Again, you are missing the point. Who cares about which one was steeper. That isn’t in question. The question centers on who is responsible for the decline in Trump’s administration. 
it’s obvious.
All you’ve done is expose your lack of expertise in this area. That in and of itself isn’t a big deal, as we all have our individual areas of expertise. What I find to be sad is your continued ridiculing and mocking of something that you don’t understand. I would expect that kind of behavior from a child but not a grown adult.
i will have to say that businesses now know they’re gonna get massive tax cuts (as our debt blows up) and will probably be able to dump more stuff in our air and water.
that tends to make companies feel good.
Uh, it kind of is, because you made the assertion that it stalled under Obama and “plunged” under Trump and I showed how that is bogus. Now you’re backpedaling.
As the data shows, Trump’s economy is basically following the same exact trend as the Obama economy he inherited. I’m ok with giving Trump credit for continuing that trend. I’ll absolutely call out BS propaganda that says the Obama economy was terrible and the Trump economy is the best ever.
no, i showed that i could cherry pick data like you are. heck, you wouldn’t even give a guess to the short and long term trend when it’s obvious.
want to give it a guess?
Indeed, massive deficit fueled tax cuts that led to massive amounts of stock buybacks that disproportionately benefit the top 10%. Yay Trump for helping out the Forgotten Man?
if i’m the CEO of a company that has coal ash ponds, i probably feel really good today too.
now, the people that live around that ponds (like i’m sure some here) are probably screwed long term.
Translation: Not agreeing with Peek means you’re stupid.
Peeks, I’m actually going to grant you this one. I’m not convinced your 16 months is truly indicative of the Obama bottom on UE but it isn’t too far fetched. You have made your case.
I’d note that your method could be applied to other areas of the UE curve that could falsely show it “flattened” when it didn’t as more data came in.
I think there is a lower limit on UE which we are in right now. Normal job churn limits UE.
Also, as Adroit pointed out, one or two data points with a rise in UE would also result in Trump’s UE being “flat”.
1 Like
So why’d you edit out the last part of my sentence??? "… with 3.9% unemployment is very good."
We did not have 3.9% under Obama.
We are in uncharted waters now, since we’ve never had such low unemployment numbers. I am not expecting to ever see large numbers of jobs created each month, as long as the labor force participation rate remains flat.
If, or when the people who left the work force reenter it, then we not only will see more jobs being created, but a corresponding spike in U3 unemployment rate as well.
I’m sure jobs being created will fluctuate, with small numbers one month, larger numbers in other months.
You showed nothing of the kind. The data clearly shows the unemployment rate bottomed out between 5% and 4.7% for the last 16 months of Obama’s term and the first 2 months of Trump’s term.
That isn’t in dispute, as anyone can look at the data for themselves.
I just provided factual data showing otherwise. 
What trend would that be? Obama left office with flat unemployment of between 5% and 4.7% for the prior 16 months.
Obama’s recovery was tepid, slowed by his anti business atmosphere, massive regulations, war on fossil fuels, Obama Care and tax increases on the rich.
Trump’s economy is on fire because he is repealing Obama’s regulations, has cut corporate tax rates, has stopped the war on fossil fuels, repealed the Obama Care individual mandate.
The point you are missing is that Trump is not solely responsible for the good economic times we are currently seeing. I belienve you called it an economic boon. Yet, over the last 8 years all we heard was “slowest recovery ever”, “real umemployent as high as 45%”,
What we see today is a continuation of a trend that was already there. We have not witnessed some miracle. We have seen some things that should stimulate the economy. A $2 Trillion tax cut should be creating jobs. It increases the deficit but I guess those things don’t matter, just like the things that Cons complained about over the last 8 years.
Sara Sanders tweeting that this administration is putting Americans back to work implies that we had mass unemployment problems before Trump. We all know this not to be the case.
Trump should take credit for what he has done. The problem is that he can’t do that. He has to make it bigger than it actually is. Just like the 6 new mills by American Steel.
Thanks for your objective review of my work.
I don’t disagree with the bold. I didn’t mean to imply that the unemployment rate will continue to drop. I’m thinking it will bottom out and at some point might even go back up again.
My argument has been that Trump owns this economy good or bad.
This is exactly what happened to my company. $100 million plus stock buyback campaign, but tons of front line employees got fired because the ridiculous year over year goals they set couldn’t be met. Thankfully we will get to pay for this tax cut for the rest of our lives.
The argument is that Trump owns this economy. It is ludicrous for a former President to claim credit when he has been out of office for almost 2 years.
In any case, my data shows the unemployment rate had bottomed out for 16 months prior to Obama leaving office. Thus we can no longer claim that Trump’s numbers are a continuation of Obama’s trend.
So all we are left with is the question of who is responsible for breaking through that 18 month plateau (2 months in Trump’s administration).
I understand that we will disagree on that point. I’m simply looking for acknowledgement of the point rather than blindly displaying the meaningless LIB sanctioned unemployment chart.
Now you are just regurgitating LW talking points.
Why are you only limiting it to the last 16 months? Using that same timeframe in Trump’s term, it’s between 4.3 and 3.9. That’s 0.3 vs 0.4 decline. Shift either by only one month and they are both the same at a decline of 0.5. Over similar time frames, they have an almost identical downward slope.
Who knew empirical facts are LW talking points.
How do you know the trend isn’t just from an election year? Take a look at 2012 compared to 2013.
Unemployment went from 8.3 to 7.9. Fairly modest numbers compared to 2013 that went from 8.0 to 6.7
