|
shrike82 posted:Trump saved 1000 Carrier jobs and created 50000 new ones through a deal with Sprint. What has Obama done? I guess you were in middle school or something when the auto bailout happened huh
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 05:26 |
|
|
# ? May 15, 2024 03:53 |
|
shrike82 posted:Trump saved 1000 Carrier jobs and created 50000 new ones through a deal with Sprint. What has Obama done? By these metrics saved 1.2 million jobs with the auto bailout.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 05:39 |
|
Bip Roberts posted:By these metrics saved 1.2 million jobs with the auto bailout. We (America) also made money through financing the deal that bailed them out so not only did he save those jobs, he turned a profit.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 06:20 |
|
namaste faggots posted:Obama only achieved full us employment not at all really?
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 06:40 |
|
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/12/02/504115031/unemployment-rate-drops-to-4-6-percent-lowest-level-since-2007quote:
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 06:42 |
|
Kinda funny to see progressives who had previously criticized employment stats for not factoring in the underemployed or those who had given up looking for jobs are now talking about how good the Obama economy is. "America is already great!"
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 06:46 |
|
guys, i'm trolling. i don't actually believe this poo poo
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 06:48 |
|
but shrike1982, if poo poo like this https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-28/some-29-trillion-later-the-corporate-debt-boom-looks-exhausted and this http://www.wsj.com/articles/chinas-currency-and-the-dollar-debt-time-bomb-1447608685 and this http://www.forbes.com/sites/douglasbulloch/2016/06/17/chinas-playing-hot-potato-with-non-performing-loans/#28ddae5615e2 and this https://www.ft.com/content/655dd004-bc78-11e6-8b45-b8b81dd5d080 quote:US interest rate rises set to expose China’s frailties doesn't scare you shitless well then lol i guess
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 06:55 |
I don't post in here often. I also hold that the unemployment numbers aren't good because the jobs that are available are largely crap jobs. Crap jobs that are also on their way to being automated. Like pushing carts. That's been in the works since before the minimum wage hike talk became national news. That'll happen way sooner than automated cars becoming normal. I also think that the crap jobs plus high personal debts plus high housing costs plus high financial speculation plus global instability are signs that things are going to get rough sooner rather than later. And that's even before climate change. And that my mom is screwed if Medicare and Social Security get privatized. Edit: I'd put this together as a more coherent argument, but, well, kinda freaking out because she can't even hold down fluids lately. We couldn't afford the medical bills if she had to go with private insurance only. RandomPauI fucked around with this message at 07:06 on Dec 8, 2016 |
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 07:03 |
|
also you're all going to die early because trump just appointed this rear end in a top hat to head the EPA https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Pruitt lol i can't wait until the senate rolls over for this motherfucker
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 07:05 |
|
Like the election was largely decided by how lovely neoliberal Dems have managed the economy and we still have people defending the Obama-Clinton economy. Like there's a serious amount of denial among posters here.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 07:18 |
|
namaste faggots posted:also you're all going to die early because trump just appointed this rear end in a top hat to head the EPA Now he's supposed to lead it?
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 07:20 |
|
bird food bathtub posted:This mother fucker has straight up sued the EPA to allow more mercury, arsenic and sulfur in the air. By burning it down.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 07:23 |
|
shrike82 posted:Like the election was largely decided by how lovely neoliberal Dems have managed the economy and we still have people defending the Obama-Clinton economy. Like there's a serious amount of denial among posters here. I can't decide who exactly you are suppose to be attacking here.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 07:29 |
|
bird food bathtub posted:This mother fucker has straight up sued the EPA to allow more mercury, arsenic and sulfur in the air. Didn't realize Trump was an adherent to satanism.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 07:28 |
|
Earlier today I read shrike82's post and decided not to reply to it. A moment ago I saw a bunch of new posts and thought something significant had happened and people were discussing it. Turns out other people read shrike82's post and decided to reply. I'd prefer if we can share and comment on the developments of the various structural issues facing national economies as we see them unfold instead of raising to troll bait like fish to a lure. I'm disappointed in you thread.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 07:34 |
|
Perhaps if he wrote the prospectus for Monte dei Paschi he could actually save the European banking sectors. Alas
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 07:49 |
|
MPS blowing up along with the EU is pretty good news for the US.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 07:50 |
|
shrike82 posted:MPS blowing up along with the EU is pretty good news for the US. Are you sure? What's your thought process?
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 07:51 |
|
We'll see a flood of money from Europe to the US partly due to flight to safety and partly due to the US commitment to deregulation. With stuff like Dodd-Frank on the chopping board, US financials are up 20% over the past month. I mean the EU is melting down - look at Fillon talking about firing half a million civil servants while Trump is focused on bringing jobs back to the US e.g. Sprint.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 08:02 |
|
I think you forget that derivatives will kill any of that, oh, and you are taking Trump at his word... Good luck with that xD
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 08:08 |
|
bird food bathtub posted:This mother fucker has straight up sued the EPA to allow more mercury, arsenic and sulfur in the air.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 08:22 |
|
shrike82 posted:Like the election was largely decided by how lovely neoliberal Dems have managed the economy and we still have people defending the Obama-Clinton economy. Like there's a serious amount of denial among posters here. Mmhmm shrike82 posted:Trump is already boosting the markets before he's taken office. Mmmhm yes.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 09:21 |
|
shrike82 posted:Trump saved 1000 Carrier jobs and created 50000 new ones through a deal with Sprint. What has Obama done? Yes, sprint increasing its workforce by 270% is definitely realistic. In what world do you live in that you would not only believe such a thing but parrot it back as if it were a fact?
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 11:25 |
|
In a post-Trump world?
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 12:01 |
|
Actually we're still in the pre-Trump world. Let's hope someone digs up these posts 5, or god forbid, 9 years from now so we can see which poster can claim their place alongside the alltime greats such as the Grover Iraq Invasion List.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 12:52 |
|
Orange Devil posted:the Grover Iraq Invasion List. The what now?
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 14:09 |
|
shrike82 posted:Like the election was largely decided by how lovely neoliberal Dems have managed the economy and we still have people defending the Obama-Clinton economy. Like there's a serious amount of denial among posters here. shrike82 posted:We'll see a flood of money from Europe to the US partly due to flight to safety and partly due to the US commitment to deregulation. With stuff like Dodd-Frank on the chopping board, US financials are up 20% over the past month. I mean the EU is melting down - look at Fillon talking about firing half a million civil servants while Trump is focused on bringing jobs back to the US e.g. Sprint. What exactly are you arguing here? Do you even know what neoliberalism is? Yes, as a leftist, Clinton-Obama sucked. The Republicans and the Democrats agree on virtually everything in terms of economic philosophy. The only debate is on how hard and brutal the reforms will be. Neither party will substantially improve economic conditions for the average American -- at least, not to the extent the average American believes they will. sitchensis fucked around with this message at 14:30 on Dec 8, 2016 |
# ? Dec 8, 2016 14:27 |
|
shrike82 posted:Trump saved 1000 Carrier jobs and created 50000 new ones through a deal with Sprint. What has Obama done? See what others have said re: the auto bailout. In addition, I wouldn't brag about the Carrier thing, seeing as how they are still laying off like 600 people. It sets a bad precedent if I'm a medium-big business owner. Say hypothetically that I as a CEO want to lay off 1500 people to outsource their jobs to wherever: All I have to do now is publicly announce that I'm outsourcing 3000 jobs instead and wait for the Trump administration to bring me into the negotiation table where I can negotiate for a multi-billion dollar tax break in bad faith. I still get to lay off the 1500 people that I wanted to, and now the government is effectively paying me to do it! Edit: Also you do realize that W. Bush was also a giant Neoliberal as well? Basically every president since at least Reagan has been.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 15:13 |
|
People who have latched unto the concept in the last year don't seem to actually be aware that neoliberalism has been the dominant political ideology since the aftermath of the second Saudi Oil on both right and left. Reagan kicked it off in the US and for Europe Thatcher was our emissary. Anglo-saxon nations such as the US and UK changed much quicker than social democratic Scandinavia or Ordoliberal Germany (not really kicking it off until the 90's) but everyone was along for the ride after that point.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 15:26 |
|
whataboutisms about the bad team does it too doesn't really come off well when the "good" team is supposed to be for workers etc.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 15:59 |
|
MiddleOne posted:The what now? One of the stupidest posts ever made in this forum by one of its stupidest members. I don't have it on hand but it was basically "they will greet us as liberators" only even more absurd. Also only 10 people would die or something else hilariously dumb.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 16:14 |
|
axeil posted:One of the stupidest posts ever made in this forum by one of its stupidest members. I don't have it on hand but it was basically "they will greet us as liberators" only even more absurd. Vilerat was one of these people.
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 16:31 |
namaste faggots posted:Vilerat was one of these people. I'm pretty sure Vilerat didn't die during the 2003 invasion of Iraq.
|
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 16:35 |
|
Well that was some unfortunate quoting
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 16:37 |
|
Vilerat died when he installed EVE
|
# ? Dec 8, 2016 17:18 |
|
Grover posted:How long will it take to capture Baghdad? 2 days
|
# ? Dec 9, 2016 02:06 |
|
And there was also groverhaus. When Grover's do-it-yourself home renovation was so bad it got it's own SAclopedia entry and smilie but back on topic: Upward mobility has fallen greatly and income inequality has surged.
I don't see the Trump Administration reversing this. The planned tax cuts would likely widen it even more. Interesting move from the European Central Bank. It will extend it's bond-buying program to December 2017, but drop the amount from €80 to €60 billion starting April 2017. Seems to be trying to walk the tightrope between the Germans fearing inflation and Southern Europeans fearing deflation.
|
# ? Dec 9, 2016 03:00 |
|
OhFunny posted:It finds barely 2 in 5 men born in the mid-80s grew up to earn as much, at age 30, as their father's did at the same age. What were the numbers like for women? I didn't see anything about a gender split in the article, but I'm phone-reading.
|
# ? Dec 9, 2016 03:08 |
|
|
# ? May 15, 2024 03:53 |
|
Subjunctive posted:What were the numbers like for women? I didn't see anything about a gender split in the article, but I'm phone-reading. Page 15. End of Section IV: quote:When comparing children’s family incomes to their parents’ family incomes as in our baseline analysis, we find similar declines in absolute mobility for sons and daughters (Figure S10). However, the patterns differ by gender when we focus on individual earnings. As noted above, sons’ chances of earning more than their fathers fell steeply, from 95% in 1940 to 41% in 1984, underscoring the sharp decline in the economic prospects of American men. In contrast, the fraction of daughters earning more than their fathers fell from 43% for the 1940 birth cohort to 22% in 1960, and then rose slightly to 26% in 1984. The pattern for women’s individual earnings differs because of the rise in female labor force participation rates and earnings over the period we study (Figure S11). In sum, the subgroup analysis shows that declines in absolute mobility have been a systematic, widespread phenomenon throughout the United States since 1940.
|
# ? Dec 9, 2016 04:20 |