What's new
By:
Filters

Election Prediction Thread

How Will The Election Go?

  • Blue Tsunami (Dems take both the House and Senate)

    Votes: 3 18.8%

  • Blue Wave (Dems take the House, senate is still narrowly Rep)

    Votes: 11 68.8%

  • Blue Whimper (Dems Fail to take the house)

    Votes: 1 6.3%

  • Red Tide (Reps make gains in both the House and Senate)

    Votes: 1 6.3%

  • Red Rampage (Reps Make big gains)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    16
  • Poll closed .
DutchJazzer said:
lol, they better hope the economy doesn't crash in the coming 18 months! because then their will be a redwave! they will get the blame
Click to expand...
Haha Haha
Ooohhhh maaan!
Bring it on!
Trump lost the House with a booming economy. You think he is going to do better when it tanks??? Lol Trump policies will not stand up under scrutiny.
Tax cuts for the few, which cripples government ability to respond to economic down turns, will not sell well in 2020. Trade wars with China and Europe will be blamed for the tank. He can blame the Democrats but it will be hogwash... and we'll have had fours to have grown tired of his shtick. And the Mueller probe is still to come. If you think a bad economy will help Republikans in 2020, you are way out there.

Oh and wait until the redistricting efforts balance the playing field... nah. This is progress and the momentum is swinging away from the far right nonsense.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using JazzFanz mobile app
 
DutchJazzer said:
lol that is because now people are entitled!

people who arent even working, who are living on government assitence are buying things like 500-1000 dollar phones! every 1-2 years. you are living on governments dime! don't ****ing buy **** that are out of your living standards!

so what this does it makes big companies sell more of their products! which means those big companies make MORE money. this is simple economics. if you look at certain countries and you look at the lowest class. and you see what kind of luxury items they have like 200+ dollar phones. and those who have not. there is one coloration they are getting free government money and spent it unwisely!

so these kind of things makes the 1% richer! because they are selling **** to people who can afford it.

people should live according to their income bracket! if you are living of govenrment assitence stop buying luxury products. start saving some of that money!instead of buying a fricking 500-1000 dollar phone buy a 100 dollar phone and get some ****ing stocks into apple or samsung! you did not work for that money so you don't deserve that phone!

this is what makes the rich richer!
people dont seem to grasp this simple concept.
if you was poor in the 50's you had less luxury items then now!

simple economics these fools do not understand, then eeniemeenie questions my inteliffence. bo i got a degree in aerospace engineering! what do you have! you dont have a grasp of free market economy.
because governmetn taking money and then redistrubiting it is NOT free market economy! it rigs the economy.
the govenrment mandating banks to lend money is also not free market economy. it makes people consume luxury items and items beyond their mean income! throws the whoel system out of whack so when it fails people blame capitalism!

no you illiterate uninformed punk! it is the fault of RIGGING free markets. restraining them and tying them down
Click to expand...
Hey, ds, the rich get rich not by their own labor; they don't work for it. They manipulate the financial system like hedge fund billionaires. The system is rigged and that's why the rich get richer. A lot of people who collect checks have been beaten down in menial labor jobs working for people and companies whose only ethic is the bottom line. Things might be good for some, and I don't necessarily think the SMART phones are so wonderful for our society, though I capitulated two years ago and got one. The real entitlement program as I said is the military and they do some pretty horrible things with that money. The way you talk, ds, you'd probably be a good candidate for Herr Meister Trump's right hand man.
 
The Thriller said:
More evidence of the divide most manifested by this:



Real estate not popularity is what’s keeping republicans in business at the senate level.
Click to expand...


You used the National Senate popular vote (meaningless btw) to prop up a ****** argument. I detailed it for you earlier, but you must have missed it.
 
RandyForRubio said:
I’m not sure tbh. Believe it was not adjusted for inflation.

Best I could find in a very, very, very short amount of research was that since 2001 wages have risen 5.3% adjusted to inflation and benefit costs adjusted to inflation have risen 22.5% since 2001. Purchasing power is about the same as it was in 1973
Click to expand...

That's only if you use the faulty deflator CPI-U. Other measurements that aren't as subject to human error tell a far different story (PCE). So does anyone alive who has half a brain. Wages have clearly outpaced inflation since 1973 -- wages probably closer to have doubled.
 
gandalfe said:
So, no, you don't. Good to know.
Click to expand...

If you are interested, here's a more in depth page on the subject.

http://www.hamiltonproject.org/papers/thirteen_facts_about_wage_growth

Also, since most economists use CPI as a deflator, maybe with some adjustments, it was difficult to find alternative data. But here's a Dartmouth paper that tries to calculate wage growth using all kinds of different deflation models. Depending on the method, wages have grown between 8% and 45% since 1973.

https://www.dartmouth.edu/~bsacerdo/Sacerdote 50 Years of Growth in American Wages Income and Consumption May 2017.pdf
 
Alfalfa said:
If you are interested, here's a more in depth page on the subject.

http://www.hamiltonproject.org/papers/thirteen_facts_about_wage_growth

Also, since most economists use CPI as a deflator, maybe with some adjustments, it was difficult to find alternative data. But here's a Dartmouth paper that tries to calculate wage growth using all kinds of different deflation models. Depending on the method, wages have grown between 8% and 45% since 1973.

https://www.dartmouth.edu/~bsacerdo/Sacerdote 50 Years of Growth in American Wages Income and Consumption May 2017.pdf
Click to expand...

I've referenced Sacerdote and plenty other stuff in the past. Gandolfini ignores it and is playing dumb.

I dont like to pull out Sacerdote's NBER paper because it's newer which undercuts emphasis on how long economists have known this. Obama tried to put SS COLA on the unpopular but more reasonable chained CPI. We had the Boskin commission in the 1990's. BLS has a FAQ page explaining the problems with their CPI for the shadowstats nutjobs and why it's been adjusted soooooo many times.

The discussion these days is on why wage growth has decoupled from productivity growth. The two used to track rather tightly but wages now lag. That and difference in growth rates by segment, which Sacerdote covers a bit.
 
Alfalfa said:
If you are interested, here's a more in depth page on the subject.

http://www.hamiltonproject.org/papers/thirteen_facts_about_wage_growth

Also, since most economists use CPI as a deflator, maybe with some adjustments, it was difficult to find alternative data. But here's a Dartmouth paper that tries to calculate wage growth using all kinds of different deflation models. Depending on the method, wages have grown between 8% and 45% since 1973.

https://www.dartmouth.edu/~bsacerdo/Sacerdote 50 Years of Growth in American Wages Income and Consumption May 2017.pdf
Click to expand...
Alfalfa said:
http://www.hamiltonproject.org/papers/thirteen_facts_about_wage_growth
Click to expand...

I finally clicked through this and there are some good "facts" there.

I wish Americans could discus this stuff point specific rather than mass appeal advertising, but we only seem interested in converting to 51% while pissing off the 49%. Whenever this topic comes up I catch flack for not liking the myth of wage stagnation. I'm very much in favor of taxing the rich way more and helping the poorer out much, much, much more, while also making the middle class pay as well for what I see as the sins of their voting block (both sides, all stripes). But saying wages and living standards havent increased is treated in America like being against Marxism means you are denying inequality, inequity exists.

Why is it too much to expect focus and ears open to hear?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top