Author Topic: Political Economics  (Read 888384 times)


G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: CNN: "THIS is why stagflation won't come to America"
« Reply #2201 on: September 04, 2022, 08:46:13 AM »
All the military age males coming across the border are going to do what when they arrive at the destinations?

CNN: "THIS is why stagflation won't come to America"

"The US economy added another 315,000 jobs in August after tacking on more than half a million jobs in July."
https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/02/perspectives/stagflation-economy-jobs-labor-market/index.html
   - CNN Sept 2.

Oops, Jobs report revised downward:
https://www.cnn.com/2021/09/03/economy/august-jobs-report/index.html
"Only 235,000 jobs were added back to the economy last month, the lowest number since January, vastly missing economists' expectations."
   - CNN Sept 3.

Jobs report was overstated by 80,000 jobs, 34%.  How does THAT happen?

From the article above, Point 2: "The unemployment rate is 3.7%, not far from a 50-year low."

The unemployment rate is reported artificially low due to the record numbers leaving or have left the workforce.   "The unemployment rate is rising"https://finance.yahoo.com/video/august-jobs-report-unemployment-rises-124916008.html
Inconvenient truth.

What does 3.7 unemployment mean?
Out of a population of 335 million, oops that just went up at the southern border while writing this,
84 Million people work full time in the private sector supporting 148 million receiving benefits and the millions who work for the government, federal, state and local.
https://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/terence-p-jeffrey/86m-full-time-private-sector-workers-sustain-148m-benefit-takers
https://www.worldometers.info/world-population/us-population/

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72264
    • View Profile
Re: Political Economics
« Reply #2202 on: September 04, 2022, 12:39:41 PM »
Any good charts on the labor participation rate?


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: Political Economics
« Reply #2204 on: September 05, 2022, 06:48:17 AM »
Any good charts on the labor participation rate?

Yes:
https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CIVPART

(Please post the chart if possible. I can't post the image with my phone.)

Note that we are downwardly approaching the rate from before women entered the workforce.

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72264
    • View Profile
Re: Political Economics
« Reply #2205 on: September 05, 2022, 08:27:14 AM »
Thank you, very helpful to see the trends over time. 

I wonder what the rate is right now?

The participation rate seems relevant to me in discussion of the meaning of the unemployment rate.

Also, highly relevant are the numbers about unfilled jobs and whether they are skilled or not (welder or waiter) that sort of thing-- my wife challenged me on this and I would love to be able to back her up haha.


Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72264
    • View Profile
WT: Behind the latest job numbers
« Reply #2206 on: September 07, 2022, 03:23:14 AM »
The latest jobs numbers seem impressive — until you look closer

The labor market, like the rest of the economy, is anemic

By E.J. Antoni

The latest Labor Department employment report shows the economy added 315,000 jobs in August, ordinarily a healthy increase and sign of a robust economy. Sadly, the devil is in the details, which shows that the labor market is running on fumes. The report, like the economy as a whole, looks good from afar but is far from good.

The first red flag in the report was revisions to the previous two months, which totaled 107,000 to the downside. So about a third of the jobs added in August were jobs we thought the economy already had.

While this headline jobs number comes from a survey of businesses, the unemployment rate and other details come from a survey of households, and that also contained troubling data. The household survey actually peaked back in March and has never recovered to its prepandemic level. And while labor force participation rose overall in August, a healthy indicator, it fell for Black people, as did the number of Black people employed.

Yet another cause for alarm is weekly earnings, which were flat in August. When those numbers are adjusted for inflation, real weekly earnings will be negative; that means workers are demonstrably poorer because prices are rising faster than incomes.

These stagnating weekly earnings are not surprising when other data is considered. Businesses are facing tremendous uncertainty and are hiring fewer full-time employees and more part-time ones. The number of full-time workers peaked in May and continued falling in August. Although wages are rising, the average workweek continues to decline, so weekly earnings are still flat.

But there are still more problems under the hood. The survey of businesses allows for double counting of some jobholders, and there is considerable evidence that this doublecounting has accelerated recently. For example, people holding multiple jobs are counted for each job they have. Also, when someone transitions from self-employment to working for someone else, that is counted as a new job, even though there is no net gain in employment.

The result is that of the 5.8 million jobs recovered in the last year, approximately 1.3 million are double-counting. For August, the double-counting was approximately 208,000.

Accounting for this and the downward revisions from the previous two months, there were technically no jobs added in August.

The headline jobs number appears strong, but the reality of the labor market, like the rest of the economy, is more anemic. The economy already contracted in the first half of the year and the headwinds are building. For example, the housing market is in free fall, with the typical monthly mortgage payment up 54% to over $1,900 in the last year, while home builder sentiment has collapsed, falling every month this year and down 42% since December. But the trend is broader than the housing market. The Conference Board’s leading economic indicators have trended down for the last six months and, disturbingly, show new orders slowing. Other data from Federal Reserve Banks in Dallas, Philadelphia, Richmond, New York, and Chicago also show new orders declining.

This is troubling because current levels of business activity are only being sustained by a near-record backlog of unfilled orders, which are not being replaced by new orders. Once businesses work through those unfilled orders, there won’t be enough new orders to replace them.

That translates into reduced future output and layoffs, which means unemployment. So, the monthly headline job numbers seen in the news are not only weaker than they appear, but even this illusion will be disappearing soon. These figures are the swan song of an anemic economy weighed down by President Biden’s inflation, regulation, and taxation.

E.J. Antoni is a research fellow for re-gional economics in The Heritage Foun-dation’s Center for Data Analysis and a senior fellow at Committee to Unleash Prosperity

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Policies of Decline: Household wealth falls RECORD $6.1 TRILLION in 2nd qtr
« Reply #2207 on: September 10, 2022, 09:21:28 AM »
https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/us-household-wealth-falls-again-second-quarter-fed-says-2022-09-09/

But "experts" don't know if we're in a recession.

"Sept 9 (Reuters) - U.S. household wealth fell by a record $6.1 trillion in the second quarter to its lowest in a year as a bear market in stocks far outweighed further gains in real estate values, a Federal Reserve report showed on Friday.

Household net worth tumbled to $143.8 trillion at the end of June from $149.9 trillion at the end of March, its second consecutive quarterly decline, the Fed's quarterly snapshot of the national balance sheet showed. Through June, Americans' collective wealth had fallen by more than $6.2 trillion from a record $150 trillion at the end of 2021."


Americans' record wealth was in 2021.  Weird, isn't that the year Trump left office.

We had "job growth" from shutdown businesses reopening, and decline ever since.

No mention of underlying causation, just that markets dropped.

The markets dropped because PEOPLE LOST CONFIDENCE after their government enacted policies of decline.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
If you support Fiscal Responsibility, you might be a MAGA Republican
« Reply #2208 on: September 10, 2022, 09:38:19 AM »
https://www.americanexperiment.org/if-you-support-fiscal-responsibility-you-might-be-a-maga-republican/

If you support fiscal responsibility, you might be a ‘MAGA Republican’

Last week, President Biden gave a speech outside Independence National Historical Park in Philadelphia, where he said “Donald Trump and the MAGA Republicans represent an extremism that threatens the very foundations of our republic.” Americans were assured that “This was not a speech targeting all Republicans:” “I want to be very clear,” the president said, “Not every Republican, not even the majority of Republicans, are MAGA Republicans.”

One would certainly not want to be an extremist who “threatens the very foundations of our republic,” so how do you know if you’re a ‘MAGA Republican’? Fortunately, President Biden has offered some detail on what it is that ‘MAGA Republicans’ believe:

Joe Biden   @JoeBiden
Republicans have pushed an ultra-MAGA agenda to:

—Threaten Social Security and Medicare
—Raise taxes on working families
—Give big corporations and billionaires tax breaks
7:35 AM · Sep 9, 2022

The GOP has said little recently about entitlement reform which is a shame. Social Security, for example, is an absolute dog of a policy which is on a fast track to insolvency. As I wrote in 2019:

Social Security is estimated to run out of reserves in 2034, after which benefits would have to be reduced by about 25 percent to keep spending within available annual revenue. Over 75 years, Social Security has an unfunded liability of $13.9 trillion.

The Medicare hospital insurance trust fund will run out of reserves in 2026. Medicare’s second trust fund, for physician and outpatient services and for prescription drugs, is permanently “solvent” because it has an unlimited call on the general fund of the Treasury—the incomes of future taxpayers. Premiums paid by the beneficiaries will cover only about 25 percent of program costs; the rest of the spending is unfinanced. Medicare’s overall unfunded liability over 75 years is more than $37 trillion.



This is only going to get worse. According to Census Bureau projections, by 2030 each 100 working-age Americans will be supporting 35 retirees, and this could rise to 42 by 2060. Another way to think of this is to calculate the number of retirees each worker must support. In 1946, the burden of one retiree was shared between 42 workers. Today, according to the SSA, roughly three workers cover each retiree’s Social Security and Medicare benefits. By 2030, however, there will be only two workers supporting each retiree.

In other words, a working couple will have to support not only themselves and their family but also someone outside the family thanks to Social Security and Medicare.

To make Social Security solvent again, the payroll tax rate would need to be hiked immediately from 12.4 percent to 15.2 percent, or Social Security benefits would need to be cut on a permanent basis by about 17 percent. According to economists Roger LeRoy Miller, Daniel K. Benjamin, and Douglass C. North:

“[F]or Social Security and Medicare to stay as they are, the payroll tax rate may have to rise to 25 percent of wages over the next decade. And a payroll tax rate of 40 percent is not unlikely by the middle of the twenty-first century.”

Wanting to reform this program and avoid this situation ought to be an imperative for any responsible government, But, to President Biden, it makes you a ‘MAGA Republican’ like those whose “extremism…threatens the very foundations of our republic.” To paraphrase Jeff Foxworthy, if you believe in fiscal responsibility, you might be a MAGA Republican.

When it comes to raising taxes on working families, nobody has any clue what the President is talking about. But, considering that his recent Inflation Reduction Act, which won’t reduce inflation, will increase taxes, according to the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation, for every income bracket, with more than half of the tax increases on people making less than $400,000 annually, the question has to be asked: Why is President Biden pushing a ‘MAGA Republican’ agenda?

The strategy here is obvious. You start by saying that some group or other are beyond the pale. You offer genuine lunatics as examples of this group. Then, you expand that definition to include everybody who disagrees with you. Now, everyone who opposes you is beyond the pale. It didn’t take long for the criteria for being a ‘MAGA Republican’ to expand from “election denialism…outlandish-to-the-point-of-being-embarrassing conspiracy theories… [and] weird weekend MAGA warriors training as if their militia might take on the U.S. military” and include entitlement reform. Just eight days, in fact.

White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre stated this strategy explicitly last week:
 "When you are not with what majority of Americans are, then you know, that is extreme. That is an extreme way of thinking."

Such moves — to delegitimize any opposition — are deeply troubling whoever is responsible for them and should concern all Americans.
 
John Phelan is an Economist at the Center of the American Experiment.
Give at: https://center-of-the-american-experiment.revv.co/donate

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Political Economics, "Stymie Capitalism"
« Reply #2209 on: September 15, 2022, 04:47:39 AM »
Here it is, posting the Democrat 2022:view of economics in their own wotds.  What's wrong is capitalism (economic freedom) run amok.  The answer is simple.  "Stymie Capitalism".  Shut down what's left of economic freedom and put all the control in the all knowing, all powerful federal government.  Hear Wisconsin Sen Ron Johnson's opponent in his own words explain how Democrat today equals fascist socialist and why I will never be a Democrat (fascist socialist).

https://freebeacon.com/democrats/video-watch-mandela-barnes-say-world-must-stymie-capitalism-to-combat-climate-change/

All I can think of is send money now to Send Ron Johnson.  Name an amount by private message and I will match you.

https://secure.winred.com/ron-johnson/website

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19762
    • View Profile

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile


G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
« Last Edit: September 21, 2022, 12:43:06 AM by Crafty_Dog »


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: Political Economics
« Reply #2215 on: September 27, 2022, 07:00:19 AM »
Just copying a headline, not saying click on CNN. 

Even CNN admitting soaring prices hurt ordinary people / everyone.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/26/economy/fixed-income-seniors-budget/index.html

I wonder if they mention, every policy of the last two years falls within the definition of inflation:

more money [chasing] fewer goods and services.
---------------------------------------
Also CNN: 
https://www.cnn.com/2022/09/27/economy/economy-inflation-savings/index.html
71% of workers say their pay isn’t keeping up with inflation
[20% more won't yet admit it.]
---------------------------------------
Cost to heat your home is going up double digits from last year's record high cost:
https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/winter-coming-families-brace-large-heating-bill-again

Heating your home is kind of a big deal here. 
http://news.minnesota.publicradio.org/features/200212/04_robertsont_heating/
« Last Edit: September 27, 2022, 07:44:57 AM by DougMacG »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19762
    • View Profile
Re: Political Economics
« Reply #2216 on: September 27, 2022, 08:33:20 AM »
CNN

garbage

read CNN post above

ABSOLUTELY NO MENTION IT IS BIDEN'S POLICIES CAUSING THIS

just Trump just corona just ukraine
  it is all due to world wide problem blah blah blah

CNN are lying bastards - they will never really change

and they need to rid us of that beady eyed Vanderbilt guy ..  I am sick of his partisan BS ..

Yes I have hate, but it is due to MSM BS
not because I am "fascist ", "white supremacist", or 'threat to democracy "


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: Political Economics
« Reply #2217 on: September 27, 2022, 08:57:57 AM »
 :|"CNN is garbage".   Right, but ...
they can't hide the fact that this economy is hurting their people, people who voted for this.

And we only need 20%, 10%, 5%, maybe less, of their [former] voters to reconsider the wisdom and efficacy of suicidal economics to swing the balance and save the republic.

As I drive the rich liberal urban, well kept neighborhoods of the Twin Cities, I see no conservative yard signs but perhaps fewer liberal ones than in the past.  Then in the tougher and minority neighborhoods I frequent, I see a few liberal signs, mostly local candidates, but NO real Dem enthusiasm since Obama's first election in 2008.  They know now, these economic policies do NOTHING for them.  Converting them to our side is another matter.
« Last Edit: September 27, 2022, 11:03:41 AM by DougMacG »

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Political Economics
« Reply #2218 on: September 27, 2022, 11:06:57 AM »
:|"CNN is garbage".   Right, but ...
they can't hide the fact that this economy is hurting their people, people who voted for this.

And we only need 20%, 10%, 5%, maybe less, of their [former] voters to reconsider the wisdom and efficacy of suicidal economics to swing the balance and save the republic.

As I drive the rich liberal urban, well kept neighborhoods of the Twin Cities, I see no conservative yard signs but perhaps fewer liberal ones than in the past.  Then in the tougher and minority neighborhoods I frequent, I see a few liberal signs, mostly local candidates, but NO real Dem enthusiasm since Obama's first election in 2008.  They know now, these economic policies do NOTHING for them.  Converting them to our side is another matter.

You will get this instead:
https://media.gab.com/system/media_attachments/files/116/616/434/playable/0f611395286397ee.mp4

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: Political Economics
« Reply #2219 on: October 02, 2022, 08:36:06 AM »
Examiner column with scathing comments from Dem pollster John Zogby:
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/washington-secrets/white-house-report-card-wheres-jackie-is-a-problem

by Paul Bedard, Washington Secrets Columnist |
October 01, 2022 11:34 AM
This week’s White House Report Card finds President Joe Biden muttering through another week that didn’t help his party’s chances in the 2022 congressional midterm elections just about five weeks away.

The highlights of the week were continued increasing inflation, a surprise decision to rip 770,000 students out of the college loan forgiveness program, Russia’s annexation of four Ukrainian territories, and Biden’s shocking decision to call out for the late Jackie Walorski, an Indiana Republican who died in an August car crash.

Biden and his administration displayed their characteristic bumbling and fumbling this week, but for the past seven days, it wasn’t the least bit funny.

To begin with, the bear Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped below 30,000, losing all the gains it had made since Biden became president. That was a direct result of the inflation and higher interest rates brought about by Biden’s reckless and wasteful spending.

Inflation continues to rage, and gasoline prices are rising again. That didn’t prevent Biden from claiming on Tuesday that gas prices in some states were below $3 per gallon. This, of course, was entirely false: The American Automobile Association said that no state had an average gas price below $3.


One of the reasons that gasoline has been cheap for the past few weeks is that Biden has been draining our Strategic Petroleum Reserve to produce oil that could and should have been produced by all the off-and-onshore drilling and fracking Biden is blocking. Biden is selling oil from the SPR at 6 million or 7 million barrels per week, effectively using the Strategic Reserve as a credit card for the Democrats’ 2022 campaigns. The SPR reportedly now holds less than it has held in 38 years.

The SPR oil supply was intended to, and should, be used only for real emergencies such as an anti-U.S. oil embargo. Now that Biden has made us again dependent on foreign oil, his use of it is another abuse of power. And so is his $400 billion-plus buyout of student loans. That loan buyout, as presented in a new lawsuit to block it by several states, is beyond Biden’s legal and regulatory powers.

What was more pathetic? Biden’s obvious mental decay on display in a Wednesday speech and his inept press secretary’s explanation of it. Biden, speaking at the White House Conference on Hunger, Nutrition, and Health, praised several members of Congress and singled out the late Rep. Jackie Walorski (R-IN), asking, “Jackie, are you here? Where’s Jackie? I think she wasn’t going to be here — to help make this a reality.” She died in a car crash in August.


Biden’s press secretary later tried to explain away the huge flub by saying Walorski was at the “top” of Biden’s mind. Glad to know something’s there.

Meanwhile, mortgage interest rates went above 7%.

On a funnier but more serious note, Vice President Kamala Harris praised our alliance with “North” Korea during a visit to the DMZ. I sometimes

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19762
    • View Profile
Re: Political Economics
« Reply #2220 on: October 02, 2022, 10:30:33 AM »
from above Doug post

"effectively using the Strategic Reserve as a credit card for the Democrats’ 2022 campaigns"

The DNC would love  pay this off with MORE TAXES!!!!!!

 :x

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72264
    • View Profile
Re: Political Economics
« Reply #2221 on: October 02, 2022, 01:27:28 PM »
"effectively using the Strategic Reserve as a credit card for the Democrats’ 2022 campaigns"

Pithily put!

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Political Economics, Janet Yellen opinion, Economic Growth, also resilience
« Reply #2222 on: October 06, 2022, 06:44:32 AM »
Two weeks ago in The Atlantic:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/economic-growth-is-essential-so-is-resilience/ar-AA127mB6
[Posted with comments]

Economic Growth Is Essential. So Is Resilience.
Opinion by Janet Yellen - Sep 22
[Yellen is right to favor "resilient growth", wrong in the implementation.]

Policy makers have long tried to foster rapid economic growth. [No, Democrats have not! Almost every Dem policy is anti-growth.] But as we shape our post-pandemic economy, we also need to strengthen our economic resilience both in America and around the world.

In recent years, the global economy has become more and more vulnerable to supply shortages and price shocks. The coronavirus pandemic led to severe supply-chain disruptions as economic activity recovered from the fastest drop in global commerce on record. Russia’s immoral war in Ukraine [True] has created [worsened] turmoil in global energy markets and spikes in the prices of other commodities.

Experts expect periodic supply shocks to become more frequent.[Because Democrats and others have made us more vulnerable, cf. canceling pipeline on day one] Climate change produces an acceleration of extreme weather events [BS], with longer and more intense disasters potentially sidelining a greater number of farms and factories. These disruptions will affect workers, businesses, and households across the economy. [the weather isn't the problem.]

In a speech in Michigan earlier this month, I explained how the Biden administration’s economic plan will mitigate such shocks for American workers and businesses. The plan advances solutions to these global supply shocks, with America acting in concert with our partners and allies worldwide. We have four priority areas: energy, food, digital technology, and public health.

First, energy security. [Energy Insecurity was their first policy.] The contribution that our global dependence on oil makes to climate change has long been evident. It also exposes us to geopolitical risks. In the past, Russia marketed itself as a reliable energy partner. But it is leveraging its exports of natural gas and oil as a tool of geopolitical coercion over the rest of the globe. When we and our allies reduce our reliance on fossil fuels, we are not only tackling the climate crisis but strengthening our resilience to supply shocks like the one we are experiencing this year. 

To that end, the administration has just enacted the most aggressive climate action in our nation’s history. The Inflation Reduction Act [Falsely named] provides consumers and businesses with tax credits that will boost clean-energy production in the United States. [The cleanest energy we know is nuclear and it does NOTHING on that.  Electric cars burn fossil fuels on the grid, do nothing to reduce emissions.] That legislation, together with the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, is expected to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions by more than 1 billion metric tons in 2030 [No it doesn't], directly contributing to our effort to combat climate change. Accelerating the clean-energy transition will protect the planet and make the American economy less vulnerable to the actions of an autocrat halfway around the world. [Their policies have achieved the exact opposite result she seeks.] In addition, U.S. energy investments will deliver significant benefits to the rest of the world by driving down the costs of new clean-energy technology.

The administration is also responding directly to the near-term disruptions caused by Russia’s actions. The Department of Energy has released a historic volume of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to shore up crude-oil supplies, and through the International Energy Agency, we have coordinated with other countries that have committed to supplying tens of millions of additional barrels this year from their reserves. We have also expanded liquefied-natural-gas exports to Europe and set up a joint energy-security task force with the European Commission.  [Complete duplicity. How does releasing our reserves, before the worst of it, ready us for disruptions??]

Finally, the G7 finance ministers have agreed to finalize and implement a cap on the price of Russian oil. Our goal is to keep oil flowing into global markets at lower prices, while also reducing the Kremlin’s revenues. We shouldn’t let Vladimir Putin profit from a war he started. The price cap on Russian oil will particularly benefit citizens of low- and middle-income oil-importing countries. This group includes some of the world’s poorest and most vulnerable countries, which have suffered most from the spillovers resulting from Russia’s war in Ukraine.

Our second priority is improving food security. [Seriously, how could they have made food security worse, canceling fuel and fertilizer?] Regional conflicts, climate change, and COVID’s economic disruptions have hampered global food production for some time. But Russia’s illegal war on Ukraine has turned the stress on our food systems into a crisis in many countries.

The United States has taken—and will continue to take—strong action to get food to those who need it now. Our efforts include emergency interventions such as the $2.9 billion in additional food-security assistance announced yesterday, on top of billions already committed this year. We are also scaling up investment in long-term food resilience, including by encouraging production practices that increase agricultural yields while mitigating emissions. We are promoting innovations such as urban agriculture. And we are focusing on crucial logistics and infrastructure—not only to grow food but also to store and transport it. [Because "smart government" knows better than the private sector?]

In May, the International Monetary Fund, World Bank, and other international financial institutions released a food-security action plan that will support vulnerable people and climate-resilient food systems, help mitigate fertilizer shortages [fertilizer shortages that they caused], and promote open trade. The Biden administration is particularly pleased to be contributing $155 million this year to the Global Agriculture and Food Security Program, which will leverage multilateral institutions to advance promising new projects—for example, providing farmers with seeds that are more resilient to droughts, heat, and other extreme conditions. This will help boost agricultural production. [The movement against GMO, fertizer, pesticides, toward organics has the exact opposite effect, requiring more and more farmland to produce the world's food.]

Our third priority is digital technology. During the pandemic, significant supply disturbances resulted from fragile supply chains for crucially important goods, particularly semiconductors. Microchips have been in such short supply that, by one estimate, the shortage resulted in $240 billion in lost U.S. output just last year. Auto production had to be cut by millions of vehicles. Moreover, the semiconductor industry is characterized by extreme concentration risk. As of last year, nearly all manufacturing of the world’s most advanced semiconductors occurred in just one East Asian economy: Taiwan. [Other Democrats, cf. Pelosi, heightened the tensions facing Taiwan.]

The United States and other countries need secure and reliable supply chains for semiconductors, which are among the most fundamental modern technologies. The recently passed CHIPS and Science Act will establish and expand the production of leading-edge semiconductors in the United States and build a sufficient and stable supply of mature semiconductors. The law’s tens of billions of dollars in incentives for semiconductor fabrication in America will reduce the risk from “critical points of failure” in the supply chain. It will restore confidence that the chips needed for the global production of goods—toasters, computers, advanced industrial machinery—will be available whenever and wherever they’re needed.

Our fourth priority is promoting public health. [By blocking the free flow of information regarding public health?] If nothing else, the past two years have taught us that pandemics can happen. And when they do, they can bring the domestic and global economy to a standstill.

We have, first and foremost, been dedicated to fighting the coronavirus pandemic. [But not investigate the source of Covid.] More than 600 million vaccine doses have been administered in the United States through our nation’s largest-ever vaccination campaign. [Thanks to President 45] And the United States has also led the global effort to share COVID-vaccine doses. We’ve delivered more than 620 million doses to more than 110 countries. [Without investigated the side effects.] These vaccines are part of our strategy to fight COVID worldwide, which in turn helps protect Americans. Even though they don't help with transmissibility.]

But COVID will not be the last threat to global health and our own economic stability. So our work also extends to long-term public-health investments. Those investments will enable us to respond more rapidly and effectively to future threats. At home, the American Rescue Plan provided a historic investment in our public-health infrastructure. Abroad, with leadership from the United States, the G20 and other partners earlier this month launched a new fund, housed at the World Bank, for pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response. The fund’s goal is to provide a dedicated stream of financing for low- and middle-income countries. So far, the United States and our partners have committed $1.4 billion, and this is just the beginning.

Looking to the future, we intend to mitigate supply-chain vulnerabilities [supply-chain vulnerabilities that they caused] while strengthening global economic ties [that they broke, cf. Saudi]. Global trade brings economic efficiencies. We can count on many countries and are committed to deepening economic integration with them. This approach—which we call “friendshoring”—enables us to continue to securely extend market access. And it reduces both our own risks and those of our trusted partners.

In all these ways, the Biden administration has put resilient growth at the core of its economic plan. [Exact opposite is true. Biden administration policies made us more vulnerable, less resilient.] Promoting economic growth is essential [thwarting growth is on the ballot, see Dem candidates in PA and WI, "stymie capitalism"], but it’s also not enough. The pandemic and the war in Ukraine offer vivid reminders of how suddenly circumstances change. We must increase our ambitions and protect ourselves and people around the world from the economic volatility that we may witness in the months and years ahead. [Platitudes to cover up past failures]


[Strange that the Treasury Secretary has an opinion on everything except failure at the Treasury under her watch.  People's pay has shrunk a record amount in purchasing power in less than two years.  If you truly believe her priorities, it makes you think she might be voting 'R' in the midterms.]
« Last Edit: October 06, 2022, 07:04:29 AM by DougMacG »

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72264
    • View Profile
An example of the Dem argument
« Reply #2223 on: October 08, 2022, 08:47:46 AM »
Heather Cox Richardson
10h
  ·
October 7, 2022 (Friday)

The day began with news that during Trump’s first impeachment trial, all the Republican senators believed Trump had broken the law when he tried to force President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine to smear Hunter Biden before he would release the money Congress had appropriated to help Ukraine fight off Russia. “Out of one hundred senators, you have zero who believe you that there was no quid pro quo. None. There’s not a single one,” warned Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX), according to a forthcoming book by Politico reporter Rachael Bade and Washington Post reporter Karoun Demirjian.

But then–Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) kept the Republican senators behind Trump by telling them: “This is not about this president. It’s not about anything he’s been accused of doing…. It has always been about November 3, 2020. It’s about flipping the Senate.”

Republicans did not manage to hold the Senate, of course, in part because Trump’s fury at Republican leaders’ refusal to force Georgia to throw out its electoral votes made him depress Republican voting in the special Senate election that ultimately yielded two Democratic senators—Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock—and gave Democrats 50 seats. Because Vice President Kamala Harris, the deciding vote in the tied Senate, is a Democrat, control of the Senate shifted to the Democrats.

Democratic control of the House, Senate, and presidency ushered in an economic strategy discredited by Republicans since 1981. Rather than cutting taxes and regulations to move money upward to the “supply side” of the economy in the hope that wealthy investors would expand industries and hire more workers, the Democrats focused on getting money into the hands of ordinary Americans. This investment in the “demand side” was the heart of government economic policy between 1933 and 1981 and brought about what economists know as the “great compression,” in which the wealth gap that had characterized the country in the 1920s shrank considerably. After President Ronald Reagan took office in 1981 and shifted the country toward supply side economics, that compression reversed to become the “great divergence.”

Their approach to the economy made Democrats invest in economic recovery from the worst of the pandemic with the American Rescue Plan, a $1.9 trillion economic stimulus bill passed in March 2021 with no Republican votes. That bill ushered in a dramatic economic recovery—the most rapid of any of the G7 wealthy nations—with the U.S. adding ten million jobs since Biden’s inauguration. No other president in our history has seen this level of job growth in his first two years in office.

Today a new jobs report revealed that the U.S. economy added 263,000 jobs last month and the unemployment rate fell to 3.5%. That was more jobs and a lower unemployment rate than economists expected. That job growth has affected all Americans. The Hispanic jobless rate has fallen from 8.6% in Trump’s last month to 3.8% now; the Black jobless rate went from 9.2% to 5.8%. Notable in the numbers, though, was that K–12 education lost more than 21,000 workers in September, putting the number of teachers and support staff 309,000 people lower than it was before the pandemic.

That extraordinary job growth, along with money saved during the pandemic, helped to drive inflation, as people were able to pay higher prices for goods and services jacked up by supply chain tangles, transportation shortages, and price gouging. But so far, it does not seem that we are locked into an inflationary spiral as we were in the 1970s.

Seemingly paradoxically, today’s good news about jobs drove the stock market downward. Investors are guessing that the Federal Reserve will raise interest rates to slow down the economy. If it costs more to borrow, businesses will likely cut back hiring and wages. Less money in people’s hands should slow the inflation that’s still high.

The Democrats have also hammered out legislation to rebuild the nation’s infrastructure. Last November, they passed the $1.2 trillion Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act to rebuild the nation’s crumbling roads and bridges and to extend broadband to rural areas. More than 60% of Americans wanted infrastructure investment, and for that bill, which is often called the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, the Democrats picked up “aye” votes from 19 Republican senators and 13 Republican representatives.

But former president Trump attacked those Republicans who voted for the measure, insisting that Republicans’ main goal was to keep Biden from accomplishing anything. “Very sad that the RINOs in the House and Senate gave Biden and Democrats a victory on the ‘Non-Infrastructure’ Bill,” Trump said. “All Republicans who voted for Democrat longevity should be ashamed of themselves, in particular Mitch McConnell, for granting a two month stay which allowed the Democrats time to work things out at our Country’s, and the Republican Party’s, expense!”

Trump loyalists threatened to strip committee assignments from Republicans who supported the bill. They complained about what Minnesota representative Tom Emmer called “President Biden’s multi-trillion dollar socialist wish list.” Arizona representative Paul Gosar said: “this bill only serves to advance the America Last’s socialist agenda, while completely lacking fiscal responsibility.” Kentucky representative Andy Barr said the measure was a “big government socialist agenda.” Iowa representative Ashley Hinson said the law was a “socialist spending spree.” Representative Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma said: “I will not support funding for policies that drive our country into socialism.”

In the CNN piece today that collected all those quotations, authors Edward-Isaac Dovere and Sarah Fortinsky went on to point out that, despite their insistence that government investment in infrastructure is socialism (it is not, by the way), all these representatives and more have been quietly applying to take that money to their districts, often in the same language Democrats used to justify the bill in the first place. Improving highways would “serve as a social justice measure,” Emmer wrote. “The completion of this project means improved economic opportunities for ethnically underserved communities.” Adding bicycle lanes to a rural area, Mullin wrote, “would greatly improve sustainability by reducing emissions and redeveloping an existing infrastructure plan.”

The president has directed his administration not to let politics or votes for the bill influence how project grants are awarded. But for all their talk of socialism and wasteful spending, Republicans clearly understand that the American people want investment in the country and that such investment improves their quality of life. They just don’t want to vote for it after years of rallying voters with a narrative that any Democratic investments in the country are far-left radicalism.

Today Biden named the Republicans who voted against the infrastructure law and then asked for money. Biden said, "I was surprised to see so many socialists in the Republican caucus."

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19762
    • View Profile
An example of the Dem argument
« Reply #2224 on: October 08, 2022, 10:26:36 AM »
one response would be to look at how unemployment/employment are calculated

AS ALWAYS  data can be manipulated :

https://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0609/what-the-unemployment-rate-doesnt-tell-us.aspx

Crafty_Dog

  • Administrator
  • Power User
  • *****
  • Posts: 72264
    • View Profile
Labor Shortage ending
« Reply #2225 on: October 10, 2022, 04:37:51 PM »
Say Goodbye to the Labor Shortage
Jeffrey A. Tucker
Jeffrey A. Tucker
 October 5, 2022



It was good, or at least fascinating, while it lasted. The labor shortage is ending.

In the entirety of the post-lockdown period, labor markets have been behaving strangely. We’ve seen incredibly low unemployment numbers (3.6 percent) that everyone has known don’t tell the whole story. That figure only calculates people in the market but leaves out everyone else.

Labor participation has been very low, not having recovered from lockdowns either. This has given rise to a whole genre of literature revolving around odd themes. There has been a contest over what phrase best characterizes it:

The Great Resignation
Quiet quitting
The Lost Generation
Mostly there has been a labor shortage that has been something of a solace to those with jobs. Workers have been able to name their price. Employers have been pulling their hair out trying to find warm bodies who are willing to do work. The canonical job portal Indeed.com has been flooded with applicants, but it’s not clear how many are real or how many are just people applying in order to extend unemployment benefits.

Then we’ve seen a strange anomaly in job creation. It’s been very high but not matched by increases in the labor force. How is this possible? A careful look has revealed that this job creation has been dominated by people who are taking second and third jobs. It’s good that there are jobs for the taking, but doesn’t this seem a bit strange? At the very least, it’s not great news.

As an aside, the scene reminds me of a book I read on the Weimar hyperinflation. One might believe that the times were characterized by sadness and poverty. Not so, at least not in the early stages. Jobs were plentiful, and money flowed like mad. People were working 18 hours per day, chasing down every opportunity to make bank. The problem was that all the frenzy was fake, a sign of monetary fakery. We’re nowhere near that point, but we’ve seen some signs of that over the past two years.

Meanwhile, economic output as measured by the gross domestic product (GDP) figures in real terms has been negative for two straight quarters, technically an indicator of recession. But the Biden administration—the same gang that says inflation is either flat or moving up barely “an inch”—says there’s no recession. The evidence they give is the unemployment rate and job creation.

They claim it isn’t possible to be in recession while the job market is so obviously healthy. It’s not a bad point when you consider the history of recessions. There’s something strange going on. At what point will the labor markets start flashing signs of red?

That point seems to have arrived. The Labor Department reported that total job openings fell by 10 percent in August, a huge drop by any historical standard. The 1.1 million drop in openings is the largest decline since the lockdowns. Job openings are now at their lowest level in a year. At the same time, labor participation is still stuck. Millions are missing from payrolls. Counterfactual history suggests that we’re missing as many as 8.3 million people from payrolls who otherwise would be working.

What this means is fewer job opportunities for those who are bothering to look for work, which is to say that the salad days are over. The crash in job openings affects every industry: leisure and hospitality, construction, manufacturing, and the whole of the private sector. This would seem to indicate a major weakening of the entire business environment.

Epoch Times Photo
(Data: Federal Reserve Economic Data [FRED], St. Louis Fed; Chart: Jeffrey A. Tucker)
Such a dramatic drop is a sure sign of recession, thus robbing the Biden administration of one of its talking points. It’s also reinforced by anecdotes of job cuts in major industries. The currently employed haven’t yet begun to panic, but the superfluous management layers in many businesses are being culled. This will get worse as the recession deepens.
The GDP numbers for the third quarter will be reported on Oct. 27 at 8:30 a.m. They’re highly likely to show that the negative trend will continue. After all, I’m not recalling any data releases from July, August, and September that would bump the negative into positive territory, but it’s impossible to say.

If there ever were a way for a sitting administration to lean on the Commerce Department to make sure that the first estimates were positive, this would be the time to do it. Not that the White House is this corrupt. Surely not. But it would be truly disastrous for the data release to confirm three consecutive quarters of declining real output just before the November elections.

Another talking point by the Biden administration has been the decline in gas prices. That trend has reversed itself. And based on what we’ve seen in the EU and the UK, we can expect rising prices throughout the winter months. Biden is already blaming OPEC.

Epoch Times Photo

Meanwhile, utility bills are still rising by 14.2 percent year-over-year, and inflation in food has ticked up too, now running 9.6 percent year-over-year. All of this inflation is seriously eating into household income in real terms, which entered into decline 18 months ago with absolutely no sign that the trend is going to change.

Many people are still in denial about the reality of our times. They want to believe that all will be well, that prices are going to settle down and things will become affordable again, and that the money and wealth are going to continue to flow no matter what. It’s a complete delusion at this point. The Great Reset has already happened. We’re living amid the carnage. Any appearance of normalcy can’t last for much longer.


The fall in housing is but one indication.

Let’s end with some final thoughts on the labor problem. The shortage of workers has been one of the more puzzling features of these times. The explanations have focused on issues such as early retirement, lack of child care, demographic upheaval, large shifts in various sectors and their labor needs, and so on. None of these explanations really do fully account for the strangeness of it all.

It’s impossible to avoid the real underlying reason: mass demoralization. Before the lockdowns, most people generally had the feeling that the trajectory of history was toward rising prosperity and progress for most people. After the lockdowns, the realization has set in that this isn’t necessarily the case. The multitudes that once planned their daily habits, work and education lives, and life choices around the expectation of improved living standards have subtly changed their outlook for the future.

This is the real tragedy of our times. The fundamental shift in the culture of civilization isn’t easily fixed in the next election or a positive data release from the Department of Labor. To rebuild will require a restoration of public confidence in the regime and the whole system under which we live. We’re nowhere near that point. Until something changes in that respect, we can’t look forward to seeing the return of the good old days that we knew only a few years ago.

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19762
    • View Profile
Re: Political Economics
« Reply #2227 on: October 11, 2022, 10:46:22 AM »
why is is ok for US government to print money

but I can't ?

 :wink:


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: This will end well...
« Reply #2229 on: October 11, 2022, 01:00:55 PM »
quote author=G M

https://www.theburningplatform.com/2022/10/10/dallas-fed-over-half-of-americans-experienced-real-wage-declines-this-year/
----------

"53.4% of all workers experienced real wage declines"

I would have guessed closer to 100%.  Good companies are giving out 6% adjustments against 8% inflation.  That's not good for either side of it.

Also remember CPI is under counted in the eyes of many experts and consumers.

Our cheapest grocer Aldi has some items up 33% and some items up more than 100%.  Everything is up very noticeably.

Gas at the pump is up more than 100% in less than two years.  Heating costs quadruple, depending on the location and time line.

Try doing without heat (in our climate) and groceries.  What do you substitute for those?!

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: Political Economics, The New Yorker
« Reply #2230 on: October 15, 2022, 11:33:20 AM »
I always wonder if the best liberal economic analyses are dishonest or just ignorant.  One thing they aren't is spot-on.

Here is John Cassidy at the New Yorker.  He cites published data to the tenth of a percent in what appears to be a serious pursuit of the truth.

[Don't click on it.  That's just encourages them.]
https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/why-is-high-inflation-proving-so-persistent

He wants so badly to know how inflation can persist when we are doing all these things to stop it.

Seriously?

Another reason to not click on his article is because the answers and the solutions aren't in there.

Without using the discredited word "transitory", he suggests inflation should be coming down soon on it's own.  [Good luck with that!]

The best expert he can find says:

Downward pressure on inflation is visible everywhere except in the inflation numbers,” Ian Shepherdson, a chief economist at Pantheon Macroeconomics, wrote in a client circular after the C.P.I. report came out.

[Cassidy] There was some gallows humor in that comment. But it wasn’t far off the truth.

What?!

Look around.  What is coming down the pike other than 'more money chasing fewer goods'?

The Saudis and all of OPEC agreed to produce significantly less energy.

10% loss of supply of an inelastic demand product leads to what rise in price?  10%?  No.

The US government won't let up on our war against energy here.  And our war against producing goods and services.  They still think the weather is the real crisis and that manufacturers are greedy assholes.  Forgive the language but is that overstated?

Pipelines were blown up and freighters next, I suppose.  War costs money but doesn't produce more goods or services to alleviate our scarcity.

The Midterm Petroleum Reserve is badly depleted.  That has to either be brought back up at higher prices )more money and less gas to the pump), or left depleted making us even more vulnerable to future shocks and future inflation.  (I wonder if they thought of that when they opened it.)

Food costs, supply shortages and famine are going from bad to worse.  Who knew fertilizer (and a thousand other products) come from petroleum or that ag production requires energy.

What about the trillion dollar deficits, the 6 trillion emergency spending, "infrastructure" that isn't infrastructure, and the skyrocketing costs coming to service our rapidly expanding debt?

Every dollar we use to pay people to not produce is inflationary.  Isn't that most of the budget?

But none of that is in there as he quickly switches back to hoping the psy-op polls last through the election and that Dems can keep these policies on the wrong course.

Fact is, the only answer to inflation on the liberal left side is economic slowdown, which also risks spiraling downward out of control.  cf. Jimmy carter, deja vu.

It's going to be hard for me to switch teams and vote for more liberal policies, dishonesty and ignorance in these economic times.
« Last Edit: October 15, 2022, 11:49:00 AM by DougMacG »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19762
    • View Profile
Re: Political Economics
« Reply #2231 on: October 15, 2022, 12:13:41 PM »
"I always wonder if the best liberal economic analyses are dishonest or just ignorant.  One thing they aren't is spot-on."

liberals NEVER either can or will admit they are wrong - EVER!

so when confronted with truths that do not fit their agendas

they ignore it every way possible

endless wishing the truth away

the facts are wrong
the interpretation of the facts are wrong
twist logic on its head to somehow argue they are really right

people who see with their own eyes must be confused or just don't understand
for ex. we who believe Trump are members of a "cult"

when. all else fails they simply remain silent, or
rarely make a non admission by saying well all sides do this .....

to shut down the debate

in the end NEVER ADMIT they are wrong NEVER

we all know libs like this .
indeed I know of none who are not like this.





DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: Political Economics
« Reply #2232 on: October 15, 2022, 12:39:05 PM »
"I always wonder if the best liberal economic analyses are dishonest or just ignorant.  One thing they aren't is spot-on."

liberals NEVER either can or will admit they are wrong - EVER!

so when confronted with truths that do not fit their agendas

they ignore it every way possible

endless wishing the truth away

the facts are wrong
the interpretation of the facts are wrong
twist logic on its head to somehow argue they are really right

people who see with their own eyes must be confused or just don't understand
for ex. we who believe Trump are members of a "cult"

when. all else fails they simply remain silent, or
rarely make a non admission by saying well all sides do this .....

to shut down the debate

in the end NEVER ADMIT they are wrong NEVER

we all know libs like this .
indeed I know of none who are not like this.

On some issues, we don't need media or conservatives to tell you, Joe shut down certain gas and oil operations and the price at all stations you know more than doubled.

There are leaders and there are followers.  A liberal leader HAS to tell you the Dem spin of the story, from Ron Klaine to Juan Williams.  If he doesn't, he isn't a liberal leader.

But Joe Blow, let's say a hard working Hispanic raising a family, (Jose?).  He isn't invested that way.  He is told Democrats care more about the little guy and he thinks he's the little guy so he votes all Democrat.  He sees and hears Trump.  Thinks what a jerk.  Votes against him but watches his own economy grow by leaps and bounds.  Then he sees and hears slow Joe.  Maybe votes for him and watches prices go up and everything good go down. 

Somehow we ARE getting through to people.  Our main weapon has been to give liberals a chance to govern.

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19762
    • View Profile
Re: Political Economics
« Reply #2233 on: October 15, 2022, 01:18:39 PM »
".There are leaders and there are followers.  A liberal leader HAS to tell you the Dem spin of the story, from Ron Klaine to Juan Williams.  If he doesn't, he isn't a liberal leader. "

Doug,

I respectfully don't agree that leaders have to spin everything or they are not leaders

remember All I have to offer is "blood toil sweat and tears "

or something like that.

A real leader does not tell us the economy is very good when it ain't.
Say gas prices are someone else's fault or due to causes those who keep up with current events knows is not true.

Who wants to follow a leader that tells followers what they see with their own eyes ain't what they see with their own eyes?

not me
tired of bullshit

lay it to me straight.




DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: Political Economics
« Reply #2234 on: October 15, 2022, 02:45:52 PM »
Thank you ccp, good points.  In the context, I meant leaders of the Left, on economics.  They don't have an honest leg to stand on.  Everything they do makes everything they say they care about worse.

For examples, the most deep blue states with the most socialistic policies have the widest income inequality gaps, while the growth policies they abhor bring in the most revenues to the government. Go figure.

So instead you talk about J6, abortion and orange man bad, and 'caring'.
« Last Edit: October 15, 2022, 02:48:54 PM by DougMacG »

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Political Economics, Jared_Bernstein
« Reply #2235 on: October 16, 2022, 06:59:10 AM »
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jared_Bernstein

Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers has his degrees in social work and philosophy.

He was on Fox News Sunday this morning, argued inflation is getting better because Pres. Biden has released a lot of oil from the strategic reserve.

He argued the deficit has come down (as the economy reopened from COVID disaster years).

No one asked him, if this IS full employment, as the administration contends, should we be running deficits at all?  Aren't those inflationary by definition?

What do you call this (non-existent) school of economics, selective Keynesian?

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Re: Political Economics, Jared_Bernstein
« Reply #2236 on: October 16, 2022, 07:05:32 AM »
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jared_Bernstein

Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers has his degrees in social work and philosophy.

He was on Fox News Sunday this morning, argued inflation is getting better because Pres. Biden has released a lot of oil from the strategic reserve.

He argued the deficit has come down (as the economy reopened from COVID disaster years).

No one asked him, if this IS full employment, as the administration contends, should we be running deficits at all?  Aren't those inflationary by definition?

What do you call this (non-existent) school of economics, selective Keynesian?

Magical thinking. If you just wish hard enough, it becomes true!




DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Political Economics: Black Voters Say Inflation, Economy Are Biggest Concerns
« Reply #2240 on: October 19, 2022, 08:08:07 AM »
https://thegrio.com/2022/10/18/black-voters-inflation-economy-kff-thegrio-midterm-elections/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Stereotyping blacks as only interested in welfare programs ("free shit") does everyone a disservice.

Democrats should stop doing that.

Vast majority of blacks are middle class and above.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African-American_middle_class

Working class voters of all divisions are seeing the fallacy of the Democrat paradigm.


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Political Economics, Biden-Dem-flation Chart
« Reply #2241 on: October 19, 2022, 08:56:43 AM »


Scroll right if needed.  4 years of Trump and so far with Biden.  What do you see? 
https://i0.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2022/10/Trump-Biden-inflation.png?w=940&ssl=1

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
Middle class in many cases from government make-work jobs. From the Griot, 69 % of black voters support Biden. Why is that? The great job he is doing? His brilliant public speaking?



https://thegrio.com/2022/10/18/black-voters-inflation-economy-kff-thegrio-midterm-elections/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Stereotyping blacks as only interested in welfare programs ("free shit") does everyone a disservice.

Democrats should stop doing that.

Vast majority of blacks are middle class and above.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African-American_middle_class

Working class voters of all divisions are seeing the fallacy of the Democrat paradigm.

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
"69 % of black voters support Biden.  Why is that?"


   - Down from the 98% who used to reflexively support Democrats.  Why is that?

G M

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 26643
    • View Profile
"69 % of black voters support Biden.  Why is that?"


   - Down from the 98% who used to reflexively support Democrats.  Why is that?

Because the free shit isn't keeping up with the inflation.


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Political Economics, Here's why the Left can't fix it
« Reply #2245 on: October 21, 2022, 07:17:57 AM »
Here's why the Left can't fix it.

If you pivot to support the policies it would take to fix this, you wouldn't be the Left anymore.

cf.  SPEND LESS.  Produce energy.  Reduce the disincentives for everyone to be productive.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2022/10/20/victor_davis_hanson_left_would_rather_be_ideologically_correct_and_destroy_everything_than_save_everything_and_be_incorrect.html    1:32 min,  must see.

VDH about the Left:  They're not confronting what's destroying America, and that is their ideology.  And they know they can't confront it because they are ideological, not empirical, and the're not going to change.


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
We knew prices would go up says the man who swung the nomination to Joe Biden
« Reply #2246 on: October 21, 2022, 07:54:13 AM »
All of us knew prices would go up.

On Thursday’s broadcast of MSNBC’s “Jose Diaz-Balart Reports,” House Majority Whip Rep. James Clyburn (D-SC) stated that “all of us knew” prices would increase “when we put in place this recovery program. Any time you put more money into the economy, prices tend to rise.” Clyburn also stated that President Joe Biden put kids back in school and has ensured schools are “getting fixed up for climate change” and said, “I resent people who feel that we would much rather not have jobs and education so long as we can pay ten cents less for a gallon of gasoline.”

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2022/10/20/top-democrat-admits-all-of-us-knew-their-partys-policies-would-cause-inflation-n1638723

Why isn't that a headline in the NYT (and Mpls Startribune)                                                      ?
-----------------------------------------

FYI, you miserable ideologues, gas didn't go up 10 cents and it wasn't just gas, and the people you call your people are hurt the most by it.  It would be even worse if you weren't so badly depleting our reserves - right before the crisis.

Now you can serve in the minority with a President whose approval is in the 30s.
« Last Edit: October 21, 2022, 08:24:55 AM by DougMacG »

ccp

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19762
    • View Profile
Re: Political Economics
« Reply #2247 on: October 21, 2022, 10:04:27 AM »
". “I resent people who feel that we would much rather not have jobs and education so long as we can pay ten cents less for a gallon of gasoline.”

I resent pompous race baiting democrats like Clyburn (thanks to him we have Biden)

who do not confront the problem with education - it starts in the home
no racism
not lack of funds

it is cycle of "victimhood"
and endless spending down the sewer

James Clyburn neg
 worth

https://networthgorilla.com/james-clyburn-net-worth/

https://www.opensecrets.org/personal-finances/james-e-clyburn/net-worth?cid=N00002408

I don't know where he hides his money

if wife's name


DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile
Re: Political Economics
« Reply #2248 on: October 21, 2022, 12:41:44 PM »
Pompous, yes, that's what spilled out the truth.  "We all knew."

DougMacG

  • Power User
  • ***
  • Posts: 19446
    • View Profile