Market up on strong jobs data.

[MomentsofSanity]

Are you looking at the same graph posted and trying to pretend workforce participation under Trump is worse than Obama?

Here's a different graph.

It's the BLS number showing it hasn't moved in years. It hasn't ticked up as you said. it's stagnant. And it's right where it was forecast to be over a decade ago.

 

[SlowSpyder]

I posted something positive for America, under Trump, and look at you guys spin. I am sort of surprised, maybe I shouldn't be given the amount of TDS here.. .but yet I am, there are some of you trying to actively suggest things aren't going great with our economy right now, under Trump. You're disagreeing with pretty much every economist alive to spin your bs. The Trump economy is smoking right now and your biggest fears are coming to light, that he is a successful president that is getting it done and gaining support showing the left of common sense overly PC ways of today's liberals isn't the answer. Spin guys, spin!

 

[SlowSpyder]

Labor force participation rate today is identical to what it was for the last two years under Obama.

It's not worse, it's just not any better. Any other stats you'd like to make up?

Can you expand the graph to show where workforce participation started under Obama and where it ended? Do the same for Trump too.

 

[fskimospy]

Can you expand the graph to show where workforce participation started under Obama and where it ended? Do the same for Trump too.

That would be stupid as it would include a massive global recession under Obama.

The time periods covered for both people are the same and as temporally close as possible. The last two years under Obama and the first two under Trump.

So again, you claimed it was going up under Trump and this was yet another lie. It is very telling that you feel the need to invent accomplishments for him.

 

[fskimospy]

For the record I think the economy is basically the same as it was under Obama - fine, but not great. Good jobs growth, bad wage growth.

It is worrying that Trump engaged in such colossal fiscal stimulus without a better effect on jobs or wages though.

 

[SlowSpyder]

That would be stupid as it would include a massive global recession under Obama.

The time periods covered for both people are the same and as temporally close as possible. The last two years under Obama and the first two under Trump.

So again, you claimed it was going up under Trump and this was yet another lie. It is very telling that you feel the need to invent accomplishments for him.

I linked a graph that shows workforce participation ticking up the last few years. Not a lie. Again though, spin your story so that it appears Trump isn't doing well while all of America continues to benefit from his policies. You can live in fantasy land while the rest of us live in the real world and reap the benefits. I understand why you wouldn't want to show the entire body of work under Obama in regards to workforce participation...

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Somewhere around 2-3% growth is the new norm, this isn't exactly news as it's talking about sustained growth, not a couple quarters here or there. Did you think it was special when Obama hit similar numbers multiple times? If you think Trump getting 4% growth in a quarter after engaging in massive fiscal stimulus on a level greater than Obama engaged in in response to the great recession is special you're an idiot.

At this point - getting sustained job growth is very good. Everyone was predicting the labor market was finished and would start tapering off from "full employment". The fact that it is still getting significant gains must mean that people are starting to come out of the woodwork that were previously not in the labor force participation. Time will tell on that.

And no - I don't credit Trump with any of that.

 

[trenchfoot]

We've all seen and heard how time after time Trump ignominiously attempts to bring undue credit to himself including blatantly lying about it. He's an attention whore and a very repugnant one at that. It's simply Trump being Trump.

That many of his supporters totally ignore every single objectionable thing about him (too many to comprehend actually) and give him wide berth as far as his inexcusable character flaws and deeds are concerned speaks to a very troubling and dangerous road they're careening down. It speaks to an attitude that Trump can do or say anything he wishes, well, as he actually has been since he scammed his way into office and it's all good. Would they do the same if Trump were a Democrat?

In contrast, we had a preceding POTUS that when compared with Trump was angelic in comparison yet was falsely vilified on a daily/hourly basis with spectacularly loud baseless accusations by the opposition party to the point where every false and misleading accusation made against Obama became horrendously factual in the eyes of those who opposed him simply because he was from "outside the norms and traditions that a POTUS is expected to fall within" ie - he was black, and in their eyes of highly questionable character, birth and religion.

Yet here we have Trump who is vilified on a daily/hourly basis with spectacularly truthful and factual accusations by the opposition party that is outright rejected, or totally ignored by his supporters and get this: ironically countered with the same conspiratorial ploys and disingenuous intent in defense of Trump that they weaponized against Obama.

Classy, elegant, ingenious....................................................not.

 

[fskimospy]

I linked a graph that shows workforce participation ticking up the last few years. Not a lie. Again though, spin your story so that it appears Trump isn't doing well while all of America continues to benefit from his policies. You can live in fantasy land while the rest of us live in the real world and reap the benefits. I understand why you wouldn't want to show the entire body of work under Obama in regards to workforce participation...

My numbers come directly from the federal government. They are correct. If you have a problem with them take it up with the Federal Reserve. Unlike you I approach this logically instead of emotionally. I think the economy is fine overall, I just don’t feel the need to make up lies to justify my position. It is a simple fact that wage growth under Trump has been poor, contrary to your claim.

Or maybe you aren’t lying, maybe you’re just that caught up in the propaganda.

 

[Jhhnn]

For the record I think the economy is basically the same as it was under Obama - fine, but not great. Good jobs growth, bad wage growth.

It is worrying that Trump engaged in such colossal fiscal stimulus without a better effect on jobs or wages though.

It will all trickle down, obviously, just like it has since 1980.

 

[fskimospy]

At this point - getting sustained job growth is very good. Everyone was predicting the labor market was finished and would start tapering off from "full employment". The fact that it is still getting significant gains must mean that people are starting to come out of the woodwork that were previously not in the labor force participation. Time will tell on that.

And no - I don't credit Trump with any of that.

Like I said, I think this is quite similar to the economy under Obama. Good job growth, bad wage growth.

It’s a very reasonable argument to say that the same number of jobs under Trump is more impressive because of lower unemployment. The flip side of that however is that makes his bad wage numbers even worse as low unemployment should push that up.

My primary concern is that Trump’s fiscal stimulus focused on rich people was foolish to begin with in a growing economy and, in this case counterproductive for most workers as its increased inflation is destroying whatever wage gains are coming to them. Nominal wage growth has actually been pretty good, we are just losing it all to inflation.

 

[HomerJS]

I posted something positive for America, under Trump, and look at you guys spin. I am sort of surprised, maybe I shouldn't be given the amount of TDS here.. .but yet I am, there are some of you trying to actively suggest things aren't going great with our economy right now, under Trump. You're disagreeing with pretty much every economist alive to spin your bs. The Trump economy is smoking right now and your biggest fears are coming to light, that he is a successful president that is getting it done and gaining support showing the left of common sense overly PC ways of today's liberals isn't the answer. Spin guys, spin!

How can we give positive responses when Trump himself said the numbers are fake??

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

For the record I think the economy is basically the same as it was under Obama - fine, but not great. Good jobs growth, bad wage growth.

It is worrying that Trump engaged in such colossal fiscal stimulus without a better effect on jobs or wages though.

Mmmm based on my understanding of capitalism and applying it to our economy - jobs will always come first. Wages come due to the lack of job growth (not enough qualified candidates).

So as long as we continue to have this trend where jobs are gaining - and by gaining I mean that they are higher than just keeping up with new entries into the labor force - then in theory wages aren't expected to grow much substantially.

Were finally starting to see the beginning of an uptick

https://www.frbatlanta.org/chcs/wage-growth-tracker?panel=1

But keep in mind, globalism has thrown a wrench into everything historically. While US wages aren't keeping up - globally tons of the lower class have been lifted out of poverty.... But you won't see democrats boasting about that...

 

[SlowSpyder]

Even CNBC finally had to give in and admit it (headline: Trump has set economic growth on fire. Here is how he did it). Wonder if some posters here will ever be able to reconcile their views with reality?

During his time in office, the economy has achieved feats most experts thought impossible. GDP is growing at a 3 percent-plus rate. The unemployment rate is near a 50-year low. Meanwhile, the stock market has jumped 27 percent amid a surge in corporate profits.

Friday brought another round of good news: Nonfarm payrolls rose by a better-than-expected 201,000 and wages, the last missing piece of the economic recovery, increased by 2.9 percent year over year to the highest level since April 2009. That made it the best gain since the recession ended in June 2009.

 

[fskimospy]

Mmmm based on my understanding of capitalism and applying it to our economy - jobs will always come first. Wages come due to the lack of job growth (not enough qualified candidates).

So as long as we continue to have this trend where jobs are gaining - and by gaining I mean that they are higher than just keeping up with new entries into the labor force - then in theory wages aren't expected to grow much substantially.

We are significantly below the levels of unemployment historically necessary to see a substantial increase in wages. Over the last year and a half though we've seen wage stagnation and even decline.

Were finally starting to see the beginning of an uptick

https://www.frbatlanta.org/chcs/wage-growth-tracker?panel=1

But keep in mind, globalism has thrown a wrench into everything historically. While US wages aren't keeping up - globally tons of the lower class have been lifted out of poverty.... But you won't see democrats boasting about that...

Unfortunately that's not accurate. Your chart there is showing nominal wage growth, not real wage growth. Like I said, the increase in inflation likely caused by Trump's huge stimulus plan has eaten up everyone's wage gains.

By the way, I'm fine with higher inflation for a sustained period, but Trump did it in basically the dumbest way possible, shoveling money at rich people.

 

[fskimospy]

Even CNBC finally had to give in and admit it (headline: Trump has set economic growth on fire. Here is how he did it). Wonder if some posters here will ever be able to reconcile their views with reality?

Hahaha, color me not at all surprised that what amounts to an opinion piece used nominal wage growth instead of real wage growth. If your wages went up 3% and the price of everything went up 3% you didn't actually end up any better off.

All people who actually understand economics use real wage growth almost exclusively as a measure of prosperity for workers.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Hahaha, color me not at all surprised that what amounts to an opinion piece used nominal wage growth instead of real wage growth. If your wages went up 3% and the price of everything went up 3% you didn't actually end up any better off.

All people who actually understand economics use real wage growth almost exclusively as a measure of prosperity for workers.

Of course you dismiss it, that article is VERY telling about Trump's achievements and how his policies are directly responsible for the great results we are seeing today. AT P&N, where job growth, workforce participation increases, and stock market gains are not a good thing.

 

[Vic]

Wait, I thought the employment numbers were cooked? Or did that just magically change once Trump was elected even though there's been no change in how the numbrers are calculated? And the labor participation rate hasn't improved either, but we don't care about that any more?

 

[SlowSpyder]

Wait, I thought the employment numbers were cooked? Or did that just magically change once Trump was elected even though there's been no change in how the numbrers are calculated? And the labor participation rate hasn't improved either, but we don't care about that any more?

Please find a single post of mine that says unemployment numbers were not real under Obama or Trump. You will not be able to because it was never something I implied or said.

 

[dainthomas]

Markets were up for almost 8 years straight years under Obama, but OP still hated his guts for some reason. Maybe because he wasn't a twice divorced serial adulterer, assaulter of women, and conman.

 

[Vic]

Please find a single post of mine that says unemployment numbers were not real under Obama or Trump. You will not be able to because it was never something I implied or said.

So you give the same credit to Obama for the economic recovery that occurred during his term of office that you expect us to give to Trump now?

 

[SlowSpyder]

Markets were up for almost 8 years straight years under Obama, but OP still hated his guts for some reason. Maybe because he wasn't a twice divorced serial adulterer, assaulter of women, and conman.

Absolutely false. I think Obama wasn't a bad president in many respects, overall he did an okay to moderately good job for the most part (save his half baked health care bill and Iran deal). He kicked the can down the road too often, but given the situation he inherited from the disaster that was GWB, he did alright. I'm not an either or type, I call it like i see it. Obama wasn't bad, Trump is knocking it out of the park though.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Just another day in AT P&N land, nothing has changed since I posted here months ago. Same handful of leftists pretending good news isn't good to protect their bubble, nothing more.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Absolutely false. I think Obama wasn't a bad president in many respects, overall he did an okay to moderately good job for the most part (save his half baked health care bill and Iran deal). He kicked the can down the road too often, but given the situation he inherited from the disaster that was GWB, he did alright. I'm not an either or type, I call it like i see it. Obama wasn't bad, Trump is knocking it out of the park though.

How is he though? The rate of improvement isn't going up. It's staying consistent to what it has been since early in the Obama admin. Wages aren't shooting up. New jobs aren't shooting up. The only thing shooting up under him is the national debt.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Just another day in AT P&N land, nothing has changed since I posted here months ago. Same handful of leftists pretending good news isn't good to protect their bubble, nothing more.

You're pretending consistency is improvement. It isn't. The economy has, for the most part, maintained it's trajectory.