America doing well under Trump

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
38,907
Reaction score
1,317
Points
113
The incredible Trump economy continues
227,000 new jobs for October
September adjusted up to 230,000 new jobs

The biggest danger to the jobs market, rising wages and the stock market- a Dem takeover of the House.
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
8,542
Reaction score
337
Points
83
The incredible Trump economy continues
227,000 new jobs for October
September adjusted up to 230,000 new jobs

The biggest danger to the jobs market, rising wages and the stock market- a Dem takeover of the House.
bga1 is clearly referring to the ADP report out today.

Average jobs created by month in first 21 months of Trump Presidency: 192k
Average jobs created by month for previous 21 months before that: 195k

If this economy is "incredible" according to these numbers, what did that make the Obama economy? Astounding? Stupendous?

https://www.adpemploymentreport.com/2018/October/NER/NER-October-2018.aspx

EDIT: It occurs to me that the argument could be made that what's really incredible was October itself, not the longer trend. Of course, June 2016 saw 232k jobs added. Feb 2016 was 230k. Dec 2015 was 283k.
 
Last edited:

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
38,907
Reaction score
1,317
Points
113
bga1 is clearly referring to the ADP report out today.

Average jobs created by month in first 21 months of Trump Presidency: 192k
Average jobs created by month for previous 21 months before that: 195k

If this economy is "incredible" according to these numbers, what did that make the Obama economy? Astounding? Stupendous?

https://www.adpemploymentreport.com/2018/October/NER/NER-October-2018.aspx

EDIT: It occurs to me that the argument could be made that what's really incredible was October itself, not the longer trend. Of course, June 2016 saw 232k jobs added. Feb 2016 was 230k. Dec 2015 was 283k.
Obama ran a part time economy. The lion's share of Obama jobs were not good ones. Trump is running a full time economy.One would have to really, really be in spin mode to say that the Obama economy was better or even close to the Trump economy. Obviously you are not in business. Wages are actually growing:
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>


Isn't it just so odd that after Obama running such a swell economy and being so lovable that the American people chose Trump rather than the chosen successor in Hillary? :)
 
Last edited:

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
8,542
Reaction score
337
Points
83
Wages and salaries jump by 3.1%, highest level in a decade

Isn't it just so odd that after Obama running such a swell economy and being so lovable that the American people chose Trump rather than the chosen successor in Hillary? :)
REAL. VS. NOMINAL. WAGE. GROWTH.

We've been over this THREE TIMES IN THIS THREAD. That's a nominal number. Inflation is higher than it's been in years. October numbers won't come out for two weeks, but real wage growth year-over-year in September was 0.5% and for August was negative. You've seen these stats. You've had these concepts explained.
 

cncmin

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
15,633
Reaction score
387
Points
83
REAL. VS. NOMINAL. WAGE. GROWTH.

We've been over this THREE TIMES IN THIS THREAD. That's a nominal number. Inflation is higher than it's been in years. October numbers won't come out for two weeks, but real wage growth year-over-year in September was 0.5% and for August was negative. You've seen these stats. You've had these concepts explained.
Dude, I appreciate your passion, but these folks either can't understand or just do not want to. Belief and feelings are more important than reality. You could correct Beeg, et al. 50, 100, 1000, a zillion times, and they'll just keep repeating the lies.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
38,907
Reaction score
1,317
Points
113
REAL. VS. NOMINAL. WAGE. GROWTH.

We've been over this THREE TIMES IN THIS THREAD. That's a nominal number. Inflation is higher than it's been in years. October numbers won't come out for two weeks, but real wage growth year-over-year in September was 0.5% and for August was negative. You've seen these stats. You've had these concepts explained.
Inflation is higher because the Fed couldn't sustain stimulus (Obama era tactic to prop him up) and because we finally have a real economy again. Yes there's inflation but..we also have tax cuts which you forgot to add into the equation. Americans are making more and taking home more and it's not from part time jobs like in the Obama years.
 

cncmin

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
15,633
Reaction score
387
Points
83
Inflation is higher because the Fed couldn't sustain stimulus (Obama era tactic to prop him up) and because we finally have a real economy again. Yes there's inflation but..we also have tax cuts which you forgot to add into the equation. Americans are making more and taking home more and it's not from part time jobs like in the Obama years.
That's nice. We also have massive spending increases and much larger debt. Why don't you mention the vastly increased spending when you talk about the "improved" economy. Why don't you mention the massively increased deficit spending? How do those affect the U.S. economy? So many questions left unanswered by The Beeg.
 

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
8,542
Reaction score
337
Points
83
95% of the Obama job gains were part time or contract jobs (which is why the Obama economy sucked):

https://www.investing.com/news/economy-news/nearly-95-of-all-job-growth-during-obama-era-part-time,-contract-work-449057
A) Did you honestly not find that number hard to believe?

B) If you needed proof that Investing.com is not a legit news source, this article is it:

1) The article doesn't link to the study. Dead giveaway.
2) The original study measured from 2005 to 2015. Not only does that not address the stats I cited above about the end of the Obama administration (having been based on a survey from Oct '15,) and not only does it include the worst recession in 70 years, it INCLUDES SEVERAL YEARS FROM THE BUSH ADMIN. https://dataspace.princeton.edu/jspui/bitstream/88435/dsp01zs25xb933/3/603.pdf

And since the study was discussing net job growth, that means that all the jobs lost during the recession are removed from the total number of jobs gained, and THEN they take the percentage of the remaining jobs that are part-time.

C) You say in your previous post that Obama ran a part-time economy. But the original study doesn't make that claim at all. Many independent contractors not only work full-time, but make more money than do traditional workers. https://www.bls.gov/news.release/conemp.t13.htm

D) There's absolutely nothing to suggest that the rise in non-traditional work arrangements has abated. After all, your post cited the ADP jobs report and my numbers did as well.

E) The percent of part-time workers went down every year from 2010 - 2016:

https://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cps_charts.pdf

 
Last edited:

justthefacts

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 20, 2010
Messages
8,542
Reaction score
337
Points
83
Inflation is higher because the Fed couldn't sustain stimulus (Obama era tactic to prop him up) and because we finally have a real economy again. Yes there's inflation but..we also have tax cuts which you forgot to add into the equation. Americans are making more and taking home more and it's not from part time jobs like in the Obama years.
We've discussed the tax cuts effect on wages multiple times in this thread as well. Not only are they minimal in percentage terms, they're also not compounding. As for your reasons, it doesn't matter: wages are not really growing very quickly, and were growing more quickly in the last couple of years of Obama's admin.

But your reasoning on the Fed is ridiculous. Are you somehow claiming that the Fed raising interest rates has increased inflation? Seriously?
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
38,907
Reaction score
1,317
Points
113
We've discussed the tax cuts effect on wages multiple times in this thread as well. Not only are they minimal in percentage terms, they're also not compounding. As for your reasons, it doesn't matter: wages are not really growing very quickly, and were growing more quickly in the last couple of years of Obama's admin.

But your reasoning on the Fed is ridiculous. Are you somehow claiming that the Fed raising interest rates has increased inflation? Seriously?
My error. It has only increased cost of money. I didn't think that one through. Good correction.
 

bottlebass

Main Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2013
Messages
15,701
Reaction score
349
Points
83
Dude, I appreciate your passion, but these folks either can't understand or just do not want to. Belief and feelings are more important than reality. You could correct Beeg, et al. 50, 100, 1000, a zillion times, and they'll just keep repeating the lies.
Beeg is smart enough to understand, he just sticks his head in the sand and stomps his feet. The hypocrisy he has shown onthe economy is insane. The day Trump took office the exact same numbers beeg called horrible for years all the sudden magically turned great and the best ever!

Hey beeg are you a business owner (I think you have claimed this before)? Have you taken the tax cuts and passed it on to your employees or have you embezzled it like 99% of companies?
 

LesBolstad

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
4,090
Reaction score
205
Points
63
Beeg is smart enough to understand, he just sticks his head in the sand and stomps his feet. The hypocrisy he has shown onthe economy is insane. The day Trump took office the exact same numbers beeg called horrible for years all the sudden magically turned great and the best ever!

Hey beeg are you a business owner (I think you have claimed this before)? Have you taken the tax cuts and passed it on to your employees or have you embezzled it like 99% of companies?
Great argument for Democrats: economy better under Obama vs. Trump. IALTO:clap:

You can't make it up!
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
38,907
Reaction score
1,317
Points
113
Beeg is smart enough to understand, he just sticks his head in the sand and stomps his feet. The hypocrisy he has shown onthe economy is insane. The day Trump took office the exact same numbers beeg called horrible for years all the sudden magically turned great and the best ever!

Hey beeg are you a business owner (I think you have claimed this before)? Have you taken the tax cuts and passed it on to your employees or have you embezzled it like 99% of companies?
Because the business has a June Fiscal year end- we haven't seen a direct benefit from the tax cuts yet- it will kick in for us at the end of the current fiscal year. However, we are investing in employees and capabilities because of it and the business climate and demand caused by it. We are doing fantastic and sharing generously. The more we make the more they get. Thanks for your interest. By the way - the number of employees at my company has gone up over 20% since Trump was elected. MAGA!

Interesting that you view an owner of a company as an embezzler! :) That's revealing. Do you have stocks? If so, you are a part owner of an entity. If the stock appreciates do you embezzle the money or do you give a share to someone else?? I bought something hard earned, took great risk and paid heavily for it. We hire employees who are paid well but also have a right to leave at any time should they be able to better their lives. As an investor, I think I deserve a great return on investment in good times and in turn the employees are compensated and taken care of such that they have an incentive to stay and the success continues. Our people tend to stay a long time.
 

bottlebass

Main Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2013
Messages
15,701
Reaction score
349
Points
83
Because the business has a June Fiscal year end- we haven't seen a direct benefit from the tax cuts yet- it will kick in for us at the end of the current fiscal year. However, we are investing in employees and capabilities because of it and the business climate and demand caused by it. We are doing fantastic and sharing generously. The more we make the more they get. Thanks for your interest. By the way - the number of employees at my company has gone up over 20% since Trump was elected. MAGA!

Interesting that you view an owner of a company as an embezzler! :) That's revealing. Do you have stocks? If so, you are a part owner of an entity. If the stock appreciates do you embezzle the money or do you give a share to someone else?? I bought something hard earned, took great risk and paid heavily for it. We hire employees who are paid well but also have a right to leave at any time should they be able to better their lives. As an investor, I think I deserve a great return on investment in good times and in turn the employees are compensated and taken care of such that they have an incentive to stay and the success continues. Our people tend to stay a long time.
20% must be a pretty small company.

You know what I was talking about, the buy backs have sky rocketed in corporate america. Very few people have gotten rich of the trump tax cuts. Yes I own stocks, yes my stocks have done great (until October). Did your stocks do well under Obama? So far my stocks did better under Obama than they have under Trump. It's not correct to compare that yet though as trump would need 6 more years for it to be fair. We'll see what my return on investment is after trump is done. It will be hard for Trump to beat what Obama did.
 

GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
16,456
Reaction score
173
Points
63
20% must be a pretty small company.
Could be exactly one employee. That said, I strongly admire anyone going it alone and taking a risk. This includes ShillGA, if it is true he owns a company. There is no sure thing and it takes a lot of guts, energy, smarts, luck, timing and commitment to make an entrepreneurial venture succeed. Especially long term. Point being, I don't care if it's one employee additional, 20 or 20,000. That's food on the table of everyone involved.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
38,907
Reaction score
1,317
Points
113
20% must be a pretty small company.

You know what I was talking about, the buy backs have sky rocketed in corporate america. Very few people have gotten rich of the trump tax cuts. Yes I own stocks, yes my stocks have done great (until October). Did your stocks do well under Obama? So far my stocks did better under Obama than they have under Trump. It's not correct to compare that yet though as trump would need 6 more years for it to be fair. We'll see what my return on investment is after trump is done. It will be hard for Trump to beat what Obama did.
Obama did nothing except retard an inevitable natural economic rebound with insane socialist, big government policies. What happened during the Obama years is a travesty, the worst recovery in history. During the Obama years there was nowhere to put money other than stocks because of the Fed easing programs- so the markets rose despite the dismally slow rebound. Considering that there has been a recession in every decade for the last century, it is almost inevitable that Trump will face one at some point in his 8 years. Ideally you want to become President right after a recession (like Obama did) that's the best chance you have of avoiding one during your term. The economy always cycles.
 

bottlebass

Main Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2013
Messages
15,701
Reaction score
349
Points
83
Obama did nothing except retard an inevitable natural economic rebound with insane socialist, big government policies. What happened during the Obama years is a travesty, the worst recovery in history. During the Obama years there was nowhere to put money other than stocks because of the Fed easing programs- so the markets rose despite the dismally slow rebound. Considering that there has been a recession in every decade for the last century, it is almost inevitable that Trump will face one at some point in his 8 years. Ideally you want to become President right after a recession (like Obama did) that's the best chance you have of avoiding one during your term. The economy always cycles.
Already making excuses to save face.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
38,907
Reaction score
1,317
Points
113
Could be exactly one employee. That said, I strongly admire anyone going it alone and taking a risk. This includes ShillGA, if it is true he owns a company. There is no sure thing and it takes a lot of guts, energy, smarts, luck, timing and commitment to make an entrepreneurial venture succeed. Especially long term. Point being, I don't care if it's one employee additional, 20 or 20,000. That's food on the table of everyone involved.
Thanks Jake. I have been blessed with a great opportunity and I LOVE the employees who have shared it along the way. What a ride!
 

GopherJake

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 21, 2009
Messages
16,456
Reaction score
173
Points
63
Obama did nothing except retard an inevitable natural economic rebound with insane socialist, big government policies. What happened during the Obama years is a travesty, the worst recovery in history. During the Obama years there was nowhere to put money other than stocks because of the Fed easing programs- so the markets rose despite the dismally slow rebound. Considering that there has been a recession in every decade for the last century, it is almost inevitable that Trump will face one at some point in his 8 years. Ideally you want to become President right after a recession (like Obama did) that's the best chance you have of avoiding one during your term. The economy always cycles.
The economy always cycles. Have you ever stopped to think why that might be, BGA? Why is it by definition a necessity that the economy always go boom-bust-boom-bust? I mean, that's a larger discussion, but I don't think it is something that *has to* happen. That said, very tough to avoid. But your constant railing on the Barry economy comes from a place that is pretty much emotional. There's no question that the economy seems to be doing pretty well the past several years. Maybe all those moves Barry made, while slow to recover, built a foundation that props it up higher for the long term? In any event, you would be singing a very different tune, if the D and R were reversed, nobody on this board doubts that.
 

Section2

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2009
Messages
42,332
Reaction score
543
Points
113
The economy always cycles. Have you ever stopped to think why that might be, BGA? Why is it by definition a necessity that the economy always go boom-bust-boom-bust? I mean, that's a larger discussion, but I don't think it is something that *has to* happen. That said, very tough to avoid. But your constant railing on the Barry economy comes from a place that is pretty much emotional. There's no question that the economy seems to be doing pretty well the past several years. Maybe all those moves Barry made, while slow to recover, built a foundation that props it up higher for the long term? In any event, you would be singing a very different tune, if the D and R were reversed, nobody on this board doubts that.
It doesn't have to happen. It's caused by the Fed. Barry didn't make any moves.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
38,907
Reaction score
1,317
Points
113
Maybe all those moves Barry made, while slow to recover, built a foundation that props it up higher for the long term?
No. An additional 10 trillion in debt does not prop it up higher for the longer term. Thank you for admitting that the recovery was slow, unlike jtf and others here you will acknowledge that. My problem is not that Barry was a D. Barry was a socialist/globalist and he installed more regulations and more entitlements, while dampening business optimism and incentive. To a degree Bush did the same, adding 5 trillion in debt and he did increase entitlements. Bush was much better on taxes (which are a reduction of freedom) and regulation than Barry. The wars (partly his fault) and the sub prime crisis ruined Bush's terms. The sub prime crisis had almost zero to do with Bush policies. Obamas policies and his globalist outlook ruined his terms.

A President can offer a sense of optimism to business and to investors that an honest risk taken will be rewarded to the maximum if successful. Or a President can offer the view that business should be harnessed and that the profits are do to and due to the Federal Government. Trump has chosen the former and this is why there is so much growth as compared to the Obama era.

The sub prime crisis which caused the great recession was an example of long term government intervention in the home loan industry to create "equality of result" which was followed by a greedy reaction to game the system by big banks. Tell the banks they are going to be regulated on who they have to give loans to and they will find a way to make money off of it. And they did.
 

bottlebass

Main Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2013
Messages
15,701
Reaction score
349
Points
83
No. An additional 10 trillion in debt does not prop it up higher for the longer term. Thank you for admitting that the recovery was slow, unlike jtf and others here you will acknowledge that. My problem is not that Barry was a D. Barry was a socialist/globalist and he installed more regulations and more entitlements, while dampening business optimism and incentive. To a degree Bush did the same, adding 5 trillion in debt and he did increase entitlements. Bush was much better on taxes (which are a reduction of freedom) and regulation than Barry. The wars (partly his fault) and the sub prime crisis ruined Bush's terms. The sub prime crisis had almost zero to do with Bush policies. Obamas policies and his globalist outlook ruined his terms.

A President can offer a sense of optimism to business and to investors that an honest risk taken will be rewarded to the maximum if successful. Or a President can offer the view that business should be harnessed and that the profits are do to and due to the Federal Government. Trump has chosen the former and this is why there is so much growth as compared to the Obama era.

The sub prime crisis which caused the great recession was an example of long term government intervention in the home loan industry to create "equality of result" which was followed by a greedy reaction to game the system by big banks. Tell the banks they are going to be regulated on who they have to give loans to and they will find a way to make money off of it. And they did.
http://www.usdebtclock.org/
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
38,907
Reaction score
1,317
Points
113
As discussed before- the current President and Congress can do very little to stop the debt clock without addressing entitlements. That is where the money is being spent. It is called "mandatory spending". Interest on the debt is 300B to 400B per year. That cannot be stopped.

Take a look at the debt clock you linked- It has an interesting feature...you can go back in time! Click on this day in 2008. Now look at these categories:

Social security in Nov. 2008- 614 billion Today- 988 billion
Medicare in 2008 659 billion Today- 1097 billion
Defense in 2008 697 billion Today - 669 billion What? Defense is the only one that didn't go up! :)

All those years under Obama and no one touched the entitlements only the Rs even tried, except that we added another one- Obamacare. That one was 100% Ds.
 

bottlebass

Main Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2013
Messages
15,701
Reaction score
349
Points
83
As discussed before- the current President and Congress can do very little to stop the debt clock without addressing entitlements. That is where the money is being spent. It is called "mandatory spending". Interest on the debt is 300B to 400B per year. That cannot be stopped.

Take a look at the debt clock you linked- It has an interesting feature...you can go back in time! Click on this day in 2008. Now look at these categories:

Social security in Nov. 2008- 614 billion Today- 988 billion
Medicare in 2008 659 billion Today- 1097 billion
Defense in 2008 697 billion Today - 669 billion What? Defense is the only one that didn't go up! :)

All those years under Obama and no one touched the entitlements only the Rs even tried, except that we added another one- Obamacare. That one was 100% Ds.
Trump stimulus...
 

howeda7

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
40,482
Reaction score
1,272
Points
113
That's nice. We also have massive spending increases and much larger debt. Why don't you mention the vastly increased spending when you talk about the "improved" economy. Why don't you mention the massively increased deficit spending? How do those affect the U.S. economy? So many questions left unanswered by The Beeg.
Trump and the party of fiscal responsibility have just overseen the largest one year increase in our national debit in history. And Beeg is thrilled!
 
Top Bottom