Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	The claim and the fact and the why
Date:	1/28/2018 9:44:35 AM

TRUMP'S CLAIM...''Since my election we've created 2.4 million jobs and that is going up very very substantially.'' (Have no idea what the last part of that sentence means in English)

THE FACT...There were 2.4 million new jobs between Nov 1 2016 and jan 31 2018 (14 months).  For the calendar year 2017 the number of new jobs was about 2 million...that was the smallest annual increase in 7 years (look it up!)

THE WHY...The jobs increase has slowed down not because Trump's and economic genius (he ain't) or the economy but because at 4.1% (lowest in 17 years) we are near full employment and most people who want a job has a job and because more baby boomers are leaving the job market every year.  I know most people on this forum will cry ''fake'' news, but it is a fact that the greatest percentage increase in employment since the end of WWll was the 4 Carter years (look it up)...not because Carter was an economic genius (he wasn't...look at inflation and interest rates in his years) but because 1976 and 1980 were the peak years the millions of baby boomers were coming into the job market and spending lots of money.  If we actually do get to 3 to 4% growth promised by Trump we will not have enough workers to fill the positions, especially if we reduce or shut down immigration of qualified people who want to come here. (Just heard Republican Linda Chavez on TV completely agree with my last sentence...''If we further restrict immigration we will destroy our economy.'' Mant elements are involved in driving the econmoy, but none are as strong as demographics.

Name:	lakngulf -	Reply
Subject:	The claim and the fact and the why
Date:	1/28/2018 1:27:30 PM

So was this incorrect??   ''Since my election we've created 2.4 million jobs..." 

Name:	Buteye -	Reply
Subject:	The claim and the fact and the why
Date:	1/28/2018 2:31:47 PM

Instead of going back to the 70's and 80's to try and prove whatever it is you are trying to prove, why don't you report on something that is more important to the American people such as the corruption that went on during the Obama's eight years and is continuing today by the same corrupt individulas that remain in the FBI and DOJ? Why are you DemocRATS so opposed to the American people finding out what the recent texts are revealing about the "shamefull" leaders in the FBI and DOJ? Any comments on the "secret society?

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	ARCHI-KRAP
Date:	1/28/2018 3:59:25 PM

The REAL unemployment rate is 8.1%, not the gubment “pretty picture” 4.1%.  That means that there are 13.1 million on welfare, not the 6.6 reported.  Now, if we can get those extra 6,500,000 dimokrap welfare/unemployment pay rats to go back to work we won't need all your dimokrap voters (illegals) in the country.  Now try to deal with us in real world terms.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	The claim and the fact and the why
Date:	1/28/2018 7:24:18 PM (updated 1/28/2018 7:31:43 PM)

1/   Yes Lakengulf we have ''created'' 2.4 million jobs since Trump was elected 14 months ago.  We created 2.7 million jobs in the 14 months before trump was elected.  Have you heard him priase that? Have you praised it?

2/   Buteye, with the exception of an aside factual comment that the late 70's saw the highest job growth since WWII, I was talking about what happened in the years 2011 - 2017.

3/   Wix I know you refuse to face truth, especially when it come from somebody you hate as much as me.  I am glad to hear you acknowledge that Trump is ''cooking the books'' in the same way his ''Dimokrap'' predecessor did.

Name:	wix -	Reply
Subject:	ARCH-IDIOT
Date:	1/28/2018 8:19:33 PM

I don't HATE you.  HATE is a dimokrap word reserved white people by your brethren.  I do feel sorry for you.....for obvious reasons.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	ARCH-IDIOT
Date:	1/28/2018 8:41:57 PM

Oh poor baby, don't feel bad for me, I'm just fine and perceptive enough to realize that you are either simply a joker who gets a kick out of sounding as outrageous as possible, an alt-right racist azzhole or bat chit crazy.  Take your pick.

Name:	phil -	Reply
Subject:	The claim and the fact and the why
Date:	1/29/2018 9:06:05 AM

''cooking the books'' in the same way his ''Dimokrap'' predecessor did.

just glad to know that you admit your god Trump Predecessor lied and cheated.

Name:	CRD -	Reply
Subject:	The claim and the fact and the why
Date:	1/29/2018 5:42:35 PM

Archie,

Respectully, please provide sources for your numbers.  Only then can an intelligent discussion take place.

Name:	Lifer -	Reply
Subject:	The claim and the fact and the why
Date:	1/29/2018 5:51:52 PM

I want to see a break down by government vs. Private sector. And like the doctor said some links to sources.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	The claim and the fact and the why
Date:	1/29/2018 10:07:59 PM (updated 1/29/2018 11:21:18 PM)

A fact...Obama lied as did each and every president before him Washington and Lincoln included, but Trump's lies are in a class by themselves.

Another fact...neither Obama nor Trump ''cooked the books''.

Sorry you were unable to grasp my point.  Wixidiot said while Obama was president he, in effect, cooked the books by not letting be known what he (Wixidiot) considers the ''true'' unemployment rate.  Wixidiot goes on to claim the true rate is still not being announced so l can only assume he thinks Trump is not being honest either.  Glad to know you and Wixidiot seem to think your and his ''god'' Donald Trump is doing the same thing as the preceding ''god''!

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Respectfully:
Date:	1/29/2018 10:11:43 PM (updated 1/29/2018 11:13:06 PM)

The United States Bureau of Labor Statistics.

I look forward to an ''intellegent'' discussion breaking out!  It is a rare event on this forum.

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Here are the numbers
Date:	1/29/2018 11:12:15 PM

YEAR             NEW  JOBS  

2017            1.907 million

2016            2.116 million

2015            2.396 million

2014            2.998 million

2013            2.324 million

2012            2.142 million

2011            2.091 million    

Anybody want to challange them?                                                                                                                                                   

Name:	CRD -	Reply
Subject:	Here are the numbers
Date:	1/30/2018 8:03:29 AM

Archie,

No one said that Obamas job "numbers" were the reason for his disastrous economic presidency.  The job participation rate was putrid, the #'s of people that quit looking for jobs was far too high and the most telling graph, which I dare you to post is the one detailing the rise of the National Debt to GDP ratio during his term.  Sheesh, the economists for the most part agree that Obama policies were OK for stabilization purposes but poor for GDP and very poor for long term growth.  Trump has exceeded expectations in his first year.  Those increases in your paycheck, bonuses and tax breaks come April 15 are more than "crumbs" (as Pelosi called them) to the masses.  Businesses are investing again, spending capital and the market speaks for itself.  You dems need to find another anti Trump strategy soon, or you will find yourselves in the permanent minority wasteland for a long time.

Name:	phil -	Reply
Subject:	The claim and the fact and the why
Date:	1/30/2018 10:31:04 AM (updated 1/30/2018 11:16:17 AM)

 I give your BS a 6 our of 10 - I quoted you.  " I am glad to hear you acknowledge that Trump is ''cooking the books'' in the same way his ''Dimokrap'' predecessor did."

Name:	architect -	Reply
Subject:	Here are the numbers
Date:	1/30/2018 10:54:48 AM (updated 1/30/2018 11:02:32 AM)

Whether Obama's presidency was an economic disaster is a matter of opinion, with many economists included, feeling it was a very succspessful 8 years especially under the circumstances in place at the end of 2008.  That being said, based on your post I will look forward to your condemnation of pres Trump if and when the economy heads south.  We are now 2 years past the average time for a the economy to turn down after recovery from the previous recession.

Many economists, including some very conservative ones, have pointed out that the drop in the number of people in the job market is not as much economic as demographic and in fact it is a good thing for those just coming into the job market.  Some are more troubled by the prospect of too few workers for too many jobs and the resulting inflation pressures.  A problem that will only be made worse if the more extreme Republicans get their way on immigration.

I am self-employed so don't get "bonuses"...happy for those who do!  My best year was 2015.  Last year I had 3 clients place their projects on the back burner (2 of them are still there) and another cancel it completely after the election of Trump.  Sorry, but so far Mr Trump has not been particularly good for many of us.  I am over 70 years old and restructured my portfolio to be Heavy in bonds several years ago.  Needless to say the 1st year of Trump, while not a disaster, has not been as kind to me as the Obama years.

I will have minimal benefit from the tax revisions but appreciate that minimal benefit.  I also congratulate you and most of my clients on your and their I suspect much more substantial savings that will accrue to those in the higher income brackets than I.

Mr Obama spent too much and Mr Trump is on line to spend even more at the same time income is being reduced.  Yeah yeah I know that the Republicans say that the growth in the economy will more than replace the losses in income resulting from the tax cuts.  They may very well be correct...if they are it will be the first time in history that this has happened.

Everything must be considered in context

Name:	CRD -	Reply
Subject:	Here are the numbers
Date:	1/30/2018 11:25:41 AM

Archie,

When I am most critical of leadership is when the facts don't match the MSM message (ie Obama years).   I doubt that criticism will be in short supply if the economy stumbles under Trump.  The media elite can't wait for him to fail.  That should alarm you greatly.  You and I are part of the longevity economy.  This means that we are participants in an ever expanding middle age bracket, not old age.  We want to continue to work, be productive, be charitable, not out of necessity necessarily, but because we enjoy it.  You should want to see Trump succeed.  You should want to see the National Debt/GDP ratio decline.  You should want to see government shrink in size.  You should want to see reform in tax policy.  This helps you and I to succeed and remain productive in expanded middle age.  It baffles me to see the policies supported by the Dems that do just the opposite to us gain traction in the media because people are too lazy to figure it out themselves. 

Name:	Buteye -	Reply
Subject:	Here are the numbers
Date:	1/30/2018 1:58:33 PM (updated 1/30/2018 2:11:15 PM)

After several attempts to get you to comment on the gains you received from your stocks under Trumps's first year in office to no avail, the truth finally comes out in your above post(you restructured your portfolio to be Heavy in bonds several years ago). While investing in stocks is always risky, I have been more than pleased with the stock market growth in President Trump's first year. During Obama's eight years, workers saw the economy and  their annual income stagnate. If you surveyed today's workers, I don't believe they would call their wage increases and bonuses as "crumbs" as Pelosi has called them. They may be "crumbs" in the "lifestyle" she is accustomed to, but they are  much "appreciated dollars" to the average worker(something they had not seen in the last "eight" years). What did this country acctually gain by Obama adding ten trillion dollars to the National Debt)? We coiuld haver refurbished our aging infrastrucure ten times over and have money left to build the wall without having it included in this year's budget.

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	Here are the REAL numbers
Date:	1/30/2018 2:32:56 PM

Read this today.....

“In the last eight years, the past administration has put on more new debt than nearly all of the other presidents combined,” Trump said last year during his joint address to Congress.

As the federal debt has continued to increase under his watch, Trump has talked about it less often.

The Treasury Department said Monday that it expects to borrow about $441 billion this quarter, the largest amount in eight years. Some forecasters, including Bell, have said federal deficits could top $1 trillion next year."

Name:	phil -	Reply
Subject:	Here are the REAL numbers
Date:	1/30/2018 3:06:45 PM

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/national-debt-grew-more-slowly-in-fy-2017-under-trump/article/2636311

The U.S. national debt grew by just a bit more than $600 billion in fiscal year 2017, almost half the average annual growth seen in the Obama years.

Growth of the national debt in FY 2017 was far below the growth seen in the past seven years under Obama, when it grew by more than $1 trillion per year.

Growth in the debt from fiscal years 2010 to 2016 averaged $1.08 trillion. It grew by less than $1 trillion in two fiscal years, 2013 and 2015, but that was because the U.S. hit the debt ceiling months before the fiscal year ended, which kept down growth in the debt.

However, the debt continued to rise quickly once the debt ceiling was suspended again, leading to a high average increase during the Obama years.

As you like to point out that Obama inherited the Bush economy/housing market, Trump also inherited Obama and previous spending.  As Obama once said Trump "didnt build that"

Name:	CRD -	Reply
Subject:	Here are the REAL numbers
Date:	1/30/2018 5:50:24 PM

This ratio, Govt debt to GDP, is used by investors, from what I have read, to measure a country's ability to service its debt.  This affects the country's borrowing cost and also affects government bond yields.  By no means am I trained in portfolio management, however, I would be interested in someone who is, advising if the bond market was a good play during the Obama years and likewise, if this ratio begins to come down, does the bond market respond quickly or does it take time for bonds to be a reasonable investment tool.