155
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] ComradeKhoumrag@infosec.pub 0 points 7 months ago

The stock market is doing well not the economy. The BLS statistics are bullshit. They are reporting explosive job growth when in reality full time jobs are down and there are more part time jobs, contributing to that bullshit statistic. You can scroll through more of my posts if you want to see more of my political/economics commentary

I study economics, math, Physics, AI engineering, and more. I was poly maths major. Please don't condescend to me as if I don't understand statistics, it's a really easy math to lie with.

[-] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 4 points 7 months ago

You are welcome to join the conversation here then. We looked at quite a bit of data and I think I did a pretty good job at defending the idea that the poor are, in fact, getting substantially better-off over time under Biden even under pretty challenging economic conditions. My interlocutor, for whatever reason, refused at every turn to just say "oh okay the data seem to agree with you," and kept throwing stuff at the wall until he eventually claimed that it didn't actually matter if a typical person was better off or not, at which point I decided we didn't need to talk anymore. But if you want to pick that up and have a data-based disagreement with any of it, we can rap.

And yeah I was a little bit of a dick about it. I apologize (for real). I've been speaking with people who haven't been real reasonable, and it's made me rude when talking about it, but if you wanna have a polite factually-based discussion I'm up for that. If you plan to ignore all of that detailed sourcing and analysis and just make again the absolutely unjustified claim that I or the OP article are looking for some reason at the fucking stock market, then I'm going to be rude to you. Up to you though; I'm happy being reasonable if we're being reasonable.

[-] yarr@feddit.nl 3 points 7 months ago

My interlocutor, for whatever reason, refused at every turn to just say “oh okay the data seem to agree with you,” and kept throwing stuff at the wall until he eventually claimed that it didn’t actually matter if a typical person was better off or not, at which point I decided we didn’t need to talk anymore. But if you want to pick that up and have a data-based disagreement with any of it, we can rap.

The reason is he started with a conclusion and worked backwards. Any data you provide to the contrary is "fake news" from Democrats, irrelevant, etc. You can't use reason on the unreasonable. That's why they "gish gallop" from topic to topic, just trying to see if something sticks.

[-] ComradeKhoumrag@infosec.pub 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Lol, fair. Sorry and thanks.

Edit: also, it's not like most people would expect something intelligible form my username

[-] ComradeKhoumrag@infosec.pub 1 points 7 months ago

So, that comment section is heavily nested and hard to read on mobile

I read through that article and to be honest, I think it's trash. I've already mentioned why the BLS statistics are deceiving, but even the article doesn't hide that the economy isn't doing better, it's just the US is doing better than all the other countries. It doesn't emphasize that we're all dropping in performance, but justifies our economy is good because we aren't suffering as hard.

But the rest of the world is suffering worse than we are, because they depend on our currency, and we have policy control over that. It was a decision to make ourselves relatively better off than our competition by making policy that harms them more.

I'm not saying anything nice about Trump, and he's a more extreme version of the following, but Bidens policy is still "America First with a finger up to the rest of the world if that's what it takes"

this post was submitted on 20 Mar 2024
155 points (83.5% liked)

politics

19159 readers
4523 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS