or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Trump is #2 in GOP Field
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Trump is #2 in GOP Field - Page 130

post #1936 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ataturk View Post


As much as I agree with the sentiment (and respect your html skills...), there's no way that's accurate. Surely those are raw numbers and not adjusted for inflation/purchasing power/whatever (i.e., real dollars).

Anyway, the real reason the income is shifting in quintiles is that they're households -- not composed of the same number of people. More old people, less married couples = lower income for the bottom quintiles.

https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/historical/families/2014/f01AR.xls

Quote:
Originally Posted by englade321 View Post
 

Pio doesn't know the difference between centuries and a generation. BC lacks the math skills to realize that 1996 to 2007 is not 20 years and you both present straw man arguments that have nothing to do with my post that Hills statement seems more prescient than weird.You guys must have really boring jobs

 

Who said 1996 - 2007 is 20 years?  My 20 years was referring to my table, which I used the year she was quoted, and 10 years plus or minus.

post #1937 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by englade321 View Post
 

I could give a fuck less about this beancounter bullshit I said that while you think that Hillarys statement is weird in 1996 if anyone had made that same statement in 2007 or later , no one would have found it a weird at all agree with it or not .Whats embarrassing is you free market advocates pressing your agenda on something that has nothing to do with it

 

Again, the free market wasn't responsible for the crash.  The banking industry was not only highly regulated, the government had a heavy hand in the mortgage industry, and it implicitly protected them from failure.  If we had a free market system, those banks would have been allowed to go bankrupt.

post #1938 of 8748
The banks and about half of the American car industry.

(Coming from a guy who worked at one of the bailed out institutions)
post #1939 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by englade321 View Post
 

I could give a fuck less about this beancounter bullshit

 

Profanity and willful ignorance.  Must be a Trump supporter.

post #1940 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by brokencycle View Post
 

 

Again, the free market wasn't responsible for the crash.  The banking industry was not only highly regulated, the government had a heavy hand in the mortgage industry, and it implicitly protected them from failure.  If we had a free market system, those banks would have been allowed to go bankrupt.

 

post #1941 of 8748

That ain't what it says.
Quote:
(Families as of March of the following year. Income in current and 2014 CPI-U-RS adjusted dollars (28))

There is one chart for "current" dollars and one for inflation-adjusted dollars. You quoted the wrong one.

https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/historical/dollars.html
Quote:
Current dollars is a term describing income in the year in which a person, household, or family receives it. For example, the income someone received in 1989 unadjusted for inflation is in current dollars.

Constant or real dollars are terms describing income after adjustment for inflation. The Dictionary of Business and Economics defines constant dollar values and real income as shown below.

Constant-dollar value (also called real-dollar value) is a value expressed in dollars adjusted for purchasing power. Constant-dollar values represent an effort to remove the effects of price changes from statistical series reported in dollar terms. The result is a series as it would presumably exist if prices were the same throughout as they were in the base year-in other words, as if the dollar had constant purchasing power.

Real Income. The purchasing power of the income of an individual, group, or nation, computed by adjusting money income to price changes. A comparison between incomes earned during 1970 and 1980, for example, would be pointless unless 1970 and 1980 price levels were identical. Using a price index showing, for example, that average consumer prices increased by 50 percent between those years, it becomes clear that $1,000 in 1980 bought what $667 bought in 1970. Thus, even if total income actually doubled, real income would double only if prices remained constant.
post #1942 of 8748
Trump iphone Apps are starting to pop up,

Trump your hair,



Trump yourself,



Obviously, if it's Hillary versus Trump, we have an historic election coming up. I Wish Harvey Falcon was around to share his insight. Rumor has it that he is working with the Trump campaign as their E & E advisor ( etiquette and ethics ).
post #1943 of 8748
Those Apps must have been approved by Trump advisers. Funny stuff,: "Make Everything Great Again!", lmao

Interesting chart for dropped out candidates.
My conclusions from these numbers would be:
Carson is leading in private donations is a disturbing sign of religiosity in society. That guy was a Sleepy Wonder with an alertness of a Winter fly. But that did not matter he was a good candidate because he was a beliber in Jeebus.
The most dangerous asshole was clearly Bush (no surprise there), all mothefuckers with deep pockets wanted their Bush-boy to hand the country back to them,so they can play more.
Meager numbers for DEMs tell me that they did not even have any pool of candidates , Hillary was a forgone conclusion and Bernie was just an outlier same as Trump. DEMs appear to be much more organised internally they just did not foresee Bernie , or could they?
REPs are really have it free for all in their primary, with no clear favorite, which leads me to belive REPs from the start were planning to have a convention nominee.

Edited by Medwed - 3/17/16 at 2:05am
post #1944 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibonius View Post

That was suitably vague.

What are "the threat" and "the words," and how exactly has Obama not enunciated them?

The rules of engagement was the important part, but okay. Based on the response from military personnel I assume you agree with that part. He, and others like him, are in various stages of denial about the threat of Islam, be it cultural or physical violence. It's just a bunch of isolated incidents that in no way represent a larger trend. It's a teeny tiny fraction. No harm in bringing them in by the millions. In fact, he probably thinks it would make us "stronger," and has publicly stated as much. He's almost finished with two terms. Let's not pretend we don't have enough evidence to claim he could have been "tougher" on those issues.
post #1945 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnoldh View Post


Obviously, if it's Hillary versus Trump, we have an historic election coming up.

 

Yes, because the third-party candidate will be the only sane one.

post #1946 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by suited View Post


The rules of engagement was the important part, but okay. Based on the response from military personnel I assume you agree with that part. He, and others like him, are in various stages of denial about the threat of Islam, be it cultural or physical violence. It's just a bunch of isolated incidents that in no way represent a larger trend. It's a teeny tiny fraction. No harm in bringing them in by the millions. In fact, he probably thinks it would make us "stronger," and has publicly stated as much. He's almost finished with two terms. Let's not pretend we don't have enough evidence to claim he could have been "tougher" on those issues.

 

In 2004 Donald Rumsfeld's DoD issued a report categorically that Islamic violence towards the US is rooted in resistance to US policies in the Middle East, not to "cultural differences" or "hating us for our freedoms" (most of which have been oppressed since 9/11 anyway). 

post #1947 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by suited View Post

The rules of engagement was the important part, but okay. Based on the response from military personnel I assume you agree with that part. He, and others like him, are in various stages of denial about the threat of Islam, be it cultural or physical violence. It's just a bunch of isolated incidents that in no way represent a larger trend. It's a teeny tiny fraction. No harm in bringing them in by the millions. In fact, he probably thinks it would make us "stronger," and has publicly stated as much. He's almost finished with two terms. Let's not pretend we don't have enough evidence to claim he could have been "tougher" on those issues.

There are only three million Muslims in the US total, so we're hardly "bringing them in by the millions." You'd think that the US was Western Europe, being flooded by Muslim immigrants, but we're really not.

The "toughness" talk is usually regarding foreign policy. I'm not sure how fuzzy roles of engagement constitutes a lack of toughness, although it's certainly a legitimate concern. You hear it in reference to Ukraine, to Syria; like if Obama just had bigger balls the problem would have been resolved. But the actual differences in policy or approach never get enunciated.


Of course it seems the whole crop of Republicans want to invade Syria, or "bomb it until it glows" or kill ISIS family members after torturing them, so I guess that's "tough" these days.
post #1948 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gibonius View Post

There are only three million Muslims in the US total, so we're hardly "bringing them in by the millions." You'd think that the US was Western Europe, being flooded by Muslim immigrants, but we're really not.

Well...your point is a good one but factually you're incorrect. Yes, there are about 3 million Muslims in the US but well over half, about 65%, are immigrants. This means the US has indeed imported them "in the millions." wink.gif
post #1949 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ataturk View Post


That ain't what it says.
There is one chart for "current" dollars and one for inflation-adjusted dollars. You quoted the wrong one.

https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/historical/dollars.html

 

You're correct.  I updated the table and my comments.  Real income rose much slower: however, it still rose.  In fact, 1996-20206 with things like NAFTA and decreasing capital gains, incomes at the bottom brackets rose faster than the decade prior.

post #1950 of 8748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Medwed View Post
 

 I"m surprised how much money walker got.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Trump is #2 in GOP Field