Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns. The Presidency of Donald J. Trump: No smocking guns.

02-06-2017 , 12:08 PM
This just goes to show that when it's correctly pointed out that Bannon and Trump are evil fascists there are people who love it and want more.

Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
What people don't realise about Bannon is that he's been funding well researched articles and planting them in left-wing publications for years and years.

So when people post articles and share figures with each other you'll never quite know if the root source of that article was Bannon.

This is ingenious in many ways.
02-06-2017 , 12:09 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
What you mean to say is that you'd like to ban anyone who does not broadly agree with you.
This is what you keep asking chez for over in Chezfront, for ****'s sake!


Son, you forget yourself.

Hanging around the small ponds of the GamerGate/alt-right circlejerks really makes these people forget that not everyone is so afflicted, if you take my meaning.
02-06-2017 , 12:09 PM
Quote:
OutTaGetMe
banned

Join Date: Sep 2016
Posts: 171
Thank you, mod.
02-06-2017 , 12:11 PM
Clovis8 listen again and this time pay close attention to the words spoken
02-06-2017 , 12:11 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
It's because Trump is using a different metric to measure the "true" employment rate". Which is not simply total number of people who get paid to do stuff.

I forget the exact term they use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OutTaGetMe
This is the debatable stuff, what is the actual unemployment numbers, people who have quit searching, how is that counted. Trump (not that i believe it or not) said that the people not searching are not included as unemployed.

I dont think we need to re-energize the coal mines but we can bring back a lot manufacturing jobs and stuff and pay people properly (not just CEOs) if we get paid more we can pay higher prices and not rely on walmart to be americas biggest employer
Quote:
Originally Posted by einbert
To answer your questions:

Yes, about 4.9%


It's not always that easy to retrain and start a new career especially at 40 or 50 years old. However, that is the direction we should be going in (offering people more education options) because the truth is mining + manufacturing simply aren't coming back en masse.

One thing is that people are very confused because while unemployment is really low right now, wages are stagnant and have been stagnant for 30+ years. Even though prices haven't risen much in the last 5 years, over 30 years they've risen enough to where people are really getting choked out and people's wages simply aren't going up. So costs like mortgage payments, health insurance, car payments, seem much more difficult to make now than they did 25-30 years ago because the wages simply haven't risen to keep up with inflation--particularly among workers without a college degree.


We don't and we can't. There is simply no way we can compete with super-low-wage, no-regulation countries like China and Pakistan where workers gruel for long hours and little pay in horrible, unsafe conditions. If people realized the conditions they would have to work in to be competitive with those countries, they would realize this.

The way forward is investing in science, technology, software development, green energy, 3D printing, robotics, etc. and giving our population the education that they need so they can work in these fields. These are the fields that we have a huge advantage in as they produce a huge amount of value per worked manhour, and many countries simply don't have the resources to possibly compete with us in these fields. A few do, like Japan, and by not investing in education and technology we are letting them get more ahead of us every single year. Not good.

Thank you very much for the replies.

I did not know the current metric possibly leaves out people who currently are not looking for work. However with this administration it seems they are so myopic that any actual facts do not seem to matter. I mean you have their communications director and press sec making up actual lies then calling them alternative facts. Or they just double-down on the lies and then you have some guy reading Brietbart or info-wars believing those lies. So at the end of the day, Trump is only going to believe what his warped mind is going to tell him, regardless of actual facts of data. That's scary ****. It's a bizarre time we all live in.
02-06-2017 , 12:11 PM
Oh yeah, and rising income inequality. The gains that you see in the stock market over the last 30 years aren't translating to higher wages and better conditions overall for workers across the board. They are more and more going to the top of the ladder.

Top CEOs Make 300 Times More than Typical WorkersPay Growth Surpasses Stock Gains and Wage Growth of Top 0.1 Percent
http://www.epi.org/publication/top-c...e-0-1-percent/
Quote:
The chief executive officers of America’s largest firms earn three times more than they did 20 years ago and at least 10 times more than 30 years ago, big gains even relative to other very-high-wage earners. These extraordinary pay increases have had spillover effects in pulling up the pay of other executives and managers, who constitute a larger group of workers than is commonly recognized.1 Consequently, the growth of CEO and executive compensation overall was a major factor driving the doubling of the income shares of the top 1 percent and top 0.1 percent of U.S. households from 1979 to 2007 (Bivens and Mishel 2013; Bakija, Cole, and Heim 2012). Since then, income growth has remained unbalanced: as profits have reached record highs and the stock market has boomed, the wages of most workers, stagnant over the last dozen years, including during the prior recovery, have declined during this one (Bivens et al. 2014; Gould 2015) .

In examining trends in CEO compensation to determine how well the top 1 and 0.1 percent are faring through 2014, this paper finds:

Average CEO compensation for the largest firms was $16.3 million in 2014. This estimate uses a comprehensive measure of CEO pay that covers chief executives of the top 350 U.S. firms and includes the value of stock options exercised in a given year. Compensation is up 3.9 percent since 2013 and 54.3 percent since the recovery began in 2009.
From 1978 to 2014, inflation-adjusted CEO compensation increased 997 percent, a rise almost double stock market growth and substantially greater than the painfully slow 10.9 percent growth in a typical worker’s annual compensation over the same period.
The CEO-to-worker compensation ratio, 20-to-1 in 1965, peaked at 376-to-1 in 2000 and was 303-to-1 in 2014, far higher than in the 1960s, 1970s, 1980s, or 1990s.
Some people will say "well that's just meritocracy" but the truth is it's really choking up our economy. The middle class is falling apart and the working class is living on debt, and that means people don't have money to spend at local businesses even though the unemployment rate is 4.9%, which is a VERY good unemployment rate. And is it really a meritocracy when most of these CEOs went to the same Ivy League schools that the vast majority of people, more and more, could never afford to go to?
02-06-2017 , 12:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by microbet
This just goes to show that when it's correctly pointed out that Bannon and Trump are evil fascists there are people who love it and want more.
At least know exactly what you are up against
02-06-2017 , 12:12 PM
02-06-2017 , 12:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
Clovis8 listen again and this time pay close attention to the words spoken
I posted that exact episode in this very thread as a source by you know actually posting it.

Mods. Can we please for the love of god ban this guy?
02-06-2017 , 12:13 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
What people don't realise about Bannon is that he's been funding well researched articles and planting them in left-wing publications for years and years.

So when people post articles and share figures with each other you'll never quite know if the root source of that article was Bannon.

This is ingenious in many ways.
Quote:
Originally Posted by prana
Not that I believe that, but not really since most non mouth breathers look to peer reviewed research.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
Yes, he funded that too
what an absolutely breathtaking display of pure unfettered idiocy
02-06-2017 , 12:13 PM
Quote:
I did not know the current metric possibly leaves out people who currently are not looking for work. However with this administration it seems they are so myopic that any actual facts do not seem to matter. I mean you have their communications director and press sec making up actual lies then calling them alternative facts. Or they just double-down on the lies and then you have some guy reading Brietbart or info-wars believing those lies. So at the end of the day, Trump is only going to believe what his warped mind is going to tell him, regardless of actual facts of data. That's scary ****. It's a bizarre time we all live in.
This is the way it's always been measured. It's called the Labor Force Participation Rate, and a big reason it's dwindling is because of our aging population (baby boomers). If you were to not adjust based on LFRP, you would include all kinds of people in the unemployment rate who really don't make sense, like housewives who aren't even trying to get a job.

Now you could argue against using LFRP or something, but again that's the way it's always been done. So the 4.9% number is still valid because you're comparing it against past measurements that were also adjusted based on the (then) LFRP.
02-06-2017 , 12:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by yeSpiff
I second Trolly's point about this stuff being really important. This is the boring real-world version of those dumb parody twitter accounts that purport to be disgruntled White House people. Those people do actually exist, they just leak their damning info to the Post rather than dumping it on twitter.

The notion that Bannon just spoonfed Trump an EO putting himself on the principals committee of the NSC and Trump signed it without understanding what it meant... truly breathtaking.
02-06-2017 , 12:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by +rep_lol
what an absolutely breathtaking display of pure unfettered idiocy
Can you explain why?
02-06-2017 , 12:22 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
What people don't realise about Bannon is that he's been funding well researched articles and planting them in left-wing publications for years and years.

So when people post articles and share figures with each other you'll never quite know if the root source of that article was Bannon.

This is ingenious in many ways.
Citation required.
02-06-2017 , 12:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
http://www.wnyc.org/story/presidentbannon/

Literally here

Also look up Joshua Green, Bannon profile.
This was the citation. I mean the main takeaway was what I said . It is not my fault if Clovis has basic comprehension problems.

The thirteen minutes of audio is there for anyone to listen to.
02-06-2017 , 12:27 PM
**** you, i dont have to refute your bull****

brandolini's law, playboy
02-06-2017 , 12:30 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
This was the citation. I mean the main takeaway was what I said . It is not my fault if Clovis has basic comprehension problems.

The thirteen minutes of audio is there for anyone to listen to.
Where in the audio is it stated? I'm not wasting 13 minutes.
02-06-2017 , 12:30 PM
The information is there if you want it.
02-06-2017 , 12:30 PM
link to one peer-reviewed scholarly article that was in any way funded or participated in by steve bannon and published in "left wing publication", or gtfo
02-06-2017 , 12:30 PM
I'm on my phone or I'd literally transcribe it.
02-06-2017 , 12:31 PM
Do they accept youtube citations at your university?

Spoiler:
Trump University
02-06-2017 , 12:31 PM
On the Media is usually a great podcast, despite the fact that this JvM dude listens to it.
02-06-2017 , 12:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
It's because Trump is using a different metric to measure the "true" employment rate". Which is not simply total number of people who get paid to do stuff.

I forget the exact term they use.
I didn't, it's called 'pulling numbers out of their ass'.
02-06-2017 , 12:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
I'm on my phone or I'd literally transcribe it.
we appreciate the heart and commitment to the game, but it's best you get on your bike now
02-06-2017 , 12:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by LordJvK
This was the citation. I mean the main takeaway was what I said . It is not my fault if Clovis has basic comprehension problems.

The thirteen minutes of audio is there for anyone to listen to.
That's why we actually cite things.

I thought you were talking about the earlier episode regarding Russian influence.

The episode you cite is last weeks which I have not listened to but would still bet does not claim what you are saying.

      
m