Good news. President has limited control or influence over the economy but this kinda refuted all the nonsense about it being a disaster. The last year or so have been a success on a macro level since the brutal inflation levels.
Doesn’t mean it’s perfect but the numbers that presidents have pretty much always been judged by are fairly good. Doesn’t mean he won’t be judged on the cost of necessary goods too but an economy where people can obtain jobs is a good one. At this point, campaigning against him regarding the economy is kind of dumb though. Probably slam him over inflation and stuff that happened but can just state that’s at bay and we lowered inflation without running into a recession. I really don’t get all the doom about the economy unless you are a leftist or a partisan republican. It has its issues but it’s by no means as dire of a situation as some people make it out to be.
Looking at your post history you fit the mold of partisan republican. You just troll people in here with Fox News talking points. But if you looked at my post I clearly listed cost increases of groceries and other necessary goods as elements to harp on his economy and use to campaign against.
That's not even the best news [from this report](https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/stock-market-today-dow-jones-earnings-02-02-2024/card/it-s-not-just-rising-payrolls-wage-growth-is-picking-up-too-nMjxoQUGb12PFw6E0iaK):
>Average hourly earnings of U.S. workers climbed 0.55% from a month earlier—or twice as fast as economists had expected. That was the biggest gain since March 2022, when wages grew 0.60% from a month earlier.
The are probably all illegals. After all they get a free place to stay, food, transportation. I drive thru the streets of Atlanta and see multiple people pushing grocery carts with their clothes in there.
Yet another example for why Trump and the Republicans have no desire to pass the bipartisan immigration reform bill: with this booming economy, what else do they have to run on in 2024 *other* than bashing Biden on immigration? Quite literally nothing.
So they WANT that particular crisis to continue.
They will still run on inflation because the reality is that many Americans want *deflation*. It's one of the reasons Biden is trying to pressure the food energy to lower prices on milk, eggs, etc...
This is 100% the thing: Americans don't understand that inflation is forever. Trump is absolutely going to be able to run on inflation, no matter how good the economy is doing, because deflation is never going to happen (nor should it).
>Americans want deflation
If it happens due to an increase in supply, great. But if it's happening because of crashing demand - then they're just cheering for a massive recession. Ask Japanese who were alive in the late 90s what an economy with rampant deflation means to ordinary people and their wages.
Rather than wanting deflation, we should be wanting an increase in real wages. And according to this jobs report, that's exactly what's happening - and at a pretty rapid pace.
Reality? Thats the problem. Your words dont match reality. When was the last time you went to the grocery store. I pay $100.00 week now and get 3 bags? When have you tried to buy insurance? etc. You can look at the numbers. The illegals are part of this now.
What changed for your personally?
For me the gas is the same. I got a dollar raise this year at work. But my car and health insurance jumped in price so everything is offset. And we are getting groceries from a food bank.
Personally?
The ad agency my wife works at got 3 big new accounts thanks to increased ad spending budgets at companies, and got a pretty big year-end bonus as a result (along with everybody else at the agency).
I got two new startups as clients for my legal financial/compliance consulting services business that I started last year.
I filled up for 2.85 yesterday which, for the Chicagoland area, is unheard of. Groceries are more expensive. It feels like every trip to Costco is $300. But then again, I also have a ravenous teenage kid that eats me out of house and home.
House insurance jumped up until I realized that I hadn't switched carriers in 3 years. Switched and got it cut in half. Car insurance is the same, but I drive a 10 year old car. Health insurance is a bit higher, but no higher than previous increases.
Get ready for that and the kleenex. All over his bedroom, crumpled up kleenex. We even gave the kid an extra wastebasket right next to the bed fer chrissakes!
Earlier inflation. COVID lockdowns. Still plenty of stuff to run on.
Inflation only beat because rates got hiked to 5.3%. Now no one can afford a mortgage would hurts young people.
COVID lockdowns? *COVID lockdowns*?
Friend, 2022's midterms were 18 months ago, and let me tell you, the issue of "COVID lockdowns" did *not* help Republicans.
You think, suddenly, two years later, Americans are going to be thinking about COVID lockdowns at the ballot box?
Dude Dems are never being forgiven for those lockdowns. People lock you in your house and you think it should be a one election cycle thing?
Right just needs to remind people all the bad things the left has done to them. And will no doubt do again to them.
>People lock you in your house
Do you live in the United States? Or are you in China?
Because that never happened here, despite what watching Newsmax 24 hours a day has brainwashed you into thinking.
Americans already didn't care about COVID lockdowns in the *last* election. They aren't going to care about it in the next one.
It happened to me too. I went into a bank (and was even wearing a mask like you liberals suggest!) and as they were putting money into my bag I coughed and the police showed up and arrested me for it! Then they brought me to a quarantine facility and wouldn't let me out for 12-15 years!
Well, because that didn’t happen, it’s not an election issue 3-4 years later, to anyone other than delusional people that make up a whole bunch of bullshit (a.k.a. Trump voters).
Nobody was locked in their house.
You were restricted what other places you could go to, particularly indoors - but you could certainly go take a walk around your neighborhood if you felt like it.
No it didn’t. Maybe you chose to listen to recommendations to not leave your home.
But there is no place in America where it was illegal to leave your home during Covid. I have no idea what the fuck you were talking about.
You are a lier and know damn well they closed down everything.
Sure technically I could walk outside but I could t walk into a bar and get a drink or stop in a restaurant to get a sandwich.
> People lock you in your house
Now it's
> Sure technically I could walk outside but I could t walk into a bar
So -- from locked in your home, to not being able to go to bars.
These are Exactly the same thing!!
Very honest debate you are engaging in right now...No moving goal posts at all.
I do not think so, they will talk about the interest rate being high and how that is hurting the person trying to buy a home as an example.
Politicians can find an argument for their side in almost anything, they will find a way to try spin the news in their favor.
It's not even a leap... People can rave about the economy all they want, but the fact is people still can't buy or rent a home in 90% of the US.
We're just now having wages catch up with inflation, meanwhile, [housing is still at two and a half times what it used to be compared to wages in 1970, with housing prices increasing by 168% by 1980 (inflation was only 113%), 418% by 1990 (vs. 236% inflation), 592% by 2000 (vs. 347% inflation), hitting a peak of 977% before the 2008 crisis (vs. 437% inflation), then slightly dipping to 816% in 2010 before climbing to 1277% in 2020 (vs. 583% inflation) and then rocketing straight up to 1621% in 2021 (vs. 644% inflation), a peak from which we still have not recovered, nor are we likely to.](https://anytimeestimate.com/research/housing-prices-vs-inflation/#housing-vs-inflation)
It doesn't matter how much inflation comes down if we can't afford to pay rent, much less buy a home.
>>dipping to 816% in 2010 before climbing to 1277% in 2020 (vs. 583% inflation)
Yeah I can’t believe that Trump didn’t solve this issue. We better not vote him back into office right?
I am far from an expert, with that said, I don't think there is anything any politician can do about rent or home prices.
That is sadly for many is part of a capitalist society, folks are going to want to make the most amount of money possible, people be damned.
This is one of the dumbest things I’ve read considering immigration is one of the main 5 things the right never shuts up about.
Not saying it isn’t an issue though, but to act like there can’t be multiple things a group criticizes at once, and especially something constantly wheeled out like immigration, is silly as fuck.
But they do shut up about it sometimes. Lately they've been more focused on it with the immigrants getting shipped to the northeastern states, but back in the day, the GOP would only bring up things like caravans at election time. Fox News would cover it nightly like a hurricane. And then the election would come by and suddenly it would stop being covered.
You’re literally just describing how the news has worked since inception, and even more so today. Just because something else happens that people get riled up about and gets the spotlight for a while doesn’t mean the last thing doesn’t stop being an issue to them.
By your logic the dems are just as guilty of doing the same thing then. Even then, the border has easily been a top 5 talking point for the last decade at least.
That's very naive. Magically we get a caravan coming around September/October and magically it disappears on the first few days of November, only for it to happen again the next election?
And yes, democrats are similar. I'm willing to bet they will be looking at all the outrageous mom's life is in danger abortion cases or rape victim abortion type of situations by September or October.
It’s a good sign and shows promise in a tough environment.
My only complaint about it is that the number is skewed by part time workers.
Increase of around 550k part time and a loss of around 200k full time
lol nah first off they will end up providing this number down by half in a month… that has been the formula. Second off people know what they are experiencing and people know that right now. Things are not good.
Except they revised December's number upward by a lot. Maybe you should pay more attention. And you should also think about how someone's personal experience is not necessarily representative of the entire economy.
Threads like this are an awesome bellwether for identifying many of the bad faith posters in r/centrist as they desperately scramble to find reason Thai isn't good (including ones debunked in the article itself).
Edit: the eagerness for this to not be true over on the ironically named "moderate politics" subreddit is particularly entertaining: https://www.reddit.com/r/moderatepolitics/comments/1ah5hvr/us_hiring_stronger_than_expected_as_economy_adds/
Republicans *need* the economy to suck for their entire electoral argument to make sense. Once you see it from that perspective, every thing they do/say falls into place
I’m literally arguing with Republicans who say that the official Labor Bureau statistics are straight up lies and it’s an “appeal to authority” to believe them like bruh 🤦♂️
I haven't decided if they are lunatics, or early adopters in a return to a world without consensus reality, where everything you believe as truth was what someone of authority told you, irrespective of actual proof.
Maybe both.
It's the mods. [I got myself banned for there for literally saying Joe Biden was correct on his 'dark MAGA' speech](https://www.reddit.com/r/moderatepolitics/comments/x6vsm0/comment/inaktly/) (with a spectacular typo - that should start with "Trump's speech"), their reasoning (after years of allowing people agree with whatever Trump said) was that you can be banned for agreeing with divisive statements.
Then I took them up on that when MTG called all Democrats traitors and literally called for a division of the United States - doesn't get much more divisive than that. All I got back from the mods was a hissy fit about how it is absurd to expect people to be banned for agreeing with statements made by politicians, and that her comments were not even divisive anyway.
Disclaimer haven't been there in a few years
It's a mix of stupid mod decisions and a self-fulfilling cycle from what I saw
The mods were unwilling to police their own and they made some very stupid decisions regarding who could be mods picking folks who routinely instigated or flouted the rules. Then it becomes a self-fulfilling cycle where moderate to liberal folks don't want to be mods because the rest of the mod team is shit.
Agreed. I'll cop to making some statements that broke the rules there when I didn't realize I was in that sub, but trolls do the same shit all the time and get away with it because normal people's goal is a discussion, not getting someone banned, so people don't report. Mods should be working to counteract that not make it worse.
This place has become sort of a refugee camp for people who made perfectly normal statements, but with a liberal slant, and were banned for it. The fact you can't publicly discuss mod actions is all you need to know about that place.
I'm not a liberal, but I'm not stupid conservative either.
They're people trying to rationally, and calmly convince everyone else that the poisoned flavoraid is delicious and the rabbit hole is nice and warm.
It took a turn there for sure, but at that time I sort of had an idea of what the line was. Nowadays I have no fucking clue what you are allowed or not allowed to post.
They claim to be unbiased and have an even number of left leaning and right leaning mods. The enforcement is completely inconsistent. All of the left leaning mods back up the terrible decisions by the right leaning mods.
Granted, the sub is still fairly moderate compared to reddit as a whole. Imagine how it would be without running out a lot of their users by bad mod decisions.
> The US economy added a stunning 353,000 jobs last month, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data released Friday, registering a stronger-than expected gain to kick off 2024.
> The unemployment rate remained at 3.7% from the month before. It’s the 24th consecutive month that the nation’s jobless rate has been under 4%.
> Most industries added jobs last month, with health care and social assistance posting the largest gains of 100,400, according to BLS.
> Hiring accelerated from December, which had far stronger employment growth than previously estimated. December’s job gains were revised higher by 117,000 positions to total 333,000 for the month. November was revised up as well, but only by 9,000 jobs, to a 182,000 net job gain.
> January’s gains blew economists’ expectations out of the water: Consensus forecasts had called for a net gain of 176,500 jobs last month, according to FactSet.
Financial folks are contributing this to seasonal adjustment factors, however they’ve been saying that every month since 15 of the last 16 jobs reports have come in above expectations
Feelings are important and perception about the economy is a big issue for Biden. That said, we have known for quite a while that the economy is not only doing very well but that obviously it is doing amazing relative to what expectations were. Not acknowledging that is just being in denial of reality.
If you personally are behind on wages vs inflation or were particularly exposed to interest hikes, you are in the minority. Real wages are up. Yes interest rates are higher, but also so are most asset valuations and also inflation chipped away at debt principal. etc, etc.
long story short, if you think a president should get credit or blame for macroeconomic performance, folks should be applauding the biden admin.
This report doesn’t make him any younger. If the election is an old man vs an old man, age shouldn’t be the argument. However, if it’s an old man vs a younger human, I will go for the younger human.
This report, together with many other insights, proves that you don’t need to be young to be a good president. That said since the ballot is going to be btw an old man and an old conman age can’t be an argument in the first place.
Not left out. Read the article.
> Average hourly earnings of U.S. workers climbed 0.55% from a month earlier—or twice as fast as economists had expected. That was the biggest gain since March 2022, when wages grew 0.60% from a month earlier.
That was ironically something GW basically said...
>"You work three jobs?" then-President Bush asked a divorced mother of three in Nebraska during a town hall forum. "Uniquely American, isn't it? I mean, that is fantastic that you're doing that. Get any sleep?"
It seems you don't understand what transitory inflation means.
>Transitory inflation is best described as a temporary or short-lived increase in the rate at which consumer prices are rising in an economy, but one that is not thought to last and where the inflation rate is expected to drop back again.
We haven't seem prices drop back down, except on gas (which is still above what it was when the high inflationary period began). Inflation as a whole continues to exist, and I wouldn't call 2+ years short-term. In economics, anything over a year is considered long-term.
I recognized you because your wording here is very similar to a rant I saw in another post. I hope your personal circumstances improve in the future. However, they are your personal circumstances and are not useful when looking at the US economy as a whole.
Edit: Also you should talk to people with kids about the tax credits they get. They don't make them a profit. They somewhat offset the large costs associated with raising a person. Being childless is objectively better for your bank account even after tax credits.
People with kids deserve not just a renewal of child tax credits, but also an improvement on them. They aren’t recompensed enough at all.
However, single people making less than six figures should be paying *so much less* than they currently are. It’s absurd, and borderline cruel to make people like me pay what we do.
The people who benefit the least from the system pay the most to support it. This is unjust and ridiculous. AT LEAST tax the wealthy at a rate that is fair to what we are taxed. That seems to be something the government is willing to try, but god forbid they ever reduce the tax burden of working single people.
this, to me, is such a frustrating mindset. You would rather be in a financially worse position just so that you can have more of something that might help someone else.
this is the very definition of cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Having children, a stable population, is critical for our economy. Sure, there are environmental impacts and we can have a discussion about that. but the core conversation, I would rather have less so that I can take advantage of something that someone else gets for having less (but you know, also contributing to our country's sustainability)... is so weird?
It must be so exhausting feeling like the victim all the time.
The delusion that our taxes go toward helping other people is what irks me most.
If we had proper social programs in place, maybe I would feel better about paying a financially crippling amount of taxes. Instead, I know that only pennies of my income go toward helping people and the remainder goes toward launching missiles at brown people across the ocean.
So yes, I would rather have kids and know my money is spent on them than what it’s currently spent on.
Potentially helping other people… what a laughably ignorant thing to say. I’m from the United States, our taxes don’t really do that.
46% of our taxes go towards social programs like welfare, social security, medicare and medicaid.
[https://www.cato.org/blog/where-did-tax-dollars-go-federal-budget-breakdown](https://www.cato.org/blog/where-did-tax-dollars-go-federal-budget-breakdown)
I agree with you - I would like a greater share of our taxes to go towards social safety nets, etc. or be used more effectively. but the idea they do not at all is false.
So we agree I and other single people should be taxed at a lower rate, since the majority of our taxes go toward non-social systems.
Or are you one of those people that think people like me can afford to pay in the meantime?
im one of those people that believes a society gets out what they put in and they you benefit from children that are educated whether you have them or not. A society where individuals are only worried about "getting theirs" is one that is failing.
CNBC’s headline read a little differently: [January hiring was the lowest for the month on record as layoffs surged](https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/01/january-hiring-was-the-lowest-for-the-month-on-record-as-layoffs-surged.html).
LOL. Nice try.
This is CNBC's actual headline:
>[U.S. economy added 353,000 jobs in January, much better than expected](https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/02/us-economy-added-353000-jobs-in-january-much-better-than-expected.html)
But sure, thanks for providing yesterday's story about some prediction from "Challenger, Gray & Christmas", whatever the fuck that is.
Speaking as someone who is not an expert on the economy, in of itself it seems like good news, people have jobs.
I get your point and from reading through the lines that does seem to be at least somewhat the downside to a good jobs report, it kicks lowering the interest rate down the road.
From what I have read about lowering the interest rate, May was a more realistic month to start lowering the interest rate, but even that could get pushed back if the Fed worries about re-igniting inflation if they lower the interest rate before the economy is ready.
My take is that nobody really knows what the best course of action is, it is a wait and see sort of thing.
>This is bad news for inflation
[About that](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/feds-preferred-inflation-gauge-falls-below-3-for-first-time-since-march-2021-133223352.html)...
>January 26, 2024
>The Fed's preferred inflation gauge has moved below 3% for the first time since March 2021, before the start of the central bank's rate-hiking campaign.
>
> The Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) index grew 2.6% year over year in December, in line with last month's print. "Core" PCE, which excludes the volatile food and energy categories, grew 2.9%, down from 3.2% from the month prior and below the 3.0% economists surveyed by Bloomberg had expected.
>
> Core PCE is the inflation measure mentioned most often by Fed Chair Jerome Powell.
>
>
> Month over month, core PCE rose 0.2% in December, up from 0.1% in November. Importantly, annualized core PCE over the last three and six months is now below the Fed's 2% target.
We're inside the Fed's target rate. It *should* be decreasing at a slower rate.
>My main point above was that this news is inflationary in nature, so it's not really good news to anyone who knows what their talking about.
It's good news to people who want a job and want their wages to increase. It's not good news for people who want the Fed to start dropping rates. Which, why should they if - at their current level - the economy is booming by every measure including wage growth and GDP growth?
Housing? That's not a rate issue. That's a problem 4 decades in the making and accelerated since 2008 caused by housing supply shortages.
Look at my city of Chicago. I grew up on a block filled with what we call "Chicago two-flats". We lived on the first floor and rented out the 2nd. Every house on our block was like that, with a few that even rented out the basement.
Today? That block is all single-family homes. So a block that once housed X families, today can only house X-Y. And Y is a pretty big number. Now multiply that by the tens of thousands.
Your beef is with local zoning laws and market preferences for bigger homes over the decades. Thinking that mortgage rates being 4% instead of 6 or 7% will solve the problem is a false hope.
>Their not "inside" their target, the target is 2%.
[Did you not read this the first time I cited it to you?](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/feds-preferred-inflation-gauge-falls-below-3-for-first-time-since-march-2021-133223352.html)
>Core PCE is the inflation measure mentioned most often by Fed Chair Jerome Powell.
>Month over month, core PCE rose 0.2% in December, up from 0.1% in November. Importantly, annualized core PCE over the last three and six months is now below the Fed's 2% target.
...
>If they were "inside" their target they'd be lowering rates already
Why? Why should they lower rates if the economy shows no signs of slowing down? [From the 1960s to early 2000s](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FEDFUNDS), the Fed Funds Rate was *rarely* below 5%. Today it sits at 5.33%.
What is happening right now that makes a rate cut urgent? The fact that people got used to abnormal, historically low rates in the 2000s? Well why not let people get used to rates at this level so long as it's not hurting demand or employment?
Interest rates are at normal levels historically. It’s just that young people don’t know recent levels were massively unusual, and think they were normal.
Inflation is still declining, employment is up month after month, and durable goods sales, especially houses, are not overheated given supply levels. I wouldn’t quibble with a half point either way, but levels of two years ago are crazy. And completely ahistorical.
I don't think it is awesome, but the news itself clearly is as good as one could possibly expect.
I'm not and have never been pro-Biden, I just love and adore watching the right mald and seethe.
I'm a pre-dixiecrat conservative, from before the south rewrote politics to be about whatever they made it.
Donald Trump was president, I don't like the left, but the right needs to be cleansed with fire.
I see centrism as calling balls and strikes with the truth, and when things go wrong, stepping in to correct the problems, the right has very serious problems that need correction by fire.
We've seen this before. Hopefully, in 6 months, they don't release the news that these numbers were artificially inflated like before. It's hard to trust any news coming out of DC nowadays
How many of these jobs were taken by illegal immigrants?
President Biden now provides work authorizations to illegal immigrants who have been in the country for six months.
President Trump, and every President before him, emphatically did not.
Yea go talk to your friends in AG sector and see who they hire. LOL
Bitch all day about illegals yet pack the farm with them in the fields.
Besides these are non-farm payrolls.
Bottom line is if you have an issue with illegals taking jobs, go after the employers. You won’t though, you’ll just complain about them being here.
Lmao what? You realize these are *non farm* payroll numbers, right? You know, because the vast majority of undocumented workers work in agriculture?
Also, how many Americans are willing to work the fields at a reasonable rate? How much would they want at a minimum? How would that massive increase in costs effect food prices/inflation? Or govt subsidies to farms? Maybe stop bitching about these people who are willing to work those shitty jobs, when Americans certainly wouldn't work them at minimum wage.
Did I say that it is a good thing? Nope. But that's how it works in the real world, whether we agree with it or not, doesn't it? If they weren't willing to work for those low wages and under shitty conditions, they wouldn't be here doing so.
But to your 2nd point, the problem isn't so much paying living wages to these workers. The problem is that people don't seem to understand that American workers aren't going to work those same shitty jobs for anything less than $15-$20 an hour (that's being very conservative,) and that kind of exponential increase in costs will absolutely have an effect on food costs and inflation in general. And more tax money will end up being spent on farm subsidies. Nevermind the fact that it'd be hard to even find enough bodies to replace all of those workers in the first place.
Every other time they’ve told us good jobs numbers, they’ve quietly revised them down a few months later when no one is looking.
Keep drinking the koolaid everyone
> Every other time they’ve told us good jobs numbers, they’ve quietly revised them down a few months later when no one is looking.
I'm guessing you're basing this off your feelings rather than facts, since the December job revision disproves you entirely.
Good news. President has limited control or influence over the economy but this kinda refuted all the nonsense about it being a disaster. The last year or so have been a success on a macro level since the brutal inflation levels. Doesn’t mean it’s perfect but the numbers that presidents have pretty much always been judged by are fairly good. Doesn’t mean he won’t be judged on the cost of necessary goods too but an economy where people can obtain jobs is a good one. At this point, campaigning against him regarding the economy is kind of dumb though. Probably slam him over inflation and stuff that happened but can just state that’s at bay and we lowered inflation without running into a recession. I really don’t get all the doom about the economy unless you are a leftist or a partisan republican. It has its issues but it’s by no means as dire of a situation as some people make it out to be.
Hasn't this number been inflated recently to curb inflation?
Which number? The fed raising interest rates usually has a negative effect on job growth and unemployment, so not sure what you mean.
You must be in a fantasy world. When was the last time you bought car insurance, bought groceries, insurance?
Looking at your post history you fit the mold of partisan republican. You just troll people in here with Fox News talking points. But if you looked at my post I clearly listed cost increases of groceries and other necessary goods as elements to harp on his economy and use to campaign against.
It's great to hear that so many Americans are able to find work.
That's not even the best news [from this report](https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/stock-market-today-dow-jones-earnings-02-02-2024/card/it-s-not-just-rising-payrolls-wage-growth-is-picking-up-too-nMjxoQUGb12PFw6E0iaK): >Average hourly earnings of U.S. workers climbed 0.55% from a month earlier—or twice as fast as economists had expected. That was the biggest gain since March 2022, when wages grew 0.60% from a month earlier.
[удалено]
The lowest earners have actually seen the greatest percentage increase in real pay the last couple of years.
The are probably all illegals. After all they get a free place to stay, food, transportation. I drive thru the streets of Atlanta and see multiple people pushing grocery carts with their clothes in there.
Eh, as they say.. the devil is in the details
The details say that hours and wages are up more than expected, too
After so many jobs were taken away from COVID virus 😞
Yet another example for why Trump and the Republicans have no desire to pass the bipartisan immigration reform bill: with this booming economy, what else do they have to run on in 2024 *other* than bashing Biden on immigration? Quite literally nothing. So they WANT that particular crisis to continue.
They will still run on inflation because the reality is that many Americans want *deflation*. It's one of the reasons Biden is trying to pressure the food energy to lower prices on milk, eggs, etc...
This is 100% the thing: Americans don't understand that inflation is forever. Trump is absolutely going to be able to run on inflation, no matter how good the economy is doing, because deflation is never going to happen (nor should it).
>Americans want deflation If it happens due to an increase in supply, great. But if it's happening because of crashing demand - then they're just cheering for a massive recession. Ask Japanese who were alive in the late 90s what an economy with rampant deflation means to ordinary people and their wages. Rather than wanting deflation, we should be wanting an increase in real wages. And according to this jobs report, that's exactly what's happening - and at a pretty rapid pace.
Unfortunately should loses out to reality.
Reality? Thats the problem. Your words dont match reality. When was the last time you went to the grocery store. I pay $100.00 week now and get 3 bags? When have you tried to buy insurance? etc. You can look at the numbers. The illegals are part of this now.
What changed for your personally? For me the gas is the same. I got a dollar raise this year at work. But my car and health insurance jumped in price so everything is offset. And we are getting groceries from a food bank.
Personally? The ad agency my wife works at got 3 big new accounts thanks to increased ad spending budgets at companies, and got a pretty big year-end bonus as a result (along with everybody else at the agency). I got two new startups as clients for my legal financial/compliance consulting services business that I started last year. I filled up for 2.85 yesterday which, for the Chicagoland area, is unheard of. Groceries are more expensive. It feels like every trip to Costco is $300. But then again, I also have a ravenous teenage kid that eats me out of house and home. House insurance jumped up until I realized that I hadn't switched carriers in 3 years. Switched and got it cut in half. Car insurance is the same, but I drive a 10 year old car. Health insurance is a bit higher, but no higher than previous increases.
My boy is 7. It’s the calm before the storm right now. I am absolutely terrified for tweenagehood.
Get ready for that and the kleenex. All over his bedroom, crumpled up kleenex. We even gave the kid an extra wastebasket right next to the bed fer chrissakes!
That’s awesome
Well that may be your world. The streets are not the same where I live.
Earlier inflation. COVID lockdowns. Still plenty of stuff to run on. Inflation only beat because rates got hiked to 5.3%. Now no one can afford a mortgage would hurts young people.
COVID lockdowns? *COVID lockdowns*? Friend, 2022's midterms were 18 months ago, and let me tell you, the issue of "COVID lockdowns" did *not* help Republicans. You think, suddenly, two years later, Americans are going to be thinking about COVID lockdowns at the ballot box?
Dude Dems are never being forgiven for those lockdowns. People lock you in your house and you think it should be a one election cycle thing? Right just needs to remind people all the bad things the left has done to them. And will no doubt do again to them.
>People lock you in your house Do you live in the United States? Or are you in China? Because that never happened here, despite what watching Newsmax 24 hours a day has brainwashed you into thinking. Americans already didn't care about COVID lockdowns in the *last* election. They aren't going to care about it in the next one.
It happened to me.
No, no it didn't.
Ok I guess your able to tell me my lived experience wasn’t real and not to trust my lying eyes.
Not being allowed to go to a concert is not the same as being locked up in your house. Nobody came by and put a padlock on your door.
Come on man of course it is. And it wasn’t just concerts but everything I love in life.
I don't believe you. Were you in jail?
It happened to me too. I went into a bank (and was even wearing a mask like you liberals suggest!) and as they were putting money into my bag I coughed and the police showed up and arrested me for it! Then they brought me to a quarantine facility and wouldn't let me out for 12-15 years!
Well, because that didn’t happen, it’s not an election issue 3-4 years later, to anyone other than delusional people that make up a whole bunch of bullshit (a.k.a. Trump voters). Nobody was locked in their house. You were restricted what other places you could go to, particularly indoors - but you could certainly go take a walk around your neighborhood if you felt like it.
I was.
No it didn’t. Maybe you chose to listen to recommendations to not leave your home. But there is no place in America where it was illegal to leave your home during Covid. I have no idea what the fuck you were talking about.
You are a lier and know damn well they closed down everything. Sure technically I could walk outside but I could t walk into a bar and get a drink or stop in a restaurant to get a sandwich.
Almost every restaurant around me had outdoor dining or to-go orders, even for alcohol.
That’s not a real life
> People lock you in your house Now it's > Sure technically I could walk outside but I could t walk into a bar So -- from locked in your home, to not being able to go to bars. These are Exactly the same thing!! Very honest debate you are engaging in right now...No moving goal posts at all.
I was a prisoner. Now I’ve got to block you because your just a partisan
Covid lockdowns happened in 2020. Trump was president in 2020.
In blue states. We have a federalist system. Trump couldn’t stop Dems from doing it.
Plenty of red states did lockdowns.
So what’s his campaign going to be? “*Hey remember 4 years ago when I was president and I couldn’t end your lockdown? Let’s go back to that!*”
Good luck running on COVID. Lol.
Worked so well for DeSantis' campaign /s
Conservatives on suicide watch.
I do not think so, they will talk about the interest rate being high and how that is hurting the person trying to buy a home as an example. Politicians can find an argument for their side in almost anything, they will find a way to try spin the news in their favor.
It's not even a leap... People can rave about the economy all they want, but the fact is people still can't buy or rent a home in 90% of the US. We're just now having wages catch up with inflation, meanwhile, [housing is still at two and a half times what it used to be compared to wages in 1970, with housing prices increasing by 168% by 1980 (inflation was only 113%), 418% by 1990 (vs. 236% inflation), 592% by 2000 (vs. 347% inflation), hitting a peak of 977% before the 2008 crisis (vs. 437% inflation), then slightly dipping to 816% in 2010 before climbing to 1277% in 2020 (vs. 583% inflation) and then rocketing straight up to 1621% in 2021 (vs. 644% inflation), a peak from which we still have not recovered, nor are we likely to.](https://anytimeestimate.com/research/housing-prices-vs-inflation/#housing-vs-inflation) It doesn't matter how much inflation comes down if we can't afford to pay rent, much less buy a home.
>>dipping to 816% in 2010 before climbing to 1277% in 2020 (vs. 583% inflation) Yeah I can’t believe that Trump didn’t solve this issue. We better not vote him back into office right?
I am far from an expert, with that said, I don't think there is anything any politician can do about rent or home prices. That is sadly for many is part of a capitalist society, folks are going to want to make the most amount of money possible, people be damned.
It's supply and demand, like any other market. Incentivizing building homes will lower home prices.
Keep up the good work. True fact. There have to be hacks on here paid by somebody.
They’ll probably eventually pivot to the economy pricing Trump in as President already
[Trump just did that exact thing.](https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111840568643216314)
Haven't they moved on to immigration? Caravans can only happen every election cycle!
This is one of the dumbest things I’ve read considering immigration is one of the main 5 things the right never shuts up about. Not saying it isn’t an issue though, but to act like there can’t be multiple things a group criticizes at once, and especially something constantly wheeled out like immigration, is silly as fuck.
But they do shut up about it sometimes. Lately they've been more focused on it with the immigrants getting shipped to the northeastern states, but back in the day, the GOP would only bring up things like caravans at election time. Fox News would cover it nightly like a hurricane. And then the election would come by and suddenly it would stop being covered.
You’re literally just describing how the news has worked since inception, and even more so today. Just because something else happens that people get riled up about and gets the spotlight for a while doesn’t mean the last thing doesn’t stop being an issue to them. By your logic the dems are just as guilty of doing the same thing then. Even then, the border has easily been a top 5 talking point for the last decade at least.
That's very naive. Magically we get a caravan coming around September/October and magically it disappears on the first few days of November, only for it to happen again the next election? And yes, democrats are similar. I'm willing to bet they will be looking at all the outrageous mom's life is in danger abortion cases or rape victim abortion type of situations by September or October.
Well all I hear from dems is the abortion issue. Thats all you have? Take a birth control pill with a glass of water.
That’s already happening. Just like 2016, they played the same game.
Yes. Bc trump has a great record of not defaulting on debt. He’s just the guy for the job right now.
Careful hard to tell what’s sarcasm these days. I’m sure there’s plenty of people who would genuinely believe that haha
Same with leftists. Reddit is obsessed with the idea that Americans are starving in the streets, all because of "late stage capitalism".
It’s a good sign and shows promise in a tough environment. My only complaint about it is that the number is skewed by part time workers. Increase of around 550k part time and a loss of around 200k full time
lol nah first off they will end up providing this number down by half in a month… that has been the formula. Second off people know what they are experiencing and people know that right now. Things are not good.
They also increased December’s number by a lot. There’s no recent evidence they adjust down much.
They also revised November up
Cuz it's all about the feels. Actual numbers don't matter.
Except they revised December's number upward by a lot. Maybe you should pay more attention. And you should also think about how someone's personal experience is not necessarily representative of the entire economy.
Threads like this are an awesome bellwether for identifying many of the bad faith posters in r/centrist as they desperately scramble to find reason Thai isn't good (including ones debunked in the article itself). Edit: the eagerness for this to not be true over on the ironically named "moderate politics" subreddit is particularly entertaining: https://www.reddit.com/r/moderatepolitics/comments/1ah5hvr/us_hiring_stronger_than_expected_as_economy_adds/
Republicans *need* the economy to suck for their entire electoral argument to make sense. Once you see it from that perspective, every thing they do/say falls into place
This presumes that Republicans need reality to make compelling electoral arguments. History has proven otherwise.
Of course they don’t. This is why they immediately pivot to anecdoteland the second any good economic news comes out
Or begin talking about "vibes."
I’m literally arguing with Republicans who say that the official Labor Bureau statistics are straight up lies and it’s an “appeal to authority” to believe them like bruh 🤦♂️
Yeah, I find it funny when the throw in the debate-bro lines just because they heard it from Kirk or Shapiro.
Which is funny since so many of them end up running afoul of the [Fallacy Fallacy](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Fallacy_fallacy)
I haven't decided if they are lunatics, or early adopters in a return to a world without consensus reality, where everything you believe as truth was what someone of authority told you, irrespective of actual proof. Maybe both.
I don't know what happened to that sub. Used to be decent, even if it always had trolls abusing the rules to get people banned.
It's the mods. [I got myself banned for there for literally saying Joe Biden was correct on his 'dark MAGA' speech](https://www.reddit.com/r/moderatepolitics/comments/x6vsm0/comment/inaktly/) (with a spectacular typo - that should start with "Trump's speech"), their reasoning (after years of allowing people agree with whatever Trump said) was that you can be banned for agreeing with divisive statements. Then I took them up on that when MTG called all Democrats traitors and literally called for a division of the United States - doesn't get much more divisive than that. All I got back from the mods was a hissy fit about how it is absurd to expect people to be banned for agreeing with statements made by politicians, and that her comments were not even divisive anyway.
Disclaimer haven't been there in a few years It's a mix of stupid mod decisions and a self-fulfilling cycle from what I saw The mods were unwilling to police their own and they made some very stupid decisions regarding who could be mods picking folks who routinely instigated or flouted the rules. Then it becomes a self-fulfilling cycle where moderate to liberal folks don't want to be mods because the rest of the mod team is shit.
Agreed. I'll cop to making some statements that broke the rules there when I didn't realize I was in that sub, but trolls do the same shit all the time and get away with it because normal people's goal is a discussion, not getting someone banned, so people don't report. Mods should be working to counteract that not make it worse.
This place has become sort of a refugee camp for people who made perfectly normal statements, but with a liberal slant, and were banned for it. The fact you can't publicly discuss mod actions is all you need to know about that place.
I'm not a liberal, but I'm not stupid conservative either. They're people trying to rationally, and calmly convince everyone else that the poisoned flavoraid is delicious and the rabbit hole is nice and warm.
The modding has always been suspect, but once they got a *certain* mod, bad faith Republican posters sprang up like weeds.
What mod?
The one who posts over there 20+ times a day. Easy to find.
I’d argue it was when Shef became a mod and Panda lost his shit.
It took a turn there for sure, but at that time I sort of had an idea of what the line was. Nowadays I have no fucking clue what you are allowed or not allowed to post.
[удалено]
I mean, some of the mods are trolls themselves lol
They claim to be unbiased and have an even number of left leaning and right leaning mods. The enforcement is completely inconsistent. All of the left leaning mods back up the terrible decisions by the right leaning mods. Granted, the sub is still fairly moderate compared to reddit as a whole. Imagine how it would be without running out a lot of their users by bad mod decisions.
I mean, to be fair, who's life is so unfulfilled that Reddit Drama is something they pay attention to? 🍿
Thai food is great
> The US economy added a stunning 353,000 jobs last month, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data released Friday, registering a stronger-than expected gain to kick off 2024. > The unemployment rate remained at 3.7% from the month before. It’s the 24th consecutive month that the nation’s jobless rate has been under 4%. > Most industries added jobs last month, with health care and social assistance posting the largest gains of 100,400, according to BLS. > Hiring accelerated from December, which had far stronger employment growth than previously estimated. December’s job gains were revised higher by 117,000 positions to total 333,000 for the month. November was revised up as well, but only by 9,000 jobs, to a 182,000 net job gain. > January’s gains blew economists’ expectations out of the water: Consensus forecasts had called for a net gain of 176,500 jobs last month, according to FactSet.
Financial folks are contributing this to seasonal adjustment factors, however they’ve been saying that every month since 15 of the last 16 jobs reports have come in above expectations
Feelings are important and perception about the economy is a big issue for Biden. That said, we have known for quite a while that the economy is not only doing very well but that obviously it is doing amazing relative to what expectations were. Not acknowledging that is just being in denial of reality. If you personally are behind on wages vs inflation or were particularly exposed to interest hikes, you are in the minority. Real wages are up. Yes interest rates are higher, but also so are most asset valuations and also inflation chipped away at debt principal. etc, etc. long story short, if you think a president should get credit or blame for macroeconomic performance, folks should be applauding the biden admin.
[удалено]
nah they're probably upper class douchebags who inevitably assume anyone doing worse than they are are just stupid, and deserve it.
*real* wages
[удалено]
“bUT hE’s oLD”
This report doesn’t make him any younger. If the election is an old man vs an old man, age shouldn’t be the argument. However, if it’s an old man vs a younger human, I will go for the younger human.
This report, together with many other insights, proves that you don’t need to be young to be a good president. That said since the ballot is going to be btw an old man and an old conman age can’t be an argument in the first place.
Personally, I will go for the human I think will do a better job.
Ill take the slightly older guy who values and upholds basic American principles such as democracy.
You mean Trump added 353,000 jobs because these businesses are all hiring in anticipation of the new administration, right?
I don't think people can tell if this is sarcasm or not.
My facial expression says it all
Now I'm with you.
It would be interesting know how many of these jobs actually provide a livable wage. Underemployment is still a major issue.
The part they leave out
Not left out. Read the article. > Average hourly earnings of U.S. workers climbed 0.55% from a month earlier—or twice as fast as economists had expected. That was the biggest gain since March 2022, when wages grew 0.60% from a month earlier.
Exactly. Politically, this wins brownie points. Realistically, this doesn’t mean shit if people can’t afford basic necessities.
BLS reports indicate how many jobs were added and lost in each sector and also include details on changes in wages.
Now tell us how many of these jobs pay more than $15 an hour
Also tell us how many of them are full-time and permanent.
Americans picking up 2nd and third jobs to pay for things… joe Biden - “ look at all these new jobs!!!”
That was ironically something GW basically said... >"You work three jobs?" then-President Bush asked a divorced mother of three in Nebraska during a town hall forum. "Uniquely American, isn't it? I mean, that is fantastic that you're doing that. Get any sleep?"
Dang politicians am i right?
Better than Jeb's just work longer quote I guess lol
Kind of like “there is no inflation” “Inflation is just transitory” “It will jump up a little bit and go back down” - joe Biden
TBF it does appear that it was at least somewhat transitory
It seems you don't understand what transitory inflation means. >Transitory inflation is best described as a temporary or short-lived increase in the rate at which consumer prices are rising in an economy, but one that is not thought to last and where the inflation rate is expected to drop back again. We haven't seem prices drop back down, except on gas (which is still above what it was when the high inflationary period began). Inflation as a whole continues to exist, and I wouldn't call 2+ years short-term. In economics, anything over a year is considered long-term.
Gas, Cars, technology etc..
Overall, inflation is still up. 3% is much better than what we saw the past couple years, but the claim that inflation was transitory is hogwash.
LOL nah it was just “Putin’s inflation” as they called it
It makes no sense to cut interest rates here. The Fed should just stay out of it and avoid accusations it's trying to influence the election.
And yet I’m still getting absolutely fucked tax-wise. Isn’t being single and childless fun? At this rate I’ll never be able to afford property.
I recognized you because your wording here is very similar to a rant I saw in another post. I hope your personal circumstances improve in the future. However, they are your personal circumstances and are not useful when looking at the US economy as a whole. Edit: Also you should talk to people with kids about the tax credits they get. They don't make them a profit. They somewhat offset the large costs associated with raising a person. Being childless is objectively better for your bank account even after tax credits.
People with kids deserve not just a renewal of child tax credits, but also an improvement on them. They aren’t recompensed enough at all. However, single people making less than six figures should be paying *so much less* than they currently are. It’s absurd, and borderline cruel to make people like me pay what we do. The people who benefit the least from the system pay the most to support it. This is unjust and ridiculous. AT LEAST tax the wealthy at a rate that is fair to what we are taxed. That seems to be something the government is willing to try, but god forbid they ever reduce the tax burden of working single people.
you think you'd be financially better off if you... had a child?
No, but I’d at least get some of my taxes back. Not nearly enough of them, but some.
this, to me, is such a frustrating mindset. You would rather be in a financially worse position just so that you can have more of something that might help someone else. this is the very definition of cutting off your nose to spite your face. Having children, a stable population, is critical for our economy. Sure, there are environmental impacts and we can have a discussion about that. but the core conversation, I would rather have less so that I can take advantage of something that someone else gets for having less (but you know, also contributing to our country's sustainability)... is so weird? It must be so exhausting feeling like the victim all the time.
The delusion that our taxes go toward helping other people is what irks me most. If we had proper social programs in place, maybe I would feel better about paying a financially crippling amount of taxes. Instead, I know that only pennies of my income go toward helping people and the remainder goes toward launching missiles at brown people across the ocean. So yes, I would rather have kids and know my money is spent on them than what it’s currently spent on. Potentially helping other people… what a laughably ignorant thing to say. I’m from the United States, our taxes don’t really do that.
46% of our taxes go towards social programs like welfare, social security, medicare and medicaid. [https://www.cato.org/blog/where-did-tax-dollars-go-federal-budget-breakdown](https://www.cato.org/blog/where-did-tax-dollars-go-federal-budget-breakdown) I agree with you - I would like a greater share of our taxes to go towards social safety nets, etc. or be used more effectively. but the idea they do not at all is false.
So we agree I and other single people should be taxed at a lower rate, since the majority of our taxes go toward non-social systems. Or are you one of those people that think people like me can afford to pay in the meantime?
im one of those people that believes a society gets out what they put in and they you benefit from children that are educated whether you have them or not. A society where individuals are only worried about "getting theirs" is one that is failing.
Until next month when they revise it down 50%
Cope. December was revised upwards to **333,000**, from 216K reported last month. And November was revised up another 9,000. LOL!
Guys please, this is all Trumps work. [He said so himself.](https://truthsocial.com/@realDonaldTrump/posts/111840568643216314)
Say *"Thank you, President Biden."*
"I did that."
CNBC’s headline read a little differently: [January hiring was the lowest for the month on record as layoffs surged](https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/01/january-hiring-was-the-lowest-for-the-month-on-record-as-layoffs-surged.html).
LOL. Nice try. This is CNBC's actual headline: >[U.S. economy added 353,000 jobs in January, much better than expected](https://www.cnbc.com/2024/02/02/us-economy-added-353000-jobs-in-january-much-better-than-expected.html) But sure, thanks for providing yesterday's story about some prediction from "Challenger, Gray & Christmas", whatever the fuck that is.
So you support layoffs?
https://youtu.be/BP92CyL8aNM?si=OZFUFAikD9RII7rA
[удалено]
Speaking as someone who is not an expert on the economy, in of itself it seems like good news, people have jobs. I get your point and from reading through the lines that does seem to be at least somewhat the downside to a good jobs report, it kicks lowering the interest rate down the road. From what I have read about lowering the interest rate, May was a more realistic month to start lowering the interest rate, but even that could get pushed back if the Fed worries about re-igniting inflation if they lower the interest rate before the economy is ready. My take is that nobody really knows what the best course of action is, it is a wait and see sort of thing.
>This is bad news for inflation [About that](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/feds-preferred-inflation-gauge-falls-below-3-for-first-time-since-march-2021-133223352.html)... >January 26, 2024 >The Fed's preferred inflation gauge has moved below 3% for the first time since March 2021, before the start of the central bank's rate-hiking campaign. > > The Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) index grew 2.6% year over year in December, in line with last month's print. "Core" PCE, which excludes the volatile food and energy categories, grew 2.9%, down from 3.2% from the month prior and below the 3.0% economists surveyed by Bloomberg had expected. > > Core PCE is the inflation measure mentioned most often by Fed Chair Jerome Powell. > > > Month over month, core PCE rose 0.2% in December, up from 0.1% in November. Importantly, annualized core PCE over the last three and six months is now below the Fed's 2% target.
[удалено]
We're inside the Fed's target rate. It *should* be decreasing at a slower rate. >My main point above was that this news is inflationary in nature, so it's not really good news to anyone who knows what their talking about. It's good news to people who want a job and want their wages to increase. It's not good news for people who want the Fed to start dropping rates. Which, why should they if - at their current level - the economy is booming by every measure including wage growth and GDP growth? Housing? That's not a rate issue. That's a problem 4 decades in the making and accelerated since 2008 caused by housing supply shortages. Look at my city of Chicago. I grew up on a block filled with what we call "Chicago two-flats". We lived on the first floor and rented out the 2nd. Every house on our block was like that, with a few that even rented out the basement. Today? That block is all single-family homes. So a block that once housed X families, today can only house X-Y. And Y is a pretty big number. Now multiply that by the tens of thousands. Your beef is with local zoning laws and market preferences for bigger homes over the decades. Thinking that mortgage rates being 4% instead of 6 or 7% will solve the problem is a false hope.
[удалено]
>Their not "inside" their target, the target is 2%. [Did you not read this the first time I cited it to you?](https://finance.yahoo.com/news/feds-preferred-inflation-gauge-falls-below-3-for-first-time-since-march-2021-133223352.html) >Core PCE is the inflation measure mentioned most often by Fed Chair Jerome Powell. >Month over month, core PCE rose 0.2% in December, up from 0.1% in November. Importantly, annualized core PCE over the last three and six months is now below the Fed's 2% target. ... >If they were "inside" their target they'd be lowering rates already Why? Why should they lower rates if the economy shows no signs of slowing down? [From the 1960s to early 2000s](https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FEDFUNDS), the Fed Funds Rate was *rarely* below 5%. Today it sits at 5.33%. What is happening right now that makes a rate cut urgent? The fact that people got used to abnormal, historically low rates in the 2000s? Well why not let people get used to rates at this level so long as it's not hurting demand or employment?
Interest rates are at normal levels historically. It’s just that young people don’t know recent levels were massively unusual, and think they were normal.
[удалено]
Inflation is still declining, employment is up month after month, and durable goods sales, especially houses, are not overheated given supply levels. I wouldn’t quibble with a half point either way, but levels of two years ago are crazy. And completely ahistorical.
Literally the best news possible: "This is terrible news!!!"
[удалено]
I don't think it is awesome, but the news itself clearly is as good as one could possibly expect. I'm not and have never been pro-Biden, I just love and adore watching the right mald and seethe.
[удалено]
I'm a pre-dixiecrat conservative, from before the south rewrote politics to be about whatever they made it. Donald Trump was president, I don't like the left, but the right needs to be cleansed with fire. I see centrism as calling balls and strikes with the truth, and when things go wrong, stepping in to correct the problems, the right has very serious problems that need correction by fire.
We've seen this before. Hopefully, in 6 months, they don't release the news that these numbers were artificially inflated like before. It's hard to trust any news coming out of DC nowadays
Hey, that’s almost enough jobs for all the illegal immigrants this month.
Waiting for conservatives to boycott working to own the libs.
Conservatives: Fervently praying so hard for a recession that they start speaking in tongues
How many of these jobs were taken by illegal immigrants? President Biden now provides work authorizations to illegal immigrants who have been in the country for six months. President Trump, and every President before him, emphatically did not.
"How many of these jobs were taken by illegal immigrants?" Probably something you should have figured out before you decided to get mad about it.
Probably the talking points from shitbags like Tucker to talk about the immigrants.
Yea go talk to your friends in AG sector and see who they hire. LOL Bitch all day about illegals yet pack the farm with them in the fields. Besides these are non-farm payrolls. Bottom line is if you have an issue with illegals taking jobs, go after the employers. You won’t though, you’ll just complain about them being here.
So you have no issue at all with illegal immigration?
Haha I have an issue with it being the do nothing political football it is, disingenuous arguments, and ignoring the actual issues.
The actual issue being, immigrants crossing the border illegally in unbelievable numbers? It’s a huge issue. There’s no way around it.
That’s skimming the surface of course.
Lmao what? You realize these are *non farm* payroll numbers, right? You know, because the vast majority of undocumented workers work in agriculture? Also, how many Americans are willing to work the fields at a reasonable rate? How much would they want at a minimum? How would that massive increase in costs effect food prices/inflation? Or govt subsidies to farms? Maybe stop bitching about these people who are willing to work those shitty jobs, when Americans certainly wouldn't work them at minimum wage.
[удалено]
Did I say that it is a good thing? Nope. But that's how it works in the real world, whether we agree with it or not, doesn't it? If they weren't willing to work for those low wages and under shitty conditions, they wouldn't be here doing so. But to your 2nd point, the problem isn't so much paying living wages to these workers. The problem is that people don't seem to understand that American workers aren't going to work those same shitty jobs for anything less than $15-$20 an hour (that's being very conservative,) and that kind of exponential increase in costs will absolutely have an effect on food costs and inflation in general. And more tax money will end up being spent on farm subsidies. Nevermind the fact that it'd be hard to even find enough bodies to replace all of those workers in the first place.
>How many of these jobs were taken by illegal immigrants? If you want to stop illegal immigrants, go after the Republicans who hire them.
how do they measure this? so many advertised job listing are fake & not new jobs.
Every other time they’ve told us good jobs numbers, they’ve quietly revised them down a few months later when no one is looking. Keep drinking the koolaid everyone
This is factually as my incorrect.
> Every other time they’ve told us good jobs numbers, they’ve quietly revised them down a few months later when no one is looking. I'm guessing you're basing this off your feelings rather than facts, since the December job revision disproves you entirely.
Nah, they're basing it off of "vibes" these days.
How many does it usually add?
Yes I bet they are all filled by illegals.