wait a minute, to be fair, these reductions were ok from 2021 through 2025
The economy
- Thread starter Rastafarian
- Start date
wait a minute, to be fair, these reductions were ok from 2021 through 2025
And were they revised down and show massive job losses? That's the point being made.
yea, that's been my argument from even before the Biden admin (carrying on to this one)...why do we put out information/data that we know is wrong (and will be revised either up or down) There are numerous departments, most notably the FED that makes decisions based on data from BLS that we all know is wrong. Wouldn't it make sense to wait a month and put out correct info?
I think they did it this way because they understood the historical trends and what was expected. It isn't the best data, but it is better than waiting another month without knowing at all.
I work in a Medical field, in our industry, we rely on insurance reimbursement for a large amount of our sales. We report daily and monthly our sales, but we are estimating what insurance reimbursement will be based on historical data. We don't know actuals for a month or more and our actual PgL will not match daily sales that are reported. It's isn't perfect,but it is fairly close and at least let's us see trends.
This morning, I read a newspaper report indicating that thirty-six (36) Iranian boats engaged in planting mines in the Strait of Hormuz have been destroyed. THAT is a development that Trump and Hegseth should be talking about. Also, isn't there a kind of specialized boat called a "Minesweeper?" I wonder if we are deploying any such boats.
might take them a while to get there...according to AI we have from 8-14 of the little devils
Had 8 avenger class minesweepers. 4 based in Persian gulf were sent back to the us to be decommissioned. Other 4 in Japan(?). In Persian Gulf, there are 3 Littoral Combat Ships with Counter Mine Mission Packages to fill that role. How well? I don’t know. Brits used to have minesweepers in Bahrain but those got pulled back last year due to budget and readiness reasons and have not been replaced. Gulf states such as Saudi and the UAE have minesweepers and other counter mine assets.
Where have you been? Do you have something to add?
The data is far from perfect and I don't even trust it after it's been revised. There's clearly something wrong with their methodology. I have more faith in the ADP report.
Isn't the long-standing philosophy that 2% inflation is the holy grail , with less than that being bad? If that's the case 2.4 % is damn close
Cheeto
“The United States is the largest Oil Producer in the World, by far, so when oil prices go up, we make a lot of money,” he said on Truth Social.
“The United States is the largest Oil Producer in the World, by far, so when oil prices go up, we make a lot of money,” he said on Truth Social.
In other words you think Trump sucks and you offer no solutions. That's what you consider an objective analysis and proposal?
the average inflation rate over the last 30 years is 2.4-2.6%
Oooooweeee you seem flustered. Kinda like the guy you voted for.
Now back to reality, the job market is struggling, and the current administration doesn't seem interested in fixing it. Just more "greatest economy ever seen before" lies.
Cutting off the tariff talk and not starting a War would be a good start IMO.
You still offer nothing which is typical for those with TDS.
My opinion is that the economy has weakened a bit for a few reasons:
- Biden (and Trump during Covid) injected a huge amount of extra money/stimulus into the economy. Biden's piece was about $3.5 trillion. That's pretty much gone.
- Job cuts in federal government and those due to AI. Some of it is cyclical.
- Maybe a little bit due to tariffs but not much. The biggest cost issues for consumers are healthcare, groceries, and housing and tariffs aren't major influencers. FWIW groceries at home increased by 2.1% in 2025. The affordability problem isn't new because of Trump.
- Do you think we should spend another $3 trillion to create jobs and boost the economy?
- Do you think we should allow Iran to continue to sponsor terror around the world (Hezoballah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad in Syria)? Should we also remain quiet as they murder tens of thousands of their own citizens?
You offered zero solutions. Referencing TDS is an immediate alarm that you arent serious about an honest discussion.
What created so much job growth was also unheard of low rates that the Fed had set. Companies could borrow for almost 0%. Could it be the stimulus packages? Sure thats a possibility but as you mentioned both presidents did that.
Groceries at home increased by 2.4% over the past 12 months from February 2026. Again this is an administration that says grocery prices are going down.
Tariffs are a tax on our consumers and also cause volatility for businesses to plan accordingly. If there is uncertainty than businesses will halt hiring to prepare for potential harder times.
Every day there is a different reason as to why we are attacking Iran. Not one clear message from the administration about why we are doing this or when it will end. Billions of dollars being lit on fire and you can't even tell me why this had to happen.
The person you voted for talked about not starting new wars and wanting the Nobel Peace Prize. Well where do we stand now with that? More uncertainty and more volatility for our economy. Also school children being killed by our missiles.
You're spewing Trump hate while offering nothing else. Please answer my questions.
- Do you support another $3.5 trillion of government spending to spiff the economy?
- Do you think we should stay out of Iran thereby allowing them to continue sponsoring terror and murdering it's citizens?
I support tariffs because they raise revenue while leveling the playing field. Are you OK with other countries tariffing or otherwise taxing our exports more than we tariff and tax imports from them? Are you OK with Canada spending 1.2% of GDP on defense while we spend 3.4%? FWIW I think Trump went too far with tariffs but I'm not totally opposed. Furthermore the big issues are housing, healthcare, and groceries and most of that isn't subject to tariffs. How much do you think health insurance comes down if we eliminate tariffs?
You've addressed nothing I have said and offered zero solutions. Again, I stated why I think tariffs and war aren't good for the economy.
Our trade deficit was .2% lower in 2025 vs 2024. After all that volatility thats what you got out of it. Well done. Plus they were deemed unconstitutional and should probably be paid back. So again two thumbs up there.
Canada can spend whatever they feel on defense. They are a sovereign nation. Just like you don't want them to dictate how much the US spends. What a childish comparison.
I do think we should stay out of Iran. There has been zero imminent threat from Iran to the US. We have followed Israel until a war that we can't even explain why we are there.
I don't want the government to spend 3.5 trillion.
Now after all of that, what is your solution?
I believe Israel got into cheeto's ear that Iran was ripe for a short operation Epstein fury attack with a fast regime change to divert public focus.
Poll: Voters who say economic and political systems are stacked against them tie a record high
Democratic pollster Jeff Horwitt said the numbers indicate “historic levels of anger and disgust with our political and economic systems.”
www.nbcnews.com
Do you know when the imaginary doge checks are coming or the imaginary tariff checks? I need to pay for the imaginary $2 gas.
So you think it's OK for the U.S. pay for the common defense of our NATO "allies"?
But that's a big part of why the unemployment rate was a bit lower under Biden. You criticize the fact that we have fewer jobs due to lower federal spending but you don't want the federal spending to continue.
Solution to what?
I'm happy to talk about any topic. War, grocery prices, taxes, housing, healthcare, etc. Pick one. You might be surprised to learn that I would take a different approach than Trump on many of these. My biggest disagreement with most libs on this board is that "Trump sucks" is a lazy ignorant argument.
Wait you think the US is paying so much on defense because of NATO? woooboy.
Totally reasonable response to an answer you don't like. You have yet to explain why we are attacking Iran.
See my FED comment above in the thread. Or don't I guess.
Good to know you hate that type of argument. Has nothing to do with me but sure good to know
OK, I gotta ask you, ANEW. So we apparently had eight (8) minesweepers in our entire Navy/Coast Guard. Four (4) have been decommissioned and the other four are in Japan? What strategic necessity does Japan or its environs present that would necessitate all of our active minesweepers being berthed there? Meanwhile, a narrow Strait in the middle of the volatile Middle East, that sees roughly 20% of the world's crude oil traffic, has zero minesweepers stationed nearby?! What kind of military resource allocation is THAT?!
Moreover, how much does one minesweeper ship cost? They sound distinctly low tech. Perhaps I am wildly mistaken (that has occurred before), but my guess is that one or two F-35's would cost far more than a minesweeper. Regardless, we could obviously use more minesweepers right about now. Your thoughts?
I watched a televised report tonight in which they had on a guy who has been an oil trader for decades. Forget his name. His take on it was that the real trouble with oil prices has yet to hit home. He said that refineries are still working through the supply of crude oil that they have on hand, and that the shiat will hit the fan when the crude oil that they were supposed to be receiving last week, this week, and perhaps next week does not show up. He said the price of gasoline, jet fuel, diesel, etc., will REALLY spike then, and that even if the hostilities and the mining of the SOH ceases tomorrow, it will take a number of weeks to turn things around and get prices back to where they were before the Iran bombing campaign began..
His take on it was that Trump will have no choice but to declare victory and GTFO out of Iran when the U.S. domestic pump price hits $4.50 or so per gallon.
There's no small amount of speculation in that take, but it would hardly surprise me if some or all of that happened. Especially the declaring of victory and the GTFO part. I'm just not sure that regime change in Iran is a big enough positive to merit the kind of cost, in both blood and treasure, it would take to make it happen. If Trump GTFO's and declares victory now, he can claim: (1) We took out Ayatollah Khamenei and a bunch of very hostile Iranian leadership; (2) we took down Iran's Navy, Air Force, and most of its missiles; and (3) We ensured that Iran will not be developing or producing any nuclear bombs in the foreseeable future.
interestingly, you have just made the case why we need a large defense budget that developes and buys things that sometimes seem questionable. We haven't had a need for minesweepers for how long...decades? So what's the need? Well, now there's a need and we now question "why don't we have more" or "why are they stained there instead of here".
As I have posted during debates about defense budgets, when conflict starts, you go with the equipment you have not the equipment you wish you had. Bet we wish we had spend more on developing anti drone defense......
you have to go back to the questioning "what is the objective of the operation?"...supposedly (although it's not totally clear) ours was decimation of their ability to continue military operations and ensuring they could never get a nuclear weapon. Israel's was regime change.
Once we can claim meeting the objective, we're likely out....Israel, I'm not sure.
Saw a different perspective on the strait and oil. We get (supposedly) only 1% of our oil from the strait....and while that would have an impact, it shouldn't be as great as what it would be on the rest of the world. It was also pointed out that now, with the arrival of a third carrier group, Iran has shut itself into the strait. We will control exit. Iran gets a lot, if not the majority of it's revenue from oil. If they can't get their ships out, they will "starve" financially. How long that would take, I don't know. And don't discount China in all this. They get a lot of oil from Iran...they need the strait open or they're going to have some economic problems that they really don't want.
I'm not sure the administration calculated correctly on how difficult it would be to keep the strait open, it might be 21 miles wide, but according to experts there is only a 6 mile corridor that are shipping lanes. And , Iran has created a couple of layers of defense to maintain control. I would imagine that at some point - may already be happening, we are going to bomb the bejesus out of every possible nook and cranny that might be capable of firing on those shipping lanes.
As I said prior (not that I'm an expert), i'd really be surprised if we're not working with a third party - maybe Russia - to act as an intermediary with Iran to find an off ramp.
We're entering, or might already be in, political territory as opposed to military. There is little doubt that we can totally obliterate Iran and bankrupt them over time. But we have an election in November..that's only 7 months to get oil prices down and make the economy "the best in the history of the world" (I'll interject the trump description) or the republicans might suffer one of the "greatest political defeats in the history of the world" (interjecting schumer's description).
So I would expect that in the not so distant future the political strategy will overtake the military...JMO
Inflation is theft. The 2% target is not grounded in science, it’s just been the acceptable level of theft.
Biden purposefully let inflation run hot, democrats were practicing Modern Monetary Theory and it did not get the results they intended. It lead to high inflation and it was the #1 issue in the election and the American voter spoke.
We had 14ish of them. Built in the '80's and early '90s. Slooow (14kts tops (?)). Made of wood. Zero offensive and i think zero defensive armament. (a few rifles for the crew don't count) so can't protect itself at all. Sweep mines pretty much the way it's been done since the early 20th century. Drive into the minefield and go to work. We're switching to new tech. Need to make tradeoffs in the budget process... can't keep all the old stuff AND field new stuff too. Need to recap that old equipmentand the $$ budgeted for the personnel and the maintenance tail and put towards new.
The LCS's were designed to have swappable mission modules depending on the threat. Lots of problems with that class of ships... not as capable in many scenarios and other issues. But we're banking on it being the solution for mine sweeping. It is fast has (limited) ability to defend itself against small surface and air threats to incled close-in missile defense. Because it's fast, we theoretically have the ability to surge them to various parts of the world when a threat emerges.. You're not going to get the 4 little sweepers from Japan to the persian gulf anytime soon under their own power. To get the ones from the gulf bak to the US for decommissioning...we loaded them onto larger cargo ships and carried them back ! The LCSs, reflect a change in philosophy on how to clear mines. LCSs are standoff using on-board helicopters and underwater semi-autonomous and fully autonomous vehicles to detect and clear mines while the ship stays outside the minefield. Theoretically safer for the vessel and crew, probably faster in detecting mines over a wider area and theoretically faster clearing mines. BUT its new tech. Still seeing if it s going to be all it's cracked up to be. I guess we'll see.
I think there are 3 LCS's in the gulf right now... and Saudi, UAE and other gulf states have minesweeping assets. A lot of times when we have to make tradeoffs, we encourage allies to field niche capabilities
Why start fielding by removing our old stuff in the gulf? I don't know? If i had to guess: 1. Allies (gulf states) have some capability there 2. Hghest threat area, so we want our most modern stuff there given the threat of air, and fast attack boat attacks.
I'm not a navy guy, so i'd defer if one of you squids wants to tell me i've got it wrong.
Last edited:
To be fair both sides practice modern monetary theory. Otherwise there wouldn't be a deficit. I agree that democrats are worse than republicans in this regard but both are pretty bad.
FWIW I think the 2% number makes sense. Deflation would be horrible. Nobody would want to buy hard assets if they felt they would just lose value over time.
My biggest concern about the war from the beginning has been understanding the end game. IMO it's a lot like the $200 billion spend in Ukraine. Some people seemed to think Putin would put his tail between his legs and run.
I'm not as opposed to the Iran conflict as I was the Ukraine war but I still have concerns. I think the administration hoped the mullahs would give up and ask for asylum but these are religious zealots who think they'll get 50 virgins in heaven if they're killed. I don't see them stopping even after we've destroyed most of their military capability. The general population doesn't have the wherewithal to overthrow their government and the mullahs will prioritize rebuilding their military including nuclear. We might have set them back for 5-10 years but I don't think we'll stop them.