The chronic kvetchers will always have something to b¡tch and moan about, but their is a widespread consensus that the progress since the Bush/Cheney collapse is undeniable. Trump presidency could cost U.S. economy $1 trillion: Oxford Economics Let's try to stick with the progress.
Translation: Let's ignore that you are wrong. It may surprise you, but I am a progressive who supports economic contraction. It is better for the planet.
If anyone really believes that the nation is worse off now that when Bush/Cheney absconded, I would find that notion quite extraordinary.
Even if trump wins there will be no wall built. Trumpbots just cannot get their heads around this simple fact. Meanwhile, our infrastructure crumbles. It's sad to see cons scream about how there is no money for things until something comes up they agree with. The never ending hypocrisy of the right.
Umm, national debt is out of control, economy is stagnating, breadwinner jobs are disappearing, labor force participation is at record lows, most new jobs are part-time or low-paying, student loan debt crisis is looming, asset inflation is off the charts, obamacare has been a disaster as predicted with costs soaring, another economic crash is coming and the Fed has no bullets left. Things are bad and getting worse.
Yes - turning around America after a recession the size of 2008 and in a global environment of recession is hard. So, one might have expected cooperation in decision making to come together on a plan. Yet, Obama was constantly rebuffed by the House, which preferred to stick with "trickle down" policies, etc. There is no possibility of suggesting it was Obama policy that caused a slow recovery given these facts.
....................................................................................................................... The improving economy, low unemployment, and higher wages are a conspiracy by "Liberals!" against the reality tv performer!
There really is no similarity in their proposals other than that they both show concern for illegal border crossing. And, that has NEVER been in question. The problems with Trump on this issue are the tens of billions Trump wants to spend, the fact that the Trump wall is totally brick and mortar, the fact that Trump thinks the US can require Mexico to pay (which shows a total lack of understanding of international issues), the fact that Trump's call for a wall includes what is essentially ugly white-supremicist/alt-right racism expressed against these people.
I have lots of things. I responded to your baseless claim with a comparably sourced claim. If The US economy were "strong", more people would think it was excellent than that it is doing poorly. That is not the case http://www.gallup.com/poll/151127/economic-conditions-weekly.aspx
Now you are switching the question. AND, you are somehow claiming that I said the US economy is "strong". You are going to have to do a better job of tracking than that, as pretty soon people are going to think that you do these things on purpose. The US economy has recovered from the world wide recession more rapidly than any other significant country on earth. And, that is an important measure, as our economy is NOT independent of the rest of the world. Interestingly, manufacturing production recovered within a couple years. Today we're learning that middle income compensation is rising at a rate that is very strong compared to any period in recent history. But, we also have Trump promoting the idea that America is a hell hole - a disaster from sea to shining sea in every dimension. And, such a monumentally self serving campaign against America may be consistent with the McConnell/Boehner dedication to making America's president fail, but that still leaves him as one of the more disgusting candidates we have had in DECADES. Plus, he's just plain wrong.
Many observers wondered how we could have 5% income growth at the same time we were experiencing 2% GDP growth, and even the most cursory review of the report’s Table 1, which contains summary data, reveals that the supposed 5.2% increase in household income has been badly overhyped. From newspaper headlines, one would assume that if you are a regular person with a full-time job, your income likely went up 5% last year. Wrong. The figures for earnings of full-time workers are much lower. Men who worked full-time in 2015 saw a median increase in earnings of only 1.5%, and women a slightly larger median increase of 2.7%. Also, the income gains were not uniformly distributed. The smallest gains went to native-born Americans. Whose incomes increased the most? Donald Trump might want to take note of this one: foreign-born non-citizens, up by 10.5%. If median full-time workers were only earning 2% more (blending the male and female numbers), why did median household income go up by over 5%? I am still digging into the data, but there are several possibilities. One is that a considerable part of the difference is made up by higher government payments. Most people do not realize that there is a difference between “earnings” and “income.” It was median household income that supposedly went up by 5.2%, and income includes Social Security, disability payments, welfare benefits, unemployment compensation, and more (alimony and various kinds of retirement benefits, for example). So measuring income doesn’t necessarily measure economic productivity. Another problem with household data is that they tell us as much about household composition as about economic progress. For example, if two people with incomes get married, household income goes up. In 2015, there was a 2% increase in the number of workers who had earnings, and a 1% increase in the number of households. As a result, the mean number of workers per household rose from 1.28 to 1.3. This would, naturally, increase household income. To the extent that this may reflect an improving job market, it is a good thing. But it is not the same as the average worker making a 5% higher income. Also, labor force participation declined last year, a fact (from a different data set) that is hard to reconcile with the growing number of workers with earnings in the Census Bureau’s Current Population Survey. http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/09/no-incomes-didnt-soar-in-2015.php
It's no trick at all. For years we've seen the median income flat despite GDP growth. Where median income are growing faster than GDP that tells you that incomes of lower/middle class folks increase faster than those at the top. You're making a logical error that those unsourced metrics are the only things that would affect median incomes. The median income could also be increase by part time incomes increasing, more part time workers moving to full time jobs, and more people working. I agree. An average increase is worse because it can be affected by income growth going to a relatively few at the time. Average incomes have grown much faster than median incomes since 1981. Growth in median incomes is a very positive development because it means more income going into the pockets of people who will spend the money as opposed to sticking it in the stock market or offshore accounts. Hopefully this is a the start of a trend and not an isolated incident.
