Welcome to ECCIE, become a part of the fastest growing adult community. Take a minute & sign up!

Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!

Go Premium

Go Back   ECCIE Worldwide > General Interest > The Political Forum
test
The Political Forum Discuss anything related to politics in this forum. World politics, US Politics, State and Local.

Most Favorited Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Most Liked Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Top Reviewers
cockalatte 649
MoneyManMatt 490
Still Looking 399
samcruz 399
Jon Bon 397
Harley Diablo 377
honest_abe 362
DFW_Ladies_Man 313
Chung Tran 288
lupegarland 287
nicemusic 285
Starscream66 281
You&Me 281
George Spelvin 270
sharkman29 256
Top Posters
DallasRain70817
biomed163484
Yssup Rider61124
gman4453308
LexusLover51038
offshoredrilling48753
WTF48267
pyramider46370
bambino42983
The_Waco_Kid37293
CryptKicker37225
Mokoa36497
Chung Tran36100
Still Looking35944
Mojojo33117

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-02-2018, 09:11 AM   #91
LexusLover
Valued Poster
 
LexusLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I B Hankering View Post
You're ignoring context, speedy. There was a negative decline -- 2% -- in wage growth under Odumbo, speedy. So, the shift towards the positive under Trump would mean it is your POV that is stagnant, speedy.
Speedo is merely suffering from TDS.

TDS has an eight-year healing process, but the "after" effects are PDS, which continue for another eight-years.
LexusLover is offline   Quote
Old 08-02-2018, 11:10 AM   #92
SpeedRacerXXX
Valued Poster
 
SpeedRacerXXX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 31, 2009
Location: Georgetown, Texas
Posts: 9,330
Encounters: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I B Hankering View Post
You're ignoring context, speedy. There was a negative decline -- 2% -- in wage growth under Odumbo, speedy. So, the shift towards the positive under Trump would mean it is your POV that is stagnant, speedy.
No, it is you is ignoring the context. The point being discussed is wage growth under TRUMP, not Obama. Obama took over a country in the worst recession since the 1930s. He was concerned more with getting people back to work than wage growth. So yes, wage growth under Obama was a sore point. Wage growth in 2016, Obama's last year in office, was 2.9%. In 2015 it was 2.5%. Still not great but considering the shit Obama was handed, the turnaround was very significant.

So getting back to wage growth under Trump, it remains in the same range as it did under the last couple of years under Obama. Still considered weak.
SpeedRacerXXX is offline   Quote
Old 08-02-2018, 12:26 PM   #93
I B Hankering
Valued Poster
 
I B Hankering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: South of Chicago
Posts: 31,214
Encounters: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX View Post
No, it is you is ignoring the context. The point being discussed is wage growth under TRUMP, not Obama. Obama took over a country in the worst recession since the 1930s. He was concerned more with getting people back to work than wage growth. So yes, wage growth under Obama was a sore point. Wage growth in 2016, Obama's last year in office, was 2.9%. In 2015 it was 2.5%. Still not great but considering the shit Obama was handed, the turnaround was very significant.

So getting back to wage growth under Trump, it remains in the same range as it did under the last couple of years under Obama. Still considered weak.
You're lying through your teeth, speedy.

I B Hankering is offline   Quote
Old 08-02-2018, 12:46 PM   #94
Hotrod511
Valued Poster
 
Hotrod511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 9, 2017
Location: USA
Posts: 2,354
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX View Post
No, it is you is ignoring the context. The point being discussed is wage growth under TRUMP, not Obama. Obama took over a country in the worst recession since the 1930s. He was concerned more with getting people back to work than wage growth. So yes, wage growth under Obama was a sore point. Wage growth in 2016, Obama's last year in office, was 2.9%. In 2015 it was 2.5%. Still not great but considering the shit Obama was handed, the turnaround was very significant.

So getting back to wage growth under Trump, it remains in the same range as it did under the last couple of years under Obama. Still considered weak.
You people say that a lot but I don't remember seeing any soup or bread lines
Hotrod511 is offline   Quote
Old 08-02-2018, 02:29 PM   #95
SpeedRacerXXX
Valued Poster
 
SpeedRacerXXX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 31, 2009
Location: Georgetown, Texas
Posts: 9,330
Encounters: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I B Hankering View Post
You're lying through your teeth, speedy.

First, the growth target for nominal wages is 3.5%-4.0% according to the following article, which is consistent with other sources.

https://www.epi.org/nominal-wage-tracker/

"Compensation for workers rose to a nearly 10-year high in the second quarter as inflation pressures continued to percolate in the U.S. economy.

The employment cost index increased 0.6 percent for civilian workers in the three-month period ending in June, according to a Bureau of Labor Statistics release Tuesday. That brought the 12-month rate up to 2.8 percent, the highest level since 2.9 percent in the third quarter of 2008, amid the financial crisis and the Great Recession."



https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/31/work...ince-2008.html

Your 2nd and 3rd charts show off your stupidity. The 2nd chart shows only 2 quarters while Trump was fully in office, with no gain from the 3rd to the 4th quarter. The 3rd chart, average hourly earnings of all private sector employees rose from $26.0 to maybe $26.575 while Trump has been in office. That comes out to a gain of .022% in the 10 month period covered. Not good at all.

"The results suggest that an economy firing on most cylinders is still failing to produce the kind of broad-based gains that Republicans have pledged to deliver through a sweeping tax cut and deregulation.

That could change: Some see more meaningful wage gains ahead as whatever slack that remains in the labor market works its way out. Tuesday’s report offered “another sign that the labor markets are tightening and that compensation is going up as employers compete for workers,” says Douglas Holtz-Eakin, president of the American Action Forum."


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.0fdda530df06

"The economy is growing strongly, the unemployment rate has been at or below 4.5 percent for 16 straight months, but wage growth remains disappointingly low.

Wages are growing much more slowly than the last time we had sustained low unemployment rates, the late 1990s. This is the notorious “wage puzzle,” a topic that has been the subject of much speculation by everyone from Federal Reserve Chair Jay Powell to pretty much every economist I follow on Twitter.

A variety of explanations have been proposed: Perhaps wages lag because there’s more labor market “slack” than there appears to be (the result of low labor force participation), or employers may be wielding new market clout against workers, or the trend could be a byproduct of the fact that wages are still effectively adjusting from the recession. Or perhaps inequality itself produces a dynamic that drives down wages."


So my opinion that the increase in wages is not meeting expectations is hardly mine alone. So if I'm lying so are most others. Wage growth is computed over a 12-month period, and over the last 12 months ending in June wage growth was at 2.8%.
SpeedRacerXXX is offline   Quote
Old 08-02-2018, 02:30 PM   #96
LexusLover
Valued Poster
 
LexusLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I B Hankering View Post
You're lying through your teeth, speedy.
Dentures. Not teeth.
LexusLover is offline   Quote
Old 08-02-2018, 02:42 PM   #97
I B Hankering
Valued Poster
 
I B Hankering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: South of Chicago
Posts: 31,214
Encounters: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX View Post
First, the growth target for nominal wages is 3.5%-4.0% according to the following article, which is consistent with other sources.

https://www.epi.org/nominal-wage-tracker/

"Compensation for workers rose to a nearly 10-year high in the second quarter as inflation pressures continued to percolate in the U.S. economy.

The employment cost index increased 0.6 percent for civilian workers in the three-month period ending in June, according to a Bureau of Labor Statistics release Tuesday. That brought the 12-month rate up to 2.8 percent, the highest level since 2.9 percent in the third quarter of 2008, amid the financial crisis and the Great Recession."



https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/31/work...ince-2008.html

Your 2nd and 3rd charts show off your stupidity. The 2nd chart shows only 2 quarters while Trump was fully in office, with no gain from the 3rd to the 4th quarter. The 3rd chart, average hourly earnings of all private sector employees rose from $26.0 to maybe $26.575 while Trump has been in office. That comes out to a gain of .022% in the 10 month period covered. Not good at all.

"The results suggest that an economy firing on most cylinders is still failing to produce the kind of broad-based gains that Republicans have pledged to deliver through a sweeping tax cut and deregulation.

That could change: Some see more meaningful wage gains ahead as whatever slack that remains in the labor market works its way out. Tuesday’s report offered “another sign that the labor markets are tightening and that compensation is going up as employers compete for workers,” says Douglas Holtz-Eakin, president of the American Action Forum."


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.0fdda530df06

"The economy is growing strongly, the unemployment rate has been at or below 4.5 percent for 16 straight months, but wage growth remains disappointingly low.

Wages are growing much more slowly than the last time we had sustained low unemployment rates, the late 1990s. This is the notorious “wage puzzle,” a topic that has been the subject of much speculation by everyone from Federal Reserve Chair Jay Powell to pretty much every economist I follow on Twitter.

A variety of explanations have been proposed: Perhaps wages lag because there’s more labor market “slack” than there appears to be (the result of low labor force participation), or employers may be wielding new market clout against workers, or the trend could be a byproduct of the fact that wages are still effectively adjusting from the recession. Or perhaps inequality itself produces a dynamic that drives down wages."


So my opinion that the increase in wages is not meeting expectations is hardly mine alone. So if I'm lying so are most others. Wage growth is computed over a 12-month period, and over the last 12 months ending in June wage growth was at 2.8%.
You're the moron, speedy. The graphs show substantial wage growth during Trump's presidency over what it was doing during Odumbo's presidency, speedy. You're just too chicken shit to concede what is obvious to every other sentient being, speedy.
I B Hankering is offline   Quote
Old 08-02-2018, 02:45 PM   #98
LexusLover
Valued Poster
 
LexusLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
Default

He's still gagging on "crow"!

Quote:
10-20-2016, 08:03 AM #21
SpeedRacerXXX


This election is OVER. Republicans should start focusing on 2020. Unless a bomb hits between now and November 8th there is no way Trump can overcome the lead that Clinton has in the polls. For those of you who are still not believing the polls . . . we'll see in a handful of days how accurate they are.
Congests his analytical abilities. What few he had in the first place.
LexusLover is offline   Quote
Old 08-02-2018, 02:58 PM   #99
MT Pockets
Valued Poster
 
MT Pockets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 9, 2016
Location: North Texas
Posts: 2,234
Encounters: 20
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover View Post
I'm not "irritated." I'm amusing myself. There's a distinction.

Lusty is what one gets when one goes full tilt "sanctuary"!

Like Spitsburg!
Finally! Something we agree on. LOL!
MT Pockets is offline   Quote
Old 08-02-2018, 11:46 PM   #100
lustylad
Premium Access
 
lustylad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 8, 2010
Location: Steeler Nation
Posts: 18,708
Encounters: 10
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover View Post
I sound more and more like AssUp!
FTFY.

Have you and assup come up with a new, politically inoffensive name for your hometown of Austin yet?

Or are you both too busy dreaming up lame-ass nicknames for Pittsburgh?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Yssup Rider View Post
...take this shit back to Pissburg?
Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover View Post
Like Spitsburg!
.
lustylad is offline   Quote
Old 08-03-2018, 12:26 AM   #101
lustylad
Premium Access
 
lustylad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 8, 2010
Location: Steeler Nation
Posts: 18,708
Encounters: 10
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MT Pockets View Post
You left out the part of what the chart was actually for. It was showing that sub par growth has become a trend. You like to manipulate things or more likely copy and pasted one of your ilks thoughts from some other forum.
A "trend"? You mean like your craving more and more trailer-park dick?

You just copied and pasted someone else's words - after falsely accusing me of doing the same.

How do you explain this supposed trend toward subpar economic growth, empty cranium? Is it a result of "secular stagnation"? Or do you want to go with the handy excuse it is harder to recover from "financial" recessions? Go ahead and explain why it has nothing to do with odumbo. Amazing how his anti-growth policies just happened to usher in a period of... slower growth!

The economy inched ahead by 1.6% in odumbo's last year. Now it's exploding at an annual rate of 4.1%, jackass.

But go ahead and elaborate on your subpar growth "trend". In your own words. If you can. No copy-pasting, ok?
lustylad is offline   Quote
Old 08-03-2018, 08:01 AM   #102
SpeedRacerXXX
Valued Poster
 
SpeedRacerXXX's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 31, 2009
Location: Georgetown, Texas
Posts: 9,330
Encounters: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I B Hankering View Post
You're the moron, speedy. The graphs show substantial wage growth during Trump's presidency over what it was doing during Odumbo's presidency, speedy. You're just too chicken shit to concede what is obvious to every other sentient being, speedy.
You have presented one chart in your defense. I have supplied you with 5 or 6 links with statements from several people who study the economy for a living all of whom state that the wage growth at this point in time is disappointing and falling short of both expectations and what is considered "good" income growth -- 3.5-4% over a 12-month period.

If you can find maybe two statements by independent analysts who support your belief that income growth is doing well and supply those links then we will continue this discussion. Until then, you've got nothing and it's over and out.
SpeedRacerXXX is offline   Quote
Old 08-03-2018, 08:13 AM   #103
LexusLover
Valued Poster
 
LexusLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
Default

There are probably some upper level FBI agents and former agents who would also agree with the "ex-spurts" on how terrible Trump is doing on the economy in comparison to the Clinton-Obaminable years.

After all they have a "sniff test" for deplorables at Walmart.

It's called the "weight" of the evidence ... more of them!
LexusLover is offline   Quote
Old 08-03-2018, 08:29 AM   #104
lustylad
Premium Access
 
lustylad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 8, 2010
Location: Steeler Nation
Posts: 18,708
Encounters: 10
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX View Post
...the wage growth at this point in time is disappointing and falling short of both expectations and what is considered "good" income growth -- 3.5-4% over a 12-month period.
Can you read a bar graph, speedy? The graph titled "US wages and salaries growth" (which you even copied in your post #95 above) shows the 12-month gain has ranged between 3.9% and 5.4% since last October.





Quote:
Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX View Post
The 3rd chart, average hourly earnings of all private sector employees rose from $26.0 to maybe $26.575 while Trump has been in office. That comes out to a gain of .022% in the 10 month period covered.
You're not very good with decimals, are you speedy? I calculated 2.2%, not .022%. And don't forget to annualize it.

Yeah I know, it still looks lackluster - but learn to do the math right, ok? The chart isn't up to date anyway.
lustylad is offline   Quote
Old 08-03-2018, 09:26 AM   #105
I B Hankering
Valued Poster
 
I B Hankering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: South of Chicago
Posts: 31,214
Encounters: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX View Post
You have presented one chart in your defense. I have supplied you with 5 or 6 links with statements from several people who study the economy for a living all of whom state that the wage growth at this point in time is disappointing and falling short of both expectations and what is considered "good" income growth -- 3.5-4% over a 12-month period.

If you can find maybe two statements by independent analysts who support your belief that income growth is doing well and supply those links then we will continue this discussion. Until then, you've got nothing and it's over and out.

You discounting the graphs because you refuse to acknowledge what they say, and that reflects your childish political bias -- not reality, speedy.



Quote:
Wage Growth Picks Up

Average hourly earnings rose by 8 cents to $26.92 in May. From a year ago, wages were up 2.7%--better than the 2.6% growth economists had forecast. That's still below precession levels but indicates the falling unemployment rate and strong pace of hiring is encouraging employers to raise pay to secure workers.



(WSJ)

Quote:
U.S. Wage Growth in June Was 2018's Strongest So Far

(The Motley Fool)
I B Hankering is offline   Quote
Reply



AMPReviews.net
Find Ladies
Hot Women

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © 2009 - 2016, ECCIE Worldwide, All Rights Reserved