American job openings outnumber the jobless, first time ever recorded

[scottw]

Originally Posted by zimmy

You are right, he probably should have said 2019. Though he doesn't claim it is causing inflation now, as you state. In any case, Jim is talking about people have more money now (he use words like "in their pocket; take home wages.") The point is that the tax cuts may cause wage increases immediately (though they haven't very much) and then they may lead to inflation. The result might be everything costs more and people haven't made enough to off set the cost.

"probably, may, might".....

are you assuming wages will never increase?
with all those jobs out there it's a great time to get a second job like we used to do in the old days

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by scottw

"probably, may, might".....

What the h else could accurately be said about something that hasn't happened yet? They are auxiliary verbs and unless you are the moron running things these days you would allow for uncertainty. He just says things like

"I may be wrong, I mean I may stand before you in six months and say, 'Hey I was wrong, I don't know that I'll ever admit that, but I'll find some kind of an excuse."

Of course it is prognostication. It is based on what has happened in the past under similar conditions.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by zimmy

What the h else could accurately be said about something that hasn't happened yet?

you wrote ...."Maybe take home wages are up, a tiny bit... That doesn't necessarily equate to people having a net positive in wealth. If everything costs more as a result of the tax cuts, well you can figure out the rest..."


reads like present not future....

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by scottw

you wrote ...."Maybe take home wages are up, a tiny bit... That doesn't necessarily equate to people having a net positive in wealth. If everything costs more as a result of the tax cuts, well you can figure out the rest..."


reads like present not future....

Right. At times, Jim has poo poo'd people's suggestions that we kinda need to wait and see what happens a bit longer before we start lauding Trump for the "great things he has done for the economy." That discussion involves present and future. If you think the tax cuts were a great decision, you might side with Jim. If you think they weren't, as employed, the best decision you probably have to give it some time before putting up the mission accomplished banner.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by zimmy

Right. At times, Jim has poo poo'd people's suggestions that we kinda need to wait and see what happens a bit longer before we start lauding Trump for the "great things he has done for the economy." That discussion involves present and future. If you think the tax cuts were a great decision, you might side with Jim. If you think they weren't, as employed, the best decision you probably have to give it some time before putting up the mission accomplished banner.

that makes less sense than Spence suggesting the media was rough on Obama...and not nearly as funny

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by scottw

that makes less sense than Spence suggesting the media was rough on Obama...and not nearly as funny

I understand, but I feel like we have gone through this with you before. It is like me blaming Feinstein because I have a hard time with quantum mechanics, and this ain't rocket science.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[scottw]

Originally Posted by zimmy

It is like me blaming Feinstein because I have a hard time with quantum mechanics,

Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I honestly have no idea what you are talking about