If the claim is that everything you do is the greatest and has never been done before, yada yada yada and then expect everyone to just agree with your fake news. He has the greatest con ever going and he has you buying in.
Remember Trump is only a salesman and they never sell down.
Politicians know that markets turn for no apparent reason and no one can control them absolutely, they are pretty careful about claiming influence on them.
His absolute clown show with the G7 is a great example. His policy is We are America, bitch. He's even pissed off the Canadians and that takes a lot. He freewheels all the time, "I'll know in the first minute"
It would be great if you were right about Trump and everything comes up roses, but Time will tell, none of this internet BS will.

Maybe you are right and I missed that people are deriding low employment and stock gains. Please show me where that happened and I will acquiesce. Maybe you are talking about Trump and his comments on unemployment in Nov '16 vs February '17?

This is basically what you are talking about Jim, but in reverse, right?

August 2016: Trump- Unemployment is one of the biggest hoaxs in politics. ..the “real” unemployment rate is anywhere from 18% to 42%. (reference to 4.9%)

August 2017: “We’ve fulfilled so many of our promises, everything we’ve wanted to do we’re doing. Unemployment is at a record low (4.2%), jobs are flowing back into the country.” Donald J. Trump

It's all true now and no longer a hoax.
He's riding the wave and you're cheering like he invented the ocean

"If the claim is that everything you do is the greatest and has never been done before, yada yada yada and then expect everyone to just agree with your fake news"

That's Trump, he's a world class egomaniac. It's fair to hold him accountable when he lies. What's not fair, is for the same liberals who touted the benefits of low unemployment and great stock returns, to suddenly say those things don't matter. That's the glaring hypocrisy Dangles and I are commenting on, and it's everywhere. Everywhere.

"Remember Trump is only a salesman "

Whatever he is, the economy is looking great at the moment. Of course it won't last. But many economists claim we are overdue for a recession, and so far, he's fighting that off. No one can do it forever.

"His absolute clown show with the G7 is a great example. His policy is We are America, bitch. He's even pissed off the Canadians and that takes a lot. He freewheels all the time, "I'll know in the first minute"

Again, those are valid, fair criticisms. We were pointing out naked, obvious hypocrisy, especially in not giving him credit for improving the economy.

I despised Obama in away that's hard to articulate, for his social policies and his radicalism and his personal arrogance. But he did some very productive things. I can say good things about Obama when de deserves it, the world doesn't stop spinning if you give credit where it's due. Liberals cannot do that with Trump, they are blinded and deranged by hate, and he loves it, he eats it up. Liberals fail to see, that's what got him elected. I don't know why they can't see that, the election wasn't that long ago, but they are acting in the same exact way. Deniro's "F--- Trump speech"? That helps Trump. How does the left not see that? It makes me want to donate to Trump.

Every single time Trump does something positive, the left either ignores it, or spins it into a negative. People see it, and it turns them off. It would do your side well to recognize that. You aren't going to beat Trump in the ring of fighting dirty, somehow he's better at it than everyone else.

Here's the difference between me and you. I can say that hypocrisy exists on my side, I have said it again and again and again. I have said Trump is a scumbag, again, and again, and again.

When we bring up the equally obvious hypocrisy on your side, all you do, every single time, is attack republicans. Anything to avoid admitting that the other side can ever have a point. In doing so, you are proving my point for me, not refuting it.

Again the irony. It s unnecessary to point out the difference between you and me. I asked you to point out where people are deriding low employment and stock gains. "Please show me where that happened and I will acquiesce." I guess that is hypocrisy on my part?

"I asked you to point out where people are deriding low employment and stock gains"

Is that a joke? Read the posts on this thread. As soon as Trump took the oath, unemployment became meaningless, and all that matters is wage gains.

Proof that ignorance knows no bounds. I am actually starting to think he doesn't understand your point Jim. It is this smug, blame the other side mentality that will have Trump reelected. No wonder that party is a mess
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Your last post nailed the hypocrisy, it really did. The democrats have literally learned nothing from the 2016 election, not a thing.

Find one please. I went back over every post in this thread.

You are right, I don't understand Jim's point. He has made several. Some are irrefutably incorrect. The others he hasn't backed up. It is smug, blame the other side mentality to ask him to back up a point that I don't find evidence for? I think you guys have trouble with word meanings. Now that was smug.

Posts #3, 16, 31, 34, 36, 37.

Nothing but deflection away from the positive, and a stubborn (and newfound!) focus on debt and wage growth.

Before he is elected
August 2016: Trump- Unemployment is one of the biggest hoaxs in politics. ..the “real” unemployment rate is anywhere from 18% to 42%.
After he was elected they became real numbers but he says it is all ME, there is BS on one of those statements, either he lied before (it was not a hoax) or he is lying now and it is a hoax. Pick one

Pete, you are petty. Just like Trump.
If it was good enough then,why isn't it now? Trump is a low life and you are stooping to his level.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

#3- you put some serious words in her mouth "feels like low unemployment isn't a big deal for the average citizen." were did she say that
Derisive about unemployment and the stock market?

#16- It doesn't mean that much unless it actually translates into wage growth. Looks like this statistic has only been tracked for the last 17 years so the historic significance isn't really that impressive.
Derisive? Not by the definition of derisive.

#31- absolutely nothing derisive

#34-
Originally Posted by spence View Post
If you were highly critical of his character you'd be razing the forum with hyped up posts like you did with Clinton and Obama.
I posted "You forgot to mention the federal debt," as something YOU would be razing the forum with hyped up posts about. Had nothing to do with my thoughts on unemployment and the stock market or the debt.

#36 whats the point of having this shortage of works wink wink if wages dont go UP? yes that is a bit derisive. But the platform of the 2nd place finisher in the democratic primary had it central to his platform. doesn't seem too hypocritical of wdmso to bring it up

#37 nothing derisive about low unemployment and stock gains in that post

One guy is saying wages are what matter. For all I know he is a Bernie guy and was saying that for the past 3 years. You make a big leap to "So when the same people who celebrated low unemployment and stock gains, are now deriding those things, I am just too stupid to see the acumen behind their genius. Gotcha' and "nothing but deflection away from the positive."

Here, Pelosi said "“Hip, hip, hooray, unemployment is down. What does that mean to me and my life?” You tell me, did she say that during the Obama years?

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/06/...ouths-economy/

"#16- It doesn't mean that much unless it actually translates into wage growth."

Yes, it does. It means a lot to the person who chose to take the job.

Spin it all you want. For 8 years, I heard Obama get patted on the back for low unemployment and stock market gains (I was one of those patting him on the back). Now all of a sudden those are not praise-worthy accomplishments.

:wall::usd:: I didn't say those words in #16, or agree with them, or ask your opinion of them. That was what was in the post. I was pointing out that those words,"it doesn't mean that much," aren't derisive.

Saying that something "doesn't mean that much", isn't derisive. Got it.

You didn't comment on Pelosi's statement I see. Once again, anything to avoid admitting that your side was wrong, anything to avoid admitting the other side has a point.

Sometimes it's valuable to put a remark in context of the thread. I wasn't saying that low unemployment didn't matter, but that the ratio of job openings to unemployed doesn't mean much unless it pushes employers to raise wages.

Don't know anyone here bashing unemployment Jim.

that is stupid

From all of your posts that I've read, it doesn't seem to me that you understand what I propose. And it seems that your vision is thoroughly embedded in the Progressive assumption that, without big "G" government direction and/or control, societal intercourse will somehow fail, or be dysfunctional.

I searched your movie title and found a comedy by that title and another sequel to it titled "The Gods Must be Crazy 2". The synopsis for neither one of them was about the failure of the free market, nor about the free market at all.

At any rate, I don't look to fictional movies, especially not to comedies, for an answer on how things fundamentally work. Comedies, fictional movies in general, can be very entertaining. But not so useful as a guide to what works or doesn't. Authors of fiction can make anything "work" or "fail" as they wish in the story they write.

I gave you a real world example of a free market oriented medical clinic that charged far less (that worked not failed) than the price for the same procedure done by our Hospital/government cartel system--even less than some of the best government controlled systems outside the US, including Switzerland.

But if you prefer fiction to reality, then I can see why you approach philosophical, political, and economic discussions the way you do--especially how the same thing is good or how it is bad (e.g., how corporatism is bad and destructive of the middle class, but can be a good thing if it can be used to belittle a free market enterprise) depending on the slant you wish to impose.

:uhuh:
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

If you're trying to challenge Dangles for irrelevancy you are giving him a run for his money.

(1) wages are rising. Google it. Not as fast as we'd like, but they are rising.

(2) it takes time for a shift in supply/demand, to effect the price of something (wages in this case). It doesn't happen immediately, and I'd bet you know this, but you're pretending you don't know it to serve your personal agenda.

(3) when the demand is greater than the supply, the workers are in a much better position than when there's no demand and a ton of supply. You also know this. If not, go take economics 101 at an online college.

"Don't know anyone here bashing unemployment Jim"

Pelosi said "hip hip hooray, unemployment is low". I posted a link. Do you want to recant your statement?

You are right. I was busy doing other things than taking the time to comment on the 4 billionth thing you have said in here. You probably should take a breath once in awhile. She had been beating the drum for higher wages way back into the Obama administration. She is a nut, but that isn't hypocritical for her. You need me to look that up for you too or can you do that when you find the definition of derisive?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Did Nancy join the forum? I hope everyone welcomed her.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

that means a lot coming from Spence Jung Un

But i do understand what you propose, I just believe that some people have and will always want Wealth and Power over others. That is why I referred you to that movie. The Bushmen had an absolute free market.
Shakespeare also wrote comedies. Art is important in society as more than just pretty pictures.
Here is a more in depth look at that movie, take with a grain of salt like all things.
https://grahambaden.com/2014/04/04/t...must-be-crazy/
Hey, it could also be a view in part of what the world will be like after the next world War.

Ok. I'll make sure I choose a right leaning source just to be safe.

Inflation rises at fastest pace in six years...average wages did not rise over the last 12 months, while real average hourly earnings fell 0.1 percent from last year.

http://thehill.com/policy/finance/39...e-in-six-years