I agree, and he still would be far better than Trump.
Bismark:
No links.
This was from watching a Political Analysis on “Face the Nation”.
Trump - a uniquely disliked political tadpole - has quite the uphill battle.
Thanks, Bis.
Now I’m a little confused.
I deleted the episode; but by some Metric the two were close…and they cited the demographics that I mentioned.
Any thoughts?
Is it possible they were trying to make it seem closer than it is? I have not seen any article that claims the current electoral map is neck and neck. It is currently very favorable to Hillary… but as mentioned there are many story lines that still need to play out.
I’ll be sure and keep a closer eye on what exactly the Poll actually “saying”.
Context is everything, I guess. I suppose that is looking at one Metric; Trump and Clinton are close. However; by some other Metric one crushes the other by a landslide.
Very confusing.
I do know this; the bottom line is who leads in terms of the Electoral College.
By the way…
The EC was put into the CONSTITUTION by the Founding Fathers.
(Just thought that was worth mentioning).
There is one other thing that keeps coming up.
The idea that neither Trump nor Clinton will have the support of the majority of Americans…and in fact, when either is elected, they will actually be disliked; to the core; by a majority of Americans.
Quite frankly, I don’t think either Trump or Clinton gives a shit.
It’s all about them and their egos.
1 Like
Currently that is Hillary, by a decent margin and a better outlook to reach 270.
Yep, which is why some of us are pissed at the voters who picked such a terrible candidate as the GOP nominee.
1 Like
The people who support Bernie are similar to those that support Trump in that they are sick of the status quo with our political environment. Now people make these comments about how lazy millennial support him, but the fact of the matter is that millennial have the lowest wages, the least job opportunities, the largest wealth gap, and the highest cost of living in over 100 years. The fact of the matter is that we are the richest nation in the world, yet somehow we cannot control the cost of education, the cost of healthcare, or provide a reasonable minimum wage. Our productivity has increased yet worker pay and benefits hasn’t. There is something called the millennial wealth gap and it is very real and disturbing.
I do not like the idea that I will have to drain my savings if I go to the hospital.
I do not like the idea that I will not be able to afford education for my kids and will be paying mine for the next 8 years
I am pissed off that wages have been more-or-less flat for 30 years or so, yet our capacity to produce has increased significantly along with the cost of living.
I also don’t like that no matter how much I save, I still may not be able to afford to retire
In the 1980s home prices were about 3 times average earnings, In the 1930s they were about 1 times, today it is over 5x. How will I be able to afford a home with prices rising faster than wages?
Bernie is the only candidate who recognizes these issues are crucial to the integrity of our nation. In short, if millennials are the generation of the poor, our economy will collapse. This is already starting to show: the average age of the car on the road is about 10 years old. People are less educated because they cant afford it. The average life expectancy in the US has DECREASED for the first time in 100 years. People are taking less vacations…because they cant afford it. People are not buying homes…because they cant afford it.
Now there will be people that say things like “Well you don’t HAVE to go to school.” or “You don’t HAVE to own a home.” blah blah blah… These same people usually have supplemental income (such as retirement, social security, military benefits, etc), and a job that requires some schooling, and their own home. We cant be a nation of plumbers or carpenters. We need scientists, doctors, lawyers, and other highly skilled professions too. I agree that there are too many people with a degree, reducing the “usefulness” of their education, but to say you don’t HAVE to have one is an obnoxious self-righteous argument. You don’t HAVE to eat either, for 40 days specifically, it doesn’t mean you shouldn’t.
This article is an example:
And an interesting perspective on raising the minimum wage - something I was once against:
When I look at Elizabeth Warren I get this picture of her eyes rolling around in her head as she talks. I wonder if she’s ever had a real job? I don’t know I am asking. My guess is she’s like the rest of those who want to hike the minimum wage, out of touch.
I run a small business…a few of them and if minimum wage ever went up to $22 I would raise my prices and my customers would pay every cent of the hike.
That is actually not true. There is something called the Productivity Paradox. It turns out that productivity increase is not associated with the computer coming to the work environment. It is very interesting.
Id argue that the opposite perspective is out of touch. Even if the minimum wage jobs aren’t glamorous, people still need to make a living. That whole, “don’t go to school to save money” argument is contingent on jobs being available that don’t require school which pay enough to support ones self. Also small businesses have a lot of bullshit to deal with that wasn’t the case 30 or 40 years ago. It is almost impossible to start something up without a lot of capital up front.
I find that very difficult to believe.
-
None of the points you made are relevant. What she makes is not the issue specifically. There are many dimensions to the out of control cost of education. The article I posted illustrates a point and a link to a study with hard data. Administrators rolling in 400 grand is one of them, but we also have federal money dumped into these schools like water, textbooks which are a few hundred dollars, and pay walls for research publication. It is a mess and makes me want to burn villages.
-
What you believe doesn’t matter. It is real. Productivity paradox - Wikipedia
… Mkay…
She’s an educator that make $400,000 to teach and you think that’s irrelevant to the cost of education…
Didn’t say otherwise.
Uhuh. I just created a journal entry to code 32 invoices in about 20 minutes. The process would have taken me at least 2 hours by hand. So ya, I find it hard to believe the advent of the computers hasn’t increased productivity.
-
You don’t understand, your specific points don’t prove or disprove anything. One person who makes a lot of money is not the issue. The issue is there is systematic corruption, one of the symptoms being administrators like Elizabeth Warren making 400 grand/year. I believe the president of BU makes over a million dollars a year. Fantastic, the issue is how someone in that position can earn so much money, and where the federal money students take out for their education goes/is wasted. What she makes doesn’t invalidate the study, it just makes her hypocritical. She is an example is a system that needs to be held accountable, not the cause in itself.
-
Your personal experience doesn’t matter. That is great that you made something to encode your invoices. How much time do you waste reading and writing posts on T-Nation? The analysis provided by the professors clearly shows productivity is weakly correlated with the availability of computers and IT.
And to give you some perspective, at a private university the cost of education will be about 50 grad/yr, lets assume we have 10,000 students with a 250 million dollar operating budget. Taking this into account alone shows the school making about 100% profit. These are rich assholes we are dealing with. I got these numbers from a school I know about, but rounded the figures for illustration.