It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Trump's first full month in office brings massive employment boom as U.S.

page: 10
58
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 09:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: KaDeCo
a reply to: SlapMonkey

You're right, to a degree. I believe the way to combat what you describe is with trying to educate them about how the economy actually works.

Agreed, but the problem lies in who is doing the educating--schools, even higher learning, aren't teaching from real-world economic realities, but instead are parroting economic theories and, quite often, demonizing on (capitalism) while advocating for another (socialism, or the recent invention, democratic socialism). It doesn't matter to which degree the demonizing/advocation happens, the fact that it is happening stops students from learning and makes them more into students who are being guided in certain directions concerning their interpretations of topics.

So, there are multiple problems contained within the solution, and I think that it's damn-near impossible to properly educate children anymore in the public setting, and that's why we have chosen to homeschool our children with a heavy emphasis on learning and coming to their own conclusion. Sure, we're not perfect at it, but I can guarantee from experience that we are more even-keeled that the public school system, especially considering that our children get both sides of the homeschooling equation (my wife is religious, I am atheist, so they are allowed to see all sides of the education argument on things like world history, astronomy, and the like).

Luckily (IMO, anyway), the non-religious side is the chosen approach at the moment with my 13-year-old. My 3-year-old isn't exactly at a point where I know where she'll lie on the topics.


I notice though not a single person (save you) bothered to respond to a single word and are all rabid frothing for 'their side' despite what they are saying/advocating makes no sense as far as employment or the economy goes. Well, one day someone might read the things here and gain insight. You can't fault a person for trying, yes?

This is the story of most threads, sadly. (and by most, I mean all)

But don't give up--there are often some decent dialogues going on within threads, but it takes so much work to weed through the overgrowth of ignorant comments to find those rare flowers. In any event, I'm glad that you noticed that I actually put thought into my comment instead of hopping on an ideological bandwagon--I try very hard to approach my comments with thought, so it's nice to be noticed from time to time.

To be fair, though, I'm not the only one discussing things sensibly in this thread.
edit on 10-3-2017 by SlapMonkey because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 09:55 AM
link   
It's entertaining to me, to see the same people who told us that obama saved the 2008 crash (turned around in march 2009, this exact same time of year) from deepening are now telling us that trump has had no effect on the economy.

Now, some may turn it around and claim that the people who said obama had nothing to do with the recovery are now telling us that trump is providing a great boost.

The difference was in circumstance. Obama inherited a profusely bleeding economy, but steps had been taken to mitigate the damage (TARP, Auto bailouts, and most importantly QE) during the waning days of the bush administration (late 2008).

Trump, on the other hand, inherited an economy that was stagnant. Labor force participation on a steady decline, but enough growth to keep the economy from sinking. But to do that the fed had to artificially kept rates low.

The fed performed their first rate hike on december 16th, 2015. Three months later (feb 16th) the market had dropped more than 8%. The fed performed their second rate hike in december 2016 (most believe it was to spike the trump administration for being derogatory towards the fed's policies) three months later the market was up 4% and the fed is threatening (probability is in the 90% area) to hike rates again in march. How is it, in 8 years of obama the economy was only good enough for 1 rate hike, yet, post election the economy is ready for 2 rate hikes?

So, if it's not Trump optimism that is fueling the economy, which obama policies is it?

Sorry lefty's, just the idea of Trump and Republicans is M(ing)AGA.
edit on 10-3-2017 by Dfairlite because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 10:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus
That is not what you said and stop trying to shift it.You said Obama gave Trump a good send off. That would be an indication that you believe the economy to Have been good while Obama was in charge.

That was what the logic of the post I was replying to was implying. So I was saying that if that were true then it would mean that it was a good when Trump received it. Sorry if you can't understand that.


Now two months into Trumps term his detractors are denying the good he's doing while yet claiming that all
The good is from Obama term. All of this is getting ridiculous.

What I find ridiculous is that I'm not on either side. My post is actually giving credit, whatever can be given, to both sides. It's the partisans that are detractors, both sides doing the same, but they won't cop to it.


edit on 10-3-2017 by daskakik because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 06:10 PM
link   
Not that Trump and his minions would ever take credit for something that they had noting to do with but...


According to Gary Cohn, the head of Trump's National Economic Council, there's no reason to give credit to Trump for the strong report.
During an interview with CNBC, Cohn did say the report was "right exactly where we needed it to be," but also noted that Trump's team wasn't the reason for the beat.
For one thing, Cohn noted, the jobs that have been promised by CEOs meeting with Trump haven't happened yet.
"Look, there's clearly a good February as part of the number," said Cohn. "I'm not going to deny that, but on the other hand when you look at what we've been doing here are the White House and all of the CEOs we've brought in -- whether it be Sprint or Intel -- they have promised enormous amounts of jobs and job creation in the United States. Those hirings have not been done yet. Those are future hirings."


source



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 06:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: seasonal

Wonder how many of these jobs are connected to the boost in the military's budget...


None. Because fiscal year under Trump doesn't begin until October. So al the billions he's increasing on military doesn't go in effect until then.

I'm happy the economy is doing well and unemployment is low but to attribute it to Trump so early in his tenure is premature and naive. We'll truly see the ramifications of his financial policies once his fiscal year begins.

Also been a member a long time but only recently started posting again. Ive noticed a huge change in people's decorum. So many are quick to jjudge and attack each other instead of the issues and ideas put forth.

ATS is looking a lot less moderated these days and showing a lot more juvenile in nature.
edit on 3 10 2017 by Kevinquisitor because: stuff



posted on Mar, 11 2017 @ 09:57 AM
link   
SURPRISE NEWSFLASH! The left and all their leaders want Trump to fail and America to go into the crapper. My sources? Look at their actions. Do anything to hinder, stop or damage what Trump promised to the detriment of the country and it's citizens.

Torches and pitchforks time yet???




top topics
 
58
<< 7  8  9   >>

log in

join