2020 Presidential Race

#54,478
#54,478
luthervol said:
Make it 10,000 likes and you have a bet.
Click to expand...
You know whats funny? I could lose 10000 likes to you and still be more popular than you. Interesting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TNVOLNAVY, Fun coupon VOL and StarRaider
#54,479
#54,479
Boca Vol said:
I rewinded the Biden townhall so I'm a few minutes behind. A white lady with 2 daughters (8 & 10) and her youngest daughter is transgender. Seriously! Does an 8 year old know what transgender is? I doubt it.
Click to expand...

If you think this girl is one and doesn't know it you may not know what one is your self.
 
#54,484
#54,484
luthervol said:
It's official then.
Who is responsible for removing your likes?
And I missed the deleted comments.
Try saying the same thing in a way that will not get deleted; consider it a mental exercise.
Click to expand...
Idk. Let's say you and I both email whoever until it happens based on the Presidential Election winner.
 
#54,487
#54,487
Grand Vol said:
Dang, you're going to be depressed until January 2025?

Of course, when the first woman POTUS, Kristi Noem takes over from Trump, are you going to continue to be angry?
Click to expand...
I do have to admit that I would find that incredibly depressing.
 
#54,491
#54,491
Rifleman said:
There was a very slight dip in the relevant post-recession participation rate, but the actual amount of difference is so minimal that it doesn't work as a way to explain away Obama's metric of full employment.

It is an even worse talking point when you consider GDP growth didn't pick up under Trump despite unprecedented deficit spending.

All this makes little sense in an American political context anyway, as the POTUS has less to do with the 50 state economic engines and the robust American free market business cycle than any other comparable world leader. Though Trump and Obama both bungled some stuff, did some stuff right, their actual economic impact was far more minimal than their cheerleaders/detractors would have you believe. Even tariffs were an impact of fractions of a percentage point of total GDP.

So these arguments tend to waste all of our time, but that is what many voters sadly believe and they are always left wondering why outcomes don't match expectations.

View attachment 314678
Click to expand...

Adjusted numbers once again. Notice up at the top "Labor Force Participation Rate - 25-54 Yrs". The problem keeps being definitions and boundary conditions. Why would you artificially use 54 instead of a more common retirement age? Note what happens if you look at workers 55 and older.

fredgraph.png

There's no mention if these numbers include farm jobs - often labor statistics don't. Here's a chart to put that potential omission into perspective

hiredandfamilyfarmworkers_450px.png

Note the farm statistics are numbers and the other charts are percentages. With an increasing population, clearly in the earlier years the farming jobs would have had a significant impact ... but we don't know if they were included or excluded. This is the problem with adjusted numbers which was really my complaint about government's measurement of unemployment in the first place. Just the damn facts, please. None of the charts are directly comparable because we don't know the percentage of groups like 55 and above or 25-54 as a percentage of the total population.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolinWayne and TrumpedUpVol
#54,493
#54,493
I can't wait.
 
#54,494
#54,494
AM64 said:
Adjusted numbers once again. Notice up at the top "Labor Force Participation Rate - 25-54 Yrs". The problem keeps being definitions and boundary conditions. Why would you artificially use 54 instead of a more common retirement age? Note what happens if you look at workers 55 and older.

View attachment 314771

There's no mention if these numbers include farm jobs - often labor statistics don't. Here's a chart to put that potential omission into perspective

View attachment 314785

Note the farm statistics are numbers and the other charts are percentages. With an increasing population, clearly in the earlier years the farming jobs would have had a significant impact ... but we don't know if they were included or excluded. This is the problem with adjusted numbers which was really my complaint about government's measurement of unemployment in the first place. Just the damn facts, please. None of the charts are directly comparable because we don't know the percentage of groups like 55 and above or 25-54 as a percentage of the total population.
Click to expand...

Economists use prime working age of 25-54 in an aging population so you can catch actual relative participation rate and not that the population merely is getting older and either retiring or becoming to infirmed to work.
 
#54,500
#54,500
tvolsfan said:
Most Americans see him as a decent man who will return civility to politics and not act like a dangerous demagogue. It's certainly not much, but it is extremely unlike Trump, and it may be enough this election.
Click to expand...
I know, you have to elect him to find out what his policy are though, he's not very forthcoming. The dangerous demogogue is standing beside him as the VP candidate. So it's a lose lose aye?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 0nelilreb and AM64
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top