100 off topic replies

The baby boomer bump is right there. They are turning 55 as we speak. So it is pumping up the age category.

The baby boomers are a force in this and will continue to be a mess for the rest of us. Look at Japan or Russia as they are both suffering now.

http://www.indexmundi.com/graphs/pop...ramid-2014.gif
http://www.indexmundi.com/graphs/pop...ramid-2014.gif

The next five years are going to tell the tale on a global scale in the developed world.

Maybe in the next 5 years, but I don't see it happening right now. The fact that it's the lowest since Carter and it's all 24 to 54 doesn't look good. I just get tired of the democrats rallying behind the low unemployment rate when clearly it's bull shit..

[QUOTE=slapass;20602399]The baby boomer bump is right there. They are turning 55 as we speak. So it is pumping up the age category.
[QUOTE]

Baby Boomers are children born when WW2 let out up and all the soldiers came home and started fucking and they extended the years of calling them baby boomers until 1964.

My mom is a baby boomer. She is 70 years old. I'm a baby boomer. I'm 53.

I'm thinking that the majority of baby boomers who thought they might be retiring at 65 probably changed when the economy collapsed and they lost their savings (and in many cases their homes).

And people in their 50's are in the prime years of their earning potential.

Common sense tells you that when jobs aren't available...but the govt. is handing out money if you are unemployed, then you simply stop looking for work.

And common sense also says that if the economy were to start kicking ass again and true high paying jobs (not minimum wage jobs) were available and the govt. STOPPED handing out money to able bodied people...then those people would go back to work.

I think we are all over-thinking this. The answer is: Jobs.

The media doesn't need to do anything. Trump will flame out way before election time next year.

Anything which starts that fiery right out of the gate (especially in politics) can't sustain itself over the long haul. I'm talking about the strange phenomena of Trump's popularity and the bone-brained idiots who support him. They won't be around in a year, and neither will Trump.

let's check back with this thread next October to see if I'm correct.

Funny thread

And not even that...they SHOULDN'T do anything to try and change the outcome of an election.

The free press is there to keep the govt. in check. Not to decide who voters will get the opportunity to vote for.

Let the people decide for themselves. The media pundits realized how much influence they have over the last few decades. And now they are so arrogant and sure of their abilities...until Trump came along.

Now they are befuddled and can't figure out why they couldn't get everyone to vote Bush. And then they switched gears to Fiorina and that didn't work either.
They just can't seem to figure out how to get rid of Trump.

I'm in agreement with your sentiment.
Let Trump stand or fall on his own. He has already withstood a dozen things that would have pushed most candidates out of the race. And yet...he is still there and still on top.

I wonder how much bigger OR smaller his numbers would be if the press hadn't spent so much time trying to knock him down.
I have a sneaking suspicion that the majority of people are seeing what the media is doing and are "supporting" Trump just to spite the media and the Republican National Committee.

This has nothing to do with what I said.

Anytime you want to get back on track and discuss big ol' fuckin walls and deportation I'm all ears. Oops, I mean EYES.

Like Fox News does.


No. The Free Press is there to say what they want, even when they say assholish things like Fox News says.

Yes, except that some people are easily influenced, especially when Fox News reports lies as truths.

Nothing has changed.

Florina was never going to get any votes. She just isn't smart, strong or experienced enough to be president.

They can't get rid of trump because too many dopes like him. But here's the thing. If I were the Kochs or other kings of the republican party, I would do nothing for now. Trump is already burning out. All the other candidates, especially Ted Cruz, are just playing the waiting game at this point. Trump peaked too soon, and Cruz and others are starting to see a way in.



He won't be for long. But keep in mind that this fall will have nothing to do with the media. He will have killed his political career all on his own.

Again, it's not the press - it's him.

I have a sneaking suspicion that people who used to like the guy are finally coming to their senses.

No use :2 cents:
Pretty sure he's on some sort of disability.

********** your entire post is nonsense.

The Free Press in the United States Of America is constitutionally protected for the express purpose of keeping the govt. in check.

As for your opinions on Trump...who cares what your opinion or my opinion is?

You wrote a bunch of nothing.

The point of my post is that the press has gone out of their way to try and get rid of candidates before people even have an opportunity to vote for them. And yes...Fox is doing that too. They have been trying to get rid of Trump since day one if you haven't noticed.

Get your head out of the sand and quit thinking that you are an American Democrat politician and start seeing the bigger picture and the danger of what the press is trying to do.

The fact that they are failing at it so miserably this time is a win for the people. You are so busy airing your biased opinions that you can't see the bigger picture here.

A good example from today's paper -

‘You're So Vain'? | HeraldNet.com - The Buzz

You're the moron that went off track with the attempt of making an insult.

I guess that's what happens when you only have a 2 digit IQ.

I didn't want insults, you started that all up, now you are back peddling and bringing up insults from a month ago, are you fucking mental or what?

Again, I just wanted to debate it, but you have been nothing but a fucking troll about it

You're posting useless shit as usual, do you ever actually comment on topic, or is that too much to ask?

The press has been trying to get rid of them, the social media sites have been saying shit about him, I think it's funny that they all don't understand why he hasn't fallen yet. They are so use to politics as usual that when someone else comes by, they are baffled.

[QUOTE=Robbie;20602613][QUOTE=slapass;20602399]The baby boomer bump is right there. They are turning 55 as we speak. So it is pumping up the age category.
You are telling us we are over thinking this, and then demand "jobs", while the unemployment rate is 5.1%.

The economy is fine. The economy is exactly where we had hoped it would be after the recession.

Even the GOP has given up on saying the economy is bad.

How was I insulting you by pointing out you knew what you were talking about from experience? Shit man, that's a compliment! :thumbsup

Media is a prostitute who sleeps with highest bidder.

Amen hermano!

Makes sense... :winkwink:

The unemployment rate doesn't reflect the true amount of people out of work. Right now there are less people working than when Obama took office in the middle of a recession. The Recession was over according to the government 5 months after Obama took office.

I wrote this earlier, go ahead, please check my numbers, but please stop telling us everything is ok based on a BS number

Or you can look at this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jobs_c...idential_terms

Jobs created during Obama presidency, we'll round up to 8 million jobs

Increase in population 14.2 million

Just saw another example of the media at work this morning.

Remember during the 2008 election how the media hailed Obama as a "genius" for using Twitter?

Well, today Trump announced that he will be live tweeting during the Democrat debate tonight.
And CNN's reaction just moments ago?

They were ridiculing him for it.

Funny how when Obama used Twitter to a small degree...he was revolutionary and visionary.
When Trump is about to use it in a big way? They make fun of him.

That was then... This is now.

If you love Trump so much, why don't you have sex with him?

The unemployment rate has always been the standard we have used.

In the past decade four people in my family have moved out of the labor participation force. This has nothing to do with the economy, and everything to do with age. My parents and my in-laws didn't "quit looking for work", they retired.

The truth is the labor participation rate has been declining for some time now, and will continue to decline:

Bureau of Labor Statistics, November 2006: Every year after 2000, the rate declined gradually, from 66.8 percent in 2001 to 66.0 percent in 2004 and 2005. According to the BLS projections, the overall participation rate will continue its gradual decrease each decade and reach 60.4 percent in 2050.

(factcheck.org)

Again, nothing to do with the economy, and everything to do with the general age of our citizens. The truth is this is nothing more than finding a stat that looks bad and saying "here is proof our economy is crappy". The GOP has even given up on saying the economy is bad; While the economy can "always be better", it's not bad right now.

The labor participation rate will continue to decline no matter what happens with the economy in the next four, ten, or twenty years. This is because our population is getting older, and living longer:

Between 2012 and 2050, the United States will experience considerable growth in its older population (see Figure 1).2 In 2050, the population aged 65 and over is projected to be 83.7 million, almost double its estimated population of 43.1 million in 2012. The baby boomers are largely responsible for this increase in the older population, as they began turning 65 in 2011.3 By 2050, the surviving baby boomers will be over the age of 85.

(census.gov)

I'm sorry, but the labor participation rate has little to do with the economy - which is doing fine.

Why are you even commenting?

I will repeat: This is about the media influencing elections instead of reporting on them. Your childish comment directed at me adds nothing to the conversation.

I wonder if Trump takes his hair off during sex?

Except for one thing proving you are wrong, the workforce participation rate for those 54 and under has gone down, 55 and up has gone up, yes up. Disproving your theory and the theories of those trying to come up with a plausible excuse for this.

Here check it for yourself

Civilian labor force participation rates by age, sex, race, and ethnicity

LOL!

Robbie I think you are in love with Donald Trump. I think you have a serious bro crush on the guy. You love him so much you are completely blind to just what a terrible candidate he really is. But instead of accept the fact that he says one stupid thing after another after another, you choose instead to "blame the media" for making him look bad.

I'll say it again - he media isn't trying to make him look like a complete stupid fucking idiot - Donald Trump is doing this all by himself.

Okay, **********...again, this isn't about Robbie. I am not a politician, I am not running for President and I'm not one of the media trying to influence the election.

The media isn't trying to make Trump look like an idiot. They are trying to drive him out of the race completely before voters even have a chance to vote for him at all.

I'm not "blaming the media for making him look bad". He obviously doesn't look bad as the front runner since almost the minute he got in the race.

I pointed out in my first post the blatant attempt that was just tried the other day. You are choosing to ignore that and continue to try and make the post about me or about Trump.

It's not about either thing.

It's about the media.

And yeah, I get it. You think the media is just reporting the news and not trying to shape the election.
When Fox News goes after Trump, you think it's just fine.
But when they go after Hillary...you don't think it's so great anymore.

You literally are thinking about this subject matter in a very, very small way.

The media shouldn't be trying to drive anyone out. Not Hillary, and not Trump.

They should simply REPORT the actual news. Not "he said, she said" crap that belongs in the National Enquirer trash magazines.

I think you're a smart guy. And the fact that you simply can't see what I am clearly pointing out just shows how much trouble our society is in. Even though you are Canadian, your thoughts on this mirror a lot of people's thoughts here in the U.S..

It's the same old "team sports" mentality that is destroying the United States and making elections more of a joke than ever.

Let's see.... The largest growth was people aged 75 - 79 which had a 4.4% growth from 2002 -2012. Meanwhile, ages from 16-54 ALL showed a drop during that same age period. Basically, while our population is getting bigger the amount of people of working age is getting smaller, while the people who are either retired or about to retire is getting larger. Our population is getting older.

http://content.screencast.com/users/...10-13_1324.png

And did you read the report mentioned above the numbers?

Labor force projections to 2022: the labor force participation rate continues to fall : Monthly Labor Review: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

In the first 12 years of the 21st century, the growth of the population has slowed and labor force participation rates generally have declined. As a result, labor force growth also has slowed. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) projects that the next 10 years will bring about an aging labor force that is growing slowly, a declining overall labor force participation rate, and more diversity in the racial and ethnic composition of the labor force.

This has nothing to do with the economy, and every thing to do with our population. The labor population has been in decline

LOL, they said the same thing when Carter was president, then Reagan took office and proved them all wrong. Again, you pointed out that baby boomers are retiring, when in fact, participation rate for that demographic is UP!

Projections? I'm looking at the facts, 600k less people are working now than when Obama took office in a middle of a recession !

People over 75 growth is a good thing? Really?

Her's a recent article on this subject of participation rate.

If nearly 40% of Americans aren?t working, what are they doing? - Yahoo Finance

i thought that's funny :glugglug

The high unemployment rate was over 10 percent when Ronnie took office. When he left it was 5.4%. Right now the unemployment rate is 5.1%.

So basically what you just said is that Obama has done better than Reagan did when it comes to unemployment.

Where did you get that? The unemployment rate doesn't mean anything!

Obama slashed unemployment by 50%? That's pretty impressive, no wonder people like him so much :)

That is not what I said, but that is true.

I said during Reagan the unemployment was over 10% at one point, then dropped down to 5.5%.

http://content.screencast.com/users/...10-14_0917.png

It's very similar under Obama. The high was October 2009 - in the middle of a recession - and now the unemployment rate is 5.1%.

http://content.screencast.com/users/...10-14_0919.png

I am not a Democratic and I could really care less about Obama. What we needed to come out of the recession was a cool and steady hand, that's what we got, and we are exactly where we had hoped to be. Even the GOP has dropped the entire "We need to fix the economy" routine. No matter what anyone says, we are at 5.1% unemployment. This is great news. But instead we have people trying to poke holes in this with some silly stat like the "labor participation rate". The labor participation has been declining for the past decade, and will continue to decline for the next twenty years or more. The labor participation rate is going to decline no matter what the economy does.

Tell you what. I'll say that probably, Fox News is making him look bad and drive him out, because he has a grief with them as well as other reasons. Here in Canada at least, the news just reports what he says without any commentary (at least on CTV and CBC). So when I say he makes himself look bad, this is what I mean.

It's about SOME media, and its 99% about him. Fair enough?

No no nooooOOooo... of course there is Bias in media, especially American media, and especially lots of extra creamy bias on Fox. I'm just trying to say that saying "all media is destroying trump" is not fair nor accurate. Instead, SOME media is trying to destroy Trump, and Trump is not helping himself because he is destroying himself too.

Not true at all. Fox News is Fox News. They say what they are told to say. I know you know that - so does everyone. You and I are in complete agreement I think when it comes to Fox.

I completely agree.

Well wait - you have made a lot of assumptions about me that are wrong. Just because I have a difference of opinion with you on 1 subject doesn't mean I disagree with you on everything. For example, just because I think sustainable renewable energy is important should not necessarily mean I should be painted as an evil liberal.

Peace.

Mark, I have pointed out over and over examples of how the media has gone after Trump and that the RNC wants him out because they can't control him.

You keep referring to Trump acting dumb...who cares about that? That's not what I'm talking about at all. The media has been negative to Trump since day one. And they have endlessly predicted negative things about him that have all turned out to be 100% wrong at every turn.

I have pointed out blatant and transparent attempts by the media to derail his campaign, but you are just ignoring that.

As for Fox News doing what they are told to...that is my point. And so is CNN and MSNBC. They are all three being told to take Trump out. And all of them are failing.

Which is why I'm pointing this out.

At least in the past they put up a pretense. But Trump has the RNC so scared that all bets are off now. And the media is just openly going after him.

It's pretty obvious when you watch how they "report" on Trump.

And the good news is: It's not working anymore. The people are learning to no longer trust what the media is trying to sell to them.

My hope is that it will cause enough of a backlash to get some reforms done within the media. This kind of thing should not be tolerated by our citizens.

He seems bulletproof.

However I'm waiting for him to finally say something that is so far over the line that the bottom will fall out.

If this guy becomes President I'm looking for a new country to be a citizen of. He would be a disaster.

So far he's hardly put forth any tangible ideas and those that he has are ridiculous and impossible to carry out.

Sigh..... one more time. Is SOME media trashing trump? Yes of course. My entire point from the very beginning, Robbie, is that TRUMP is trashing TRUMP. You don't need "the media" to tell you he says stupid things. All you have to do is listen to him.

Agreed
 

I would agree!

Trump doesn't need much help.

But it's obvious that both the mainstream media and the political parties are scared shitless of him.

Almost makes me want him, but not quite.

It's just amazing that ********** is so caught up in his bias that he can't see what the media is doing. "Some" of them are attacking him?
Jesus Christ.
Trump has proven that if he's one thing...it's that he is not for sale. And he's pointed out that EVERY other candidate on both sides of this 2 team sport are all bought and paid for.
He is scaring the hell out of the REAL powers that be in this country.

The media (ALL of them) are doing what they are told: Take Trump out.

And yeah, I have a sneaking suspicion that a lot of Trump's support is based solely on an anti-media gut feeling that people have.
They know they've been lied to, and they are sick and tired of it. (well, not folks who have blinders on like **********)