That may be a reason or partial reason, but you don't know for sure because of other simultaneously acting factors: the economy was obviously on the upturn even before Jan 2017; unemployment was way down and going down further--a growing labor supply would promote more economic purchasing activity and higher wages. Obviously the tax debacle did not enhance small business activity being aimed at corporations. So just because trump appeared at the time when things were picking up does not necessarily mean that he and his pro-corporation policies were major contributing factors---although he would like you to think so. You do, but many economists don't. You have been blessed but probably not by lord trump.
If your company starts into a downturn, will you be willing to blame trump?
I don't know what your company makes or does, but the rising cost of steel and aluminum (due to trump tariff talk and action) with the increase of inventory in some fields like heavy truck trailers has people in such industries quite nervous and not feeling very blessed as they look toward even the near future. I guess jillionares can afford to "suffer" through "a little pain at the beginning," at the beginning (however, long the beginning is), but most of us cannot ride out such stretches.
I am glad your raise will be continued with succeeding paychecks as opposed to the one-time bonuses that some people got for propaganda purposes.

BM, I hope your crippled mom is not on a fixed income because here comes inflation:

President Donald Trump’s top economic adviser urged the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates “very slowly,” ignoring the practice from preceding administrations of avoiding comments on monetary policy out of respect for the U.S. central bank’s independence.
“My hope is that the Fed, under its new management, understands that more people working and faster economic growth, do not cause inflation,” Larry Kudlow, director of the White House National Economic Council, told Fox Business Network on Friday, shortly before fresh data showed inflation pushing a bit above the Fed’s 2 percent target.

...
"We'll have to see" is the key phrase that proponents of trickle-down spew. Just as I said above, the usual trickle-down verbiage. So to repeat for emphasis from my post above:

'The usual answer to this claim that trickle-down works is that it takes time for the system to adjust. Workers have waited >30 years for a change in their paychecks including through Reagan's try at trickle down fiasco which he finally admitted did not work. It is interesting that you buy this theory, CrazyLibertarian, because it is not even valid libertarian dogma. True libertarianism would say that the financial system should stand on its own without help from the government just as you expect the individual person to do--after all, we know from Mitt that 'corporations are people too.' Sounds like CrazyLibertarian is a trumpster deceitfully trying to hide under a legitimate libertarian cloak. 'Fess up or become a true libertarian'.'

I found this parable either on OPP or somewhere else (in a newspaper, I think) that explains the "thinking" of the trickle-down hucksters:

Metaphors abound to explain economic situations—e.g., “a rising tide lifts all boats.” Another describes a horse well-fed with oats excreting undigested oat kernels that are then eaten from the manure by the lowly sparrow; this is meant to depict the trickle-down (aka supply side) theory of economics where the wealthy at the top of the financial chain are given special favors (e.g., lower taxes) to benefit the middle and lower financial classes as they pick up possible financial scraps from the investments of the wealthy.
The trickle-down parable might be valid for horses and sparrows, but it does not describe financial reality. Tax breaks to the wealthy are often prescribed under supply-side theory, but the GDP per capita growth rate was 4-times higher when the income tax was 81-85% than when it was in the 51-74% range.
David Stockman, as Reagan’s budget director, realized that supply-side economics would not work as he described in his self-admitted “youthful screed,” 'The Triumph of Politics: Why the Reagan Revolution Failed.' Now a hedge fund manager, Stockman extends his thinking to an inevitable future financial collapse in an even ‘screedier,’ 'The Great Deformation: The Corruption of Capitalism in America' where he describes contemporary financial problems being fueled by twin problems: “FDR’s repudiation of the bipartisan tradition of sound money and the New Deal’s incubation of crony capitalism.”
Stockman’s villains in his critique include Franklin Roosevelt, Nixon, Burns, Heller, Friedman, Connally, Schulz, Laffer, Weinberger, Greenspan, Gingrich, Ruben, W. Bush, Paulson, Geitner, Mack, Krugman, Summers, and Obama while his heroes through the years include Glass, Willis, Coolidge, Hoover, Douglas, Warburg, Truman, Eisenhower, George Humphrey, Martin, Dillon, Simon, Volcker, Baker, Domenici, Clinton, O’Neill, Ron Paul, Shelby, Bair.

One notes that these are not Republican vs. Democratic divides. While Democrats are correctly seen as loose spenders and Republicans are equally correctly categorized as the prime perpetrators of crony capitalism, Stockman’s list blurs that divide. It would seem that a possible impending financial crisis and its solution are not found in the vision of the political parties. Who will lead us out of this serious problem? Some folks on this site will offer Trump. But is there any evidence in the past fifteen months that The Donald has the answer as he vows to keep Social Security and Medicare in place and as he stacks his administration with the epitome of crony-capitalist bankers from Goldman Sachs?

.... Here is the fact-checked dope:http://www.politifact.com/t***h-o-meter/statements/2017/nov/30/kevin-brady/does-70-percent-tax-bills-relief-go-those-making-u/

The real question isn't what Brady said--even though it was misleading and cherry-picked; the real question is how much is the middle class pay check going up? This article says that it is not going up for more Americans:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2018/03/28/most-americans-havent-seen-pay-increases-from-tax-cuts-but-most-republicans-have/?utm_term=.9f7f08eba015

"My mind is made up; don't confuse me with facts."

The old trickle down nonsense. Try 'for once' to give examples where trickle down logic worked and did anything but line the pockets of the political hucksters who promote this false economic theory. Sounds good, but it doesn't work--as history and as the >$700M recent stock buy-back (with no significant change in worker paychecks) once again proves. The financial community said they would buy back stock in lieu of benefiting labor, and so they did. Why should it surprise us? It doesn't. The financial community does not believe in trickle down; they believe in profits--which is fine, especially if you own stock. Profits are their motivation and they are honest about it. Only political hucksters believe that this tired and untrue "theory" helps the working stiff much less the economy as a whole.

The usual answer to this claim that trickle-down works is that it takes time for the system to adjust. Workers have waited >30 years for a change in their paychecks including through Reagan's try at trickle down fiasco which he finally admitted did not work. It is interesting that you buy this theory, Crazy, because it is not even true libertarian dogma. True libertarianism would say that the financial system should stand on its own without help from the government just as you expect the individual person to do--after all, we know from Mitt that 'companies are people too.' Sounds like CrazyLibertarian a trumpster deceitfully trying to hide under a legitimate libertarian cloak. 'Fess up or become a true libertarian.

....
Interesting data. Even more interesting question: When do trump supporters open their eyes...? Some will never open their eyes...they know that a wall won't be built much less Mexico paying for it; but it becomes part of their myth even as they see the work force in full production but no comparable rise in their paychecks. At the same time gas prices go up as do groceries--but this is making America great again--unfortunately not for them.

Meanwhile Wall Street companies buy back their stock at an unprecedented rate, while a few get headlines of giving one-time pittances (relative to the gains) to workers.

Perhaps profits will change the picture. Farmers v**ed overwhelmingly for trump--now soybeans are down 26% since 29 May. Business people said, He's one of us---now steel is up 27% since April. I spoke with a rep from a western company that uses processed steel--prices up 40%. Follow the money may have more than one application in trump's life.

....
Watched the ceremony--amazing guy, unbelievable courage.

Thank you. I wonder if Sanders will sue. It will be interesting to see what happens.

You are correct Penny, I am not a lawyer. Perhaps you are. However, if " public accommodation" means places where the public is invited, then the court may consider a bakery a public place as well, and then it seems to me that the issue is the religious opinion of the baker versus the political opinion of the restaurateur. I don't know---did the gay Colorado couple who came into the bakery for a wedding cake act unruly, were excessively loud or disturbing? Did they have any unusual requests--seems like they were in a bakery wanting a cake? Did they wear offensive or politically motivating clothing? I don't know; I am asking your lawerly opinion.

Perhaps the bakery and restaurant situations are closer than lawyers would like to admit.

Yes, the Colorado baker decision does not apply. In fact, it does not even apply to itself again. If that same gay couple approached the baker again and the local commission ruled the same way (which it probably would not), the baker would have to go to federal district court and start all over again.
But we know how precedent can build, and this court might well come to a more comprehensive decision saying that a public entity can generally serve or reject whomever it wants. But then that would justify Stephanie's current decision.
I spent several years in the Lexington area. There are many good restaurants there. I have not eaten at Stephanie's restaurant, but it is difficult to think that she could maintain a viable business amidst the great competition there. Come to think of it, if the restaurant was so bad, why did Lyin' Sarah haul her kids and guests so far down the valley to eat there. Or if there to visit, why did she or her hosts choose such a terrible place to eat? Obviously another case of Sarah's bad taste. Or maybe she wanted to generate a controversy--just like her boss does: self-sacrifice to establish another shiny object to detract from his many current controversies. Or maybe Sarah feels she herself needs some tlc after a rough couple of weeks on the fabrication-deceit podium. "You must be pleased" with such an opportunity to defend her.

"Serious trouble"? From whom? Not the supreme court obviously. The ghost of Stonewall? Robert Welch? John Birch? The hypocritical evangelical religious rights' g****r gods?

The Red Hen Farm to Table Restaurant, Lexington. Va., exercised some border control last night, deporting Press Sec. Sarah Huckabee Sanders and seven family members from it’s dining room and onto the quaint Lexington, Va. colonial streets….
...
Supreme Court decisions (like many decisions in life) have unintended consequences--what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

What in the world is the historical basis of Crony Capitalism being part of the FDR administration and how does that connect with any alleged (by you) c*******ts in the FDR administration?

(I like your epigraph).

OT: an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth
NT: love your neighbor as yourself
FINAL: love one another as I have loved you

https://www.vox.com/2018/3/9/17100880/north-korea-republicans-right-conservatives-obama

In the age of Obama the Republicants screamed near-treason about the idea of Obama meeting with certain foreign depots. Now that they are Republicults worshiping at the feet of their cult leader, meeting with the worst of the current despots deserves a Nobel peace prize. But then the rising cultists have never been consistent in their hypocrisy.

...
BM,
I don't see anything in the Constitution about numbers of laws that have to be passed. But I did hear trump talk early on about an infrastructure bill (crumbling bridges, antiquated roadways, outdated water supplies, etc). Even if the Republicant controlled congress fixed those things just in the red states that get much more money back from the fed than they put in, at least it would have been done in America to provide good jobs for Americans as opposed to providing jobs for the poor neglected Chinese criminals at ZTE (MCGA) that trump feels so much empathy for.

Are you in a red state, BM?