Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

CNN's bias for Joe Biden

Collapse

Google Ads

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by DPR View Post
    Also worth noting that 210k jobs added is Biden's lowest number yet and it would be a stronger number than a majority of months from Jan 2017 thru Feb 2020 before COVID. Yet all we heard about for those 3 years was how strong the economy was under Trump and now we're only hearing about "economic uncertainty".
    There are a number of factors that play into those descriptors. What kind of jobs? Mostly, the Biden numbers are in hospitality and retail. Jobs that were down for Covid closures and lockdowns. Nearly 80% in fact. And that doesn't take into account the extremely high turnover and the big one, every report this year has been adjusted after the fact. Massively.

    Another factor that's interesting. Women are dropping out of the jobs market at a much higher rate than men. Raises some questions. Are wages enough higher to support a family with one person working? Or is it due to the virus itself and the difficulties in acquiring child care, or it's costs?

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by DPR View Post

      No, it takes a massive propaganda machine to make a disastrous presidency (Trump) look good compared to a successful one (so far):

      . Out of curiosity, how many jobs were lost because of covid? I'm not talking about how many jobs were being created befire covid happened, I'm talking about how many jobs were lost because of covid shutdowns. I ask, because those jobs obviously had to be filled again at some point. So, what percentage of the "jobs created" is just those jobs filling back up? 20%, 50%, 80%? Because that percentage could seriously inflate the number and completely manipulate the effect this administration has had on the economy.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by DSMoneypit View Post

        . Out of curiosity, how many jobs were lost because of covid? I'm not talking about how many jobs were being created befire covid happened, I'm talking about how many jobs were lost because of covid shutdowns. I ask, because those jobs obviously had to be filled again at some point. So, what percentage of the "jobs created" is just those jobs filling back up? 20%, 50%, 80%? Because that percentage could seriously inflate the number and completely manipulate the effect this administration has had on the economy.
        Oh I know. A funny thing happened in 2009 though. When Obama was elected during a plummeting economy, Republicans blamed him for bad job numbers. When those job numbers ticked back up and things were going well by Jan 2017, Republicans immediately credited Trump for saving the economy and producing great job numbers.

        So I'm just playing the same game.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by daCat View Post

          There are a number of factors that play into those descriptors. What kind of jobs? Mostly, the Biden numbers are in hospitality and retail. Jobs that were down for Covid closures and lockdowns. Nearly 80% in fact. And that doesn't take into account the extremely high turnover and the big one, every report this year has been adjusted after the fact. Massively.

          Another factor that's interesting. Women are dropping out of the jobs market at a much higher rate than men. Raises some questions. Are wages enough higher to support a family with one person working? Or is it due to the virus itself and the difficulties in acquiring child care, or it's costs?
          Why do you guys only want to talk about deep nuances when a Democrat is posting solid job numbers?

          We're at 4.2% UE right now. I can guarantee you that if I asked you in Jan of this year what a good UE would look like by the end of the year, you would say 4% and we're about there. So spare me the parsing of the data when the big picture is clear that the economy has mostly rebounded in solid time and that is in large part to Biden burning a ton of political capital on mask/vaccine mandates to get COVID under control and get the economy humming again.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by DPR View Post

            Why do you guys only want to talk about deep nuances when a Democrat is posting solid job numbers?

            We're at 4.2% UE right now. I can guarantee you that if I asked you in Jan of this year what a good UE would look like by the end of the year, you would say 4% and we're about there. So spare me the parsing of the data when the big picture is clear that the economy has mostly rebounded in solid time and that is in large part to Biden burning a ton of political capital on mask/vaccine mandates to get COVID under control and get the economy humming again.
            Apparently, you like being told what to think.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by DPR View Post

              Why do you guys only want to talk about deep nuances when a Democrat is posting solid job numbers?

              We're at 4.2% UE right now. I can guarantee you that if I asked you in Jan of this year what a good UE would look like by the end of the year, you would say 4% and we're about there. So spare me the parsing of the data when the big picture is clear that the economy has mostly rebounded in solid time and that is in large part to Biden burning a ton of political capital on mask/vaccine mandates to get COVID under control and get the economy humming again.
              We’re also hovering around 61% workforce participation. I’ve been talking about UE numbers being horse shit on here for years, but I guess I have to again: More people drop out every time the economy takes a shit, and the overall size of the workforce continues to shrink. That’s not recovering, that’s fucking with numbers so you can play pretend on the campaign trail. This isn’t a partisan issue either, it’s a trend that’s persisted for the better part of 20 years now. Pic related demonstrates this pretty well.

              TL;DR we never really “recovered” from the dot com bubble bursting, or the financial crisis, and certainly not the pandemic. It’s just number manipulation.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by tOSUfanboi2 View Post

                We’re also hovering around 61% workforce participation. I’ve been talking about UE numbers being horse shit on here for years, but I guess I have to again: More people drop out every time the economy takes a shit, and the overall size of the workforce continues to shrink. That’s not recovering, that’s fucking with numbers so you can play pretend on the campaign trail. This isn’t a partisan issue either, it’s a trend that’s persisted for the better part of 20 years now. Pic related demonstrates this pretty well.

                TL;DR we never really “recovered” from the dot com bubble bursting, or the financial crisis, and certainly not the pandemic. It’s just number manipulation.
                Sure, but if you'll notice, MSM outlets touted the great job numbers under Trump (regardless of LFPR) and are now calling similar numbers sluggish. This thread is about media bias, not a larger overall economic discussion (which we'd likely agree on most points).

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by daCat View Post

                  Apparently, you like being told what to think.
                  By using the standard economic indicators that most media outlets use? Yes it has. UE, consumer demand, median pay, stock market etc are all getting back to Feb 2020 levels in record time.

                  Yet here you are insisting that the economy is in the dumps.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by DPR View Post

                    By using the standard economic indicators that most media outlets use? Yes it has. UE, consumer demand, median pay, stock market etc are all getting back to Feb 2020 levels in record time.

                    Yet here you are insisting that the economy is in the dumps.
                    I apply it to daily life. Costs have skyrocketed on some materials I use, as much as tripled in some cases. Cost of food has jumped dramatically. Fuel costs as well. If that's indicative of a healthy economy, I need someone to give me the new definition.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by daCat View Post

                      I apply it to daily life. Costs have skyrocketed on some materials I use, as much as tripled in some cases. Cost of food has jumped dramatically. Fuel costs as well. If that's indicative of a healthy economy, I need someone to give me the new definition.
                      I personally like making the same money but spending more

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by daCat View Post

                        I apply it to daily life. Costs have skyrocketed on some materials I use, as much as tripled in some cases. Cost of food has jumped dramatically. Fuel costs as well. If that's indicative of a healthy economy, I need someone to give me the new definition.
                        Imagine being proud of being this stupid.

                        Let this liberal socialist (or whatever you think of me) explain basic capitalism to you. As demand increases, supply decreases. When this happens, the market rate for goods goes up. Now, why would demand increase? Because people have more money to buy and are buying. That is a sign of a healthy economy. It's why Beanie Babies were $1k back in the 90s.

                        You want to see the sign of a poor economy? Look at the cost of gas in 2020. It dropped below $2 a gallon and suppliers had such a problem selling that they were literally paying people to take the oil off their hands. Now? Demand is up and so the cost of gas is up.

                        As for cost of food jumping "dramatically", this shows that it is up 4.6% over the year. That's hardly "dramatic". A $100 grocery bill now costs $104.60.

                        https://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Ar...ncrease-to-4.6

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Speaking of food costs, CNN actually ran a piece on a family that was suffering under the higher costs because they buy like 10 gallons of milk a week or something. The cost of milk has increased faster than other goods and so it was hitting them a little harder and CNN thought it prudent to highlight this extreme outlier as proof Biden wrecked the economy or something.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by DPR View Post

                            Imagine being proud of being this stupid.

                            Let this liberal socialist (or whatever you think of me) explain basic capitalism to you. As demand increases, supply decreases. When this happens, the market rate for goods goes up. Now, why would demand increase? Because people have more money to buy and are buying. That is a sign of a healthy economy. It's why Beanie Babies were $1k back in the 90s.

                            You want to see the sign of a poor economy? Look at the cost of gas in 2020. It dropped below $2 a gallon and suppliers had such a problem selling that they were literally paying people to take the oil off their hands. Now? Demand is up and so the cost of gas is up.

                            As for cost of food jumping "dramatically", this shows that it is up 4.6% over the year. That's hardly "dramatic". A $100 grocery bill now costs $104.60.

                            https://www.foodnavigator-usa.com/Ar...ncrease-to-4.6
                            LOL!

                            Do you buy groceries?

                            I like your attempt at justifying the costs of goods with "capitalism" and then thinking that covers food costs as well. Did the people you know stop buying food during lockdown? And another LOL! @ thinking 4.6% is an accurate measure of the difference in food costs.

                            Ask the person that feeds you what food costs have done in the last year. Or maybe I just need to know where you shop. Apparently I'm buying from the wrong stores.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by daCat View Post

                              LOL!

                              Do you buy groceries?

                              I like your attempt at justifying the costs of goods with "capitalism" and then thinking that covers food costs as well. Did the people you know stop buying food during lockdown? And another LOL! @ thinking 4.6% is an accurate measure of the difference in food costs.

                              Ask the person that feeds you what food costs have done in the last year. Or maybe I just need to know where you shop. Apparently I'm buying from the wrong stores.
                              Again, the ole conservative brain defaults to anecdotal data that is highly subjective over actual concrete data from national surveys.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by DPR View Post

                                Again, the ole conservative brain defaults to anecdotal data that is highly subjective over actual concrete data from national surveys.
                                I don't need a national survey to tell me what it costs me to live day to day.

                                Not sure what kind of idiot would, in all truth.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X