BigGameBaylorBear said:George Washington University announced that next academic year, the estimated cost for returning students will be just over $98,000 per year. https://t.co/R3oIhy3pLA
— NBC4 Washington (@nbcwashington) March 31, 2026
This is not sustainable
Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:🚨 178,000 NEW JOBS for the month of March
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 3, 2026
FOXBIZ: "This is one heck of a report… the expectation was 60,000, folks, the unemployment rate went down to 4.3%."
President Trump has nearly TRIPLED expectations. pic.twitter.com/FTmfU7XIdm
Eh I mean this is followed by a revised loss of 133,000 jobs in February.
Most of these workers are in healthcare and a huge portion of that just from workers on strike in healthcare.
Long term employment is a huge problem. The number of people unemployed for 27 weeks or more held at 1.8 million in March but has risen by 322,000 over the past year.
We just need to look at the data straight up.whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:🚨 178,000 NEW JOBS for the month of March
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 3, 2026
FOXBIZ: "This is one heck of a report… the expectation was 60,000, folks, the unemployment rate went down to 4.3%."
President Trump has nearly TRIPLED expectations. pic.twitter.com/FTmfU7XIdm
Eh I mean this is followed by a revised loss of 133,000 jobs in February.
Most of these workers are in healthcare and a huge portion of that just from workers on strike in healthcare.
Long term employment is a huge problem. The number of people unemployed for 27 weeks or more held at 1.8 million in March but has risen by 322,000 over the past year.
We have to be skeptical of arguments that romance the bad news and reject the good news.
The data is showing Trump economic policy is having its intended effect of reducing the trade deficit and building more domestic production capacity. That is not going to happen in a minute.
Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:🚨 178,000 NEW JOBS for the month of March
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 3, 2026
FOXBIZ: "This is one heck of a report… the expectation was 60,000, folks, the unemployment rate went down to 4.3%."
President Trump has nearly TRIPLED expectations. pic.twitter.com/FTmfU7XIdm
Eh I mean this is followed by a revised loss of 133,000 jobs in February.
Most of these workers are in healthcare and a huge portion of that just from workers on strike in healthcare.
Long term employment is a huge problem. The number of people unemployed for 27 weeks or more held at 1.8 million in March but has risen by 322,000 over the past year.
We have to be skeptical of arguments that romance the bad news and reject the good news.
The data is showing Trump economic policy is having its intended effect of reducing the trade deficit and building more domestic production capacity. That is not going to happen in a minute.
We just need to look at the data straight up.
Salaries/wages are terrible. I just don't see the overall trend ending well over the next couple of decades.
whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:🚨 178,000 NEW JOBS for the month of March
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 3, 2026
FOXBIZ: "This is one heck of a report… the expectation was 60,000, folks, the unemployment rate went down to 4.3%."
President Trump has nearly TRIPLED expectations. pic.twitter.com/FTmfU7XIdm
Eh I mean this is followed by a revised loss of 133,000 jobs in February.
Most of these workers are in healthcare and a huge portion of that just from workers on strike in healthcare.
Long term employment is a huge problem. The number of people unemployed for 27 weeks or more held at 1.8 million in March but has risen by 322,000 over the past year.
We have to be skeptical of arguments that romance the bad news and reject the good news.
The data is showing Trump economic policy is having its intended effect of reducing the trade deficit and building more domestic production capacity. That is not going to happen in a minute.
We just need to look at the data straight up.
Salaries/wages are terrible. I just don't see the overall trend ending well over the next couple of decades.
...or.....we are in a massive transformation of the business model. A supercarrier does not turn on a dime. Neither does the largest economy in the world. But if you put the right incentives into place, the turn will happen. Leaving globalism means that we will produce increasingly greater percentages of goods here. it takes time for those factories to be built.
The investment numbers of the trade deal alone are enough to ensure GDP growth. Employment will follow.
we are at the bottom.
FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:🚨 178,000 NEW JOBS for the month of March
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 3, 2026
FOXBIZ: "This is one heck of a report… the expectation was 60,000, folks, the unemployment rate went down to 4.3%."
President Trump has nearly TRIPLED expectations. pic.twitter.com/FTmfU7XIdm
Eh I mean this is followed by a revised loss of 133,000 jobs in February.
Most of these workers are in healthcare and a huge portion of that just from workers on strike in healthcare.
Long term employment is a huge problem. The number of people unemployed for 27 weeks or more held at 1.8 million in March but has risen by 322,000 over the past year.
We have to be skeptical of arguments that romance the bad news and reject the good news.
The data is showing Trump economic policy is having its intended effect of reducing the trade deficit and building more domestic production capacity. That is not going to happen in a minute.
We just need to look at the data straight up.
Salaries/wages are terrible. I just don't see the overall trend ending well over the next couple of decades.
...or.....we are in a massive transformation of the business model. A supercarrier does not turn on a dime. Neither does the largest economy in the world. But if you put the right incentives into place, the turn will happen. Leaving globalism means that we will produce increasingly greater percentages of goods here. it takes time for those factories to be built.
The investment numbers of the trade deal alone are enough to ensure GDP growth. Employment will follow.
we are at the bottom.
But, it has to be more than Wall Street value. Wall Street valuations are fine, but it has to get down to wages and production. Right now, those areas are not responding.
I did not mention Wall street. Just noted GDP stats.
I can see your position from the CEO spot, I watch it at Companies all the time. The CEO and Gen Counsel (for example) are separate from the company, they have contracts directly with the Board and different retirement, bonuses and perks. From their perspective, it is great. From the worker perspective, not so much. Everything you say is true, IF it turns into real wages and real production.
Again, you're imputing your own class-conflict template here. I'm talking macro-economics.
EVs are the best example, they looked great to Wall Street, but not turning out that way. But, maybe Musk got Trump to do the Iran War to raise gas prices, which is what EVs need to perk up sales. Hmmm... Never thought about that. Biden-esque manipulation in a GOP sort of way... : )
whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:🚨 178,000 NEW JOBS for the month of March
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 3, 2026
FOXBIZ: "This is one heck of a report… the expectation was 60,000, folks, the unemployment rate went down to 4.3%."
President Trump has nearly TRIPLED expectations. pic.twitter.com/FTmfU7XIdm
Eh I mean this is followed by a revised loss of 133,000 jobs in February.
Most of these workers are in healthcare and a huge portion of that just from workers on strike in healthcare.
Long term employment is a huge problem. The number of people unemployed for 27 weeks or more held at 1.8 million in March but has risen by 322,000 over the past year.
We have to be skeptical of arguments that romance the bad news and reject the good news.
The data is showing Trump economic policy is having its intended effect of reducing the trade deficit and building more domestic production capacity. That is not going to happen in a minute.
We just need to look at the data straight up.
Salaries/wages are terrible. I just don't see the overall trend ending well over the next couple of decades.
...or.....we are in a massive transformation of the business model. A supercarrier does not turn on a dime. Neither does the largest economy in the world. But if you put the right incentives into place, the turn will happen. Leaving globalism means that we will produce increasingly greater percentages of goods here. it takes time for those factories to be built.
The investment numbers of the trade deal alone are enough to ensure GDP growth. Employment will follow.
we are at the bottom.
But, it has to be more than Wall Street value. Wall Street valuations are fine, but it has to get down to wages and production. Right now, those areas are not responding.
I did not mention Wall street. Just noted GDP stats.
I can see your position from the CEO spot, I watch it at Companies all the time. The CEO and Gen Counsel (for example) are separate from the company, they have contracts directly with the Board and different retirement, bonuses and perks. From their perspective, it is great. From the worker perspective, not so much. Everything you say is true, IF it turns into real wages and real production.
Again, you're imputing your own class-conflict template here. I'm talking macro-economics.
EVs are the best example, they looked great to Wall Street, but not turning out that way. But, maybe Musk got Trump to do the Iran War to raise gas prices, which is what EVs need to perk up sales. Hmmm... Never thought about that. Biden-esque manipulation in a GOP sort of way... : )
Macroeconomic fact: when companies invest in building or expanding factories, employment rises - short and long term. The data is clear that companies are investing more in plant capacity here, to avoid supply chain exposure to tariffs. Nothing extraordinary about that other than so many people refuse to see the plain, textbook macroeconomic dynamics at play, working exactly as they should.
The biggest problem here is expectations. Trump was elected to make big changes. And he did. In record time. But it's only been 6 months since they were actually implemented. The transition is just now getting underway. It just takes time for these changes to bear fruit. The numbers will improve as we move forward.
whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:🚨 178,000 NEW JOBS for the month of March
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 3, 2026
FOXBIZ: "This is one heck of a report… the expectation was 60,000, folks, the unemployment rate went down to 4.3%."
President Trump has nearly TRIPLED expectations. pic.twitter.com/FTmfU7XIdm
Eh I mean this is followed by a revised loss of 133,000 jobs in February.
Most of these workers are in healthcare and a huge portion of that just from workers on strike in healthcare.
Long term employment is a huge problem. The number of people unemployed for 27 weeks or more held at 1.8 million in March but has risen by 322,000 over the past year.
We have to be skeptical of arguments that romance the bad news and reject the good news.
The data is showing Trump economic policy is having its intended effect of reducing the trade deficit and building more domestic production capacity. That is not going to happen in a minute.
We just need to look at the data straight up.
Salaries/wages are terrible. I just don't see the overall trend ending well over the next couple of decades.
...or.....we are in a massive transformation of the business model. A supercarrier does not turn on a dime. Neither does the largest economy in the world. But if you put the right incentives into place, the turn will happen. Leaving globalism means that we will produce increasingly greater percentages of goods here. it takes time for those factories to be built.
The investment numbers of the trade deal alone are enough to ensure GDP growth. Employment will follow.
we are at the bottom.
BUDOS said:
And especially when economists have a hard time agreeing. Some wonder if Trump's credibility is suspect. I wonder about such people. Additionally I wonder if we will actually have a decent qualified candidate to choose from. However I realize that we have allowed such a statement to become a joke.
Oldbear83 said:whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:🚨 178,000 NEW JOBS for the month of March
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 3, 2026
FOXBIZ: "This is one heck of a report… the expectation was 60,000, folks, the unemployment rate went down to 4.3%."
President Trump has nearly TRIPLED expectations. pic.twitter.com/FTmfU7XIdm
Eh I mean this is followed by a revised loss of 133,000 jobs in February.
Most of these workers are in healthcare and a huge portion of that just from workers on strike in healthcare.
Long term employment is a huge problem. The number of people unemployed for 27 weeks or more held at 1.8 million in March but has risen by 322,000 over the past year.
We have to be skeptical of arguments that romance the bad news and reject the good news.
The data is showing Trump economic policy is having its intended effect of reducing the trade deficit and building more domestic production capacity. That is not going to happen in a minute.
We just need to look at the data straight up.
Salaries/wages are terrible. I just don't see the overall trend ending well over the next couple of decades.
...or.....we are in a massive transformation of the business model. A supercarrier does not turn on a dime. Neither does the largest economy in the world. But if you put the right incentives into place, the turn will happen. Leaving globalism means that we will produce increasingly greater percentages of goods here. it takes time for those factories to be built.
The investment numbers of the trade deal alone are enough to ensure GDP growth. Employment will follow.
we are at the bottom.
Again whiterock, your problem is that pretty rhetoric won't change the base facts.
Job losses are epidemic, wages are in decline, and there is no evidence that ordinary people are even noticed by the corporations.
Hop over to Glassdoor.com sometime and read the forums.
Why isn’t anyone talking about this?
— Craig Fuller 🛩🚛🚂⚓️ (@FreightAlley) April 4, 2026
The railroads, the backbone of American industrials, just reported that volume excluding coal, had the highest volume March since 2008!
Chemicals +5.5% YoY - highest ever
Grains - highest volume since 1993!
There is so much noise in the… pic.twitter.com/khLp35utt1
Oldbear83 said:
Yet again, whiterock, you are selling a narrative, not supporting it with facts.
Walk down your street and ask your neighbors how the economy is doing.
D. C. Bear said:Oldbear83 said:
Yet again, whiterock, you are selling a narrative, not supporting it with facts.
Walk down your street and ask your neighbors how the economy is doing.
He did use facts to support his "narrative." I don't know the extent to which they support his"narrative,", but he's definitely using facts.
BoA’s shipper survey is one of the most reliable datasets to monitor the health of the freight market.
— Craig Fuller 🛩🚛🚂⚓️ (@FreightAlley) April 4, 2026
In March 2022, it signaled the collapse in the freight market, alongside SONAR’s data. At the time, there was massive skeptism about the collapse of freight, as it had been… https://t.co/Ae4cv7hIVO
The American Manufacturing Renaissance is happening.
— Craig Fuller 🛩🚛🚂⚓️ (@FreightAlley) April 4, 2026
We are now getting confirmation from multiple freight and supply chain datasets that the industrial recovery is real and manufacturing is on course to enjoy one of the best markets in years.
The domestic freight market… pic.twitter.com/DaxvmrXwHp
D. C. Bear said:Oldbear83 said:
Yet again, whiterock, you are selling a narrative, not supporting it with facts.
Walk down your street and ask your neighbors how the economy is doing.
He did use facts to support his "narrative." I don't know the extent to which they support his"narrative,", but he's definitely using facts.
Financial stress among US consumers is intensifying:
— The Kobeissi Letter (@KobeissiLetter) April 4, 2026
The delinquency rate on subprime loans is up to 10% of total outstanding debt, the highest in 11 years.
Subprime loans are those made to borrowers with a credit score below 660, meaning they were already considered… pic.twitter.com/lQMtLQlofo
The US economy is going through a hiring recession:
— The Kobeissi Letter (@KobeissiLetter) April 5, 2026
The number of hires as a % of total employment fell -0.3 percentage points in February, to 3.1%, in-line with the 2020 pandemic low.
This is also the lowest level since January 2011, and just 0.3 percentage points above the… pic.twitter.com/0JN9y9gJjP
FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:🚨 178,000 NEW JOBS for the month of March
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 3, 2026
FOXBIZ: "This is one heck of a report… the expectation was 60,000, folks, the unemployment rate went down to 4.3%."
President Trump has nearly TRIPLED expectations. pic.twitter.com/FTmfU7XIdm
Eh I mean this is followed by a revised loss of 133,000 jobs in February.
Most of these workers are in healthcare and a huge portion of that just from workers on strike in healthcare.
Long term employment is a huge problem. The number of people unemployed for 27 weeks or more held at 1.8 million in March but has risen by 322,000 over the past year.
We have to be skeptical of arguments that romance the bad news and reject the good news.
The data is showing Trump economic policy is having its intended effect of reducing the trade deficit and building more domestic production capacity. That is not going to happen in a minute.
We just need to look at the data straight up.
Salaries/wages are terrible. I just don't see the overall trend ending well over the next couple of decades.
...or.....we are in a massive transformation of the business model. A supercarrier does not turn on a dime. Neither does the largest economy in the world. But if you put the right incentives into place, the turn will happen. Leaving globalism means that we will produce increasingly greater percentages of goods here. it takes time for those factories to be built.
The investment numbers of the trade deal alone are enough to ensure GDP growth. Employment will follow.
we are at the bottom.
But, it has to be more than Wall Street value. Wall Street valuations are fine, but it has to get down to wages and production. Right now, those areas are not responding.
I did not mention Wall street. Just noted GDP stats.
I can see your position from the CEO spot, I watch it at Companies all the time. The CEO and Gen Counsel (for example) are separate from the company, they have contracts directly with the Board and different retirement, bonuses and perks. From their perspective, it is great. From the worker perspective, not so much. Everything you say is true, IF it turns into real wages and real production.
Again, you're imputing your own class-conflict template here. I'm talking macro-economics.
EVs are the best example, they looked great to Wall Street, but not turning out that way. But, maybe Musk got Trump to do the Iran War to raise gas prices, which is what EVs need to perk up sales. Hmmm... Never thought about that. Biden-esque manipulation in a GOP sort of way... : )
Macroeconomic fact: when companies invest in building or expanding factories, employment rises - short and long term. The data is clear that companies are investing more in plant capacity here, to avoid supply chain exposure to tariffs. Nothing extraordinary about that other than so many people refuse to see the plain, textbook macroeconomic dynamics at play, working exactly as they should.
The biggest problem here is expectations. Trump was elected to make big changes. And he did. In record time. But it's only been 6 months since they were actually implemented. The transition is just now getting underway. It just takes time for these changes to bear fruit. The numbers will improve as we move forward.
No, he did not say that. Go back and check the record. He said he "When I win, I will immediately bring prices down," especially gas prices (drill, drill, drill), starting no wars. Higher fuel costs, cost of living the same, a 1.5T Defense Budget and constant military actions is NOT what he ran and won on. The only ones that seem better off are his family and his inner circle.
You keep going into the realities of macroeconomics, he didn't. Bessent didn't. You may feel it it is great and reasonable, so vote for him. But, don't tell the rest of us, that we have it wrong.
boognish_bear said:The US economy is going through a hiring recession:
— The Kobeissi Letter (@KobeissiLetter) April 5, 2026
The number of hires as a % of total employment fell -0.3 percentage points in February, to 3.1%, in-line with the 2020 pandemic low.
This is also the lowest level since January 2011, and just 0.3 percentage points above the… pic.twitter.com/0JN9y9gJjP
FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:🚨 178,000 NEW JOBS for the month of March
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 3, 2026
FOXBIZ: "This is one heck of a report… the expectation was 60,000, folks, the unemployment rate went down to 4.3%."
President Trump has nearly TRIPLED expectations. pic.twitter.com/FTmfU7XIdm
Eh I mean this is followed by a revised loss of 133,000 jobs in February.
Most of these workers are in healthcare and a huge portion of that just from workers on strike in healthcare.
Long term employment is a huge problem. The number of people unemployed for 27 weeks or more held at 1.8 million in March but has risen by 322,000 over the past year.
We have to be skeptical of arguments that romance the bad news and reject the good news.
The data is showing Trump economic policy is having its intended effect of reducing the trade deficit and building more domestic production capacity. That is not going to happen in a minute.
We just need to look at the data straight up.
Salaries/wages are terrible. I just don't see the overall trend ending well over the next couple of decades.
...or.....we are in a massive transformation of the business model. A supercarrier does not turn on a dime. Neither does the largest economy in the world. But if you put the right incentives into place, the turn will happen. Leaving globalism means that we will produce increasingly greater percentages of goods here. it takes time for those factories to be built.
The investment numbers of the trade deal alone are enough to ensure GDP growth. Employment will follow.
we are at the bottom.
But, it has to be more than Wall Street value. Wall Street valuations are fine, but it has to get down to wages and production. Right now, those areas are not responding.
I did not mention Wall street. Just noted GDP stats.
I can see your position from the CEO spot, I watch it at Companies all the time. The CEO and Gen Counsel (for example) are separate from the company, they have contracts directly with the Board and different retirement, bonuses and perks. From their perspective, it is great. From the worker perspective, not so much. Everything you say is true, IF it turns into real wages and real production.
Again, you're imputing your own class-conflict template here. I'm talking macro-economics.
EVs are the best example, they looked great to Wall Street, but not turning out that way. But, maybe Musk got Trump to do the Iran War to raise gas prices, which is what EVs need to perk up sales. Hmmm... Never thought about that. Biden-esque manipulation in a GOP sort of way... : )
Macroeconomic fact: when companies invest in building or expanding factories, employment rises - short and long term. The data is clear that companies are investing more in plant capacity here, to avoid supply chain exposure to tariffs. Nothing extraordinary about that other than so many people refuse to see the plain, textbook macroeconomic dynamics at play, working exactly as they should.
The biggest problem here is expectations. Trump was elected to make big changes. And he did. In record time. But it's only been 6 months since they were actually implemented. The transition is just now getting underway. It just takes time for these changes to bear fruit. The numbers will improve as we move forward.
No, he did not say that. Go back and check the record. He said he "When I win, I will immediately bring prices down," especially gas prices (drill, drill, drill), starting no wars. Higher fuel costs, cost of living the same, a 1.5T Defense Budget and constant military actions is NOT what he ran and won on. The only ones that seem better off are his family and his inner circle.
CPI increase in 2024 = 2.9%
CPI increase in 2025 = 2.7%
Gasoline prices in Jan 2026 were $3.01, down 8% over Jan 2025
The data does not support your narrative.
You keep going into the realities of macroeconomics, he didn't. Bessent didn't. You may feel it it is great and reasonable, so vote for him. But, don't tell the rest of us, that we have it wrong.
Bessent has explained that his plan is to grow the economy faster than the debt, to use tariffs to promote reindustrialization. THAT is macroeconomics.
Yeah I'd agree if leaving globalism was actually possible.whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:🚨 178,000 NEW JOBS for the month of March
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 3, 2026
FOXBIZ: "This is one heck of a report… the expectation was 60,000, folks, the unemployment rate went down to 4.3%."
President Trump has nearly TRIPLED expectations. pic.twitter.com/FTmfU7XIdm
Eh I mean this is followed by a revised loss of 133,000 jobs in February.
Most of these workers are in healthcare and a huge portion of that just from workers on strike in healthcare.
Long term employment is a huge problem. The number of people unemployed for 27 weeks or more held at 1.8 million in March but has risen by 322,000 over the past year.
We have to be skeptical of arguments that romance the bad news and reject the good news.
The data is showing Trump economic policy is having its intended effect of reducing the trade deficit and building more domestic production capacity. That is not going to happen in a minute.
We just need to look at the data straight up.
Salaries/wages are terrible. I just don't see the overall trend ending well over the next couple of decades.
...or.....we are in a massive transformation of the business model. A supercarrier does not turn on a dime. Neither does the largest economy in the world. But if you put the right incentives into place, the turn will happen. Leaving globalism means that we will produce increasingly greater percentages of goods here. it takes time for those factories to be built.
The investment numbers of the trade deal alone are enough to ensure GDP growth. Employment will follow.
we are at the bottom.
whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:🚨 178,000 NEW JOBS for the month of March
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 3, 2026
FOXBIZ: "This is one heck of a report… the expectation was 60,000, folks, the unemployment rate went down to 4.3%."
President Trump has nearly TRIPLED expectations. pic.twitter.com/FTmfU7XIdm
Eh I mean this is followed by a revised loss of 133,000 jobs in February.
Most of these workers are in healthcare and a huge portion of that just from workers on strike in healthcare.
Long term employment is a huge problem. The number of people unemployed for 27 weeks or more held at 1.8 million in March but has risen by 322,000 over the past year.
We have to be skeptical of arguments that romance the bad news and reject the good news.
The data is showing Trump economic policy is having its intended effect of reducing the trade deficit and building more domestic production capacity. That is not going to happen in a minute.
We just need to look at the data straight up.
Salaries/wages are terrible. I just don't see the overall trend ending well over the next couple of decades.
...or.....we are in a massive transformation of the business model. A supercarrier does not turn on a dime. Neither does the largest economy in the world. But if you put the right incentives into place, the turn will happen. Leaving globalism means that we will produce increasingly greater percentages of goods here. it takes time for those factories to be built.
The investment numbers of the trade deal alone are enough to ensure GDP growth. Employment will follow.
we are at the bottom.
But, it has to be more than Wall Street value. Wall Street valuations are fine, but it has to get down to wages and production. Right now, those areas are not responding.
I did not mention Wall street. Just noted GDP stats.
I can see your position from the CEO spot, I watch it at Companies all the time. The CEO and Gen Counsel (for example) are separate from the company, they have contracts directly with the Board and different retirement, bonuses and perks. From their perspective, it is great. From the worker perspective, not so much. Everything you say is true, IF it turns into real wages and real production.
Again, you're imputing your own class-conflict template here. I'm talking macro-economics.
EVs are the best example, they looked great to Wall Street, but not turning out that way. But, maybe Musk got Trump to do the Iran War to raise gas prices, which is what EVs need to perk up sales. Hmmm... Never thought about that. Biden-esque manipulation in a GOP sort of way... : )
Macroeconomic fact: when companies invest in building or expanding factories, employment rises - short and long term. The data is clear that companies are investing more in plant capacity here, to avoid supply chain exposure to tariffs. Nothing extraordinary about that other than so many people refuse to see the plain, textbook macroeconomic dynamics at play, working exactly as they should.
The biggest problem here is expectations. Trump was elected to make big changes. And he did. In record time. But it's only been 6 months since they were actually implemented. The transition is just now getting underway. It just takes time for these changes to bear fruit. The numbers will improve as we move forward.
No, he did not say that. Go back and check the record. He said he "When I win, I will immediately bring prices down," especially gas prices (drill, drill, drill), starting no wars. Higher fuel costs, cost of living the same, a 1.5T Defense Budget and constant military actions is NOT what he ran and won on. The only ones that seem better off are his family and his inner circle.
CPI increase in 2024 = 2.9%
CPI increase in 2025 = 2.7%
Gasoline prices in Jan 2026 were $3.01, down 8% over Jan 2025
The data does not support your narrative.
You keep going into the realities of macroeconomics, he didn't. Bessent didn't. You may feel it it is great and reasonable, so vote for him. But, don't tell the rest of us, that we have it wrong.
Bessent has explained that his plan is to grow the economy faster than the debt, to use tariffs to promote reindustrialization. THAT is macroeconomics.
Yes, you do have it all wrong.
neverTrumpism does that to people
Jack Bauer said:boognish_bear said:The US economy is going through a hiring recession:
— The Kobeissi Letter (@KobeissiLetter) April 5, 2026
The number of hires as a % of total employment fell -0.3 percentage points in February, to 3.1%, in-line with the 2020 pandemic low.
This is also the lowest level since January 2011, and just 0.3 percentage points above the… pic.twitter.com/0JN9y9gJjP
Oldbear83 said:D. C. Bear said:Oldbear83 said:
Yet again, whiterock, you are selling a narrative, not supporting it with facts.
Walk down your street and ask your neighbors how the economy is doing.
He did use facts to support his "narrative." I don't know the extent to which they support his"narrative,", but he's definitely using facts.
Sorry, I meant relevant facts, like wages and job losses.
ok , what do you currently do for a living/job. Are you on any govt subsidies such as Medicare, Medicaid, govt pendion. Social security? Here is ur opportunity to set me straightOldbear83 said:
It's actually impressive how many posts you put up with absolutely no valid points or supporting evidence.
J.R. said:Oldbear83 said:
It's actually impressive how many posts you put up with absolutely no valid points or supporting evidence.
ok , what do you currently do for a living/job. Are you on any govt subsidies such as Medicare, Medicaid, govt pendion. Social security? Here is ur opportunity to set me straight
Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:🚨 178,000 NEW JOBS for the month of March
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 3, 2026
FOXBIZ: "This is one heck of a report… the expectation was 60,000, folks, the unemployment rate went down to 4.3%."
President Trump has nearly TRIPLED expectations. pic.twitter.com/FTmfU7XIdm
Eh I mean this is followed by a revised loss of 133,000 jobs in February.
Most of these workers are in healthcare and a huge portion of that just from workers on strike in healthcare.
Long term employment is a huge problem. The number of people unemployed for 27 weeks or more held at 1.8 million in March but has risen by 322,000 over the past year.
We have to be skeptical of arguments that romance the bad news and reject the good news.
The data is showing Trump economic policy is having its intended effect of reducing the trade deficit and building more domestic production capacity. That is not going to happen in a minute.
We just need to look at the data straight up.
Salaries/wages are terrible. I just don't see the overall trend ending well over the next couple of decades.
...or.....we are in a massive transformation of the business model. A supercarrier does not turn on a dime. Neither does the largest economy in the world. But if you put the right incentives into place, the turn will happen. Leaving globalism means that we will produce increasingly greater percentages of goods here. it takes time for those factories to be built.
The investment numbers of the trade deal alone are enough to ensure GDP growth. Employment will follow.
we are at the bottom.
Yeah I'd agree if leaving globalism was actually possible.
But midterms are going to democrats and the GOP has no intention of upholding commitment to undoing their globalist agenda. It's not like the GOP is onboard with Trump either. They're all mostly warhawks and neocons.
The investments you mentioned can still be sabotaged.
FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:🚨 178,000 NEW JOBS for the month of March
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 3, 2026
FOXBIZ: "This is one heck of a report… the expectation was 60,000, folks, the unemployment rate went down to 4.3%."
President Trump has nearly TRIPLED expectations. pic.twitter.com/FTmfU7XIdm
Eh I mean this is followed by a revised loss of 133,000 jobs in February.
Most of these workers are in healthcare and a huge portion of that just from workers on strike in healthcare.
Long term employment is a huge problem. The number of people unemployed for 27 weeks or more held at 1.8 million in March but has risen by 322,000 over the past year.
We have to be skeptical of arguments that romance the bad news and reject the good news.
The data is showing Trump economic policy is having its intended effect of reducing the trade deficit and building more domestic production capacity. That is not going to happen in a minute.
We just need to look at the data straight up.
Salaries/wages are terrible. I just don't see the overall trend ending well over the next couple of decades.
...or.....we are in a massive transformation of the business model. A supercarrier does not turn on a dime. Neither does the largest economy in the world. But if you put the right incentives into place, the turn will happen. Leaving globalism means that we will produce increasingly greater percentages of goods here. it takes time for those factories to be built.
The investment numbers of the trade deal alone are enough to ensure GDP growth. Employment will follow.
we are at the bottom.
But, it has to be more than Wall Street value. Wall Street valuations are fine, but it has to get down to wages and production. Right now, those areas are not responding.
I did not mention Wall street. Just noted GDP stats.
I can see your position from the CEO spot, I watch it at Companies all the time. The CEO and Gen Counsel (for example) are separate from the company, they have contracts directly with the Board and different retirement, bonuses and perks. From their perspective, it is great. From the worker perspective, not so much. Everything you say is true, IF it turns into real wages and real production.
Again, you're imputing your own class-conflict template here. I'm talking macro-economics.
EVs are the best example, they looked great to Wall Street, but not turning out that way. But, maybe Musk got Trump to do the Iran War to raise gas prices, which is what EVs need to perk up sales. Hmmm... Never thought about that. Biden-esque manipulation in a GOP sort of way... : )
Macroeconomic fact: when companies invest in building or expanding factories, employment rises - short and long term. The data is clear that companies are investing more in plant capacity here, to avoid supply chain exposure to tariffs. Nothing extraordinary about that other than so many people refuse to see the plain, textbook macroeconomic dynamics at play, working exactly as they should.
The biggest problem here is expectations. Trump was elected to make big changes. And he did. In record time. But it's only been 6 months since they were actually implemented. The transition is just now getting underway. It just takes time for these changes to bear fruit. The numbers will improve as we move forward.
No, he did not say that. Go back and check the record. He said he "When I win, I will immediately bring prices down," especially gas prices (drill, drill, drill), starting no wars. Higher fuel costs, cost of living the same, a 1.5T Defense Budget and constant military actions is NOT what he ran and won on. The only ones that seem better off are his family and his inner circle.
CPI increase in 2024 = 2.9%
CPI increase in 2025 = 2.7%
Gasoline prices in Jan 2026 were $3.01, down 8% over Jan 2025
The data does not support your narrative.
You keep going into the realities of macroeconomics, he didn't. Bessent didn't. You may feel it it is great and reasonable, so vote for him. But, don't tell the rest of us, that we have it wrong.
Bessent has explained that his plan is to grow the economy faster than the debt, to use tariffs to promote reindustrialization. THAT is macroeconomics.
Yes, you do have it all wrong.
neverTrumpism does that to people
You are looking at indicators in the short term and attributing any positives to drastic policy moves that have not had time to impact.
LOL, cause-effect error. I'm pointing to indicators that the drastic policy moves are starting to happen.
Tariffs take time, shifts don't occur in 6 months and they definitely don't show in economic indicators.
Have said that many times. And have cited the data indicating they are starting to have the desired effect.
How is GDP?
2.2% for 2025, despite a long government shutdown that robbed as much as 2-percentage points off the total, a net decline in federal spending led by elimination of 300k federal jobs. Not a bad outcome at all given the calamity we faced a year ago.
https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2025-10/61823-Shutdown.pdf
Same with gas prices, have you checked gas prices? They are rising. You would argue that is a short term phenomenon due to Iraq.
How could one NOT make that argument? They were down (slightly) before the war and they've bumped approx $1/gal directly as a result of the war. And they will decline quickly when the war concludes. https://www.jpmorgan.com/insights/global-research/commodities/oil-prices
But for tariff's the impacts are instant, at the macro scale!
Instant and ONE-TIME. Not like inflation which compounds. Notably, data I have posted here indicates that tariffs did not cause inflation, WHICH DECLINED in 2025 over 2024.
Come one, you are cherry picking data. Trump-worship does that to people, I get it.
I'm not cherry-picking. You, on the other hand, are making up kitchen sink fallacies as you go.
By the way, Powell has done a good job maintaining inflation Feb is looking to be down to 2.4 overall, it looks like his managing of the rates is the right move, doesn't it?
Careful there. Seems like you're saying that the Fed can keep tariffs from causing inflation. Tariffs, you see, don't cause inflation. increasing the supply of money faster than the supply of goods causes inflation.
Now, let's dig deeper...
This may be why the disconnect, not TDS, just higher prices on things people actually buy.
whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:FLBear5630 said:whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:🚨 178,000 NEW JOBS for the month of March
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 3, 2026
FOXBIZ: "This is one heck of a report… the expectation was 60,000, folks, the unemployment rate went down to 4.3%."
President Trump has nearly TRIPLED expectations. pic.twitter.com/FTmfU7XIdm
Eh I mean this is followed by a revised loss of 133,000 jobs in February.
Most of these workers are in healthcare and a huge portion of that just from workers on strike in healthcare.
Long term employment is a huge problem. The number of people unemployed for 27 weeks or more held at 1.8 million in March but has risen by 322,000 over the past year.
We have to be skeptical of arguments that romance the bad news and reject the good news.
The data is showing Trump economic policy is having its intended effect of reducing the trade deficit and building more domestic production capacity. That is not going to happen in a minute.
We just need to look at the data straight up.
Salaries/wages are terrible. I just don't see the overall trend ending well over the next couple of decades.
...or.....we are in a massive transformation of the business model. A supercarrier does not turn on a dime. Neither does the largest economy in the world. But if you put the right incentives into place, the turn will happen. Leaving globalism means that we will produce increasingly greater percentages of goods here. it takes time for those factories to be built.
The investment numbers of the trade deal alone are enough to ensure GDP growth. Employment will follow.
we are at the bottom.
But, it has to be more than Wall Street value. Wall Street valuations are fine, but it has to get down to wages and production. Right now, those areas are not responding.
I did not mention Wall street. Just noted GDP stats.
I can see your position from the CEO spot, I watch it at Companies all the time. The CEO and Gen Counsel (for example) are separate from the company, they have contracts directly with the Board and different retirement, bonuses and perks. From their perspective, it is great. From the worker perspective, not so much. Everything you say is true, IF it turns into real wages and real production.
Again, you're imputing your own class-conflict template here. I'm talking macro-economics.
EVs are the best example, they looked great to Wall Street, but not turning out that way. But, maybe Musk got Trump to do the Iran War to raise gas prices, which is what EVs need to perk up sales. Hmmm... Never thought about that. Biden-esque manipulation in a GOP sort of way... : )
Macroeconomic fact: when companies invest in building or expanding factories, employment rises - short and long term. The data is clear that companies are investing more in plant capacity here, to avoid supply chain exposure to tariffs. Nothing extraordinary about that other than so many people refuse to see the plain, textbook macroeconomic dynamics at play, working exactly as they should.
The biggest problem here is expectations. Trump was elected to make big changes. And he did. In record time. But it's only been 6 months since they were actually implemented. The transition is just now getting underway. It just takes time for these changes to bear fruit. The numbers will improve as we move forward.
No, he did not say that. Go back and check the record. He said he "When I win, I will immediately bring prices down," especially gas prices (drill, drill, drill), starting no wars. Higher fuel costs, cost of living the same, a 1.5T Defense Budget and constant military actions is NOT what he ran and won on. The only ones that seem better off are his family and his inner circle.
CPI increase in 2024 = 2.9%
CPI increase in 2025 = 2.7%
Gasoline prices in Jan 2026 were $3.01, down 8% over Jan 2025
The data does not support your narrative.
You keep going into the realities of macroeconomics, he didn't. Bessent didn't. You may feel it it is great and reasonable, so vote for him. But, don't tell the rest of us, that we have it wrong.
Bessent has explained that his plan is to grow the economy faster than the debt, to use tariffs to promote reindustrialization. THAT is macroeconomics.
Yes, you do have it all wrong.
neverTrumpism does that to people
You are looking at indicators in the short term and attributing any positives to drastic policy moves that have not had time to impact.
LOL, cause-effect error. I'm pointing to indicators that the drastic policy moves are starting to happen.
Tariffs take time, shifts don't occur in 6 months and they definitely don't show in economic indicators.
Have said that many times. And have cited the data indicating they are starting to have the desired effect.
How is GDP?
2.2% for 2025, despite a long government shutdown that robbed as much as 2-percentage points off the total, a net decline in federal spending led by elimination of 300k federal jobs. Not a bad outcome at all given the calamity we faced a year ago.
https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2025-10/61823-Shutdown.pdf
Same with gas prices, have you checked gas prices? They are rising. You would argue that is a short term phenomenon due to Iraq.
How could one NOT make that argument? They were down (slightly) before the war and they've bumped approx $1/gal directly as a result of the war. And they will decline quickly when the war concludes. https://www.jpmorgan.com/insights/global-research/commodities/oil-prices
But for tariff's the impacts are instant, at the macro scale!
Instant and ONE-TIME. Not like inflation which compounds. Notably, data I have posted here indicates that tariffs did not cause inflation, WHICH DECLINED in 2025 over 2024.
Come one, you are cherry picking data. Trump-worship does that to people, I get it.
I'm not cherry-picking. You, on the other hand, are making up kitchen sink fallacies as you go.
By the way, Powell has done a good job maintaining inflation Feb is looking to be down to 2.4 overall, it looks like his managing of the rates is the right move, doesn't it?
Careful there. Seems like you're saying that the Fed can keep tariffs from causing inflation. Tariffs, you see, don't cause inflation. increasing the supply of money faster than the supply of goods causes inflation.
Now, let's dig deeper...
This may be why the disconnect, not TDS, just higher prices on things people actually buy.
The disconnect is that you just don't understand economics very well.
C + I + G + T = GDP.
In the past, we have pursued growth by running government deficits (which increase "G" via debt) in order to stimulate "C," and overcome a negative on "T" (a trade deficit being a drag on GDP....GDP is Gross DOMESTIC Product.....). The new model is to reduce govt deficit, which will reduce G (a drag on GDP), while seeking to run trade surpluses (making "T" boost rather than drag GDP) and use massive increases in "I" (trade deal investment pledges) to (later on) drive "C."
It's a perfectly reasonable plan, and quite a bit more sustainable than the old model. It cannot fail in the short run. The investment monies are going to flow.....already are. So 2026 will look substantially better than 2025. and 2027 & 2028 are going to roar, on "I" alone. "C" will follow as the factories get built and payrolls fire up. It's a pretty simple plan. Macroeconomics are pretty simple. Gotta work kinda hard not to see it.
whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:Doc Holliday said:whiterock said:🚨 178,000 NEW JOBS for the month of March
— RNC Research (@RNCResearch) April 3, 2026
FOXBIZ: "This is one heck of a report… the expectation was 60,000, folks, the unemployment rate went down to 4.3%."
President Trump has nearly TRIPLED expectations. pic.twitter.com/FTmfU7XIdm
Eh I mean this is followed by a revised loss of 133,000 jobs in February.
Most of these workers are in healthcare and a huge portion of that just from workers on strike in healthcare.
Long term employment is a huge problem. The number of people unemployed for 27 weeks or more held at 1.8 million in March but has risen by 322,000 over the past year.
We have to be skeptical of arguments that romance the bad news and reject the good news.
The data is showing Trump economic policy is having its intended effect of reducing the trade deficit and building more domestic production capacity. That is not going to happen in a minute.
We just need to look at the data straight up.
Salaries/wages are terrible. I just don't see the overall trend ending well over the next couple of decades.
...or.....we are in a massive transformation of the business model. A supercarrier does not turn on a dime. Neither does the largest economy in the world. But if you put the right incentives into place, the turn will happen. Leaving globalism means that we will produce increasingly greater percentages of goods here. it takes time for those factories to be built.
The investment numbers of the trade deal alone are enough to ensure GDP growth. Employment will follow.
we are at the bottom.
Yeah I'd agree if leaving globalism was actually possible.
But midterms are going to democrats and the GOP has no intention of upholding commitment to undoing their globalist agenda. It's not like the GOP is onboard with Trump either. They're all mostly warhawks and neocons.
The investments you mentioned can still be sabotaged.
we've already left globalism. Policy is no longer going to promote offshoring. Policy will attempt to grow our manufacturing base. That does not mean no trade will occur. It means we are going to pursue balanced trade instead of allowing the trade deficit to seek its own level. First phase is underway - building the infrastructure an energy generation required to power factories. Trade deal investment pledges will finance much of that.
We cannot tolerate China as a near peer competitor whose steel production capacity is 12x of ours.
We must close that gap.
What good does it do to maximize wealth if you cannot defend it?
National Security ALWAYS trumps (everything else).
