Trump saves 1,000 American jobs before even taking office

[1bad65]

Since you ducked it twice so far, here it is again with your latest obfuscation addressed:

So now we know, via sourcing, there are less manufacturing jobs than when Obama took office, median incomes have fallen under Obama, and that during the Reagan years median incomes increased.

What's your argument now in light of the newly sourced facts I just presented?

Can you please finally answer the question?

[Rocky Rode]

So what? You're cherry picking data.

You're refusing to count Obama's first 2 years, which were the Stimulus years and thus should have seen huge job growth!! Remember all the "shovel ready" jobs we were promised?

Geez, no wonder Gruber found you guys so easy to snooker.



So what? They didn't go upwards too much,. as we have less than before.

You cant escape that fact, but it's fun watching you try.



Um, LPR is LOWER!!!

There is no reverse. Again I ask your side, if such wonderful job creation is happening, why are wages falling?

2 years? Who taught you math?? First you mix up Median and Mean then you say January 2009-April 2010 is 2 years. Really?

Stimulus was signed in end of Febuary 2009 btw. That's about 13 or 14 months before manufacturing sector began to add jobs. And that was also when unemployment began to decrease.

You show proof from right wing think tanks that median income is falling. I can show proof that average income is slightly decreasing or increasing right now. You are cherry picking things here too. We are arguing two different things here which is why this will go in circles.

[Rocky Rode]

Since you ducked it twice so far, here it is again with your latest obfuscation addressed:



Can you please finally answer the question?

You're creating a straw man here and trying to get me to make an argument I have no interest in making. You are countering my points by basically say "Yeah it's true, but look at these facts these are the important one's"

I'm done with you.

[The Big Dunn]

Doesn't look like the water is the same as it was in 1992.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2...ater/95435272/

Federal and state governments must do more to protect the health of rural Americans in communities where drinking water may be contaminated by lead or not even tested for the brain-damaging toxin, lawmakers and environmental advocates said in response to a USA TODAY Network investigation this week.

[1bad65]

2 years? Who taught you math?? First you mix up Median and Mean then you say January 2009-April 2010 is 2 years. Really?

Ok, my bad. It was a year. Thanks for pointing that out, as it actually buttresses my argument!!

So the losses in Obama's first year, again The Stimulus year, has so many manufacturing job losses that the next 7 Obama years couldn't fill the lost jobs.

Bravo, you made my case for me.

Next...

Stimulus was signed in end of Febuary 2009 btw. That's about 13 or 14 months before manufacturing sector began to add jobs. And that was also when unemployment began to decrease.

Completely false.

In Feb '09 unemployment was 8.3%.
By October of 2009 unemployment maxed out at 10%.
Unemployment did not get lower than 8.3% until March 2012.

Source: http://www.miseryindex.us/indexbymonth.aspx?type=UR

So it took Obama THREE YEARS after the Stimulus to bring unemployment lower than when it passed!!

That's epic failure, especially when we were told it would keep unemployment under 8%.

You show proof from right wing think tanks that median income is falling.

Ad hominem fallacy. Try again.

The source presented was itself exhaustively sourced. The numbers are what they are. Your inability to offer rebuttal to them does not mean you can negate sourced data.

Debate 101

I can show proof that average income is slightly decreasing or increasing right now. You are cherry picking things here too. We are arguing two different things here which is why this will go in circles.

That's been clarified earlier, last post. I'm using median income for the comparison.

Please, keep up here.

[1bad65]

You're creating a straw man here

Questions can't be strawmen. Debate 101, again.

I asked you a simple question based solely on sourced facts. I never addressed your arguments in the question!

You're ducking it, and we both know why.

I'm done with you.

I figured once I posed that 'checkmate question' to you that you'd concede before answering it. Thanks for proving me correct.

[1bad65]

Doesn't look like the water is the same as it was in 1992.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2...ater/95435272/

You conceded, so no need for me to address this.

Actions have consequences.

You were given 3 strikes, ie chances, to debate in an adult manner. You failed to do so, thus you lost the ability to engage me in debate on this topic.

Remember this lesson in the future.

[The Big Dunn]

You conceded, so no need for me to address this.

Actions have consequences.

You were given 3 strikes, ie chances, to debate in an adult manner. You failed to do so, thus you lost the ability to engage me in debate on this topic.

Remember this lesson in the future.

I didn't post it to debate you or for you to address it. I posted it because it shows that your comment was utterly ******ed.

[The Big Dunn]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/n...ater/95461416/

Residents of Corpus Christi in Texas should avoid using tap water due to a possible contamination by an unknown chemical, officials said. The incident occurred late Wednesday and was caused by a recent back-flow incident in the area's industrial district, according to a city news release.

[The Big Dunn]

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/w...land/95604308/

This is an example of why I am so concerned about relaxing regulations when it comes to manufacturing and industrial companies.