The Official "Making America Great Again" Thread

[LeadBolt]

The system is great. It's worked well for 232 years, despite some hiccups here and there.

TDS suggest because the most flawed candidate ever to run for President in those 232 years lost the 2016 election the system needs to be scrapped.

This is really not a struggle between Conservatives and Progressives, Liberals or what ever they call themselves today. Rather it is a revolution against traditional, individualistic values, based upon practical experience that freedom and self reliance produce the best results for the populace which tend to be strongest in rural areas by the take care of me because I can't or don't want to, it's too hard, all power to the government and screw the individual if they object to progressive PC idea values that tend to be strongest in urban areas and among the young without as much experience.

The rest of the world has tried and discarded much of what Progressives in this country are running toward, because it doesn't work. Look at the Scandinavian countries today vs 20-30 years ago, or Great Britain for example. I know it's over used, but there can be no more stark example of this than what happened in Venezuela.

This is not to say that we have free enterprise and unlimited personal freedom in the USA today, we don't. In my lifetime both have been eroded significantly. Some for the better, some not.

It is to say that we need to stop the erosion of the personal and economic freedoms that are left, fine tune the best system in the world and not rush off the cliff as the lemming like, pc crazed, intellectually lazy, data ignoring, emotionally driven, group think Progressives, non-practical solutions would plunge us from the light of today into the darkness of socialism that has never succeeded anywhere it has been tried.

[LeadBolt]

The system is great. It's worked well for 232 years, despite some hiccups here and there.

TDS suggest because the most flawed candidate ever to run for President in those 232 years lost the 2016 election the system needs to be scrapped.

This is really not a struggle between Conservatives and Progressives, Liberals or what ever they call themselves today. Rather it is a revolution against traditional, individualistic values, based upon practical experience that freedom and self reliance produce the best results for the populace which tend to be strongest in rural areas by the take care of me because I can't or don't want to, it's too hard, all power to the government and screw the individual if they object to progressive PC idea values that tend to be strongest in urban areas and among the young without as much experience.

The rest of the world has tried and discarded much of what Progressives in this country are running toward, because it doesn't work. Look at the Scandinavian countries today vs 20-30 years ago, or Great Britain for example. I know it's over used, but there can be no more stark example of this than what happened in Venezuela.

This is not to say that we have free enterprise and unlimited personal freedom in the USA today, we don't. In my lifetime both have been eroded significantly. Some for the better, some not.

It is to say that we need to stop the erosion of the personal and economic freedoms that are left, fine tune the best system in the world and not rush off the cliff as the lemming like, pc crazed, intellectually lazy, data ignoring, emotionally driven, group think Progressives, non-practical solutions would plunge us from the light of today into the darkness of socialism that has never succeeded anywhere it has been tried.

I take exception on 1 of your points....

Rural areas need a tremendous amount of government subsidy to survive in 2020. So while there are MANY individuals in rural areas in ALL 50 STATES that are very self-sufficient......it is not a fact that rural regions survive and thrive because they are "self-sufficient".

With regard to the bolded part above, I didn't say that. You have added it to divert the attention from the point of the post. I made no statement as to the prosperity of areas within the country by classification of urban vs rural, only about the most prevalent philosophies of those within those areas. The comments about prosperity were with regard to the USA as a whole and that of even more socialistic countries mentioned.

[AZGrizFan]

Be a good place to drop another 500 pounder. Right in the middle of the Antifa tailgate.

See that type of stuff does NOTHING to make this country great again.

I disagree.

[AZGrizFan]

This is really not a struggle between Conservatives and Progressives, Liberals or what ever they call themselves today. Rather it is a revolution against traditional, individualistic values, based upon practical experience that freedom and self reliance produce the best results for the populace which tend to be strongest in rural areas by the take care of me because I can't or don't want to, it's too hard, all power to the government and screw the individual if they object to progressive PC idea values that tend to be strongest in urban areas and among the young without as much experience.

I take exception on 1 of your points....

Rural areas need a tremendous amount of government subsidy to survive in 2020. So while there are MANY individuals in rural areas in ALL 50 STATES that are very self-sufficient......it is not a fact that rural regions survive and thrive because they are "self-sufficient".

If the government didn't subsidize those rural areas (farmers), you'd be paying $8 for a loaf of bread and $7.50 for a gallon of milk, $5.00/potato, etc., etc. How are the urban areas going to survive if the people who grow 99.9% of the food they consume can't make a living? Now, one could argue that "hey, if they cut out those subsidies and reduced my tax burden, I could easily pay for a $8 loaf of bread, etc.," but if they cut out those subsidies they WOULD NOT REDUCE your tax bill. They'd just spend it on something else, because that's what they do. So just be glad it's going somewhere that actually benefits your bottom line, as opposed to another tank or ship or military base in South Korea or aid to Uzbekistan or some other shithole.

[AZGrizFan]

If the government didn't subsidize those rural areas (farmers), you'd be paying $8 for a loaf of bread and $7.50 for a gallon of milk, $5.00/potato, etc., etc. How are the urban areas going to survive if the people who grow 99.9% of the food they consume can't make a living? Now, one could argue that "hey, if they cut out those subsidies and reduced my tax burden, I could easily pay for a $8 loaf of bread, etc.," but if they cut out those subsidies they WOULD NOT REDUCE your tax bill. They'd just spend it on something else, because that's what they do. So just be glad it's going somewhere that actually benefits your bottom line, as opposed to another tank or ship or military base in South Korea or aid to Uzbekistan or some other shithole.

Nice scare tactics. I'd bake my own bread, grow my own stuff, can & freeze yada yada yada. The American people are very resourceful (that's what Republicans telling me ). We grow tomatoes in a giant greenhouse in the middle of nowhere Madison fucking Maine. I buy them at Walmart and Hannaford (regional grocery chain). I bet greenhouses could grow A LOT of stuff.....anywhere in the Great US of A.

Farmers have become the Republican entitlement noose around their neck.

That's great for you, check valve. What about urban America?

Where does the wheat come from to bake your bread? You gonna have a little patch of that out back too?

[89Hen]

But food tech is growing by leaps and bounds in this country. The days of the corn, wheat, milk, potato diets are over.

Somebody still has to grow soy, rice, nuts... whatever else you think is replacing those.

https://politicalcalculations.blogspot. ... h93y8hKiM9

[LeadBolt]

Fake meat = dog food ingredients


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AZGrizFan]

That's great for you, check valve. What about urban America?

Where does the wheat come from to bake your bread? You gonna have a little patch of that out back too?

Yup.

Look....I get what you are saying. But food tech is growing by leaps and bounds in this country. The days of the corn, wheat, milk, potato diets are over.

That being said.....Republicans being the much more politically astute party realize that fear of no food on the grocery shelves plays very well across America.....and the flag waving white farm family in Iowa can't get anymore Americana....can it?

You know what else is growing leaps and bounds? Homelessness in urban areas. Coincidence? I think not....

Food tech:

[houndawg]

Yup.

Look....I get what you are saying. But food tech is growing by leaps and bounds in this country. The days of the corn, wheat, milk, potato diets are over.

That being said.....Republicans being the much more politically astute party realize that fear of no food on the grocery shelves plays very well across America.....and the flag waving white farm family in Iowa can't get anymore Americana....can it?

You know what else is growing leaps and bounds? Homelessness in urban areas. Coincidence? I think not....

Food tech:

Not to mention that the population of the planet has doubled since the early 70s.

[houndawg]

Opinion. I like it, even when it doesn't turn out the way I want it to every time. If you only judge the system based on whether it fits with your personal preference on the outcome most or all of the time you'll be unhappy with anything short of your own personal dictatorship.

I wonder if the "founding fathers" planned for today's GOP Senate?

It may well be more like what they envisioned originally - they weren't looking for any of that one man one vote bullshit.

[JohnStOnge]

Saw an article headlined "Trump's average unemployment rate is the lowest in recorded history" at https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opin ... ed-history. And the article is factually correct given the way the author defined "recorded history" and the way he set things up.

However, as I've said before, giving Trump credit for low unemployment rates is like giving a guy who jumped on a boat at the end of a 1,000 mile cruise down river credit for getting the ship there. I posted an image of unemployment rate over time after the text in this post. You can see where 2016 and 2017 are. Saying Trump is responsible for the trend that got us here is ridiculous.

Meanwhile, I heard obscure Democrat Presidential candidate Michael Bennet say that the job creation rate for Obama's second term was higher than that of Trump's term so far. Job creation is obviously a factor in the unemployment rate. The article about the low unemployment rate referenced the first 35 full months of Trump's Presidency (February 2017 through December, 2019). So I decided to compare the job creation rate for that period to the job creation rate for the last 35 full months of Obama's Presidency (February 2014 through December 2016).

Resuls:

Average Job Creation per Month Last 35 Obama Months: 225,029
Average Job Creation per Month First 35 Trump Months: 191,086

I got the data from https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2020/nonfa ... f-2019.htm.

Just another observation consistent with the fact that there hasn't been some big change in the economy since Trump took office. Trump acting like he's made this big change is similar to when he told construction workers to move dirt around at a construction site when nothing was really going on so he could scam investors into thinking something was happening.

Here's the updated unemployment rate history graphic:

[JohnStOnge]

BTW, since my "35 months" comparison didn't involve exactly what Michael Bennet said I went ahead and checked him using the data at https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000 ... w=net_1mth. What he said was accurate.

If I include January 2017 as part of Obama's second term the average jobs created per month for his second term is 216,469. If I don't include January 2017 it's 215,729.

If I include January 2017 as part of Trump's term so far the average jobs created per month for Trump so far is 192,875. If I don't include January 2017 it's 191,086.

The job creation rate during Obama's second term was indeed higher than the job creation rate so far during Trump's tenure.

[JohnStOnge]

Looks like things have been humming right along since 2010.

Correct. The truth is that the last big change in the economy was around then. Trump has just taken the chair as things continued. Unfortunately that kind of thing is hard to get across to people during a political campaign. It's a lot easier for Trump and his allies to just say things like "Greatest Economy EVER" (it's not but you have to start showing data to explain that) and "6.9 million jobs created (it'd be 7.8 million if the rate during Obama's second term had been maintained but, again, you have to fight the simplistic sloganistic claim with some data).

It's difficult. The idea that Trump caused an economic resurgence is a scam but the attention span of the typical US voter makes it difficult to combat. Nevertheless, the Democrats should seek ways to combat it.

That unemployment rate graph showing pre-Trump in blue and Trump time in red is a pretty good graphic. Doesn't take much explaining to show that Trump didn't cause the low unemployment rate. One could make a job creation by month graph like that too. I think an annual GDP growth rate graph would also accurately convey the impression that nothing much has changed under Trump.

[CAA Flagship]

BTW, since my "35 months" comparison didn't involve exactly what Michael Bennet said I went ahead and checked him using the data at https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000 ... w=net_1mth. What he said was accurate.

If I include January 2017 as part of Obama's second term the average jobs created per month for his second term is 216,469. If I don't include January 2017 it's 215,729.

If I include January 2017 as part of Trump's term so far the average jobs created per month for Trump so far is 192,875. If I don't include January 2017 it's 191,086.

The job creation rate during Obama's second term was indeed higher than the job creation rate so far during Trump's tenure.

We're running out of employable people.

[kalm]

BTW, since my "35 months" comparison didn't involve exactly what Michael Bennet said I went ahead and checked him using the data at https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000 ... w=net_1mth. What he said was accurate.

If I include January 2017 as part of Obama's second term the average jobs created per month for his second term is 216,469. If I don't include January 2017 it's 215,729.

If I include January 2017 as part of Trump's term so far the average jobs created per month for Trump so far is 192,875. If I don't include January 2017 it's 191,086.

The job creation rate during Obama's second term was indeed higher than the job creation rate so far during Trump's tenure.

We're running out of cheep labor .

[93henfan]

*cheap

[kalm]

*cheap

Ahh fuck!

[93henfan]

*cheap

Ahh fuck!

[AZGrizFan]

BTW, since my "35 months" comparison didn't involve exactly what Michael Bennet said I went ahead and checked him using the data at https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/CES0000 ... w=net_1mth. What he said was accurate.

If I include January 2017 as part of Obama's second term the average jobs created per month for his second term is 216,469. If I don't include January 2017 it's 215,729.

If I include January 2017 as part of Trump's term so far the average jobs created per month for Trump so far is 192,875. If I don't include January 2017 it's 191,086.

The job creation rate during Obama's second term was indeed higher than the job creation rate so far during Trump's tenure.

Yes, great comparison. Because those two 35 month periods are IDENTICAL in every respect.

[AZGrizFan]

Saw an article headlined "Trump's average unemployment rate is the lowest in recorded history" at https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opin ... ed-history. And the article is factually correct given the way the author defined "recorded history" and the way he set things up.

However, as I've said before, giving Trump credit for low unemployment rates is like giving a guy who jumped on a boat at the end of a 1,000 mile cruise down river credit for getting the ship there. I posted an image of unemployment rate over time after the text in this post. You can see where 2016 and 2017 are. Saying Trump is responsible for the trend that got us here is ridiculous.

Meanwhile, I heard obscure Democrat Presidential candidate Michael Bennet say that the job creation rate for Obama's second term was higher than that of Trump's term so far. Job creation is obviously a factor in the unemployment rate. The article about the low unemployment rate referenced the first 35 full months of Trump's Presidency (February 2017 through December, 2019). So I decided to compare the job creation rate for that period to the job creation rate for the last 35 full months of Obama's Presidency (February 2014 through December 2016).

Resuls:

Average Job Creation per Month Last 35 Obama Months: 225,029
Average Job Creation per Month First 35 Trump Months: 191,086

I got the data from https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2020/nonfa ... f-2019.htm.

Just another observation consistent with the fact that there hasn't been some big change in the economy since Trump took office. Trump acting like he's made this big change is similar to when he told construction workers to move dirt around at a construction site when nothing was really going on so he could scam investors into thinking something was happening.

Here's the updated unemployment rate history graphic:

We now have more open jobs in this country than we have employable people. For the first time ever.

So suck it.

[∞∞∞]

In a separate audio clip, Trump is heard boasting about increasing the defense budget by $2.5 trillion — a massive sum he may have gotten to by adding several years’ budgets; the Pentagon budget for fiscal 2020 is $738 billion. To those who criticized his spending and the growing national debt, Trump said: “Who the hell cares about the budget? We’re going to have a country.”

For most of President Barack Obama’s time in office, Republicans seemed to care very much about the budget, making fears around the national debt and deficit their top talking point. They’ve backed off those concerns under Trump.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html

Huge increase in debt. Huge jump in deficit. #1 low-wage job creator.

Sounds exactly like a conservative.

America's unemployment rate is at a half-century low, but it also has a job-quality problem that affects nearly half the population, with a study finding 44% of U.S. workers are employed in low-wage jobs that pay median annual wages of $18,000.

Contrary to popular opinion, these workers aren't teenagers or young adults just starting their careers, write Martha Ross and Nicole Bateman of the Brookings Institution's Metropolitan Policy Program, which conducted the analysis.

Most of the 53 million Americans working in low-wage jobs are adults in their prime working years, or between about 25 to 54, they noted. Their median hourly wage is $10.22 per hour — that's above the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour but well below what's considered the living wage for many regions.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/minimum-wa ... wage-jobs/

"But teh stock market!" as they wonder why Americans are unhappy.

[AZGrizFan]

In a separate audio clip, Trump is heard boasting about increasing the defense budget by $2.5 trillion — a massive sum he may have gotten to by adding several years’ budgets; the Pentagon budget for fiscal 2020 is $738 billion. To those who criticized his spending and the growing national debt, Trump said: “Who the hell cares about the budget? We’re going to have a country.”

For most of President Barack Obama’s time in office, Republicans seemed to care very much about the budget, making fears around the national debt and deficit their top talking point. They’ve backed off those concerns under Trump.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html

Huge increase in debt. Huge jump in deficit. #1 low-wage job creator.

Sounds exactly like a conservative.

America's unemployment rate is at a half-century low, but it also has a job-quality problem that affects nearly half the population, with a study finding 44% of U.S. workers are employed in low-wage jobs that pay median annual wages of $18,000.

Contrary to popular opinion, these workers aren't teenagers or young adults just starting their careers, write Martha Ross and Nicole Bateman of the Brookings Institution's Metropolitan Policy Program, which conducted the analysis.

Most of the 53 million Americans working in low-wage jobs are adults in their prime working years, or between about 25 to 54, they noted. Their median hourly wage is $10.22 per hour — that's above the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour but well below what's considered the living wage for many regions.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/minimum-wa ... wage-jobs/

"But teh stock market!" as they wonder why Americans are unhappy.

So unhappy that he's gonna be elected again in about 9 months.

[UNI88]

In a separate audio clip, Trump is heard boasting about increasing the defense budget by $2.5 trillion — a massive sum he may have gotten to by adding several years’ budgets; the Pentagon budget for fiscal 2020 is $738 billion. To those who criticized his spending and the growing national debt, Trump said: “Who the hell cares about the budget? We’re going to have a country.”

For most of President Barack Obama’s time in office, Republicans seemed to care very much about the budget, making fears around the national debt and deficit their top talking point. They’ve backed off those concerns under Trump.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html

Huge increase in debt. Huge jump in deficit. #1 low-wage job creator.

Sounds exactly like a conservative.

America's unemployment rate is at a half-century low, but it also has a job-quality problem that affects nearly half the population, with a study finding 44% of U.S. workers are employed in low-wage jobs that pay median annual wages of $18,000.

Contrary to popular opinion, these workers aren't teenagers or young adults just starting their careers, write Martha Ross and Nicole Bateman of the Brookings Institution's Metropolitan Policy Program, which conducted the analysis.

Most of the 53 million Americans working in low-wage jobs are adults in their prime working years, or between about 25 to 54, they noted. Their median hourly wage is $10.22 per hour — that's above the federal minimum wage of $7.25 an hour but well below what's considered the living wage for many regions.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/minimum-wa ... wage-jobs/

"But teh stock market!" as they wonder why Americans are unhappy.

I don't know the details on the job creation but anecdotally the quality of jobs created seems to be better under Trump than it was under Obama. I would be interested in seeing a valid comparison. I know that unemployment dropped under Obama but some of that was people dropping off the roles because they timed out and some found jobs but were underemployed.

I appreciate the irony of liberals pretending to care about debt and deficits. As soon as they win the presidency that concern will disappear just like it did for conservatives. And anyone who supports the Green New Deal should not complain about debt or deficits.

[SDHornet]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... story.html

Huge increase in debt. Huge jump in deficit. #1 low-wage job creator.

Sounds exactly like a conservative.


https://www.cbsnews.com/news/minimum-wa ... wage-jobs/

"But teh stock market!" as they wonder why Americans are unhappy.

I don't know the details on the job creation but anecdotally the quality of jobs created seems to be better under Trump than it was under Obama. I would be interested in seeing a valid comparison. I know that unemployment dropped under Obama but some of that was people dropping off the roles because they timed out and some found jobs but were underemployed.

I appreciate the irony of liberals pretending to care about debt and deficits. As soon as they win the presidency that concern will disappear just like it did for conservatives. And anyone who supports the Green New Deal should not complain about debt or deficits.

Not to mention these are the same folks promising free shit to everyone that isn't "rich". Yeah that'll have no impact on the budget and the deficit.

[AZGrizFan]

I don't know the details on the job creation but anecdotally the quality of jobs created seems to be better under Trump than it was under Obama. I would be interested in seeing a valid comparison. I know that unemployment dropped under Obama but some of that was people dropping off the roles because they timed out and some found jobs but were underemployed.

I appreciate the irony of liberals pretending to care about debt and deficits. As soon as they win the presidency that concern will disappear just like it did for conservatives. And anyone who supports the Green New Deal should not complain about debt or deficits.

Not to mention these are the same folks promising free shit to everyone that isn't "rich". Yeah that'll have no impact on the budget and the deficit.

Yeah, feigning concern about the deficit while simultaneously offering/proposing:

*reparations for blacks
*reparations for American Indians
*reparations for LGBTQ
*free healthcare for illegals
*free college for all
*universal basic income
*waiving all college debt
*green new deal

Yep. The deficit reeeeeeeally gives them pause.