• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Whopping 71 % thing economy is good

KLATTU

KLATTU

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 2, 2013
Messages
19,259
Reaction score
6,899
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Poll: 71 percent think economy is 'good' - POLITICO

More than 7 in 10 Americans believe the U.S. economy is in good shape, according to a new poll, likely contributing to a small bump in President Donald Trump’s approval rating.

Seventy-one percent of those surveyed in the CNN Poll, published Monday, say the economy is “very” or “somewhat” good. Only 27 percent believe the economy is in poor shape.


Still way too many rich people. We need Democrats to fix that!
:lamo
 
I'm confused; is CNN good or bad?

YouTube
 
KLATTU said:
Still way too many rich people. We need Democrats to fix that!
:lamo
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's horrible that in such a rich country, so many live in such poor conditions. Considering how strongly Christian the USA is, it really says a lot about what Christianity is really about. Never mind the lip service, but what is truly at the heart and soul of Christians.

Child Poverty

About 15 million children in the United States – 21% of all children – live in families with incomes below the federal poverty threshold, a measurement that has been shown to underestimate the needs of families. Research shows that, on average, families need an income of about twice that level to cover basic expenses. Using this standard, 43% of children live in low-income families.


While the very richest of Americans rob the treasury blind.

Trump will personally save up to $15m under tax bill, analysis finds
Jared Kushner will save up to $12m, while five other members of Trump’s inner circle will also see benefits worth millions of dollars

And almost 1/3 of the country, largely fundamentalist Christians, cheer this **** on. And not only do they cheer it on, but they attack people who want to fix the situation.

Imagine, these people support child poverty so the very richest Americans, like their Dear Leader, can have even more. Crazy times.
 
Last edited:
Whopping 71 % thing economy is good
Click to expand...

Economics is not a gay science. It is a dreary, desolate, and indeed quite abject and distressing one; what we might call, by way of eminence, the dismal science.
-- Thomas Carlyle, Carlyle's dismal science qualification first appeared in "Occasional Discourse on the Negro Question"​


Within the limitations of the poll's methodology, I accept its results as an accurate representation of what people say and believe, and I'm willing therefore to extrapolate the findings to the polity writ large.

Thoughts regarding the poll's finding that 71% of people polled "rate the economic conditions in the country today" as either "good" or "very good":

Our learning that 71% of the polity thinks as noted has political value, but learning that they do so is little more than receiving a "Trivial Pursuit" answer.

Why?
  • Laymen are capable of deluding themselves with regard to all sorts of things, not least among them the existential status of a nation's economy.
  • Proportionally few American laymen are in any position to credibly analyze and, from that analysis conclude, on the fundamental status of a nation's economy. Such was the case in both 1928/'29 and 1987. Having lived through it, my own anecdotal observations from news, writings, and personal conversations suggest the same was so regarding the so-called Great Recession.

    Economists, on the other hand, as shown from the content referenced in the preceding paragraph, did aptly analyze the economy and warn people; however not all of them did, and therein lies the problem. One must have a fundamental level of economics training (intermediate macro and micro and their prerequisites) to aptly assess the merit and situational germanity of the various economic indicators and economists' mention and/or analysis of them; bereft of such training, one nearly may as well not consume, thus rely (not rely) or opine upon, economists' prospective pronouncements. So disavailed, one is either "crap shooting," or using some basis other than the substantive factors that drive economic analysis, in choosing what economists' professional opinions to rely upon.

    And, yes, there is also the "Tolstoy Factor," if you will:
    Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.
    -- Leo Tolstoy, Anna Karenina​

    Presciently, Mitchell and Burns advised assuming a multi-indicator approach to measuring/analyzing economic activity. Single-indicator-based analysis' failure to anticipate the 2001 recession revealed that missive's prudence.
Because laymen are, in large measure, existentially bereft of quintessential economic acumen, that they think the economy is in good shape must be construed as a momentary assessment of their personal financial position that they've, in turn, speciously extrapolated to the economy as a whole. They may be correct about that instant; however, the health of a national economy is, like one physiological and mental health, as much about "now" as it is about what's imminent. Accordingly, what "people" think about the state of the nation's economy has little to do with its overall existential health.
​



It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a "dismal science." But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.
-- Murray N. Rothbard​
 
Last edited:
The economy is doing well and what a surprise polling suggests people generally agree... in other shocking news, gravity is still working today.
 
Trump propped up this business cycle with the tax cuts along with sustained low interest rates.

The problem is, there will be vastly more debt when the next financial crisis hits, and the previous monetary policies we have used to try and stimulate the economy won't be viable since we are not normalizing the interest rate. Everything looks gravy now, just wait until those layoffs start to hit.
 
KLATTU said:
Poll: 71 percent think economy is 'good' - POLITICO

More than 7 in 10 Americans believe the U.S. economy is in good shape, according to a new poll, likely contributing to a small bump in President Donald Trump’s approval rating.

Seventy-one percent of those surveyed in the CNN Poll, published Monday, say the economy is “very” or “somewhat” good. Only 27 percent believe the economy is in poor shape.


Still way too many rich people. We need Democrats to fix that!
:lamo
Click to expand...

No. It's bad. Horrible , as a matter of fact. And the Earth will be destroyed in 12 years.
 
JustHanging said:
Yeah, it's horrible that in such a rich country, so many live in such poor conditions. Considering how strongly Christian the USA is, it really says a lot about what Christianity is really about. Never mind the lip service, but what is truly at the heart and soul of Christians.

Child Poverty

About 15 million children in the United States – 21% of all children – live in families with incomes below the federal poverty threshold, a measurement that has been shown to underestimate the needs of families. Research shows that, on average, families need an income of about twice that level to cover basic expenses. Using this standard, 43% of children live in low-income families.


While the very richest of Americans rob the treasury blind.

Trump will personally save up to $15m under tax bill, analysis finds
Jared Kushner will save up to $12m, while five other members of Trump’s inner circle will also see benefits worth millions of dollars

And almost 1/3 of the country, largely fundamentalist Christians, cheer this **** on. And not only do they cheer it on, but they attack people who want to fix the situation.

Imagine, these people support child poverty so the very richest Americans, like their Dear Leader, can have even more. Crazy times.
Click to expand...

The overwhelming majority of below-poverty children live in democrat-controlled, **** hole urban areas, with hypodermic needles and human feces laying around on the sidewalks.

The SAME DEMCORATS who think they should also be running the REST OF THE COUNTRY INTO THE GROUND.
 
TrueScotsman said:
Trump propped up this business cycle with the tax cuts along with sustained low interest rates.

The problem is, there will be vastly more debt when the next financial crisis hits, and the previous monetary policies we have used to try and stimulate the economy won't be viable since we are not normalizing the interest rate. Everything looks gravy now, just wait until those layoffs start to hit.
Click to expand...

Obama increased the deficit like NO OTHER POTUS, with taxpayer funded stimuli to failed companies that continue to fail, such as GM, Solyndra, etc.


Keep hoping for BAD NEWS....it's the Left Mantra...always has been.

Things going great...NO ONE NEEDS the LEFT to "SAVE THEM"...
 
Xelor said:
Economics is not a gay science. It is a dreary, desolate, and indeed quite abject and distressing one; what we might call, by way of eminence, the dismal science.
-- Thomas Carlyle, Carlyle's dismal science qualification first appeared in "Occasional Discourse on the Negro Question"​


Within the limitations of the poll's methodology, I accept its results as an accurate representation of what people say and believe, and I'm willing therefore to extrapolate the findings to the polity writ large.

Thoughts regarding the poll's finding that 71% of people polled "rate the economic conditions in the country today" as either "good" or "very good":

Our learning that 71% of the polity thinks as noted has political value, but learning that they do so is little more than receiving a "Trivial Pursuit" answer.

Why?
  • Laymen are capable of deluding themselves with regard to all sorts of things, not least among them the existential status of a nation's economy.
  • Proportionally few American laymen are in any position to credibly analyze and, from that analysis conclude, on the fundamental status of a nation's economy. Such was the case in both 1928/'29 and 1987. Having lived through it, my own anecdotal observations from news, writings, and personal conversations suggest the same was so regarding the so-called Great Recession.

    Economists, on the other hand, as shown from the content referenced in the preceding paragraph, did aptly analyze the economy and warn people; however not all of them did, and therein lies the problem. One must have a fundamental level of economics training (intermediate macro and micro and their prerequisites) to aptly assess the merit and situational germanity of the various economic indicators and economists' mention and/or analysis of them; bereft of such training, one nearly may as well not consume, thus rely (not rely) or opine upon, economists' prospective pronouncements. So disavailed, one is either "crap shooting," or using some basis other than the substantive factors that drive economic analysis, in choosing what economists' professional opinions to rely upon.

    And, yes, there is also the "Tolstoy Factor," if you will:
    Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.
    -- Leo Tolstoy, Anna Karenina​

    Presciently, Mitchell and Burns advised assuming a multi-indicator approach to measuring/analyzing economic activity. Single-indicator-based analysis' failure to anticipate the 2001 recession revealed that missive's prudence.
Because laymen are, in large measure, existentially bereft of quintessential economic acumen, that they think the economy is in good shape must be construed as a momentary assessment of their personal financial position that they've, in turn, speciously extrapolated to the economy as a whole. They may be correct about that instant; however, the health of a national economy is, like one physiological and mental health, as much about "now" as it is about what's imminent. Accordingly, what "people" think about the state of the nation's economy has little to do with its overall existential health.
​



It is no crime to be ignorant of economics, which is, after all, a specialized discipline and one that most people consider to be a "dismal science." But it is totally irresponsible to have a loud and vociferous opinion on economic subjects while remaining in this state of ignorance.
-- Murray N. Rothbard​
Click to expand...

Yes, things are horrible.
 
OrphanSlug said:
The economy is doing well and what a surprise polling suggests people generally agree... in other shocking news, gravity is still working today.
Click to expand...

And they credit the President for it.


Now ,hurry up and tell us all how it's "Obama's Economy" , ignoring the fact that the US NEVER ACHIEVED 3% ANNUAL GROWTH his ENTIRE PRESIDENCY, despite having such and incredible low-bar starting point, and didn't even achieve 2% in his last year in office.
 
Grokmaster said:
Obama increased the deficit like NO OTHER POTUS, with taxpayer funded stimuli to failed companies that continue to fail, such as GM, Solyndra, etc.


Keep hoping for BAD NEWS....it's the Left Mantra...always has been.

Things going great...NO ONE NEEDS the LEFT to "SAVE THEM"...
Click to expand...
I'm a student of history and knowledgeable of the debt cycle. We are somewhere in the 7th or 8th inning of the 70 Year Long Term Debt Cycle. We have over and over again used the Fed to flood the system with liquidity and resulted in corporations and households being massively leveraged. As one of the men who predicted 2008 said, "they mistook leverage for genius."

China has dropped their exports by 23%, the global economy is slowing down this year and will likely be in recession by 2020. The Fed won't be able to prop up markets like it did in the past, and growth will again slow afterwards. Enjoy the fun while it lasts, but pretty much every major economist agrees we are heading for a recession quite soon.
 
Grokmaster said:
And they credit the President for it.


Now ,hurry up and tell us all how it's "Obama's Economy" , ignoring the fact that the US NEVER ACHIEVED 3% ANNUAL GROWTH his ENTIRE PRESIDENCY, despite having such and incredible low-bar starting point, and didn't even achieve 2% in his last year in office.
Click to expand...

Not sure what stats you are using but 2014 was 2.5%, 2015 was 2.9%, and 2018 looks to be revised to 3.4% to 3.5%. The outlook for 2019 is somewhere between 2.3% and 2.5%. (All of this is sourced from the Fed.)

Unsure why we are engaging in selective success claims.
 
So we're back to believing polls again?

I can't keep up. Can someone make the rules and we all stick with them?
 
Grokmaster said:
Obama increased the deficit like NO OTHER POTUS, with taxpayer funded stimuli to failed companies that continue to fail, such as GM, Solyndra, etc.


Keep hoping for BAD NEWS....it's the Left Mantra...always has been.

Things going great...NO ONE NEEDS the LEFT to "SAVE THEM"...
Click to expand...

I never understood the left, that claims to stick up for workers and want to fix inequality, don't care at all about the debt. The debt is the main cause of inequality. If they ram through this green new deal, and the US takes out trillions in loans, who do you think is going to own that debt? Not you and me, but the rich, bankers, other countries are going to have all that debt, and they're going to be the ones who gain the interest from all these programs. It turns the political system into a pyramid scheme, and all the poor lose out.
 
Grokmaster said:
The overwhelming majority of below-poverty children live in democrat-controlled, **** hole urban areas, with hypodermic needles and human feces laying around on the sidewalks.

The SAME DEMCORATS who think they should also be running the REST OF THE COUNTRY INTO THE GROUND.
Click to expand...

Is this non-sequiter hour? What does any of that have to do with so many children living below the poverty line, while 1/3 of the country, largely Evangelical Christians btw, cheer as the very richest Americans give themselves huge tax cuts?

Why not try reading the post again, and seeing if you can 1) figure out what it says, and 2) come up with a coherent response, with citations to reputable sources to support any claims (If you're not sure what that means, take a look at what I always do, ie statements don't count for anything without support. Otherwise I'll have to treat your response like the rest of the nonsense you post.) Thanks in advance.
 
Last edited:
tres borrachos said:
So we're back to believing polls again?

I can't keep up. Can someone make the rules and we all stick with them?
Click to expand...

As goes accepting the results of a poll, the "rules" are quite simple:
  1. Review the poll's methodology and executional details.
    • If the methodology is completely-enough exposed and the questions neutrally phrased, one must accept the polls results to the extent of its stated statistical constraints.
    • If the methodology is inadequately exposed, accept the poll's results within limits one expressly states, referencing the specific methodological limitations that preclude one's unqualified acceptance of the poll's results.
    • If the poll's executional details are materially biased and unmitigated:
      1. Show the bias and the nature and extent of its materiality (obviously, one doesn't object to immaterial bias and its effects) with regard to specific poll questions whereof one disputes the question's results.
        • Material quantitative bias --> Materiality and the bias' impact must be shown quantitatively.
        • Material qualitative bias --> Materiality and the bias' impact must be shown qualitatively.
      2. Express the nature and extent of one's dissent.
That's it. It's not any more complicated than that.



ETA:
If you need more guidance than the above, you may find the following helpful:
Those references are more narrative/wordy than is my explication, but they say the same thing.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom