OT: SPS Economists and Psychologists chime in

[Seinfeld]

BLS data

Which appears to come from roughly 60k household surveys out of 130 million households in the U.S. along with a sampling of business payrolls around the country.

Don't get me wrong, both sides of the aisle have either used this data to their advantage or ignored it at one time or another depending upon whether it benefits them or not, but there are some pretty broad assumptions being used to come up with the +6M figure. It's not a comprehensive aggregate of country-wide payroll data like some are thinking

 

[BulldogBlitz]

I dunno. Pre-pandemic, I was employed. Now, I own my own biz. I deal with a fair number of people that seem to have 4 to 6 "side gigs" and no regular. Are we in that "employed" count? Also, what about all the people, like me, with an OF subscribers?

 

[patdog]

I dunno. Pre-pandemic, I was employed. Now, I own my own biz. I deal with a fair number of people that seem to have 4 to 6 "side gigs" and no regular. Are we in that "employed" count? Also, what about all the people, like me, with an OF subscribers?

If you’re paying into Social Security (either through payroll withholding or self-employment tax), you’re employed.

 

[Boom Boom]

And here is the answer to the question… no one trust data anymore unless it’s released by their political party of choice. This goes for people on both sides of the isle. If Trump wins the election in a few months the majority of democrats will suddenly not trust inflation reports or job numbers.

Sigh. Radical centrism. I know you can find examples of the left not trusting govt data, but the two sides are not comparable on this issue.
But you are right at the end. If Trump is elected and does like he says he will and replaces all the non-partisan civil servants who compile these numbers with partisans....then yeah I'll probably not trust Margery Taylor Greens numbers. But hey, call me the same as people who don't trust the numbers now.

 

[aTotal360]

It's getting harder and harder to trust any data. Not trying to get all conspiratorial, but I feel like we've always been lied to.

"Lies, damn lies, and statistics."

 

[Boom Boom]

Fact: There are 6 million more people employed in the US than there were pre-pandemic.

Observation: It doesn't "feel" that way. i.e. the service industry still seems very hit or miss, etc.

Why is there such a gap between the reality and the way it feels?

Is it simply that we are 4 years further down the road of population growth and that 6MM doesn't put a dent in the need?

Were we that underemployed pre-pandemic so we don't notice?

Are there simply way more available jobs for people who would have previously been in the service industry?

The common number, for 20 years or so, has been 150k job growth per month is what keeps pace with growth. Might be outdated. But if not, that actually comes to more than 6M over 4 years.

 

[Boom Boom]

Since 2021, I have observed plenty of work available. In my area, the service industry is posting $15-20/hour entry-level openings on billboards. There isn't an effective minimum wage because there is so much demand for workers.

So, from my perspective, the pain hasn't been unemployment. It's been people with one or more jobs that can't afford the rising cost of living.

Postings don't equal available jobs. If their criteria is a unicorn that will take low pay....it's not really an open job.

For the above, I'd imagine they won't take people that fail a drug test, among other selection criteria. That's why they have to post for it, because in this economy drug free good workers can make more than $20/hr.

 

[mcdawg22]

And here is the answer to the question… no one trust data anymore unless it’s released by their political party of choice. This goes for people on both sides of the isle. If Trump wins the election in a few months the majority of democrats will suddenly not trust inflation reports or job numbers.

Honestly I won’t. Unless huge sweeping actions are taken I don’t think the president affects gas prices or the economy as easily as people think. If they did, do you think they would willfully have high gas prices and a bad economy? Bush has very high gas prices heading into an election year and had a background in the oil business. If any president could truly curb prices he would have been able to.

 

[mcdawg22]

Sigh. Radical centrism. I know you can find examples of the left not trusting govt data, but the two sides are not comparable on this issue.
But you are right at the end. If Trump is elected and does like he says he will and replaces all the non-partisan civil servants who compile these numbers with partisans....then yeah I'll probably not trust Margery Taylor Greens numbers. But hey, call me the same as people who don't trust the numbers now.

Is centrist an insult now? If so I’ll wear it with a badge of honor. The 60% of us think ya’ll are both nucking futs on your wings.

 

[horshack.sixpack]

Honestly I won’t. Unless huge sweeping actions are taken I don’t think the president affects gas prices or the economy as easily as people think. If they did, do you think they would willfully have high gas prices and a bad economy? Bush has very high gas prices heading into an election year and had a background in the oil prices. If any president could truly curb prices he would have been able to.

You mean when I was going broke trying to fuel up my Expedition post-Katrina it wasn't Dubya's fault?***

 

[horshack.sixpack]

Yes it would. Which is why we have the reserves to begin with. It’s nice we’re buying back cheaper. But it’s an unnecessary risk.

That's a reasonable take. Even if I had access to all of the information that the president does, I have no idea if I would have considered it a reasonable risk or not.

 

[mcdawg22]

You mean when I was going broke trying to fuel up my Expedition post-Katrina it wasn't Dubya's fault?***

Nope. I remember we had a Dodge Dealership next to where I worked and the new Hemi Ram prices were @ $17000.

 

[retire the banner]

Is centrist an insult now? If so I’ll wear it with a badge of honor. The 60% of us think ya’ll are both nucking futs on your wings.

Radical centrism and white supremacy are the biggest threats to our democracy

 

[POTUS]

And here is the answer to the question… no one trust data anymore unless it’s released by their political party of choice. This goes for people on both sides of the isle. If Trump wins the election in a few months the majority of democrats will suddenly not trust inflation reports or job numbers.

The democrats ask me to believe stuff my eyes say is false a lot more than the republicans do. That’s what radicalized me. I mean they are stealth editing Harris’s and Walz’s resumes non stop to make them look better. This is a confirmed fact. Axios called her the most liberal senator for years, she gets the nomination, they edit it out. Give me a break. I honestly can’t understand how anyone with any self respect votes blue anymore. Not to mention the absolute hatchet job on Kavanaugh (this was the inflection point for many).

 

[retire the banner]

The democrats ask me to believe stuff my eyes say is false a lot more than the republicans do. That’s what radicalized me. I mean they are stealth editing Harris’s and Walz’s resumes non stop to make them look better. This is a confirmed fact. Axios called her the most liberal senator for years, she gets the nomination, they edit it out. Give me a break. I honestly can’t understand how anyone with any self respect votes blue anymore. Not to mention the absolute hatchet job on Kavanaugh (this was the inflection point for many).

It starts and ends with the corrupt free press. It’s no longer about reporting the news, but about pushing an agenda. It’s sad there are people out there who still believe what the MSM media tells them.

 

[horshack.sixpack]

It starts and ends with the corrupt free press. It’s no longer about reporting the news, but about pushing an agenda. It’s sad there are people out there who still believe what the MSM media tells them.

This site has been incredibly helpful for me. You can quickly see what each side is saying about a common issue.

https://www.allsides.com/story/fact...laims-about-vances-and-walzs-military-records

 

[Boom Boom]

Is centrist an insult now? If so I’ll wear it with a badge of honor. The 60% of us think ya’ll are both nucking futs on your wings.

When you feel compelled to equate two sides that are not equivalent on an issue.....that's not a good thing. It's just as bad as the nucking futs people.

Just for the sake of argument, it IS possible to have one Party go off the rails without the other Party doing so. You should ask yourself how you should react in such a situation. Is continuously moving and making excuses to stay between both those Parties the right thing to do?

 

[L4Dawg]

Fact: There are 6 million more people employed in the US than there were pre-pandemic.

Observation: It doesn't "feel" that way. i.e. the service industry still seems very hit or miss, etc.

Why is there such a gap between the reality and the way it feels?

Is it simply that we are 4 years further down the road of population growth and that 6MM doesn't put a dent in the need?

Were we that underemployed pre-pandemic so we don't notice?

Are there simply way more available jobs for people who would have previously been in the service industry?

It's inflation. High inflation is a killer.

 

[mstateglfr]

The democrats ask me to believe stuff my eyes say is false a lot more than the republicans do. That’s what radicalized me. I mean they are stealth editing Harris’s and Walz’s resumes non stop to make them look better. This is a confirmed fact. Axios called her the most liberal senator for years, she gets the nomination, they edit it out. Give me a break. I honestly can’t understand how anyone with any self respect votes blue anymore. Not to mention the absolute hatchet job on Kavanaugh (this was the inflection point for many).

Are you referring to GovTrack and not Axios?
And are you referring to GovTrack's decision to stop ranking single years and instead focus on 2 year legilative sessions?

Webpage that rated Kamala Harris the 'most liberal' senator in 2019 suddenly disappears

GovTrack removed a web page ranking Vice President Kamala Harris as "most liberal compared to all senators" in 2019 when she was still in Congress.

www.foxnews.com

The site still shows Harris' 2 year congressional session report card from 2020 and still calls Harris 'most politically left compared to Senate Democrats' and ranked her 2nd to Sanders as the most liberal Senator.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/kamala_harris/412678/report-card/2020


If this is the site you are referring to, your analysis of what happened is quite different from reality. The site clearly still shows her time in the Senate as extremely liberal.

 

[retire the banner]

This site has been incredibly helpful for me. You can quickly see what each side is saying about a common issue.

https://www.allsides.com/story/fact...laims-about-vances-and-walzs-military-records

Yeah I’ve read that. But truthfully, MSNBC, Fox, CNN and every news outlet from the left and right are corrupt. There are more informed and unbiased independent journalists out there.

 

[Hot Rock]

Delete

 

[ckDOG]

The democrats ask me to believe stuff my eyes say is false a lot more than the republicans do. That’s what radicalized me. I mean they are stealth editing Harris’s and Walz’s resumes non stop to make them look better. This is a confirmed fact. Axios called her the most liberal senator for years, she gets the nomination, they edit it out. Give me a break. I honestly can’t understand how anyone with any self respect votes blue anymore. Not to mention the absolute hatchet job on Kavanaugh (this was the inflection point for many).

Not asking you to vote or not vote for anyone but it is entirely realistic and reasonable that politicians moderate/change with the more people the job represents and impacts. You can be further left and further right in CA or OK and it's fine bc the constituency expects it. If you carry those state focused politics to the presidency don't expect to be elected or remain there for more than a term. Now, should you believe that person and trust they would implement their moderated positions? I can't answer that but the idea it's possible someone genuinely shifts positions based on the job isn't unrealistic at all.

 

[horshack.sixpack]

Yeah I’ve read that. But truthfully, MSNBC, Fox, CNN and every news outlet from the left and right are corrupt. There are more informed and unbiased independent journalists out there.

My point is, allsides.com provides a way to vet stories so I don't depend on new sites or "news" sites, or social media for information. It helps with my ability to navigate the bias.

 

[ckDOG]

When you feel compelled to equate two sides that are not equivalent on an issue.....that's not a good thing. It's just as bad as the nucking futs people.

Just for the sake of argument, it IS possible to have one Party go off the rails without the other Party doing so. You should ask yourself how you should react in such a situation. Is continuously moving and making excuses to stay between both those Parties the right thing to do?

Moderate generally good. Centrist generally bad.

Former embraces reasonable compromise to move necessary business forward. Centrist positions to the center (regardless of where that center is) for sake of it to avoid pissing too many people off.

 

[Boom Boom]

Are you referring to GovTrack and not Axios?
And are you referring to GovTrack's decision to stop ranking single years and instead focus on 2 year legilative sessions?

Webpage that rated Kamala Harris the 'most liberal' senator in 2019 suddenly disappears

GovTrack removed a web page ranking Vice President Kamala Harris as "most liberal compared to all senators" in 2019 when she was still in Congress.

www.foxnews.com

The site still shows Harris' 2 year congressional session report card from 2020 and still calls Harris 'most politically left compared to Senate Democrats' and ranked her 2nd to Sanders as the most liberal Senator.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/members/kamala_harris/412678/report-card/2020


If this is the site you are referring to, your analysis of what happened is quite different from reality. The site clearly still shows her time in the Senate as extremely liberal.

These rankings have been worthless for decades, ever since Congress stopped functioning. Almost all votes are signaling exercises these days. It tells you something, but not what they claim. Someone who ranks on one end or the other either doesn't care to massage their rankings, or is intentionally massaging them in that direction.

 

[MedDawg]

Sigh. Radical centrism. I know you can find examples of the left not trusting govt data, but the two sides are not comparable on this issue.
But you are right at the end. If Trump is elected and does like he says he will and replaces all the non-partisan civil servants who compile these numbers with partisans....then yeah I'll probably not trust Margery Taylor Greens numbers. But hey, call me the same as people who don't trust the numbers now.

You think current civil servants are non-partisan?

 

[POTUS]

These rankings have been worthless for decades, ever since Congress stopped functioning. Almost all votes are signaling exercises these days. It tells you something, but not what they claim. Someone who ranks on one end or the other either doesn't care to massage their rankings, or is intentionally massaging them in that direction.

the validity of the ranking is inconsequential. The fact they stealth edited after she was handed the nomination is. They put their thumb on the scale. Period. You either admit the mainstream media is in the bag for the left or you are an idiot or just being willfully ignorant. Those are the only 3 options at this point.

 

[Seinfeld]

Moderate generally good. Centrist generally bad.

Former embraces reasonable compromise to move necessary business forward. Centrist positions to the center (regardless of where that center is) for sake of it to avoid pissing too many people off.

Which one is it when you’re in the middle because you don’t want to have a gosh damn thing to do with either side?

 

[POTUS]

Not asking you to vote or not vote for anyone but it is entirely realistic and reasonable that politicians moderate/change with the more people the job represents and impacts. You can be further left and further right in CA or OK and it's fine bc the constituency expects it. If you carry those state focused politics to the presidency don't expect to be elected or remain there for more than a term. Now, should you believe that person and trust they would implement their moderated positions? I can't answer that but the idea it's possible someone genuinely shifts positions based on the job isn't unrealistic at all.

She was running for president when she espoused all these views that the media is gleefully trying to memory hole. She wasn’t running for alderman. She was running for president. But she was so poor at it her campaign didn’t last long so I forgive you for forgetting it.

 

[IBleedMaroonDawg]

She was running for president when she espoused all these views that the media is gleefully trying to memory hole. She wasn’t running for alderman. She was running for president. But she was so poor at it her campaign didn’t last long so I forgive you for forgetting it.

I keep waiting by my phone for a phone call from Barry and Michelle saying that I am the next presidential candidate according to them and the rest of Pelosi's army!

I am waiting...

 

[mcdawg22]

Which one is it when you’re in the middle because you don’t want to have a gosh damn thing with either side?

 

[mstateglfr]

the validity of the ranking is inconsequential. The fact they stealth edited after she was handed the nomination is. They put their thumb on the scale. Period. You either admit the mainstream media is in the bag for the left or you are an idiot or just being willfully ignorant. Those are the only 3 options at this point.

Again, the FOXNEWS article that I linked clearly states the actual website vs the one you claimed, and clearly states the actual event with context.
I know that context constantly irks you and others here, but its important.

The website has Harris' 2 year term voting record up for everyone to easily see. Its right there and shows her as extremely liberal. The website explained why the 1 year information was removed and it is consistent with their policy change.
That should help you realize your rant is either dishonest or you were working off of incomplete information, and you should question the source that gave you the information.


No thumb is being placed on any scale here. No mainstream media is in the bag here.
The website clearly shows her voting record and clearly states she is extremely liberal...yet you claim they are placing their thumb on the scale.
The website is not at all 'mainstream media', to the point that you didnt even name the correct website in your initial rant.

 

[POTUS]

Again, the FOXNEWS article that I linked clearly states the actual website vs the one you claimed, and clearly states the actual event with context.
I know that context constantly irks you and others here, but its important.

The website has Harris' 2 year term voting record up for everyone to easily see. Its right there and shows her as extremely liberal. The website explained why the 1 year information was removed and it is consistent with their policy change.
That should help you realize your rant is either dishonest or you were working off of incomplete information, and you should question the source that gave you the information.


No thumb is being placed on any scale here. No mainstream media is in the bag here.
The website clearly shows her voting record and clearly states she is extremely liberal...yet you claim they are placing their thumb on the scale.
The website is not at all 'mainstream media', to the point that you didnt even name the correct website in your initial rant.

You could have saved time and just said, I’m willfully ignorant. But you’re you. So you’re gonna take 3 paragraphs to sum up what could be said in on sentence. You can’t be critical of the left. It will never happen. Ask yourself what that means.

 

[ckDOG]

She was running for president when she espoused all these views that the media is gleefully trying to memory hole. She wasn’t running for alderman. She was running for president. But she was so poor at it her campaign didn’t last long so I forgive you for forgetting it.

Almost like she realized some positions don't get you elected to POTUS based on actual experience. Politicians do in fact adapt to the constituencies that will put them in an office.

 

[POTUS]

Almost like she realized some positions don't get you elected to POTUS based on actual experience. Politicians do in fact adapt to the constituencies that will put them in an office.

Yes. She has muted her opinions in hopes to be in office so she can then enact those unpopular opinions with impunity. And knowing that she is all but lying to get elected, still morons will vote for her. She was front and center during Kavanaugh and I won’t forget it. Neither will others. Best of luck to her.

ETA: I’m not even a Trump fan. But I honestly loathe her. Not sure how any father could look their daughter in the eyes and say, “See honey, if you just sleep with the right people, you can be president too.”

 

[horshack.sixpack]

Yes. She has muted her opinions in hopes to be in office so she can then enact those unpopular opinions with impunity. And knowing that she is all but lying to get elected, still morons will vote for her. She was front and center during Kavanaugh and I won’t forget it. Neither will others. Best of luck to her.

ETA: I’m not even a Trump fan. But I honestly loathe her. Not sure how any father could look their daughter in the eyes and say, “See honey, if you just sleep with the right people, you can be president too.”

If sexual immorality turns you off, you can't vote Trump. Imagine if Harris had slept with a porn star while pregnant!

 

[Boom Boom]

You think current civil servants are non-partisan?

I think the majority of them try to be.

 

[Boom Boom]

the validity of the ranking is inconsequential.

not really

The fact they stealth edited after she was handed the nomination is.

I agree, there's an issue there. Not necessarily the one you think though.

They put their thumb on the scale. Period.

maybe. Or maybe someone looked at it and said the past position was dumb.

You either admit the mainstream media is in the bag for the left or you are an idiot or just being willfully ignorant.

that conclusion is incompatible with the facts.

Those are the only 3 options at this point.

Incorrect.

 

[Boom Boom]

Which one is it when you’re in the middle because you don’t want to have a gosh damn thing to do with either side?

That's just apathy. It's fine to say i have no position, or have no idea, etc. It's only "centrism" when you try to hold up your view as superior because you're in the middle.

 

[ckDOG]

Yes. She has muted her opinions in hopes to be in office so she can then enact those unpopular opinions with impunity. And knowing that she is all but lying to get elected, still morons will vote for her. She was front and center during Kavanaugh and I won’t forget it. Neither will others. Best of luck to her.

ETA: I’m not even a Trump fan. But I honestly loathe her. Not sure how any father could look their daughter in the eyes and say, “See honey, if you just sleep with the right people, you can be president too.”

How do you enact with impunity? There's a Congress and a conservative court that have checks on the office.