medicaid requirements, a
picture of stagnant household income is revealed even tho poverty
declined. The change from 2017 to 2018 was only up 0.9% even with
adjustment for inflation. That is not statistically significant
especially when compared with 5.2% in 2015, 3.2% in 2016 and 1.8% in
2017. This is even more striking if we look at the household income in
the primarily Republican south - 0.3%! The bottom line is that
households are not seeing the same gains that were measured during the
last years of the Obama administration.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/09/10/median-household-income-stagnant-last-year-poverty-fell/2271025001/
But, there is more: Our population is increasing at a rate of about
200,000 per month. But, job growth averaged 180,000 for most of 2019
compared with an average monthly gain of 223,000 in 2018 according to
BLS report for Nov 2019. It appears that the bloom is off the Trump
economic rose.

Please let me sum up in one sentence ...
The Left is desperate to find a way, any way, to denigrate the Trump
economy, and above all else is praying for a deep debilitating
recession, or better yet, depression.

That would be silly and non-productive. The Left is justifiably
concerned about the damage that Trump is doing and it would be foolish
to ignore the data. By ignoring the data, you are engaging in
confirmation bias to support your political opinions. Better, don't you
think, to look at the data and be open to understanding the trends?

Remember, I majored in economics and spent my working years in and
around finance, was licensed to sell some pretty obscure instruments,
and sat through countless briefings by a bank economist. Of one thing
I am certain, given the incentive a dark cloud can always be found. I
will stick with unemployment numbers, GDP, and the DOW/S&P. The
numbers I have quoted have a great deal of meaning for me, and when I
said that the Left is praying for a recession, I meant it, and you
know it's true. A strong economy will keep Trump in office doing the
things that got us where we are. A recession is what the left wing of
your party needs to gain power and unleash its brand of socialism.

GDP looks like pretty much straight line growth since 2009. Given that
Trump supposedly poured a lot of money into the economy with his tax
cut, what is there to brag about? That he didn't screw up the recovery
from the mess that GW Bush gave us?
You might want to consider the declining household income. People are
getting tired of promises by Trump that aren't delivered. Most of the
people in the country are still having trouble making ends meet.

"President Trump’s critics can’t deny that the economy is doing well,
so instead they insist all the benefits have gone to the rich and
large corporations. “America’s middle class is under attack,” Sen.
Elizabeth Warren asserted in her presidential campaign announcement
last December. The latest data from the Census Bureau monthly surveys
tell a different story. Real median household income—the amount earned
by those in the very middle—hit $65,084 (in 2019 dollars) for the 12
months ending in July. That’s the highest level ever and a gain of
$4,144, or 6.8%, since Mr. Trump took office. By comparison, during 7½
years under President Obama—starting from the end of the recession in
June 2009 through January 2017—the median household income rose by
only about $1,000."
"https://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps-middle-class-economic-progress-11569786435"

A good example of how to lie with statistics and the WSJ should know
better. Household income is pretty noisy data and using a single number
to calculate gain is susceptible to end point bias (similar to end point
fallacy error).
While the US Census publishes monthly data, they refrain from drawing
conclusions from a single data point. Organizations like Sentier
Research which is widely quoted by conservative media are not so
careful. As nearly as I can tell, the $65,084 figure came from a July
2019 report by them and is cited as coming from the CPS monthly report.
To their credit, they only compare that number to 2000, but not the
dates that the WSJ picked.
The latest 3 year averages of CPS data are published by the US Census to
avoid end point bias. If you look at three year averages of median
figures, you will see that for the period 2016-2018 the gain was 1.74%,
for 2015-2017 was 3.30%, for 2014-2016 was 2.25% and for 2013-2015 was
4.01%. Since figures are not out yet, numbers from the US Monthly
Census are not available to compute 2017-2019. So, the most that we can
say is that Trump's figures are down as of the end of 2018.
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h08b.xls
Secondly, even tho the WSJ cites median figures (to their credit), it is
revealing to look at gain over three years using mean figures for the
quintile breakdown of household income over 3 year averages. These are
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h03ar.xls
Lowest Fifth 6.43%
Second Fifth 8.08%
Third Fifth 7.48%
Fourth Fifth 6.72%
Fifth Fifth 9.33%
Top 5% 11.05%
Clearly the top household incomes are benefiting the most and the poor
are doing the worst.

And Back & Hispanic unemployment is at an all time low.

Are you attempting to say that household income is not an important
indicator of a healthy economy? Do you deny that the downward trend in
household income isn't an issue of concern?
But, let's look more closely at 3 year moving averages for Black and
For Black households, income is down from 2015-2017 5.96% to 2016-2018
4.46%.
For Hispanic households, income is down from 2015-2017 2.43% to
2016-2018 1.17%.
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h16.xls
How do you explain the downward trend in household income in the context
of your claim for unemployment rates?

"Bad News For Dems: Household Income Hits All-Time High Under Trump …
And He's Getting Credit For It "
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/household-income-trump-economy-optimism/
"Black household income is rising across the United States"
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2019/10/03/black-household-income-is-rising-across-the-united-states/
"Rising Rates for Minority Homeownership"
https://dsnews.com/daily-dose/11-19-2019/increase-reported-for-minority-homeownership
"Nov 2019: Rise in jobs sparks rise in optimism for people with
disabilities"
https://eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2019-12/kf-nn2120619.php
"Disposable Personal Income in the United States increased to 16702.70
USD Billion in November from 16615 USD Billion in October of 2019.
Disposable Personal Income in the United States averaged 5415.47 USD
Billion from 1959 until 2019, reaching an all time high of 16702.70
USD Billion in November of 2019 and a record low of 351.54 USD Billion
in January of 1959."
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/disposable-personal-income

You are still trying to avoid the declining household income, not only
for the population in general, but even worse for Blacks and Hispanics.
Yes, it is still increasing, but at a slowing rate.
So now you want to change the topic to disposable personal income. Are
you now admitting that demand side economics are at work? If so,
perhaps you should look at the rate of increase in the personal
consumption expenditures. The rate of improvement during the first
three years of the Trump administration is almost identical to the Obama
years - not really anything to crow about - at least that is what the
Republicans complained about the Obama recovery being so slow. In fact,
the only dip in the rate over the past 10 years happened in Dec 2018 -
Feb 2019. The market also declined. 2018 is said to have ended in a thud.

OK -- I accept that you will never accept or admit that Trump in
particular, or conservatives in general, have ever, or will ever, be
of benefit to the people of the United States. I waste my time and
yours trying to convince you otherwise. The only material fact is that
in a little less than a year a poll will be taken of US voters. What
they decide will frustrate one of us, but I doubt it will change your
mind or mine. So, got any good recipes for salmon?

On the contrary, I have often quoted a woman who said something to the
effect that if we had only conservatives, we would never make progress
and if we only had liberals we would perpetually be in chaos. We need
both. Unfortunately, Trump is not a conservative. He is a bungling
narcissist who is corrupt to the core. Where are the real conservatives
when we need them?

There is no more a definition of conservative than there is for
liberal, but if Trump is not a conservative he will do until one comes
along. Granted, he is a loud mouth, and I suppose, a narcissist, but I
am more concerned with what he does than his annoying personality, and
i can't see the corrupt part. The corporate tax reform was long
overdue, as was an at least partially successful attempt to control
the border and immigration, reduce regulation, encourage domestic
energy production, the long overdue light he is shining on unfair
trade practices, getting the troops out of Syria, his support of
Israel, and who could not be delighted with the increase in Black
employment?

Post by islander
As to salmon, I usually rely on a simple recipe. Lemon juice, seasoning
salt and capers. Bake at 400 degrees for a time dependent on thickness.
About 20 min for a 1" steak or fillet. I try to catch it when it is
still moist, but not raw.

About the same here, although I haven't tried capers. On another food
topic I just found an interesting gadget on sale in a local store, an
omelet maker. I picked one up on a whim, and by golly it really does
the job, and is extremely easy to use. Here it is on Amazon.
https://www.amazon.com/Lekue-Omelette-Maker-Model-3402700R10U008/dp/B00BB64RA6/ref=sr_1_9?keywords=omelette%2Bmaker&qid=1577434045&sr=8-9&th=1

We are not particularly fond of omelets and have far too many gadgets,
so I'll pass on this one. For those who like omelets, it is simple and
clever. Clever people, those Spaniards! https://www.lekueusa.com/

[El Castor]

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

Hmmm. That would be comparing the economy to that at the end of the
Clinton administration which was also setting records for a good
economy. What happened since then? Gosh, there was the GW Bush
administration including the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Fortunately the Obama administration was able to recover from that
disaster and set us on the path to a healthy economy.

Which was exceeded by Donald Trump.
"Black and Hispanic unemployment is at a record low"
"There have never been more Black and Hispanic Americans in the
workforce, Friday’s Labor Department job report showed.
The jobless rate for Hispanics hit a record low of 3.9% in September,
while African Americans maintained its lowest rate ever, 5.5%."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/04/black-and-hispanic-unemployment-is-at-a-record-low.html
"Americans' Positive Views on the Economy Could Earn Trump a Boost in
2020, New Poll Suggests
By Blake Dodge On 12/20/19 at 4:56 PM EST"
https://www.newsweek.com/best-economy-scores-since-2001-could-earn-trump-boost-2020-new-poll-cnn-1478567

And where is the optimism about the Labor Force Participation Rate?
Still stuck around 63%.

The work force is aging, and retiring. There have been numerous
reports over the course of the Trump administration of more job
openings than unemployed. Face it, Trumps policies have been good for
the economy, and prosperity in general, which is the central reason I
am a conservative.
"The U.S. has 1 million more job openings than unemployed workers
March 15, 2019"
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-u-s-has-1-million-more-job-openings-than-unemployed-workers/
"There are now more job openings than workers to fill them
June 5, 2018"
"For the first time in at least 20 years, there are now more job
openings than there are people looking for work.
The ratio of unemployed workers to job openings dropped below one in
April for the first time since the Labor Department started collecting
data in 2000, the agency reported Tuesday."
https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/05/news/economy/job-openings-unemployed-workers/index.html

There are a number of problems with your citations on unemployment.
First of all, it is an average number which does not reflect the skewed
distributions upon which it is based. (The U-3 unemployment rate is
essentially unemployed/labor force.) The biggest problem with this is
that it counts temporary, part-time, along with full time jobs in
determining the labor force part of that equation. But, as I'm sure you
realize, it does not count disabled or discouraged workers who have
dropped out of the labor force. This results in what is described as an
overly optimistic figure that does not accurately represent unemployment.
There are actually six definitions of unemployment and the most
comprehensive published by the BLS is U-6 which takes these factors into
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/unemploymentrate.asp
If we are looking for actual health of the households of working
families, you should look at median household income. This basically is
a measure of how income results in benefit to the household and factors
out the variables of temporary, part-time and other factors for people
who are loosely attached to the workforce. Here, the numbers are not so
rosy.
With the Trump weakening of the ACA and tougher Medicaid requirements, a
picture of stagnant household income is revealed even tho poverty
declined. The change from 2017 to 2018 was only up 0.9% even with
adjustment for inflation. That is not statistically significant
especially when compared with 5.2% in 2015, 3.2% in 2016 and 1.8% in
2017. This is even more striking if we look at the household income in
the primarily Republican south - 0.3%! The bottom line is that
households are not seeing the same gains that were measured during the
last years of the Obama administration.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/09/10/median-household-income-stagnant-last-year-poverty-fell/2271025001/
But, there is more: Our population is increasing at a rate of about
200,000 per month. But, job growth averaged 180,000 for most of 2019
compared with an average monthly gain of 223,000 in 2018 according to
BLS report for Nov 2019. It appears that the bloom is off the Trump
economic rose.

Please let me sum up in one sentence ...
The Left is desperate to find a way, any way, to denigrate the Trump
economy, and above all else is praying for a deep debilitating
recession, or better yet, depression.

That would be silly and non-productive. The Left is justifiably
concerned about the damage that Trump is doing and it would be foolish
to ignore the data. By ignoring the data, you are engaging in
confirmation bias to support your political opinions. Better, don't you
think, to look at the data and be open to understanding the trends?

Remember, I majored in economics and spent my working years in and
around finance, was licensed to sell some pretty obscure instruments,
and sat through countless briefings by a bank economist. Of one thing
I am certain, given the incentive a dark cloud can always be found. I
will stick with unemployment numbers, GDP, and the DOW/S&P. The
numbers I have quoted have a great deal of meaning for me, and when I
said that the Left is praying for a recession, I meant it, and you
know it's true. A strong economy will keep Trump in office doing the
things that got us where we are. A recession is what the left wing of
your party needs to gain power and unleash its brand of socialism.

GDP looks like pretty much straight line growth since 2009. Given that
Trump supposedly poured a lot of money into the economy with his tax
cut, what is there to brag about? That he didn't screw up the recovery
from the mess that GW Bush gave us?
You might want to consider the declining household income. People are
getting tired of promises by Trump that aren't delivered. Most of the
people in the country are still having trouble making ends meet.

"President Trump’s critics can’t deny that the economy is doing well,
so instead they insist all the benefits have gone to the rich and
large corporations. “America’s middle class is under attack,” Sen.
Elizabeth Warren asserted in her presidential campaign announcement
last December. The latest data from the Census Bureau monthly surveys
tell a different story. Real median household income—the amount earned
by those in the very middle—hit $65,084 (in 2019 dollars) for the 12
months ending in July. That’s the highest level ever and a gain of
$4,144, or 6.8%, since Mr. Trump took office. By comparison, during 7½
years under President Obama—starting from the end of the recession in
June 2009 through January 2017—the median household income rose by
only about $1,000."
"https://www.wsj.com/articles/trumps-middle-class-economic-progress-11569786435"

A good example of how to lie with statistics and the WSJ should know
better. Household income is pretty noisy data and using a single number
to calculate gain is susceptible to end point bias (similar to end point
fallacy error).
While the US Census publishes monthly data, they refrain from drawing
conclusions from a single data point. Organizations like Sentier
Research which is widely quoted by conservative media are not so
careful. As nearly as I can tell, the $65,084 figure came from a July
2019 report by them and is cited as coming from the CPS monthly report.
To their credit, they only compare that number to 2000, but not the
dates that the WSJ picked.
The latest 3 year averages of CPS data are published by the US Census to
avoid end point bias. If you look at three year averages of median
figures, you will see that for the period 2016-2018 the gain was 1.74%,
for 2015-2017 was 3.30%, for 2014-2016 was 2.25% and for 2013-2015 was
4.01%. Since figures are not out yet, numbers from the US Monthly
Census are not available to compute 2017-2019. So, the most that we can
say is that Trump's figures are down as of the end of 2018.
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h08b.xls
Secondly, even tho the WSJ cites median figures (to their credit), it is
revealing to look at gain over three years using mean figures for the
quintile breakdown of household income over 3 year averages. These are
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h03ar.xls
Lowest Fifth 6.43%
Second Fifth 8.08%
Third Fifth 7.48%
Fourth Fifth 6.72%
Fifth Fifth 9.33%
Top 5% 11.05%
Clearly the top household incomes are benefiting the most and the poor
are doing the worst.

And Back & Hispanic unemployment is at an all time low.

Are you attempting to say that household income is not an important
indicator of a healthy economy? Do you deny that the downward trend in
household income isn't an issue of concern?
But, let's look more closely at 3 year moving averages for Black and
For Black households, income is down from 2015-2017 5.96% to 2016-2018
4.46%.
For Hispanic households, income is down from 2015-2017 2.43% to
2016-2018 1.17%.
https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/cps/tables/time-series/historical-income-households/h16.xls
How do you explain the downward trend in household income in the context
of your claim for unemployment rates?

"Bad News For Dems: Household Income Hits All-Time High Under Trump …
And He's Getting Credit For It "
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/household-income-trump-economy-optimism/
"Black household income is rising across the United States"
https://www.brookings.edu/blog/the-avenue/2019/10/03/black-household-income-is-rising-across-the-united-states/
"Rising Rates for Minority Homeownership"
https://dsnews.com/daily-dose/11-19-2019/increase-reported-for-minority-homeownership
"Nov 2019: Rise in jobs sparks rise in optimism for people with
disabilities"
https://eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2019-12/kf-nn2120619.php
"Disposable Personal Income in the United States increased to 16702.70
USD Billion in November from 16615 USD Billion in October of 2019.
Disposable Personal Income in the United States averaged 5415.47 USD
Billion from 1959 until 2019, reaching an all time high of 16702.70
USD Billion in November of 2019 and a record low of 351.54 USD Billion
in January of 1959."
https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/disposable-personal-income

You are still trying to avoid the declining household income, not only
for the population in general, but even worse for Blacks and Hispanics.
Yes, it is still increasing, but at a slowing rate.
So now you want to change the topic to disposable personal income. Are
you now admitting that demand side economics are at work? If so,
perhaps you should look at the rate of increase in the personal
consumption expenditures. The rate of improvement during the first
three years of the Trump administration is almost identical to the Obama
years - not really anything to crow about - at least that is what the
Republicans complained about the Obama recovery being so slow. In fact,
the only dip in the rate over the past 10 years happened in Dec 2018 -
Feb 2019. The market also declined. 2018 is said to have ended in a thud.

OK -- I accept that you will never accept or admit that Trump in
particular, or conservatives in general, have ever, or will ever, be
of benefit to the people of the United States. I waste my time and
yours trying to convince you otherwise. The only material fact is that
in a little less than a year a poll will be taken of US voters. What
they decide will frustrate one of us, but I doubt it will change your
mind or mine. So, got any good recipes for salmon?

On the contrary, I have often quoted a woman who said something to the
effect that if we had only conservatives, we would never make progress
and if we only had liberals we would perpetually be in chaos. We need
both. Unfortunately, Trump is not a conservative. He is a bungling
narcissist who is corrupt to the core. Where are the real conservatives
when we need them?

There is no more a definition of conservative than there is for
liberal, but if Trump is not a conservative he will do until one comes
along. Granted, he is a loud mouth, and I suppose, a narcissist, but I
am more concerned with what he does than his annoying personality, and
i can't see the corrupt part. The corporate tax reform was long
overdue, as was an at least partially successful attempt to control
the border and immigration, reduce regulation, encourage domestic
energy production, the long overdue light he is shining on unfair
trade practices, getting the troops out of Syria, his support of
Israel, and who could not be delighted with the increase in Black
employment?

Post by islander
As to salmon, I usually rely on a simple recipe. Lemon juice, seasoning
salt and capers. Bake at 400 degrees for a time dependent on thickness.
About 20 min for a 1" steak or fillet. I try to catch it when it is
still moist, but not raw.

About the same here, although I haven't tried capers. On another food
topic I just found an interesting gadget on sale in a local store, an
omelet maker. I picked one up on a whim, and by golly it really does
the job, and is extremely easy to use. Here it is on Amazon.
https://www.amazon.com/Lekue-Omelette-Maker-Model-3402700R10U008/dp/B00BB64RA6/ref=sr_1_9?keywords=omelette%2Bmaker&qid=1577434045&sr=8-9&th=1

We are not particularly fond of omelets and have far too many gadgets,
so I'll pass on this one. For those who like omelets, it is simple and
clever. Clever people, those Spaniards! https://www.lekueusa.com/

I'm not a huge omelet fan either, but occasional eggs are a healthy
addition to the diet.

[b***@gmail.com]

Post by El Castor

Post by islander
You are still trying to avoid the declining household income, not only
for the population in general, but even worse for Blacks and Hispanics.
Yes, it is still increasing, but at a slowing rate.
So now you want to change the topic to disposable personal income. Are
you now admitting that demand side economics are at work? If so,
perhaps you should look at the rate of increase in the personal
consumption expenditures. The rate of improvement during the first
three years of the Trump administration is almost identical to the Obama
years - not really anything to crow about - at least that is what the
Republicans complained about the Obama recovery being so slow. In fact,
the only dip in the rate over the past 10 years happened in Dec 2018 -
Feb 2019. The market also declined. 2018 is said to have ended in a thud.

OK -- I accept that you will never accept or admit that Trump in
particular, or conservatives in general, have ever, or will ever, be
of benefit to the people of the United States. I waste my time and
yours trying to convince you otherwise. The only material fact is that
in a little less than a year a poll will be taken of US voters. What
they decide will frustrate one of us, but I doubt it will change your
mind or mine. So, got any good recipes for salmon?

Meanwhile, the S&P and Russel indexes are at all time highs. Should be a good day tomorrow. Trump is driving the market higher and will win the electiop by a landslide.

For Islander, My recipie for Salmon is to fry some onion in a pan until it turns brown and then put the Salmon on top and cook for a few minutes with oil and butter in the pan and then turn over the salmon and cook for another few minutes. I usually eat it with a fork and a half slice of lemon on top to squeese. I eat some of it and the rest over the next 5 days. My SNAP benefits are now buying more than I can eat. I am so happy. All I need now is a driver's license.

[islander]

Post by b***@gmail.com

Post by El Castor

Post by islander
You are still trying to avoid the declining household income, not only
for the population in general, but even worse for Blacks and Hispanics.
Yes, it is still increasing, but at a slowing rate.
So now you want to change the topic to disposable personal income. Are
you now admitting that demand side economics are at work? If so,
perhaps you should look at the rate of increase in the personal
consumption expenditures. The rate of improvement during the first
three years of the Trump administration is almost identical to the Obama
years - not really anything to crow about - at least that is what the
Republicans complained about the Obama recovery being so slow. In fact,
the only dip in the rate over the past 10 years happened in Dec 2018 -
Feb 2019. The market also declined. 2018 is said to have ended in a thud.

OK -- I accept that you will never accept or admit that Trump in
particular, or conservatives in general, have ever, or will ever, be
of benefit to the people of the United States. I waste my time and
yours trying to convince you otherwise. The only material fact is that
in a little less than a year a poll will be taken of US voters. What
they decide will frustrate one of us, but I doubt it will change your
mind or mine. So, got any good recipes for salmon?

Meanwhile, the S&P and Russel indexes are at all time highs. Should be a good day tomorrow. Trump is driving the market higher and will win the electiop by a landslide.
For Islander, My recipie for Salmon is to fry some onion in a pan until it turns brown and then put the Salmon on top and cook for a few minutes with oil and butter in the pan and then turn over the salmon and cook for another few minutes. I usually eat it with a fork and a half slice of lemon on top to squeese. I eat some of it and the rest over the next 5 days. My SNAP benefits are now buying more than I can eat. I am so happy. All I need now is a driver's license.

I haven't heard much about fear of inflation lately and the principal
fear seems to be a recession, not if but when. I'm reading this morning
about stock offerings that are tailored to political bias. There is
always a scheme to attract the gullible. Personally, the absence of any
market change attributed to the impeachment tells me that the market
doesn't give a damn about politics and will do what it will do as long
as we have no major crises.

Glad to hear that you are happy. You are fortunate to be living in
California. SNAP is administered by the state governments. Trump's
cuts to SNAP will probably not affect you.

I've also done salmon with onions, but my wife likes capers better.

[El Castor]

Post by islander

Post by b***@gmail.com

Post by El Castor

Post by islander
You are still trying to avoid the declining household income, not only
for the population in general, but even worse for Blacks and Hispanics.
Yes, it is still increasing, but at a slowing rate.
So now you want to change the topic to disposable personal income. Are
you now admitting that demand side economics are at work? If so,
perhaps you should look at the rate of increase in the personal
consumption expenditures. The rate of improvement during the first
three years of the Trump administration is almost identical to the Obama
years - not really anything to crow about - at least that is what the
Republicans complained about the Obama recovery being so slow. In fact,
the only dip in the rate over the past 10 years happened in Dec 2018 -
Feb 2019. The market also declined. 2018 is said to have ended in a thud.

OK -- I accept that you will never accept or admit that Trump in
particular, or conservatives in general, have ever, or will ever, be
of benefit to the people of the United States. I waste my time and
yours trying to convince you otherwise. The only material fact is that
in a little less than a year a poll will be taken of US voters. What
they decide will frustrate one of us, but I doubt it will change your
mind or mine. So, got any good recipes for salmon?

Meanwhile, the S&P and Russel indexes are at all time highs. Should be a good day tomorrow. Trump is driving the market higher and will win the electiop by a landslide.
For Islander, My recipie for Salmon is to fry some onion in a pan until it turns brown and then put the Salmon on top and cook for a few minutes with oil and butter in the pan and then turn over the salmon and cook for another few minutes. I usually eat it with a fork and a half slice of lemon on top to squeese. I eat some of it and the rest over the next 5 days. My SNAP benefits are now buying more than I can eat. I am so happy. All I need now is a driver's license.

I haven't heard much about fear of inflation lately and the principal
fear seems to be a recession, not if but when. I'm reading this morning
about stock offerings that are tailored to political bias. There is
always a scheme to attract the gullible. Personally, the absence of any
market change attributed to the impeachment tells me that the market
doesn't give a damn about politics and will do what it will do as long
as we have no major crises.
Glad to hear that you are happy. You are fortunate to be living in
California. SNAP is administered by the state governments. Trump's
cuts to SNAP will probably not affect you.

I'm born and raised in California, and doubt I will ever choose to
live elsewhere -- as you apparently did. (-8

But, here is a problem, cost of living compared to the national
average.

Los Angeles +42.6%
San Francisco +62.5%
https://www.salary.com/research/cost-of-living/ca

Post by islander
I've also done salmon with onions, but my wife likes capers better.

[islander]

Post by El Castor
I'm born and raised in California, and doubt I will ever choose to
live elsewhere -- as you apparently did. (-8
But, here is a problem, cost of living compared to the national
average.
Los Angeles +42.6%
San Francisco +62.5%
https://www.salary.com/research/cost-of-living/ca

The largest factor in cost of living is shelter and I agree that it is a
problem, especially in areas where there is heavy competition for
available housing. This problem was even evident at Stanford where the
cost of housing was a problem in recruiting faculty. There are
solutions and in the case of Stanford, retaining ownership of the land
and infrastructure by Stanford reduced the cost of housing to affordable
levels. There is a similar approach that is used widely across the
nation including on this island. It is called Community Land Trust in
its various forms essentially owns the land and infrastructure in
perpetuity with individual ownership of the structure. Here is a good
description of the local very successful program: https://www.opalclt.org/

It is significant to note that there were no defaults on mortgages
during the housing crisis of 2008-9.

It works despite opposition by the more conservative organizations.
Since 1989, it has built or renovated 105 single-family homes and 30
rental apartments. Their most recent project is building 45 affordable
rental townhouses.

Still, we have difficulty retaining workers due to the introduction of
vacation rentals on the island which have removed a lot of year-round
rentals from the open market. The appeal of quick profits from the
tourist trade have disrupted the overall rental market causing some
community associations to adopt policies that seek to ban them. Legal
challenges are being mounted.

[El Castor]

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
I'm born and raised in California, and doubt I will ever choose to
live elsewhere -- as you apparently did. (-8
But, here is a problem, cost of living compared to the national
average.
Los Angeles +42.6%
San Francisco +62.5%
https://www.salary.com/research/cost-of-living/ca

The largest factor in cost of living is shelter and I agree that it is a
problem, especially in areas where there is heavy competition for
available housing. This problem was even evident at Stanford where the
cost of housing was a problem in recruiting faculty. There are
solutions and in the case of Stanford, retaining ownership of the land
and infrastructure by Stanford reduced the cost of housing to affordable
levels. There is a similar approach that is used widely across the
nation including on this island. It is called Community Land Trust in
its various forms essentially owns the land and infrastructure in
perpetuity with individual ownership of the structure. Here is a good
description of the local very successful program: https://www.opalclt.org/
It is significant to note that there were no defaults on mortgages
during the housing crisis of 2008-9.
It works despite opposition by the more conservative organizations.
Since 1989, it has built or renovated 105 single-family homes and 30
rental apartments. Their most recent project is building 45 affordable
rental townhouses.
Still, we have difficulty retaining workers due to the introduction of
vacation rentals on the island which have removed a lot of year-round
rentals from the open market. The appeal of quick profits from the
tourist trade have disrupted the overall rental market causing some
community associations to adopt policies that seek to ban them. Legal
challenges are being mounted.

There is an annual migration out of California. The two most popular
destinations seem to be Idaho and Texas.

4 Bedrooms and a pool, 2,023 sq ft in Del Rio Texas, $187,000
https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/212-Quail-Creek-Dr_Del-Rio_TX_78840_M79282-75832?view=qv

3 Bedrooms, 1,056 sq ft in Palo Alto California, $2,598,000
https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/777-Allen-Ct_Palo-Alto_CA_94303_M25970-76360?view=qv

My daughter moved from Santa Rosa Ca, To Boise. Loves it there and
rents her house in California. BTW -- The citizens of Boise are not
fond of Californians. Californians moving there are wise to
immediately get Idaho plates for the car. (-8

[islander]

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
I'm born and raised in California, and doubt I will ever choose to
live elsewhere -- as you apparently did. (-8
But, here is a problem, cost of living compared to the national
average.
Los Angeles +42.6%
San Francisco +62.5%
https://www.salary.com/research/cost-of-living/ca

The largest factor in cost of living is shelter and I agree that it is a
problem, especially in areas where there is heavy competition for
available housing. This problem was even evident at Stanford where the
cost of housing was a problem in recruiting faculty. There are
solutions and in the case of Stanford, retaining ownership of the land
and infrastructure by Stanford reduced the cost of housing to affordable
levels. There is a similar approach that is used widely across the
nation including on this island. It is called Community Land Trust in
its various forms essentially owns the land and infrastructure in
perpetuity with individual ownership of the structure. Here is a good
description of the local very successful program: https://www.opalclt.org/
It is significant to note that there were no defaults on mortgages
during the housing crisis of 2008-9.
It works despite opposition by the more conservative organizations.
Since 1989, it has built or renovated 105 single-family homes and 30
rental apartments. Their most recent project is building 45 affordable
rental townhouses.
Still, we have difficulty retaining workers due to the introduction of
vacation rentals on the island which have removed a lot of year-round
rentals from the open market. The appeal of quick profits from the
tourist trade have disrupted the overall rental market causing some
community associations to adopt policies that seek to ban them. Legal
challenges are being mounted.

There is an annual migration out of California. The two most popular
destinations seem to be Idaho and Texas.
4 Bedrooms and a pool, 2,023 sq ft in Del Rio Texas, $187,000
https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/212-Quail-Creek-Dr_Del-Rio_TX_78840_M79282-75832?view=qv
3 Bedrooms, 1,056 sq ft in Palo Alto California, $2,598,000
https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/777-Allen-Ct_Palo-Alto_CA_94303_M25970-76360?view=qv
My daughter moved from Santa Rosa Ca, To Boise. Loves it there and
rents her house in California. BTW -- The citizens of Boise are not
fond of Californians. Californians moving there are wise to
immediately get Idaho plates for the car. (-8

Yea, there has been a migration out of California for as long as I can
remember. Is the population declining? No.

[El Castor]

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
I'm born and raised in California, and doubt I will ever choose to
live elsewhere -- as you apparently did. (-8
But, here is a problem, cost of living compared to the national
average.
Los Angeles +42.6%
San Francisco +62.5%
https://www.salary.com/research/cost-of-living/ca

The largest factor in cost of living is shelter and I agree that it is a
problem, especially in areas where there is heavy competition for
available housing. This problem was even evident at Stanford where the
cost of housing was a problem in recruiting faculty. There are
solutions and in the case of Stanford, retaining ownership of the land
and infrastructure by Stanford reduced the cost of housing to affordable
levels. There is a similar approach that is used widely across the
nation including on this island. It is called Community Land Trust in
its various forms essentially owns the land and infrastructure in
perpetuity with individual ownership of the structure. Here is a good
description of the local very successful program: https://www.opalclt.org/
It is significant to note that there were no defaults on mortgages
during the housing crisis of 2008-9.
It works despite opposition by the more conservative organizations.
Since 1989, it has built or renovated 105 single-family homes and 30
rental apartments. Their most recent project is building 45 affordable
rental townhouses.
Still, we have difficulty retaining workers due to the introduction of
vacation rentals on the island which have removed a lot of year-round
rentals from the open market. The appeal of quick profits from the
tourist trade have disrupted the overall rental market causing some
community associations to adopt policies that seek to ban them. Legal
challenges are being mounted.

There is an annual migration out of California. The two most popular
destinations seem to be Idaho and Texas.
4 Bedrooms and a pool, 2,023 sq ft in Del Rio Texas, $187,000
https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/212-Quail-Creek-Dr_Del-Rio_TX_78840_M79282-75832?view=qv
3 Bedrooms, 1,056 sq ft in Palo Alto California, $2,598,000
https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/777-Allen-Ct_Palo-Alto_CA_94303_M25970-76360?view=qv
My daughter moved from Santa Rosa Ca, To Boise. Loves it there and
rents her house in California. BTW -- The citizens of Boise are not
fond of Californians. Californians moving there are wise to
immediately get Idaho plates for the car. (-8

Yea, there has been a migration out of California for as long as I can
remember. Is the population declining? No.

Marin's population declined in 2019.

"Marin’s population changes for the recent fiscal year included 2,119
births, 1,929 deaths and a net migration of -1,485." ...
"Cynthia Murray, president and CEO of the North Bay Leadership
Council, said “the housing crisis is very real in the North Bay.”
“It is forcing out our younger workforce to live where housing is more
affordable,” she said. “It is also driving out seniors who want to
ensure that their retirement funds are not consumed by housing alone."
https://www.marinij.com/2019/12/26/state-marin-among-counties-with-population-declines/

"Some of the states Californians are fleeing to offer a life without
corporate or personal income taxes and home costs in the low six
figures. Texas, for instance, has boomed, becoming one of the
fastest-growing states in the nation. It’s now home to 867,000 new
residents from California, who arrived between 2010 and 2016."
https://www.curbed.com/2018/2/27/17058006/california-housing-crisis-rent-migration-texas

On the other hand coastal California has some of he best weather in
the world, and for a retiree sheltered by Prop13 it's not so bad.
Looks like a proposal allowing retirees to take their Prop 13 taxes
with them wherever they go in the state may be back on the ballot. I
signed a petition this morning.

[islander]

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
I'm born and raised in California, and doubt I will ever choose to
live elsewhere -- as you apparently did. (-8
But, here is a problem, cost of living compared to the national
average.
Los Angeles +42.6%
San Francisco +62.5%
https://www.salary.com/research/cost-of-living/ca

The largest factor in cost of living is shelter and I agree that it is a
problem, especially in areas where there is heavy competition for
available housing. This problem was even evident at Stanford where the
cost of housing was a problem in recruiting faculty. There are
solutions and in the case of Stanford, retaining ownership of the land
and infrastructure by Stanford reduced the cost of housing to affordable
levels. There is a similar approach that is used widely across the
nation including on this island. It is called Community Land Trust in
its various forms essentially owns the land and infrastructure in
perpetuity with individual ownership of the structure. Here is a good
description of the local very successful program: https://www.opalclt.org/
It is significant to note that there were no defaults on mortgages
during the housing crisis of 2008-9.
It works despite opposition by the more conservative organizations.
Since 1989, it has built or renovated 105 single-family homes and 30
rental apartments. Their most recent project is building 45 affordable
rental townhouses.
Still, we have difficulty retaining workers due to the introduction of
vacation rentals on the island which have removed a lot of year-round
rentals from the open market. The appeal of quick profits from the
tourist trade have disrupted the overall rental market causing some
community associations to adopt policies that seek to ban them. Legal
challenges are being mounted.

There is an annual migration out of California. The two most popular
destinations seem to be Idaho and Texas.
4 Bedrooms and a pool, 2,023 sq ft in Del Rio Texas, $187,000
https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/212-Quail-Creek-Dr_Del-Rio_TX_78840_M79282-75832?view=qv
3 Bedrooms, 1,056 sq ft in Palo Alto California, $2,598,000
https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/777-Allen-Ct_Palo-Alto_CA_94303_M25970-76360?view=qv
My daughter moved from Santa Rosa Ca, To Boise. Loves it there and
rents her house in California. BTW -- The citizens of Boise are not
fond of Californians. Californians moving there are wise to
immediately get Idaho plates for the car. (-8

Yea, there has been a migration out of California for as long as I can
remember. Is the population declining? No.

Marin's population declined in 2019.
"Marin’s population changes for the recent fiscal year included 2,119
births, 1,929 deaths and a net migration of -1,485." ...
"Cynthia Murray, president and CEO of the North Bay Leadership
Council, said “the housing crisis is very real in the North Bay.”
“It is forcing out our younger workforce to live where housing is more
affordable,” she said. “It is also driving out seniors who want to
ensure that their retirement funds are not consumed by housing alone."
https://www.marinij.com/2019/12/26/state-marin-among-counties-with-population-declines/
"Some of the states Californians are fleeing to offer a life without
corporate or personal income taxes and home costs in the low six
figures. Texas, for instance, has boomed, becoming one of the
fastest-growing states in the nation. It’s now home to 867,000 new
residents from California, who arrived between 2010 and 2016."
https://www.curbed.com/2018/2/27/17058006/california-housing-crisis-rent-migration-texas
On the other hand coastal California has some of he best weather in
the world, and for a retiree sheltered by Prop13 it's not so bad.
Looks like a proposal allowing retirees to take their Prop 13 taxes
with them wherever they go in the state may be back on the ballot. I
signed a petition this morning.

We won't know for sure until the 2020 census, but California is
projected to pass 40M in 2020. Overall growth continues, but is not
setting any records for rate of growth.
http://worldpopulationreview.com/states/california-population/

As to the Prop13 proposal, I'm guessing that it has strong advocacy in
the Real Estate industry. If passed, I would expect it to increase
volatility in turnover, increases in valuation and would probably make
the homeless problem more severe. Not sure it is a good thing.
California is one of the states that does not mirror the federal
exclusion for capital gains on primary residence, so that may dampen
turnover volatility. Glad that I am no longer in that situation. I'll
pay no taxes (federal or state) on the sale of our home this past year.

[El Castor]

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
I'm born and raised in California, and doubt I will ever choose to
live elsewhere -- as you apparently did. (-8
But, here is a problem, cost of living compared to the national
average.
Los Angeles +42.6%
San Francisco +62.5%
https://www.salary.com/research/cost-of-living/ca

The largest factor in cost of living is shelter and I agree that it is a
problem, especially in areas where there is heavy competition for
available housing. This problem was even evident at Stanford where the
cost of housing was a problem in recruiting faculty. There are
solutions and in the case of Stanford, retaining ownership of the land
and infrastructure by Stanford reduced the cost of housing to affordable
levels. There is a similar approach that is used widely across the
nation including on this island. It is called Community Land Trust in
its various forms essentially owns the land and infrastructure in
perpetuity with individual ownership of the structure. Here is a good
description of the local very successful program: https://www.opalclt.org/
It is significant to note that there were no defaults on mortgages
during the housing crisis of 2008-9.
It works despite opposition by the more conservative organizations.
Since 1989, it has built or renovated 105 single-family homes and 30
rental apartments. Their most recent project is building 45 affordable
rental townhouses.
Still, we have difficulty retaining workers due to the introduction of
vacation rentals on the island which have removed a lot of year-round
rentals from the open market. The appeal of quick profits from the
tourist trade have disrupted the overall rental market causing some
community associations to adopt policies that seek to ban them. Legal
challenges are being mounted.

There is an annual migration out of California. The two most popular
destinations seem to be Idaho and Texas.
4 Bedrooms and a pool, 2,023 sq ft in Del Rio Texas, $187,000
https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/212-Quail-Creek-Dr_Del-Rio_TX_78840_M79282-75832?view=qv
3 Bedrooms, 1,056 sq ft in Palo Alto California, $2,598,000
https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/777-Allen-Ct_Palo-Alto_CA_94303_M25970-76360?view=qv
My daughter moved from Santa Rosa Ca, To Boise. Loves it there and
rents her house in California. BTW -- The citizens of Boise are not
fond of Californians. Californians moving there are wise to
immediately get Idaho plates for the car. (-8

Yea, there has been a migration out of California for as long as I can
remember. Is the population declining? No.

Marin's population declined in 2019.
"Marin’s population changes for the recent fiscal year included 2,119
births, 1,929 deaths and a net migration of -1,485." ...
"Cynthia Murray, president and CEO of the North Bay Leadership
Council, said “the housing crisis is very real in the North Bay.”
“It is forcing out our younger workforce to live where housing is more
affordable,” she said. “It is also driving out seniors who want to
ensure that their retirement funds are not consumed by housing alone."
https://www.marinij.com/2019/12/26/state-marin-among-counties-with-population-declines/
"Some of the states Californians are fleeing to offer a life without
corporate or personal income taxes and home costs in the low six
figures. Texas, for instance, has boomed, becoming one of the
fastest-growing states in the nation. It’s now home to 867,000 new
residents from California, who arrived between 2010 and 2016."
https://www.curbed.com/2018/2/27/17058006/california-housing-crisis-rent-migration-texas
On the other hand coastal California has some of he best weather in
the world, and for a retiree sheltered by Prop13 it's not so bad.
Looks like a proposal allowing retirees to take their Prop 13 taxes
with them wherever they go in the state may be back on the ballot. I
signed a petition this morning.

We won't know for sure until the 2020 census, but California is
projected to pass 40M in 2020. Overall growth continues, but is not
setting any records for rate of growth.
http://worldpopulationreview.com/states/california-population/

Population growth in California is largely Hispanic. In 1970
non-Hispanic Whites made up 76% of the population. Now it's 36%.

Post by islander
As to the Prop13 proposal, I'm guessing that it has strong advocacy in
the Real Estate industry. If passed, I would expect it to increase
volatility in turnover, increases in valuation and would probably make
the homeless problem more severe. Not sure it is a good thing.
California is one of the states that does not mirror the federal
exclusion for capital gains on primary residence, so that may dampen
turnover volatility. Glad that I am no longer in that situation. I'll
pay no taxes (federal or state) on the sale of our home this past year.

We have relatives north of here in Sonoma and had considered moving to
Petaluma or Cotati. The $500K exemption would have made the tax
bearable, but the massive increase in property taxes was a killer.In
any event, there are worse places than southern Marin. (-8

[Johnny]

On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 18:11:55 -0800

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
I'm born and raised in California, and doubt I will ever choose to
live elsewhere -- as you apparently did. (-8
But, here is a problem, cost of living compared to the national
average.
Los Angeles +42.6%
San Francisco +62.5%
https://www.salary.com/research/cost-of-living/ca

The largest factor in cost of living is shelter and I agree that
it is a problem, especially in areas where there is heavy
competition for available housing. This problem was even evident
at Stanford where the cost of housing was a problem in recruiting
faculty. There are solutions and in the case of Stanford,
retaining ownership of the land and infrastructure by Stanford
reduced the cost of housing to affordable levels. There is a
similar approach that is used widely across the nation including
on this island. It is called Community Land Trust in its various
forms essentially owns the land and infrastructure in perpetuity
with individual ownership of the structure. Here is a good
https://www.opalclt.org/
It is significant to note that there were no defaults on mortgages
during the housing crisis of 2008-9.
It works despite opposition by the more conservative organizations.
Since 1989, it has built or renovated 105 single-family homes and
30 rental apartments. Their most recent project is building 45
affordable rental townhouses.
Still, we have difficulty retaining workers due to the
introduction of vacation rentals on the island which have removed
a lot of year-round rentals from the open market. The appeal of
quick profits from the tourist trade have disrupted the overall
rental market causing some community associations to adopt
policies that seek to ban them. Legal challenges are being
mounted.

There is an annual migration out of California. The two most popular
destinations seem to be Idaho and Texas.
4 Bedrooms and a pool, 2,023 sq ft in Del Rio Texas, $187,000
https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/212-Quail-Creek-Dr_Del-Rio_TX_78840_M79282-75832?view=qv
3 Bedrooms, 1,056 sq ft in Palo Alto California, $2,598,000
https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/777-Allen-Ct_Palo-Alto_CA_94303_M25970-76360?view=qv
My daughter moved from Santa Rosa Ca, To Boise. Loves it there and
rents her house in California. BTW -- The citizens of Boise are not
fond of Californians. Californians moving there are wise to
immediately get Idaho plates for the car. (-8

Yea, there has been a migration out of California for as long as I
can remember. Is the population declining? No.

That's because of illegal immigration and legal migrants bringing their
families. I don't think anyone with any sense would move from another
state to California, or stay there very long once they found out how
much it would cost.

[Josh Rosenbluth]

Post by Johnny
On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 18:11:55 -0800

{snip}

Post by Johnny

Post by islander
Yea, there has been a migration out of California for as long as I
can remember. Is the population declining? No.

That's because of illegal immigration and legal migrants bringing their
families. I don't think anyone with any sense would move from another
state to California, or stay there very long once they found out how
much it would cost.

I moved here in 2016. The weather is great.

[El Castor]

On Sun, 29 Dec 2019 08:31:45 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth

Post by Josh Rosenbluth

Post by Johnny
On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 18:11:55 -0800

{snip}

Post by Johnny

Post by islander
Yea, there has been a migration out of California for as long as I
can remember. Is the population declining? No.

That's because of illegal immigration and legal migrants bringing their
families. I don't think anyone with any sense would move from another
state to California, or stay there very long once they found out how
much it would cost.

I moved here in 2016. The weather is great.

Coastal California has a Mediterranean climate -- perhaps a little
better than the Med.

[Johnny]

On Sun, 29 Dec 2019 08:31:45 -0800

Post by Josh Rosenbluth

Post by Johnny
On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 18:11:55 -0800

{snip}

Post by Johnny

Post by islander
Yea, there has been a migration out of California for as long as I
can remember. Is the population declining? No.

That's because of illegal immigration and legal migrants bringing
their families. I don't think anyone with any sense would move
from another state to California, or stay there very long once they
found out how much it would cost.

I moved here in 2016. The weather is great.

If you wanted great weather, you should have moved about 200 miles
inland from the Gulf Coast. The weather is nice, you wouldn't have to
worry about hurricanes or forest fires, and if you chose Georgia, you
would be close to Gary.

[Josh Rosenbluth]

Post by El Castor
On Sun, 29 Dec 2019 08:31:45 -0800

Post by Josh Rosenbluth

Post by Johnny
On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 18:11:55 -0800

{snip}

Post by Johnny

Post by islander
Yea, there has been a migration out of California for as long as I
can remember. Is the population declining? No.

That's because of illegal immigration and legal migrants bringing
their families. I don't think anyone with any sense would move
from another state to California, or stay there very long once they
found out how much it would cost.

I moved here in 2016. The weather is great.

If you wanted great weather, you should have moved about 200 miles
inland from the Gulf Coast. The weather is nice, you wouldn't have to
worry about hurricanes or forest fires, and if you chose Georgia, you
would be close to Gary.

It's too hot in that area in the summertime.

[El Castor]

On Sun, 29 Dec 2019 14:59:39 -0800, Josh Rosenbluth

Post by Josh Rosenbluth

Post by El Castor
On Sun, 29 Dec 2019 08:31:45 -0800

Post by Josh Rosenbluth

Post by Johnny
On Sat, 28 Dec 2019 18:11:55 -0800

{snip}

Post by Johnny

Post by islander
Yea, there has been a migration out of California for as long as I
can remember. Is the population declining? No.

That's because of illegal immigration and legal migrants bringing
their families. I don't think anyone with any sense would move
from another state to California, or stay there very long once they
found out how much it would cost.

I moved here in 2016. The weather is great.

If you wanted great weather, you should have moved about 200 miles
inland from the Gulf Coast. The weather is nice, you wouldn't have to
worry about hurricanes or forest fires, and if you chose Georgia, you
would be close to Gary.

It's too hot in that area in the summertime.

Depending on what floats your boat, Santa Barbara and San Diego may
have the best climate in the world.

[CLOISTER]

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor

Post by islander

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

Hmmm. That would be comparing the economy to that at the end of the
Clinton administration which was also setting records for a good
economy. What happened since then? Gosh, there was the GW Bush
administration including the worst recession since the Great Depression.
Fortunately the Obama administration was able to recover from that
disaster and set us on the path to a healthy economy.

Which was exceeded by Donald Trump.
"Black and Hispanic unemployment is at a record low"
"There have never been more Black and Hispanic Americans in the
workforce, Friday’s Labor Department job report showed.
The jobless rate for Hispanics hit a record low of 3.9% in September,
while African Americans maintained its lowest rate ever, 5.5%."
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/04/black-and-hispanic-unemployment-is-at-a-record-low.html
"Americans' Positive Views on the Economy Could Earn Trump a Boost in
2020, New Poll Suggests
By Blake Dodge On 12/20/19 at 4:56 PM EST"
https://www.newsweek.com/best-economy-scores-since-2001-could-earn-trump-boost-2020-new-poll-cnn-1478567

And where is the optimism about the Labor Force Participation Rate?
Still stuck around 63%.

The work force is aging, and retiring. There have been numerous
reports over the course of the Trump administration of more job
openings than unemployed. Face it, Trumps policies have been good for
the economy, and prosperity in general, which is the central reason I
am a conservative.
"The U.S. has 1 million more job openings than unemployed workers
March 15, 2019"
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-u-s-has-1-million-more-job-openings-than-unemployed-workers/
"There are now more job openings than workers to fill them
June 5, 2018"
"For the first time in at least 20 years, there are now more job
openings than there are people looking for work.
The ratio of unemployed workers to job openings dropped below one in
April for the first time since the Labor Department started collecting
data in 2000, the agency reported Tuesday."
https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/05/news/economy/job-openings-unemployed-workers/index.html

There are a number of problems with your citations on unemployment.
First of all, it is an average number which does not reflect the skewed
distributions upon which it is based. (The U-3 unemployment rate is
essentially unemployed/labor force.) The biggest problem with this is
that it counts temporary, part-time, along with full time jobs in
determining the labor force part of that equation. But, as I'm sure you
realize, it does not count disabled or discouraged workers who have
dropped out of the labor force. This results in what is described as an
overly optimistic figure that does not accurately represent unemployment.
There are actually six definitions of unemployment and the most
comprehensive published by the BLS is U-6 which takes these factors into
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/u/unemploymentrate.asp
If we are looking for actual health of the households of working
families, you should look at median household income. This basically is
a measure of how income results in benefit to the household and factors
out the variables of temporary, part-time and other factors for people
who are loosely attached to the workforce. Here, the numbers are not so
rosy.
With the Trump weakening of the ACA and tougher Medicaid requirements, a
picture of stagnant household income is revealed even tho poverty
declined. The change from 2017 to 2018 was only up 0.9% even with
adjustment for inflation. That is not statistically significant
especially when compared with 5.2% in 2015, 3.2% in 2016 and 1.8% in
2017. This is even more striking if we look at the household income in
the primarily Republican south - 0.3%! The bottom line is that
households are not seeing the same gains that were measured during the
last years of the Obama administration.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2019/09/10/median-household-income-stagnant-last-year-poverty-fell/2271025001/
But, there is more: Our population is increasing at a rate of about
200,000 per month. But, job growth averaged 180,000 for most of 2019
compared with an average monthly gain of 223,000 in 2018 according to
BLS report for Nov 2019. It appears that the bloom is off the Trump
economic rose.

Please let me sum up in one sentence ...
The Left is desperate to find a way, any way, to denigrate the Trump
economy, and above all else is praying for a deep debilitating
recession, or better yet, depression.

VERY TRUE...more symptoms of their illness
Hate rules them.

[me]

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

We are borrowing our way to prosperity. Genius!

[John Wesley Harding]

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

But hey lets kill the goose that lays the golden eggs

Great economy for the rich but not the working poor who live in their
cars but you don't give a shit about them and neither does Trump.

[me]

Post by John Wesley Harding

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

But hey lets kill the goose that lays the golden eggs

Great economy for the rich but not the working poor who live in their
cars but you don't give a shit about them and neither does Trump.

What have you done for them?

[John Wesley Harding]

Post by me

Post by John Wesley Harding

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

But hey lets kill the goose that lays the golden eggs

Great economy for the rich but not the working poor who live in their
cars but you don't give a shit about them and neither does Trump.

What have you done for them?

I'm not a government, asshole. I can't require the right wing dip shit
assholes to raise the minimum wage.

[me]

Post by John Wesley Harding

Post by me

Post by John Wesley Harding

Post by El Castor
"US economy receives its best ranking in nearly 20 years, CNN poll
finds
By Grace Sparks, CNN 1 day ago
As 2019 comes to a close, the US economy earns its highest ratings in
almost two decades, potentially boosting President Donald Trump in
matchups against the Democrats vying to face him in next year's
election, according to a new CNN poll conducted by SSRS.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/us-economy-receives-its-best-ranking-in-nearly-20-years-cnn-poll-finds/ar-BBYbQD9

But hey lets kill the goose that lays the golden eggs

Great economy for the rich but not the working poor who live in their
cars but you don't give a shit about them and neither does Trump.

What have you done for them?

I'm not a government, asshole. I can't require the right wing dip shit
assholes to raise the minimum wage.

No surprise. Typical Liberal behavior. Delegate to the government what you wouldn’t do yourself.

When some societal issue is said to be a ‘collective responsibility’ you can be sure who ever says it doesn’t want to be responsible. Once responsibility is delegated to someone else it is no longer a responsibility. When shifted to someTHING else like a ‘collective’ you expect a 'thing' to be responsible - an impossibility. Caring can’t be legislated, nor can effort be decreed.

http://www.endit.info/Socialism.shtml