The Real Cure for Inequality

The left’s apocalyptic economic predictions for the Trump Presidency haven’t panned out. With jobs plentiful and wages rising at the fastest rate in a decade, liberals are doubling down on alarms about inequality. The inconvenient evidence is that low- and middle-income folks are reaping more economic benefits than during the Obama years.

Democrats flogged last week’s Census report that showed health coverage and Medicaid enrollment declined in 2018. But they ignored the other side of that story: Worker earnings increased by 3.4% while the poverty rate declined 0.5 percentage points to 11.8%, the lowest level since 2001. Benefit rolls are shrinking as low-income workers earn more.

According to the Census Bureau, the number of full-time, year-round workers increased by 2.3 million in 2018, and employment gains were biggest among minority female-led households. The share of workers in female-led households who worked full-time year-round increased by 4.2 percentage points among blacks and 3.6 percentage points among Hispanics.

As a result, real median earnings for female households with no spouse present jumped 7.6% last year. The poverty rate among female households declined 2.7 percentage points for blacks, four percentage points for Hispanics and 7.1 percentage points for their children. Remember this the next time Senator Kamala Harris complains that Mr. Trump’s policies are harming women and minorities.


https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-real-cure-for-inequality-11569020055

Wages are up if you are lucky enough to have a job...

Just don't get sick..   Or hope to buy a house anytime soon.

Part-time and casual work is up --  as is 'underemployment' ;   but it's simply "tough shit" for anyone hoping for permanent full-time positions..

And genuine 'homelessness' in the USA hasn't decreased in decades --  it simply keeps on being pushed "out of sight and out of mind".

That article itself infers that inequality doesn't matter though --  apparently people are supposed to celebrate the rich getting richer --  and don't worry about the poor.  They deserve to be poor --  it's their own fault afterall !

'Wolfie wrote:

Wages are up if you are lucky enough to have a job...

Just don't get sick..   Or hope to buy a house anytime soon.

Part-time and casual work is up --  as is 'underemployment' ;   but it's simply "tough shit" for anyone hoping for permanent full-time positions..

And genuine 'homelessness' in the USA hasn't decreased in decades --  it simply keeps on being pushed "out of sight and out of mind".

That article itself infers that inequality doesn't matter though --  apparently people are supposed to celebrate the rich getting richer --  and don't worry about the poor.  They deserve to be poor --  it's their own fault afterall !

Yeah, I just looked at this WSJ piece and decided it wasn't worth it. It's a game of tiptoe through the trigonometry, or how to lie with statistics. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Lie_with_Statistics

It's very much like the discussion I had recently with Redneck, over poverty rates. Turns out the indicia depend upon an affluent economy: the better the economy, the more the comparative poverty. WTF??

Although I am still an advocate of statistics to portray generalizations, you can lie with statistics just like you can lie with words. This WSJ article cherry-picks numbers, without context, to create a false picture. Don't bother with the cherries. The fact is, the top 1% own 99% of the assets--the "good" economy is good for the wealthy.

Treat it like garbage and toss it in the bin.

Original Quill wrote:

'Wolfie wrote:

Wages are up if you are lucky enough to have a job...

Just don't get sick..   Or hope to buy a house anytime soon.

Part-time and casual work is up --  as is 'underemployment' ;   but it's simply "tough shit" for anyone hoping for permanent full-time positions..

And genuine 'homelessness' in the USA hasn't decreased in decades --  it simply keeps on being pushed "out of sight and out of mind".

That article itself infers that inequality doesn't matter though --  apparently people are supposed to celebrate the rich getting richer --  and don't worry about the poor.  They deserve to be poor --  it's their own fault afterall !

Yeah, I just looked at this WSJ piece and decided it wasn't worth it.  It's a game of tiptoe through the trigonometry, or how to lie with statistics.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Lie_with_Statistics

It's very much like the discussion I had recently with Redneck, over poverty rates.  Turns out the indicia depend upon an affluent economy: the better the economy, the more the comparative poverty.  WTF??

Although I am still an advocate of statistics to portray generalizations, you can lie with statistics just like you can lie with words.  This WSJ article cherry-picks numbers, without context, to create a false picture.  Don't bother with the cherries.  The fact is, the top 1% own 99% of the assets--the "good" economy is good for the wealthy.

Treat it like garbage and toss it in the bin.

Or just make up shit right?

phildidge wrote:The left’s apocalyptic economic predictions for the Trump Presidency haven’t panned out. With jobs plentiful and wages rising at the fastest rate in a decade, liberals are doubling down on alarms about inequality. The inconvenient evidence is that low- and middle-income folks are reaping more economic benefits than during the Obama years.

Democrats flogged last week’s Census report that showed health coverage and Medicaid enrollment declined in 2018. But they ignored the other side of that story: Worker earnings increased by 3.4% while the poverty rate declined 0.5 percentage points to 11.8%, the lowest level since 2001. Benefit rolls are shrinking as low-income workers earn more.

According to the Census Bureau, the number of full-time, year-round workers increased by 2.3 million in 2018, and employment gains were biggest among minority female-led households. The share of workers in female-led households who worked full-time year-round increased by 4.2 percentage points among blacks and 3.6 percentage points among Hispanics.

As a result, real median earnings for female households with no spouse present jumped 7.6% last year. The poverty rate among female households declined 2.7 percentage points for blacks, four percentage points for Hispanics and 7.1 percentage points for their children. Remember this the next time Senator Kamala Harris complains that Mr. Trump’s policies are harming women and minorities.


https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-real-cure-for-inequality-11569020055

This article would be celebrated if there were a different president in office.

Regardless of your position in Trump, the economy is doing well by any historic standard.

There are pocketed areas that are not doing well, but that's because of local decisions.

Meanwhile, N Texas is seeing 1000 transplants a DAY move into the area. And a former resident of this area, that posts on here thinks we should adopt policies like the places they are leaving.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Yeah, I just looked at this WSJ piece and decided it wasn't worth it.  It's a game of tiptoe through the trigonometry, or how to lie with statistics.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Lie_with_Statistics

It's very much like the discussion I had recently with Redneck, over poverty rates.  Turns out the indicia depend upon an affluent economy: the better the economy, the more the comparative poverty.  WTF??

Although I am still an advocate of statistics to portray generalizations, you can lie with statistics just like you can lie with words.  This WSJ article cherry-picks numbers, without context, to create a false picture.  Don't bother with the cherries.  The fact is, the top 1% own 99% of the assets--the "good" economy is good for the wealthy.

Treat it like garbage and toss it in the bin.

Or just make up shit right?

Well...that's what you were doing, you lyin' hick. Guess you know all about that.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Yeah, I just looked at this WSJ piece and decided it wasn't worth it.  It's a game of tiptoe through the trigonometry, or how to lie with statistics.  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Lie_with_Statistics

It's very much like the discussion I had recently with Redneck, over poverty rates.  Turns out the indicia depend upon an affluent economy: the better the economy, the more the comparative poverty.  WTF??

Although I am still an advocate of statistics to portray generalizations, you can lie with statistics just like you can lie with words.  This WSJ article cherry-picks numbers, without context, to create a false picture.  Don't bother with the cherries.  The fact is, the top 1% own 99% of the assets--the "good" economy is good for the wealthy.

Treat it like garbage and toss it in the bin.

Or just make up shit right?
.

Making up shit...

That's what your beloved Cato Institute does,  every day of the week..

'Wolfie wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Or just make up shit right?
.

Making up shit...

That's what your beloved Cato Institute does,  every day of the week..

Maddog wrote:

phildidge wrote:The left’s apocalyptic economic predictions for the Trump Presidency haven’t panned out. With jobs plentiful and wages rising at the fastest rate in a decade, liberals are doubling down on alarms about inequality. The inconvenient evidence is that low- and middle-income folks are reaping more economic benefits than during the Obama years.

Democrats flogged last week’s Census report that showed health coverage and Medicaid enrollment declined in 2018. But they ignored the other side of that story: Worker earnings increased by 3.4% while the poverty rate declined 0.5 percentage points to 11.8%, the lowest level since 2001. Benefit rolls are shrinking as low-income workers earn more.

According to the Census Bureau, the number of full-time, year-round workers increased by 2.3 million in 2018, and employment gains were biggest among minority female-led households. The share of workers in female-led households who worked full-time year-round increased by 4.2 percentage points among blacks and 3.6 percentage points among Hispanics.

As a result, real median earnings for female households with no spouse present jumped 7.6% last year. The poverty rate among female households declined 2.7 percentage points for blacks, four percentage points for Hispanics and 7.1 percentage points for their children. Remember this the next time Senator Kamala Harris complains that Mr. Trump’s policies are harming women and minorities.


https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-real-cure-for-inequality-11569020055

This article would be celebrated if there were a different president in office.

Regardless of your position in Trump, the economy is doing well by any historic standard.

There are pocketed areas that are not doing well, but that's because of local decisions.

Meanwhile, N Texas is seeing 1000 transplants a DAY move into the area.  And a former resident of this area, that posts on here thinks we should adopt policies like the places they are leaving.  

Very valid points

Maddog wrote:Regardless of your position in Trump, the economy is doing well by any historic standard.

For the rich. The vaunted 1%...fook the 99%, cause conservatives only work for special interests.

Maddog wrote:There are pocketed areas that are not doing well, but that's because of local decisions.

Great excuse: Eees nou ma yob, mon.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:There are pocketed areas that are not doing well, but that's because of local decisions.

Great excuse: Eees nou ma yob, mon.

Its an explanation.

Certain areas don't do well, because of local decisions.

Others, have 1000 people a day moving in. Those places are making the correct decisions.

Maddog wrote:Meanwhile, N Texas is seeing 1000 transplants a DAY move into the area. And a former resident of this area, that posts on here thinks we should adopt policies like the places they are leaving.

Transplants? What, heart transplants? Migrant transplants? Houseplant houseplants? You are just talking to hear yourself talk.

The article receives favorable mention from you, because it does what you routinely do: Obfuscate by cherry-picking facts, but failing to give context.

Cherry-picked numbers are not good just because they are high. What is the denominator? In other words, 7.6% of what... last year, 10-years ago, or during the last administration? Likewise, 2.7 percentage points; 7.1 percentage points? You like them because quantifiable expressions sound impressive. That's why it's so easy to lie with statistics. Huff, How to Lie with Statistics (1954); or easier yet, https://www.wikihow.com/Lie-with-Statistics

But you forget: you are most persuasive by making things comprehensible, not by appearing impressive.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:Meanwhile, N Texas is seeing 1000 transplants a DAY move into the area.  And a former resident of this area, that posts on here thinks we should adopt policies like the places they are leaving.  

Transplants?  What, heart transplants?  Migrant transplants?  Houseplant houseplants?  You are just talking to hear yourself talk.

The article receives favorable mention from you, because it does what you routinely do: Obfuscate by cherry-picking facts, but failing to give context.

Cherry-picked numbers are not good just because they are high.  What is the denominator?  In other words, 7.6% of what... last year, 10-years ago, or during the last administration?  Likewise, 2.7 percentage points; 7.1 percentage points?  You like them because quantifiable expressions sound impressive.  That's why it's so easy to lie with statistics.  Huff, How to Lie with Statistics (1954); or easier yet, https://www.wikihow.com/Lie-with-Statistics

But you forget: you are most persuasive by making things comprehensible, not by appearing impressive.

Americans leaving other parts of the country.

Any more ignorant questions professor?

Dallas-Fort Worth was the greatest beneficiary of this domestic migration, adding nearly 59,000 domestic movers in 2017, followed by Phoenix (51,000) and Tampa (41,000), which serve as anchors for the western and southern regions that got the bulk of the gains.

Business relocations to North Texas have been steady since the Great Recession. In just the last few weeks, Fortune 500 companies McKesson and Core-Mark announced moves to the area. Both are leaving California.

On the flip side, more than 208,000 residents left the New York City metropolitan area last year. This was nearly twice as many as the second biggest loser, Los Angeles, which had a decline of nearly 110,000. Chicago fell by 85,000. Honolulu, San Jose, New York and Bridgeport, Conneticut, lost the highest shares of their residents to other parts of the country.

https://www.dallasnews.com/business/economy/2018/12/14/dallas-fort-worth-leads-nation-in-people-relocations-so-how-many-new-residents-is-that-each-day/

Studies have been watching the southern four cities since the 1970's: Dallas, Houston, Atlanta and Miami. Time Magazine has run several articles on so-called Confederate Cities and their growth in the latter half of the 20th-century.

I'm with you. I want Texas to succeed...but with its fair compliment of equality for Hispanic and Black citizens. The war is not between Texas and California--with Texas a woeful second--but between Texas, held back by the sluggish beliefs of antebellum south, versus Texas moving forward under the breath of fresh air provided by progressive thinking.

Hook 'em horns!

Original Quill wrote:Studies have been watching the southern four cities since the 1970's: Dallas, Houston, Atlanta and Miami.  Time Magazine has run several articles on so-called Confederate Cities and their growth in the latter half of the 20th-century.

I'm with you.  I want Texas to succeed...but with its fair compliment of equality for Hispanic and Black citizens.  The war is not between Texas and California--with Texas a woeful second--but between Texas, held back by the sluggish beliefs of antebellum south, versus Texas moving forward under the breath of fresh air provided by progressive thinking.

Hook 'em horns!

Blathering nonsense. Per as usual.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:Studies have been watching the southern four cities since the 1970's: Dallas, Houston, Atlanta and Miami.  Time Magazine has run several articles on so-called Confederate Cities and their growth in the latter half of the 20th-century.

I'm with you.  I want Texas to succeed...but with its fair compliment of equality for Hispanic and Black citizens.  The war is not between Texas and California--with Texas a woeful second--but between Texas, held back by the sluggish beliefs of antebellum south, versus Texas moving forward under the breath of fresh air provided by progressive thinking.

Hook 'em horns!

Blathering nonsense.  Per as usual.  

You sound like nicko. Is the subject too hard for you? Even Time is too abstract? I know, lets get out the blocks and build a wall.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Blathering nonsense.  Per as usual.  

You sound like nicko.  Is the subject too hard for you?  Even Time is too abstract?  I know, lets get out the blocks and build a wall.

Your posts are rambling nonsense filled with straw man fallacies.

I will give them the responses they deserve.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

You sound like nicko.  Is the subject too hard for you?  Even Time is too abstract?  I know, lets get out the blocks and build a wall.

Your posts are rambling nonsense filled with straw man fallacies.  

I will give them the responses they deserve.  

Well, it's mostly about the limits of your comprehension of my posts.  You "give them the responses" that a knuckledragger would, who is confused and can't hold one thought, while he considers another.

For example, in your thread about "third-worlds" and homelessness, you have become confused about the very topic you chose.  If it's about California, what about California?  If its about homelessness, why limit it to just California?  You seem confused by your own thread.

That's not good, as these things go.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Your posts are rambling nonsense filled with straw man fallacies.  

I will give them the responses they deserve.  

Well, it's mostly about the limits of your comprehension of my posts.  You "give them the responses" that a knuckledragger would, who is confused and can't hold one thought, while he considers another.

For example, in your thread about "third-worlds" and homelessness, you have become confused about the very topic you chose.  If it's about California, what about California?  If its about homelessness, why limit it to just California?  You seem confused by your own thread.

That's not good, as these things go.