forums
Harvard Yale game
- Thread starter CTCANE
- Start date
Advertisement
supersaiyanshel
Senior
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2013
- Messages
- 9,831
I knew you wouldnt provide the answer to what was black unemployment when Obama was elected versus what it was when he left. It would defeat your entire narrative. Of Trump being responsible for the record low rate. So here you go --
2009 - 15.6
2016 - 7.8
Using your words facts are facts. Black unemployment dropped under Obama and was dropping already when Trump was elected.
As I said Trump inherited a trend. You've done nothing to disprove that.
Exactly my reaction.
supersaiyanshel
Senior
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2013
- Messages
- 9,831
You dont have to be a judge to nominated. He can nominate me or you and has in fact nominated people with little legal experience at all and had them confirmed.
But okay, how about Janice Rogers Brown ?
Funny how Bush and even Reagan were able to find black conservatives, but now suddenly they're hard to find?
da truth
1st team All-American
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2013
- Messages
- 4,910
So Trump took what Obama was doing and made it better? Okay, I can get down with that. Minorities are doing better under Trump then Obama. I still have not gotten my doctor back that Obama claimed I could keep when he created the non affordable health care act so I am hoping Trump will fix that.
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2012
- Messages
- 9,143
all you have to do is look at who is on a president’s cabinet to understand what type of people a particular president trusts and cares for/about. The fact is that the only black person in any cabinet position in the current admin is Ben Carson, who is the HUD secretary and Devos as Education secretary. Which are the government equivalents of Human Resources, which is where minorities and women and typically put when a corporation wants to show that it has minorities in important positions.
Trump had made it clear over 50 years that he believes:
White men are most suited to lead
Jews are to be employed accountants and attorneys
Blacks are to be employed as entertainers and athletes
Women are to be quiet
Now any of you can take a paternalistic view of this administration and argue that these old white guys are doing a better job than the blacks, women and Latinos who preceded them, but that is in effect what you are arguing without necessarily understanding that view that is shared by the non white male world.
Trump had made it clear over 50 years that he believes:
White men are most suited to lead
Jews are to be employed accountants and attorneys
Blacks are to be employed as entertainers and athletes
Women are to be quiet
Now any of you can take a paternalistic view of this administration and argue that these old white guys are doing a better job than the blacks, women and Latinos who preceded them, but that is in effect what you are arguing without necessarily understanding that view that is shared by the non white male world.
Empirical Cane
We are what we repeatedly do.
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2018
- Messages
- 45,186
Using 2007-2009 data is completely irrelevant.
Why not use Great Depression as your baseline?
Trump accelerated and economy that was NATURALLY returning to norms after Great Recession.
Love/hate POTUS, math doesn't lie on economy and what his policies have done.
Empirical Cane
We are what we repeatedly do.
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2018
- Messages
- 45,186
You don't even have a basic grasp as to how Federal Government is organized. Not even close.
HUD and Education are FAR from "human resources" of government.
supersaiyanshel
Senior
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2013
- Messages
- 9,831
Okay. First off Obama wasn't even president in 2007 to 2008. So there goes that talking point. Secondly, cool. You speak as if the numbers would automatically return to normal and therefore the president should get no credit. What a ridiculous notion. This is the conservative talking point being used to dismiss what Obama did with the economy (but at least it recognizes that the recession he inherited was caused by a Republican)? But sure, Let's use 2010 and beyond. The numbers are even more on Obama's side in a direct +/- comparison.
I love how you say Trump accelerated the economy and then provide absolutely no source for this (false claim). So here you go:
S&P 500 Has Performed Far Worse Under Trump Than Under Obama | Fortune
Dow Industrials and Nasdaq also saw much higher growth in 2009 to 2012.
Trump Has Created 1.5 Million Fewer Jobs Than Obama
Trump’s economy is not the best ever. In fact Obama added 1.49 million more jobs than Trump over a comparable timeframe, and on a yearly basis Trump has not generated more jobs than any of Obama’s last 3 years even with the tax cut helping 2018’s result.
www.forbes.com
Trump’s job growth falls short of Obama’s last three years (from the above article)
The Labor Department’s revised job count lowered the April 2018 to March 2019 by 501,000. Assuming that the almost 42,000 per month lower number is spread evenly across the 12 months, Trump’s 2018 total of 2.303 million jobs falls short of Obama’s 2014 to 2016 results and essentially matches his 2.302 million for 2013. And 2018 was helped by Trump’s tax cut sugar high.
- 2011 total: 2.075 million
- 2012 total: 2.174 million
- 2013 total: 2.302 million
- 2014 total: 3.006 million
- 2015 total: 2.729 million
- 2016 total: 2.318 million
- 2017 total: 2.153 million
- 2018 total: 2.303 million (first year of tax cut)
- Past 12 months: 1.782 million
- 2019 year to date through August: 1.141 million
- 2019 year to date annualized: 1.711 million
At least we agree, though. Math doesn't lie.
Now, let's compare the deficit increase under Obama to Trump?
Advertisement
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2015
- Messages
- 19,501
And this thread the mods leave open.....
Awsi Dooger
Junior
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2012
- Messages
- 2,662
Okay. First off Obama wasn't even president in 2007 to 2008. So there goes that talking point. Secondly, cool. You speak as if the numbers would automatically return to normal and therefore the president should get no credit. What a ridiculous notion. This is the conservative talking point being used to dismiss what Obama did with the economy (but at least it recognizes that the recession he inherited was caused by a Republican)? But sure, Let's use 2010 and beyond. The numbers are even more on Obama's side in a direct +/- comparison.
I love how you say Trump accelerated the economy and then provide absolutely no source for this (false claim). So here you go:
S&P 500 Has Performed Far Worse Under Trump Than Under Obama | Fortune
Dow Industrials and Nasdaq also saw much higher growth in 2009 to 2012.fortune.com
Trump Has Created 1.5 Million Fewer Jobs Than Obama
Trump’s economy is not the best ever. In fact Obama added 1.49 million more jobs than Trump over a comparable timeframe, and on a yearly basis Trump has not generated more jobs than any of Obama’s last 3 years even with the tax cut helping 2018’s result.
Trump’s job growth falls short of Obama’s last three years (from the above article)
The Labor Department’s revised job count lowered the April 2018 to March 2019 by 501,000. Assuming that the almost 42,000 per month lower number is spread evenly across the 12 months, Trump’s 2018 total of 2.303 million jobs falls short of Obama’s 2014 to 2016 results and essentially matches his 2.302 million for 2013. And 2018 was helped by Trump’s tax cut sugar high.
Oh hey look, the article doesn't mention the Obama years you said didn't count. How bout that! You also said his policies are the reason why the economy is what is, but a year after his very unnecessary tax cut, job creation is actually down versus last year. Any other economic metrics you'd like to compare from Obama (post 2010 per you) to Trump's?
- 2011 total: 2.075 million
- 2012 total: 2.174 million
- 2013 total: 2.302 million
- 2014 total: 3.006 million
- 2015 total: 2.729 million
- 2016 total: 2.318 million
- 2017 total: 2.153 million
- 2018 total: 2.303 million (first year of tax cut)
- Past 12 months: 1.782 million
- 2019 year to date through August: 1.141 million
- 2019 year to date annualized: 1.711 million
At least we agree, though. Math doesn't lie.
Now, let's compare the deficit increase under Obama to Trump?
Buddy, you're talking to braindead conservatives here. You won't receive a speck of logic. All you'll get are the ingrained biases they will carry throughout their lives, the ones their simpleton daddy taught them.
They are going to tell you the Bush 2008 recession was caused by Clinton. They are going to tell you the Clinton economy was the result of Alan Greenspan, even though every single Republican in both chambers voted against Clinton's 1993 budget plan despite a letter of support by Greenspan. That was most hilarious of all, and a sign of what a parody the Republican Party was already becoming. We voted unanimously against Greenspan's recommendation but now we'll desperately give him all the credit. In Greenspan's book he savages George Bush I, Denny Hastert and Tom DeLay for making every economic decision solely to gain seats, while praising Bill Clinton profusely for his smarts and economic instincts. I laughed at one conservative after another in Las Vegas while detailing this type of stuff. They responded with their typical two sentences of supposed ammo. Once you parry the word taxes they have nothing.
Trump was always going to be in far greater shape toward re-election than most Democrats preferred to believe, because Trump inherited an Obama economy on the upswing and bottom line it is **** near impossible to defeat an incumbent whose party has been in power only one term. Only Jimmy Carter has lost in that scenario in more than a century. If Trump doesn't win it will be totally a self-inflicted defeat. Basically all he had to do was shut up for 4 years. The so-called Silent Generation born 1929-1945 is steadily dying out but it is by far the most heavily conservative generation and still in sufficient numbers to push their nominee barely over the top.
Regardless, I agree this site is not the proper place for topics like this. I was surprised to open this thread and see so much of it had been tolerated.
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2012
- Messages
- 9,143
Oh yes they are the human resource dept of the fed govt. that why you have a black man and woman at the head of those agencies. Every other agency under trump is run by an old white man. Which I can only assume you are-a white man.
And please no civics lessons from you my undereducated trump supporting friend.
Empirical Cane
We are what we repeatedly do.
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2018
- Messages
- 45,186
Okay. First off Obama wasn't even president in 2007 to 2008. So there goes that talking point. Secondly, cool. You speak as if the numbers would automatically return to normal and therefore the president should get no credit. What a ridiculous notion. This is the conservative talking point being used to dismiss what Obama did with the economy (but at least it recognizes that the recession he inherited was caused by a Republican)? But sure, Let's use 2010 and beyond. The numbers are even more on Obama's side in a direct +/- comparison.
I love how you say Trump accelerated the economy and then provide absolutely no source for this (false claim). So here you go:
S&P 500 Has Performed Far Worse Under Trump Than Under Obama | Fortune
Dow Industrials and Nasdaq also saw much higher growth in 2009 to 2012.
Trump Has Created 1.5 Million Fewer Jobs Than Obama
Trump’s economy is not the best ever. In fact Obama added 1.49 million more jobs than Trump over a comparable timeframe, and on a yearly basis Trump has not generated more jobs than any of Obama’s last 3 years even with the tax cut helping 2018’s result.
Trump’s job growth falls short of Obama’s last three years (from the above article)
The Labor Department’s revised job count lowered the April 2018 to March 2019 by 501,000. Assuming that the almost 42,000 per month lower number is spread evenly across the 12 months, Trump’s 2018 total of 2.303 million jobs falls short of Obama’s 2014 to 2016 results and essentially matches his 2.302 million for 2013. And 2018 was helped by Trump’s tax cut sugar high.
Oh hey look, the article doesn't mention the Obama years you said didn't count. How bout that! You also said his policies are the reason why the economy is what is, but a year after his very unnecessary tax cut, job creation is actually down versus last year. Any other economic metrics you'd like to compare from Obama (post 2010 per you) to Trump's?
- 2011 total: 2.075 million
- 2012 total: 2.174 million
- 2013 total: 2.302 million
- 2014 total: 3.006 million
- 2015 total: 2.729 million
- 2016 total: 2.318 million
- 2017 total: 2.153 million
- 2018 total: 2.303 million (first year of tax cut)
- Past 12 months: 1.782 million
- 2019 year to date through August: 1.141 million
- 2019 year to date annualized: 1.711 million
At least we agree, though. Math doesn't lie.
Now, let's compare the deficit increase under Obama to Trump?
Are you ******* insane? That is a rhetorical question of course.
Seriously.
Empirical Cane
We are what we repeatedly do.
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2018
- Messages
- 45,186
Okay. First off Obama wasn't even president in 2007 to 2008. So there goes that talking point. Secondly, cool. You speak as if the numbers would automatically return to normal and therefore the president should get no credit. What a ridiculous notion. This is the conservative talking point being used to dismiss what Obama did with the economy (but at least it recognizes that the recession he inherited was caused by a Republican)? But sure, Let's use 2010 and beyond. The numbers are even more on Obama's side in a direct +/- comparison.
I love how you say Trump accelerated the economy and then provide absolutely no source for this (false claim). So here you go:
S&P 500 Has Performed Far Worse Under Trump Than Under Obama | Fortune
Dow Industrials and Nasdaq also saw much higher growth in 2009 to 2012.
Trump Has Created 1.5 Million Fewer Jobs Than Obama
Trump’s economy is not the best ever. In fact Obama added 1.49 million more jobs than Trump over a comparable timeframe, and on a yearly basis Trump has not generated more jobs than any of Obama’s last 3 years even with the tax cut helping 2018’s result.
Trump’s job growth falls short of Obama’s last three years (from the above article)
The Labor Department’s revised job count lowered the April 2018 to March 2019 by 501,000. Assuming that the almost 42,000 per month lower number is spread evenly across the 12 months, Trump’s 2018 total of 2.303 million jobs falls short of Obama’s 2014 to 2016 results and essentially matches his 2.302 million for 2013. And 2018 was helped by Trump’s tax cut sugar high.
Oh hey look, the article doesn't mention the Obama years you said didn't count. How bout that! You also said his policies are the reason why the economy is what is, but a year after his very unnecessary tax cut, job creation is actually down versus last year. Any other economic metrics you'd like to compare from Obama (post 2010 per you) to Trump's?
- 2011 total: 2.075 million
- 2012 total: 2.174 million
- 2013 total: 2.302 million
- 2014 total: 3.006 million
- 2015 total: 2.729 million
- 2016 total: 2.318 million
- 2017 total: 2.153 million
- 2018 total: 2.303 million (first year of tax cut)
- Past 12 months: 1.782 million
- 2019 year to date through August: 1.141 million
- 2019 year to date annualized: 1.711 million
At least we agree, though. Math doesn't lie.
Now, let's compare the deficit increase under Obama to Trump?
I can't even respond to your utter lack of basic concepts of Federal finances from a smart phone.
Give me a minute to get to a computer and keyboard.
Quick question. CDFM, CGFM...you know what those are correct? You, of course, know who DW and RR are, because ANYONE who has even a rudimentary grasp of Federal finances would answer these in less than a second.
Empirical Cane
We are what we repeatedly do.
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2018
- Messages
- 45,186
I'm just curious, Colin Powell held what POSITIONS again?
I'll wait.
Condoleeza Rice says hi too.
Shall I go on?
Advertisement
supersaiyanshel
Senior
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2013
- Messages
- 9,831
And there it is. There's the deflection. Anything to provide numbers to the (false claim) that Trump has accelerated the economy. You still haven't provided a scintilla of evidence that shows Trump has accelerated the economy as you (falsely) claimed. Just deflection , emotion, projection, and obfuscation. Just answer the basic question.
What is your evidence that Trump has accelerated the economy?
Two Charts Show Trump's Job Gains Are Just A Continuation From Obama's Presidency
When you look at the numbers (and graphs) the gains in employment under President Trump are essentially a continuation from President Obama‘s last six years in office.
www.forbes.com
Trump boasts the US economy is the best it's ever been under his watch. Here are 9 charts showing how it compares to the Obama and Bush presidencies.
Trump touts his handling of the economy as the strongest indicator of his success, but a closer look reveals a mixed picture.
www.businessinsider.com
Trump and GOP promised economic growth much better than Obama's. That's not what happened
Throughout the 2016 campaign and since, Trump and the GOP have vowed to kick-start tepid Obama-era economic growth. New government data show that Trump, too, has failed to reach the 3 percent promised land – or even match Obama's strongest year.
Trump Is Falling Almost 1 Million Jobs Short Vs. Obama
Trump’s economy is not the best ever. In fact Obama added almost one million more jobs than Trump over the same timeframe.
www.forbes.com
Federal deficit increases 26% to $984 billion for fiscal 2019, highest in 7 years
The gap between revenues and spending was the widest in seven years. Defense, Medicare and interest payments ballooned the shortfall.
My dude -- without sounding sanctimonious -- I follow the markets. Religiously. Probably more than sports and movies/film. I can assure you I am as politically unbiased as they come when it comes to my wallet. I only care about the numbers. Trump has done a good job on the (inherited) economy, but he absolutely has not accelerated it, nor is he doing a better job than Obama (not considerably much worse to be fair to him). No metric will tell that he is which is why I suspect you haven't provided any. Now, you might personally be doing better, and that's cool, and I actually hope you are, but that is a micro example when we're talking macro.
I'm going to ask that you do me a favor, and don't respond to me if you're not going to provide any evidence that Trump accelerated the economy. I don't need the backhanded slights or assumptions or change of topic which you've already done. Just keep it simple my bro:
How has Trump accelerated the economy? Show me the numbers.
But just know, I won't be responding and you'll be talking to yourself. I'm done with this thread. I already know how this is going to end (with you not answering the question). I'll take Dooger's advice.
What's liberal about public education ? What does that even mean?
a squared + b squared = c squared no matter if you're a liberal or conservative or whether you're at a charter or private or public school.
Of course you can't define a liberal education because you don't know, do you? How are the schools run differently? I've worked at local Charter schools and Public schools, let me know when you find out, but stop pretending you know when you don't. Educate yourself . . .
Also, you realize the 28th dumbest kids in the world is taking into account all students in the education system. There are many education "systems" worldwide where they don't bother to educate significant portions of their population. It's not an even playing field. Here are some stats;
Epi.org
Because social class inequality is greater in the United States than in any of the countries with which we can reasonably be compared, the relative performance of U.S. adolescents is better than it appears when countries’ national average performance is conventionally compared.
That being said, I think there needs to be significant changes in our education infrastructure. Too much wasteful spending. Bring back vocational options to students so that they can earn a living wage when they graduate. (not everyone is cut out for college) Incentives for professionals to actually want to become educators. It's a freakin **** show right now. Teacher turnover is at an all-time high, morale is in the toilet, pay is ridiculously low, insane evaluation system, etc. . .until people start taking education seriously, we are definitely ****ed.
a squared + b squared = c squared no matter if you're a liberal or conservative or whether you're at a charter or private or public school.
Of course you can't define a liberal education because you don't know, do you? How are the schools run differently? I've worked at local Charter schools and Public schools, let me know when you find out, but stop pretending you know when you don't. Educate yourself . . .
Also, you realize the 28th dumbest kids in the world is taking into account all students in the education system. There are many education "systems" worldwide where they don't bother to educate significant portions of their population. It's not an even playing field. Here are some stats;
Epi.org
Because social class inequality is greater in the United States than in any of the countries with which we can reasonably be compared, the relative performance of U.S. adolescents is better than it appears when countries’ national average performance is conventionally compared.
- Because in every country, students at the bottom of the social class distribution perform worse than students higher in that distribution, U.S. average performance appears to be relatively low partly because we have so many more test takers from the bottom of the social class distribution.
- A sampling error in the U.S. administration of the most recent international (PISA) test resulted in students from the most disadvantaged schools being over-represented in the overall U.S. test-taker sample. This error further depressed the reported average U.S. test score.
- If U.S. adolescents had a social class distribution that was similar to the distribution in countries to which the United States is frequently compared, average reading scores in the United States would be higher than average reading scores in the similar post-industrial countries we examined (France, Germany, and the United Kingdom), and average math scores in the United States would be about the same as average math scores in similar post-industrial countries.
- A re-estimated U.S. average PISA score that adjusted for a student population in the United States that is more disadvantaged than populations in otherwise similar post-industrial countries, and for the over-sampling of students from the most-disadvantaged schools in a recent U.S. international assessment sample, finds that the U.S. average score in both reading and mathematics would be higher than official reports indicate (in the case of mathematics, substantially higher).
- This re-estimate would also improve the U.S. place in the international ranking of all OECD countries, bringing the U.S. average score to sixth in reading and 13th in math. Conventional ranking reports based on PISA, which make no adjustments for social class composition or for sampling errors, and which rank countries irrespective of whether score differences are large enough to be meaningful, report that the U.S. average score is 14th in reading and 25th in math.
That being said, I think there needs to be significant changes in our education infrastructure. Too much wasteful spending. Bring back vocational options to students so that they can earn a living wage when they graduate. (not everyone is cut out for college) Incentives for professionals to actually want to become educators. It's a freakin **** show right now. Teacher turnover is at an all-time high, morale is in the toilet, pay is ridiculously low, insane evaluation system, etc. . .until people start taking education seriously, we are definitely ****ed.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2014
- Messages
- 48,003
This is another area where politics has been inserted where it shouldn't be. People push for religion, diversity, acceptance issues to be added to curriculum when they have no place in the classroom when the core math, reading, science and critical thinking skills are lacking. Further, the narrative that teachers dont make enough gets hijacked with a bloated administration and union structure.
Everybody wants kids to have a better education. The problem is that parasites get involved trying to get rich or push an agenda. You're right, we are ****ed.