|
Sheng-ji Yang posted:hes giving a great speech yeah. this win and speech could make him the establishment candidate He sounded exactly like the AntiTrump here. He'll most certainly be the next big thing for a while.
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 07:02 |
|
|
axeil posted:...it's not growing though, that's the point i'm trying to make. I'm sorry I didn't mean to come off as I was disagreeing with you 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:25
|
|
|
But Rocks Hurt Head posted:Woah baaaaard lighting for Marco greenman for president
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:25
|
|
|
blue squares posted:all those drat students and retirees sucking up our resources Brannock posted:I dunno, guys, between the "economic recovery" going mostly to the hedge funders and bankers instead of the common man, and Trump talking about how he'll return jobs to America, I think you're a fool if you deny the appeal of that message It would be nice if it were just students, but it isn't. We have about 20.2 million students with about 322 million citizens. Or roughly 6.27%. Force participation numbers have been higher before in the 90s and way lower in the 50s. The big thing is the home with a single worker is normally gone which means a lot of homes require two workers. You would see this number go way up because of this. But then add in the people who can't find a job and this gets fucky. You can see this in the different U unemployment numbers. U-3 Total unemployed, as a percent of the civilian labor force (official unemployment rate) U-4 Total unemployed plus discouraged workers, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus discouraged workers U-5 Total unemployed, plus discouraged workers, plus all other persons marginally attached to the labor force, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force U-6 Total unemployed, plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force, plus total employed part time for economic reasons, as a percent of the civilian labor force plus all persons marginally attached to the labor force U-4 tends to be pretty good here but even then we are talking about 4.9 (U-3) and 5.3 (U-4) So trump is just taking the force participation rate and applying it incorrectly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
Who chose the lighting at Rubio's event? Next time maybe choose something that doesn't make your guy look literally green..
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
Sorry Obama isn't taking one for the team buy shifting one arbitrary indicator for a much worse looking one.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
Goetta posted:Pretty folksy ramblings from a union busting shitlord Yeah I'm bored as hell. But he'll get the usual Random Spotlight for a while.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
Alfred P. Pseudonym posted:I want to know where you go to get just a seat belt car store
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
Hello I'm an economist irl and no one really knows what the actual rate of unemployment hope this helps
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
Goetta posted:Hello I'm an economist irl and no one really knows what the actual rate of unemployment hope this helps Wait... measurements have uncertainties?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:27
|
|
|
I repeat I will not make the same mistake I repeat I will not make the same mistake
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:27
|
|
|
There's some truth to Rubio's insistence that his bad debate moment won't happen again: even if he stays in the race, Christie won't qualify for the next debate.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:27
|
|
|
axeil posted:i'm sorry the current administration uses the same number for headline unemployment that gw bush, clinton, ghw bush, reagan, etc have all used? U3 is a decent number when there hasnt been a massive downturn that has lead to significant numbers leaving the labor force or becoming underemployed. In the wake of a major recession its more an indicator of who has given up on the economy. Using full U6 overstates unemployment sure, but come on, using U3 after the Great Recession is just a *little* disingenuous. At 5% we'd be close to full employment and should begin to see wages creep up as labor markets tighten. Does this country look like its close to full employment to you? It does make for great headlines though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:27
|
|
|
Ted Cruz holds the mic like a TV preacher that sends people flying with the Holy Spirit. He is a creepy. Go Trump!
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:27
|
|
|
can we find some financier to keep Christie's campaign afloat just so he can keep going to debates and making GBS threads in Rubio's mouth?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:27
|
|
|
Brannock posted:I'm sorry I didn't mean to come off as I was disagreeing with you it's cool, been pretty sick this week so i'm a little cranky 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:28
|
|
|
The combination of that overwhelming humbleness, maniac laugh, and sharp weird turn to attack Bernie's age and Hillary's showing make me not trust Kasich at all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:28
|
|
|
Third World Reggin posted:The big thing is the home with a single worker is normally gone which means a lot of homes require two workers. You would see this number go way up because of this. That's true, but incomes haven't risen to match (in fact they've gone down slightly, if you extrapolate across inflation and purchasing power), and productivity per-worker has shot up EXTREMELY, which makes the lack of income gain even worse We've gone from an economy where a single person could support a household, to one where two people have to work to be able to support a household, and the latter is actually working harder yet worse off than the former This is why there's huge appeal for Bernie from the left and for Trump on the right
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:28
|
|
|
Goetta posted:Hello I'm an economist irl and no one really knows what the actual rate of unemployment hope this helps uh clearly you do not adhere to chicago school or austrian economics and therefore 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:28
|
|
|
Alfred P. Pseudonym posted:can we find some financier to keep Christie's campaign afloat just so he can keep going to debates and making GBS threads in Rubio's mouth? Bad news http://money.cnn.com/2016/02/09/media/cbs-democratic-debate-criteria/index.html Christy might not make next debate
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:28
|
|
|
Cruz is delivering the speech Rubio gave last week.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:28
|
|
|
I want new South Carolina polls so badly.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:29
|
|
|
detectivemonkey posted:The combination of that overwhelming humbleness, maniac laugh, and sharp weird turn to attack Bernie's age and Hillary's showing make me not trust Kasich at all. He's a total shithead and dems should probably attack him hard because he's the least transparent shithead on the republican side.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:29
|
|
|
Christie sounds like he's going to drop out if he doesn't end up in the top five.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:29
|
|
|
Jeb! could easily come in third.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:29
|
|
|
Mr Ice Cream Glove posted:Bad news 
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:29
|
|
|
Bip Roberts posted:Sorry Obama isn't taking one for the team buy shifting one arbitrary indicator for a much worse looking one. a thousand times this, you guys, jesus christ
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:29
|
|
|
Bip Roberts posted:Wait... measurements have uncertainties? This fancy degree has taught me that no one is safe from the spectre of our eventual death and nonexistence.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:29
|
|
|
178/300 Trump, Donald GOP 52,546 34% Kasich, John GOP 24,743 16% Cruz, Ted GOP 17,760 12% Bush, Jeb GOP 17,184 11% Rubio, Marco GOP 16,064 10% Christie, Chris GOP 11,762 8% Fiorina, Carly GOP 6,600 4% Carson, Ben GOP 3,454 2%
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:29
|
|
|
Not a Step posted:U5 is a decent number when there hasnt been a massive downturn that has lead to significant numbers leaving the labor force or becoming underemployed. In the wake of a major recession its more an indicator of who has given up on the economy. Using full U6 overstates unemployment sure, but come on, using U5 after the Great Recession is just a *little* disingenuous. At 5% we'd be close to full employment and should begin to see wages creep up as labor markets tighten. Does this country look like its close to full employment to you? well, there's also the issue of retiring boomers. we knew labor force participation was gonna tick down as those folks retired, and the most compelling theory i've seen is that folks who got laid off that were in their 50s or 60s in 08 just never re-entered the labor pool. the recovery was/is pretty anemic, but i think we're just not going to see massive growth levels again as that was fueled by fairly irresponsible lending practices. you can either get good growth rates or a well-regulated financial system. ya gotta pick one.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:30
|
|
|
But Rocks Hurt Head posted:Woah baaaaard lighting for Marco Thin men are real. Call xcom.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:31
|
|
|
Not a Step posted:U3 is a decent number when there hasnt been a massive downturn that has lead to significant numbers leaving the labor force or becoming underemployed. In the wake of a major recession its more an indicator of who has given up on the economy. Using full U6 overstates unemployment sure, but come on, using U3 after the Great Recession is just a *little* disingenuous. At 5% we'd be close to full employment and should begin to see wages creep up as labor markets tighten. Does this country look like its close to full employment to you? Wages are starting to creep up though??
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:31
|
|
|
SNAKES N CAKES posted:He sounded exactly like the AntiTrump here. He'll most certainly be the next big thing for a while.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:31
|
|
|
Bip Roberts posted:Sorry Obama isn't taking one for the team buy shifting one arbitrary indicator for a much worse looking one. I don't care about Obama man. He was a colossal loving disappointment and, speaking of reasons that voters are coming out in droves to support outsider candidates, there's one. We were promised hope and change and we got a gentle, caressing blowjob to the insurance industry instead. People are only barely better off today than they were before 2008. Obama's been trying to spin it as a supreme success but the only success has been for the bankers who've benefited hugely from the economic crash that they caused Almost the entire 'economic recovery' have gone to the bankers and other financiers
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:32
|
|
|
Goetta posted:Hello I'm an economist irl and no one really knows what the actual rate of unemployment hope this helps It doesn't count if you work out of a basement FYI
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:32
|
|
|
Bip Roberts posted:He's a total shithead and dems should probably attack him hard because he's the least transparent shithead on the republican side. So Huckabee in 2008?
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:32
|
|
|
Deki posted:Thin men are real. Call xcom. Thin men are now snake women with tits and would like you to respect their gender choices. mr whistler posted:Wages are starting to creep up though?? Really? Where? Im keen to move.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:33
|
|
|
Bush/Kaisch will be the ticket. I still don't know how to spell or say his name and I live in Ohio.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:33
|
|
|
Brannock posted:I don't care about Obama man. He was a colossal loving disappointment and, speaking of reasons that voters are coming out in droves to support outsider candidates, there's one. We were promised hope and change and we got a gentle, caressing blowjob to the insurance industry instead. People are only barely better off today than they were before 2008. Obama's been trying to spin it as a supreme success but the only success has been for the bankers who've benefited hugely from the economic crash that they caused keeping everything from becoming a burning crater ala the 1930s is a big accomplishment. it's not what we were promised, but he's had a hostile congress for 3/4ths of his term and i think deserves lots of credit for keeping things from completely imploding.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 07:02 |
|
|
Not a Step posted:Really? Where? Im keen to move. They're going up in places that are facing a bubble collapse so don't get too excited
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2016 04:34
|
|