You were really wrong and everyone told you exactly how and why for months and you just kept getting madder and wronger until you were telling people on here you'd fight them irl.
Losing in and of itself isn't embarrassing, losing because your twitter posts are so annoying that all your opponent had to do was stick them on a mailer is, in fact, embarrassing.
You know, I asked the guy who lives in his car down the street the same questions and for some reason he didn't want to have an academic debate. Weird!
American consumers under Biden enjoyed rising real wages and were spending record amount of excess disposable income on restaurants, entertainment, travel, and luxury goods
Unemployment being down is not a good enough metric alone. Why is part-time work enough to be considered "employed" but not enough to be part of the median wage calculations? Why are unemployed people left out completely as well? There are some glaring oversights in how data is being interpreted.
It doesn't really matter because they are measured by other indicators and they all move up/down together. What matters is if we are improving or getting worse.
Look at inflation rates for cost of living and the stagnation of minimum wage too if you want more "evidence," assuming average people need deep understanding of economics to comment on it is dense in its own way and why Dems keep losing elections. If the dollar doesn't stretch as far, people notice
Wouldn't a better metric be what people *actually* earn? The minimum wage is a floor, not a ceiling. A record low % of workers earn the federal minimum wage (1%)
Real wages for the bottom 10% rose a lot over the past 5 years. The 10th %ile is up 30% since just before COVID.
The thing about this article is that if the methodology was bad and things are actually much worse it doesn't explain why people were happier about the economy when under the "correct" methodology things were much worse than it was under the "correct" methodology in Nov 2024
They also publish data back 30 years and were at a historic low at the moment. If the argument is “the economy has always been bad for ever and ever” I guess that’s…an argument… https://www.lisep.org/tru
The article claims some other metric is a better indicator of the economy. Then it never actually uses that metric to compare it to some prior time period. If you actually do then you realize the economy is BETTER than it was in 2019 before the pandemic.
Will, this week you tried to argue that the Dems in 2016 who paid actual campaign dollars to advertise for Trump in the primary were the ones warning us all about the threat he posed, while the leftists actually doing that at the time were underselling him. YOU are extremely unpersuasive.
I am struggling to understand how you could read that whole article and come away thinking the economy is good. Especially when millions of people have been screaming the same thing.
The article doesn't align with it's own premise. It provides no evidence of a bad economy. It mostly just complains that some economic data is bad to use and some other data is better. Then fails to actually compare that other data across time. It's a really terrible article.
One of their key points is that the unemployment rate is ACTUALLY 23.7% thus the economy is bad. They conveniently leave out that (using their metric) this is historically low! I suppose if you want to argue we’ve literally never had a good economy, that’s one thing, but then they should say that.
Yeah but the second half of that sentence is their broader point - that THIS election’s results was a function of this (apparently) perma-bad economy. If that’s the case, why was this the first time voters “got it right?”
I don't think this article really makes that claim. Only that it's unreasonable to expect the electorate to perceive this economy as great, and reward Democrats for it. Perhaps that the Democrats made a strategic error in expecting to be rewarded. Not that the electorate was "correct" to pick Trump.
The article says “voters were right” but fails to acknowledge that this was (apparently) the very first time voters have been right, and that by their metrics the voters have been more wrong in every election in the last 30 years. Perhaps there’s something else going on that isn’t just economics…
I live in a house where my wife and I both make decent money and live frugally and are still check to check. It might not have gotten worse, but I’m not gonna give the democrats credit for “not worse.”
I asked to show his work. You did it for him. Where did I say I hated him? You’re right though. I do hate him. He makes a living out of being contrarian and discounting the lived experiences of working Americans. He also is a big boy who can defend himself, but never does.
Comments
- Upton Sinclair
Ive got an afternoon free
And they hated every minute of it
Wait until they experience a real recession again
That “data” are plural
If you want to claim the economy sucks then we'll need some evidence. That Politico article supplies none.
What do you consider worthwhile economic indicators? Why do you use them? And how have they changed in the last 5 years?
If you want to claim the economy sucks you need evidence.
Real wages for the bottom 10% rose a lot over the past 5 years. The 10th %ile is up 30% since just before COVID.
(Reading comprehension am hard)
Idk, did we ever figure out for sure who blew it up?
IDF has bombed all hospitals , but not this time.
Why die on this Hill, when there are literally hundrets and thiusands of IDF war crimes to point out?
But So what?
Even If someone uses nonsense arguments, it does not mean that they are always wrong. People can be right for wrong reasons.
Was hoping you'd seen it/could comment.