Manning345 Loc: Richmond, Virginia

It was only 45 or 46 responses, but I suppose you didn't look it up. Of course this site fosters free speech, and it is patently obvious that there are extremists on the Left here, and cool cats on the Right of Center. I have not noticed any far, far Rightists yet, have you? My own categorization is that I am a Conservative that is Right of Center, a strong Constitutionalist, and a dedicated foe against collectivism and Liberalism/Progressivism in any form.

Manning345 Loc: Richmond, Virginia

Very good summary! I would modify your list of sinners slightly:

1. Communist
2. Socialist
3. Humanist
4. Progressive Democrat (Hillary's self classification)
5. Liberal Democrat
6. Democrat
7. Blasphemer
8. Rapist
9. Adulterer
10. Liar
11. Murderer

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

I have often wondered whom the left on OPP considers a far right extremest. I doubt if we will get a substantive answer.

E

Probably anyone who disagrees with anything they post. Thankfully, I disagree with almost everything they post. But I don't consider myself a right extremist.
Just someone who believes in common sense and freedom. Something they can't understand.

Morgan

Yeah, hate much... sigh

Wouldn't you rather live on an Island, then again maybe you do but still have to contend with those pesky natives. Another one of those people who lives way above everyone else and looks down upon all the little people, eh. Must be grand to live in such a delusion. were you harshly judged as a young child, to be as you are?

Morgan

Are you denying the Republicans want to scale it down?

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

Not sure, but we were talking about the tax plan. There is no requirement in the plan to cut that program that I can find. I’m sure it should be reduced and given to only those who are truly needy. God forbid we cut some fraud, waste or size out of any program with a compassionate sounding name or what the programs Initials stand for.

kcstargoat

I'll put it simply - Abortion is Murder!

Morgan

What it still comes down to is that the Republicans are fine and willing to cut funding to programs as chips which does protect children in order to give more of a tax refund to people who aren't in any danger of even feeling a loss from the interest they would've paid from their dividends.

http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2017/11/30/567267266/states-sound-warning-that-chip-kids-health-insurance-is-at-risk

Morgan

Then I assume you are for planned parenthood?

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

If they cut it get back to me. I still believe all govt. programs could be cut and or run more efficiently. I know, sacrilege.

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

Sure. As long as they don’t provide abortions or receive tax payer dollars.

Morgan

No offense but I wasn't asking you. But OK...

Federal tax dollars don't pay for abortions.

But to really understand what federal funds pay for at Planned Parenthood, you first need to know that federal tax dollars don’t pay for abortions. A decades-old, "Unfair Law" already prohibits that except in cases of rape, incest, or when a woman’s life is in danger.

But this isn't about abortion, No One is pro-abortion. Let's focus on prevention, an abortion doesn't prevent pregnancies. let's stay focused on prevention and the abortions will go away.

alabuck Loc: Tennessee

—————————-
Nothing you write upsets me. I enjoy reading your fact-less gibberish. I do wonder who makes this stuff up for you, though. For someone with a moniker of “EconomistDon,” I must wonder where you received your education. No matter where it was from, you were ripped-off, because your knowledge of even basic economics leave a lot to be desired.

The Trumpet administration likes to brag about the economy. And, it brags a lot. During a Fox News interview with Laura Ingraham on Nov. 2, Trumpet boasted about the economic gains during his first year in office, calling it “one of the greatest [economic revivals] in the history of our country.” Then, he whined: “I’m not getting enough credit for it.”

It’s not just Trumpet who brags. White House Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders rattled off several tweets on Dec. 10, citing a series of one-year economic improvements. Her stats were taken from an editorial in the pro-Trumpet, Investor’s Business Daily that claims, “Donald Trump’s relentless focus on tax cuts, deregulation and draining the swamp is great for job growth.”

Even regular readers of “The Fact Checker” know it, automatically, awards 2 Pinocchios to anyone (editorials included) who gives sole credit to a president for economic improvements. That’s because the U.S. economy is far more complex than any one man, and the decisions of both, companies and consumers, loom far larger than most any acts of government, let alone, a single president.

Moreover, and contrary to your comment, it usually takes 2-3 years and a lot of effort for presidential policies to work their way through the country; which, incidentally, is the same amount of “lead-time” big business takes to decide on and to ramp-up it’s capital investments to expand or build new facilities.

Over one year into Trumpet’s presidency, we are still feeling the effects of policies laid out by the Obama administration. But Sanders asserts Barack Obama “now wants credit for the booming Trump economy,” arguing that the “economy is better under President Trump.”

Sanders’s comments bank in the direction of “opinion,” but it is worth asking: Has Trumpet, singlehandedly, hastened an “economic revival” in the United States? Or does Trumpet’s so-called “booming economy” have its roots firmly planted in the Obama era?

Jobs:
Again, regular readers of “The Fact Checker” may remember that it gave Trumpet 4 Pinocchios for claiming that he created 1 million jobs just six months into his presidency. The claim was a departure from how other presidents have spoken about job creation. Most give credit to Americans, the economy, or businesses. But Trump takes the credit for himself. “I’ve created over a million jobs since I’m president,” he bragged in August, while giving remarks about revitalizing U.S. infrastructure.

Regarding all of the Carrier jobs that Trumpet claims to have saved was very short-lived. Most of them still went out of the country. The same holds for the Ford jobs he claims to have stopped from leaving the country. In fact, if he’s so gung-ho about bringing jobs back to America, why won’t he stop getting his Trump-branded products made overseas? Can you say, “hypocrite?”

Has President Trumpet created 1 million jobs, on his own? President Trump has a tendency to say he is responsible for job growth, rather than U.S. businesses or the American economy, itself. He’s so desperate for attention and glory that he makes-up &/or misuses figures to justify his ridiculous claims.

Since February, after Trumpet took office, the economy has gained nearly 1.7 million jobs, according to preliminary data on ‘non-farm payroll’ for November. But once again, the job gains are part of a multi-year trend that started in 2010. Bear in mind, Obama was still in office in 2010.

Trumpet has repeatedly boasted that the “unemployment rate is at a 17-year low,” citing the standard unemployment rate from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which hovers around 4.4 percent in 2017. His new-found excitement for the BLS numbers represents a considerable flip-flop for Trump, who claimed the BLS-furnished, unemployment rate was “nonsense” and “fake news” long before his inauguration.

In fact, during the election campaign, Trumpet called the unemployment figure “fake” or ”fake news” as many as 19 times before he inherited the low unemployment numbers from Obama. Since 2011, the unemployment rate has steadily declined from a high of 9.6 percent following the Great Recession. It was 4.8 percent in January, when Trumpet took the oath of office, and it was 4.1 percent in the December employment report. down to 4.8 percent, or a drop of 50%. Trumpet’s figures are actually 4.8% down to 4.1%, or a drop of 50%. is a LOT more than 0.7%. But, I’m not trying to make the figures say what they can’t say; and, that is, that Trumpet is responsible for a new low in unemployment. Anyone who tries to sell that is trying to sell a boat-load of B.S.!

Let’s also look at another measure of unemployment: The U-6 unemployment rate, which covers people who have given up looking for a job because of poor economic conditions or people who are employed part-time because they can’t find work in their desired field. Some economists argue the official unemployment rate, which measures people who are actively looking for work, is too narrow. The U-6 figure, in contrast, covers a broader swath of workers.

Another indicator of economic health is the employment to population ratio for people in their prime working years. This ratio measures the number of people employed as a share of the population. By narrowing in on people ages 25 to 54 we avoid counting older people who have retired or young people who aren’t working because they are still in school. In 2017, the employment to population ratio reached 78.5 percent. It’s been on an upward trend since 2011.

The stock market:
Just one month after taking office, Trumpet bragged about the stock market. During a news conference on Feb. 2, he claimed, “the stock market has hit record numbers.” It’s been pointed out before that this talking point is a HUGE flip-flop for Trumpet, who dismissed stock-market performance under Obama as a “big, fat bubble” ready to pop. (The U.S. stock market had been rising steadily since March 2009, shortly after Obama took office.)

Trumpet routinely cites numbers from the Dow Jones industrial average, a collection of 30 U.S. “blue-chip” companies. Much of the recent rise in the Dow can be attributed to a single company: Boeing. Over the course of the year, Boeing’s stock is up 82 percent.

But when looking at a broader index, Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index, it’s clear U.S. stocks haven’t rallied as robustly as their foreign equivalents. Trumpet’s been touting the stock market growth since February, but in November the S&P still lagged behind Japan, Germany and the United Kingdom.

Another one of Trumpet’s frequent economic boasts is about Gross Domestic Product growth. GDP is the broadest measure of an economy. With each quarterly estimate Trumpet brags the GDP has grown at never before seen rates.

“We were at 3.2 last quarter, but we were at 3. And to be at 3 with a 1 point, that would have meant we would have hit 4 or thereabouts. And those are numbers that have not been seen for many years,” he said on Oct. 31 after the release of second quarter numbers. Never mind that most economists think 4 percent growth is unlikely in a “developed economy” — or that quarterly GDP growth has often topped 3 percent during Obama’s presidency.

Poverty:
Trumpet hasn’t made much of a fuss about poverty during the first year of his presidency, but the poverty rate is the lowest it has been in nearly 10 years. For three consecutive years, 2010–2012, the poverty rate held stable at 11.8 percent. But in 2013 the rate began to decline, ending at 9.8 percent in 2016.

Sanders suggests that, “... its outlandish to give Obama credit for the current economy,” claiming that “we can all agree the economy is better under Trump.” The problem is, Trumpet’s economy owes largely to trends started in the Obama era. By almost every economic measure, the upward trends Sanders and Trumpet cite began while Obama was still in office.

I’ve said it before, anyone who gives sole credit to a president for economic gains should receive an automatic, 2 Pinocchios; and both, Trumpet’s and Sanders’ claims certainly fit the bill.

I don’t know what kind of economist you are, but with all of my years in helping states and local communities land new companies, the process takes far longer than the 6-9 months you claim. It can take longer than that for the states and communities to negotiate an incentive package to present to the prospective employer for their consideration. Site selection and acquisition can take just as long, too. Next, comes the placement of the utilities and roads. Then, you have the construction period of the factility(s), itself/themselves.

And, even before all of that occured, the prospective company wil have spent several months, collecting the necessary ROÍ figures and projectedl sales statistics on to see if they’re justified to even consider an expansion or build a new facility.

So, if you want me to believe that it only takes 6-9 months for a project to go from inception to completion, you’re far more crazy than I thought you are. I hope you don’t have a professional economist license. If so, you’re a fraud.

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

Nice try. It’s called cooking the books. Not even gonna try to explain to you how they get around the stipulations. I agree 100 percent about prevention. You honestly believe today’s kids don’t know what causes pregnancies? Of course they do. They don’t (not all) care. Hell when I was a kid we played army. Now kids play porn star.