Current Events > African American unemployment at all time lows

(+) Yeah! (+)

DiegoSanchez206 posted...

Kazi1212 posted...

DiegoSanchez206 posted...

Kazi1212 posted...

But Trump is racist. Gee you would think minorities would be hit hard by this racist we have as president, but their lives are just getting better

Can I have a link

Its all over the internet, thats why nobody has bothered to ask for a link so far, everyone and their grandma knows about it

So can I have a link

No do your own damn research, if more people want a link then Ill provide one. But right now its just you who cant type a simple search into google, so Im not sure I even care what someone like you thinks about this issue, no offense
---

TC, we all know this is a lie. It can't possibly be true, since Trump is racist and the system is anti-black.
---

HypnoCoosh posted...

*activate deflection card*

*activate "because obama" card*

*activate racist card*

solves that argument

I mean you're literally describing yourself

Mal_Fet posted...

Makeveli_lives posted...

Mal_Fet posted...

This article is from the end of Obama's presidency

Ouuuuuch....

The article you posted is from 2014.

Toward the end of his presidency.

2 years and 7 months before trump took office is quite a bit of time. Which is when that article is posted if that date is accurate.
---

Bishop9800 posted...

I'm just going to leave this here....

https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-claims-credit-still-mostly-185032789.html

---

Kazi1212 posted...

DiegoSanchez206 posted...

Kazi1212 posted...

DiegoSanchez206 posted...

Kazi1212 posted...

But Trump is racist. Gee you would think minorities would be hit hard by this racist we have as president, but their lives are just getting better

Can I have a link

Its all over the internet, thats why nobody has bothered to ask for a link so far, everyone and their grandma knows about it

So can I have a link

No do your own damn research, if more people want a link then Ill provide one. But right now its just you who cant type a simple search into google, so Im not sure I even care what someone like you thinks about this issue, no offense

Why do I have to provide evidence to what you are saying?

Thats illogical at best.
---

Trump is the best.
---

Kazi1212 posted...

Webmaster4531 posted...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/unemployment-rate-can-be-misleading-because-of-labor-force-dropouts-yellen-says/article/2619907

You realize that every other administration is being measured against the standard unemployment rate right? So it averages out because every year people drop from the work pool. Furthermore, as I linked to an article earlier in this topic, the real unemployment is also down under the Trump administration, so I really dont see what youre trying to say

It doesn't average out though. If one specific year 25 percent more drop out of the workplace than any other previous year measured, then that is statistically significant and shouldn't be ignored.
---

Kazi1212 posted...

But Trump is racist. Gee you would think minorities would be hit hard by this racist we have as president, but their lives are just getting better

imagine thinking this is sound logic
---

Thank you Obama!
---

Kazi1212 posted...

gp1829 posted...

What specific Trump policy is putting Africian Americans to work?

His economic policy is good for the economy as a whole. He doesnt base his polices around which race would do best under which policy, thats a racist mindset he doesnt have. He does what is best for all Americans, and obviously the numbers show

This exactly why republicans don't cater to racial demographic groups, because they don't need to. Prosperity is a class issue, not a race issue. Good economic policy benefits everyone.

Annihilated posted...

This exactly why republicans don't cater to racial demographic groups, because they don't need to.

They feel they don't need to in part because they make efforts to exclude demographics from the voting population: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/29/the-smoking-gun-proving-north-carolina-republicans-tried-to-disenfranchise-black-voters/
---

Antifar posted...

Annihilated posted...

This exactly why republicans don't cater to racial demographic groups, because they don't need to.

They feel they don't need to in part because they make efforts to exclude demographics from the voting population: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/29/the-smoking-gun-proving-north-carolina-republicans-tried-to-disenfranchise-black-voters/

rabble rabble racism rabble voting rights rabble

Antifar posted...

Annihilated posted...

This exactly why republicans don't cater to racial demographic groups, because they don't need to.

They feel they don't need to in part because they make efforts to exclude demographics from the voting population: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/29/the-smoking-gun-proving-north-carolina-republicans-tried-to-disenfranchise-black-voters/

Do these rules apply to all demographics?
---

Kazi1212 posted...

Do these rules apply to all demographics?

Yes. So did poll taxes and literacy tests

At any rate, these specific rules and rollbacks were explicitly enacted to reduce the black vote.

In particular, the court found that North Carolina lawmakers requested data on racial differences in voting behaviors in the state. "This data showed that African Americans disproportionately lacked the most common kind of photo ID, those issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV)," the judges wrote.

So the legislators made it so that the only acceptable forms of voter identification were the ones disproportionately used by white people. "With race data in hand, the legislature amended the bill to exclude many of the alternative photo IDs used by African Americans," the judges wrote. "The bill retained only the kinds of IDs that white North Carolinians were more likely to possess."

The data also showed that black voters were more likely to make use of early voting particularly the first seven days out of North Carolina's 17-day voting period. So lawmakers eliminated these seven days of voting. "After receipt of this racial data, the General Assembly amended the bill to eliminate the first week of early voting, shortening the total early voting period from seventeen to ten days," the court found.

Most strikingly, the judges point to a "smoking gun" in North Carolina's justification for the law, proving discriminatory intent. The state argued in court that "counties with Sunday voting in 2014 were disproportionately black" and "disproportionately Democratic," and said it did away with Sunday voting as a result.

---

Antifar posted...

Kazi1212 posted...

Do these rules apply to all demographics?

Yes. So did poll taxes and literacy tests

I didnt realize literacy tests were equivalent to asking for more identification but ok
---

Kazi1212 posted...

I didnt realize literacy tests were equivalent to asking for more identification but ok

I edited the post; NC's restrictions go beyond just voter ID; they specifically sought out demographic data and then cut the ways in which black people disproportionately vote.
---

Kazi1212 posted...

You realize that every other administration is being measured against the standard unemployment rate right?

lol too bad Trump didn't realize this when he was campaigning.

And it takes longer than a year for your economic policies to affect the economy in any kind of substantial way. Things happening during your presidency doesn't mean your presidency was the cause of it lol. Idk why this even needs to be explained again, its been reiterated multiple times.

And really if you're going to make this argument sincerely then you need to point to the actual economic policies he's enacted and find the statistical proof that they are responsible for this positive change. Otherwise you'll just look like you're trolling and don't know what you're talking.
---

Antifar posted...

Kazi1212 posted...

I didnt realize literacy tests were equivalent to asking for more identification but ok

I edited the post; NC's restrictions go beyond just voter ID; they specifically sought out demographic data and then cut the ways in which black people disproportionately vote.

Fair enough
---

nicklebro posted...

Kazi1212 posted...

You realize that every other administration is being measured against the standard unemployment rate right?

lol too bad Trump didn't realize this when he was campaigning.

And it takes longer than a year for your economic policies to affect the economy in any kind of substantial way. Things happening during your presidency doesn't mean your presidency was the cause of it lol. Idk why this even needs to be explained again, its been reiterated multiple times.

And really if you're going to make this argument sincerely then you need to point to the actual economic policies he's enacted and find the statistical proof that they are responsible for this positive change. Otherwise you'll just look like you're trolling and don't know what you're talking.

I have never once refuted the Obama administration is the cause for the trend towards lower unemployment. However, the narrative against Trump has always been he would destroy our economy and hurt minorities. But if he was indeed this bad as libs say, do you seriously think we would be seeing the numbers that we do? The unemployment trend didnt weaken one iota under the Trump administration, it got even stronger in fact. But liberals have portrayed him as a monumental destabilizing figure, and yet confidence in the economy grows in the market. If he was indeed as destabilizing as liberals propose, it is impossible to say with a straight face the numbers dont mean anything because he cant affect the economy st such a scale, lets not move the goalposts
---

Kazi1212 posted...

I have never once refuted the Obama administration is the cause for the trend towards lower unemployment. However, the narrative against Trump has always been he would destroy our economy and hurt minorities. But if he was indeed this bad as libs say, do you seriously think we would be seeing the numbers that we do? The unemployment trend didnt weaken one iota under the Trump administration, it got even stronger in fact. But liberals have portrayed him as a monumental destabilizing figure, and yet confidence in the economy grows in the market. If he was indeed as destabilizing as liberals propose, it is impossible to say with a straight face the numbers dont mean anything because he cant affect the economy st such a scale, lets not move the goalposts

I don't think Trump has affected the unemployment numbers substantially so its silly to act as if you can make any definitive statements, which it seems as though you're trying to do.

And while I didn't personally see anyone making the accusations you're accusing liberals of making, namely that Trump would destroy the economy and hurt minorities, even if we just assume that they did say that, black unemployment numbers declining would not disprove those predictions at all.

If anyone is moving the goalposts, it'd be you by suggesting that the entire debate rests on the unemployment rate of black people. Trump can hurt minorities and ruin the economy without raising the unemployment rates of one minority group. Now I'm not saying I agree with the people who said that's what Trump would do, because I don't. I don't think Trump is such a devious racist that he would go out of his way to hurt minorities to the point that it actually harmed the country and made him look bad. Nor do I think he's even intelligent or knowledgeable on politics in general to pull something like that off.

So this is a case where all parties involved are wrong.
---

nicklebro posted...

Kazi1212 posted...

I have never once refuted the Obama administration is the cause for the trend towards lower unemployment. However, the narrative against Trump has always been he would destroy our economy and hurt minorities. But if he was indeed this bad as libs say, do you seriously think we would be seeing the numbers that we do? The unemployment trend didnt weaken one iota under the Trump administration, it got even stronger in fact. But liberals have portrayed him as a monumental destabilizing figure, and yet confidence in the economy grows in the market. If he was indeed as destabilizing as liberals propose, it is impossible to say with a straight face the numbers dont mean anything because he cant affect the economy st such a scale, lets not move the goalposts

I don't think Trump has affected the unemployment numbers substantially so its silly to act as if you can make any definitive statements, which it seems as though you're trying to do.

And while I didn't personally see anyone making the accusations you're accusing liberals of making, namely that Trump would destroy the economy and hurt minorities, even if we just assume that they did say that, black unemployment numbers declining would not disprove those predictions at all.

If anyone is moving the goalposts, it'd be you by suggesting that the entire debate rests on the unemployment rate of black people. Trump can hurt minorities and ruin the economy without raising the unemployment rates of one minority group. Now I'm not saying I agree with the people who said that's what Trump would do, because I don't. I don't think Trump is such a devious racist that he would go out of his way to hurt minorities to the point that it actually harmed the country and made him look bad. Nor do I think he's even intelligent or knowledgeable on politics in general to pull something like that off.

So this is a case where all parties involved are wrong.

Do you think Trump is a monumentally destabilizing figure, yes or no? If yes, then we would have economic indicators hinting as such, and im not saying just employment numbers. Agreed? Is it not reasonable to assume at least some forms of economic indicators would at very least point towards him being a monumentally destabilizing figure if he in fact is one? Or is that totally unreasonable to you?

I have yet to find an economic indicator that hints at Trump being monumentally destabilizing, if you find one let me know. If you dont think hes monumentally destabilizing, then youre not the one Im speaking too. But clearly many liberals do or else we wouldnt have the sickeningly amount of coverage he does
---

Kazi1212 posted...

Do you think Trump is a monumentally destabilizing figure, yes or no? If yes, then we would have economic indicators hinting as such, and im not saying just employment numbers. But I have yet to find an economic indicator that hints at Trump being monumentally destabilizing, if you find one let me know. If you dont think hes monumentally destabilizing, then youre not the one Im speaking too. But clearly many liberals do or else we wouldnt have the sickeningly amount of coverage he does

Its quite obvious that Trump is a monumentally destabilizing figure, that's actually a fact, not an opinion. But like I have already said, his economic policies would not even begin to have a substantial impact on our economy as a whole, not to mention you can be monumentally destabilizing without affecting the economy at all. Trump is the most socially divisive and destabilizing president we've ever had, but that has very little or maybe even nothing to do with the economy.

You get where I'm coming from now?

Tbh IMO, I don't think Trump will ruin the economy at all. I think he came into office with a great economy offered to him on a silver platter, thanks Obama! and all he has to do is not fuck it up. But his social divisiveness and horrendous foreign relations has America's international reputation free falling while at home, tensions have never been higher while extremist organizations on both sides have been gaining a foothold and becoming more and more brazen with their antics. So really talking about very specific economic statistics is silly when the actual discussion is far more apparent than that.
---

I agree with TC if he's saying that Trump is the best president ever. Cause everyone knows he is.
Except for old people and kids. Old people believe to 5pm news. Kids think all meme are truth.
oh and CE believes both.
---

nicklebro posted...

Kazi1212 posted...

Do you think Trump is a monumentally destabilizing figure, yes or no? If yes, then we would have economic indicators hinting as such, and im not saying just employment numbers. But I have yet to find an economic indicator that hints at Trump being monumentally destabilizing, if you find one let me know. If you dont think hes monumentally destabilizing, then youre not the one Im speaking too. But clearly many liberals do or else we wouldnt have the sickeningly amount of coverage he does

Its quite obvious that Trump is a monumentally destabilizing figure, that's actually a fact, not an opinion. But like I have already said, his economic policies would not even begin to have a substantial impact on our economy as a whole, not to mention you can be monumentally destabilizing without affecting the economy at all. Trump is the most socially divisive and destabilizing president we've ever had, but that has very little or maybe even nothing to do with the economy.

You get where I'm coming from now?

Tbh IMO, I don't think Trump will ruin the economy at all. I think he came into office with a great economy offered to him on a silver platter, thanks Obama! and all he has to do is not fuck it up. But his social divisiveness and horrendous foreign relations has America's international reputation free falling while at home, tensions have never been higher while extremist organizations on both sides have been gaining a foothold and becoming more and more brazen with their antics. So really talking about very specific economic statistics is silly when the actual discussion is far more apparent than that.

Interesting, I just figure the term destabilizing figure necessarily leads to a destabilizing of economy. From various political philosophies Ive delved into, it seemed most were trying to articulate that the economy has always been the primary mode through which public sentiment is expressed. You have social issues of course, but those are symptoms expressed under within larger economic ecosystem. So what Im saying is no doubt theres a more tense social climate, but I do believe it to be exaggerated given the state of the economic climate. Thats my reasoning at least. I think America will go on and maintain the status quo with Trump, but then again Im one of those folks who never really believed there are as many crucial amount of differences between political leaders as we are ordinarily led to believe. If America is or is not great, Trump in the grand scheme of things isnt going to do anything to change that.
---

Kazi1212 posted...

Interesting, I just figure the term destabilizing figure necessarily leads to a destabilizing of economy. From various political philosophies Ive delved into, it seemed most were trying to articulate that the economy has always been the primary mode through which public sentiment is expressed. You have social issues of course, but those are symptoms expressed under within larger economic ecosystem. So what Im saying is no doubt theres a more tense social climate, but I do believe it to be exaggerated given the state of the economic climate. Thats my reasoning at least. I think America will go on and maintain the status quo with Trump, but then again Im one of those folks who never really believed there are as many crucial amount of differences between political leaders as we are ordinarily led to believe. If America is or is not great, Trump in the grand scheme of things isnt going to do anything to change that.

I don't think there's as close of s relationship between our economy and the rest of society in general. But I do agree there is a relationship. I mean I'd say it's pretty clear that a failing economy wasn't the reason for our only civil war, so you can't expect the economy to tell you everything about the country.

That said, I'm sure.there probably were some liberals who made irrational predictions about Trump tanking the economy. Those people are obviously wrong and insanely ignorant for 1) thinking that Trump would make such idiotic mistakes that would affect the economy this quickly and 2) underestimating the absolutely sky rocketing economy that Obama delivered to the Republicans on a silver platter.
---

Remember that one time that nickleback bet his account saying that trump wont win and then welched?

Hilarious.
---