How many jobs could your state gain (or lose) under each presidential candidate? (1 Viewer)

Domefan504

SR is my life!
Joined
Jan 31, 2013
Messages
15,027
Reaction score
13,022
Location
Metry/NOLA
Offline
Joined
Oct 28, 2007
Messages
13,132
Reaction score
6,951
Location
LA
Offline
I'm not voting for any of these clowns, but bias much?

Her plan is so perfect it will create jobs in every state while ol boy Trump will cost jobs in every single state?
 

not2rich

NO State of Mind
Joined
Jul 23, 2001
Messages
7,591
Reaction score
15,303
Location
Denver
Offline
I'm not voting for any of these clowns, but bias much?

Her plan is so perfect it will create jobs in every state while ol boy Trump will cost jobs in every single state?
I know what you're trying to say, but technically only one of them is a clown. :9:
 

Galbreath34

Very Banned
Gold VIP Contributor
Joined
May 8, 2008
Messages
32,273
Reaction score
30,805
Offline
I'm not voting for any of these clowns, but bias much?

Her plan is so perfect it will create jobs in every state while ol boy Trump will cost jobs in every single state?
It's a third party study, and I can't imagine a study based on national policy that came up with a reason a broad national policy like a tax rate or an investment in infrastructure or whatever would benefit West Virginia but hurt Wyoming. That'd be projecting that there's a huge difference in the way states respond to policy and would take a lot of justification. It'd be very weird if that were the result. All that's being done is applying the projection to the size of the job market in each state more or less I'd imagine.
 

Saint_Ward

Don't be a Jerk.
Staff member
Administrator
Gold VIP Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
46,350
Reaction score
39,925
Location
Fort Lauderdale, FL
Offline
. The estimated job gains and losses under each candidate’s plan were calculated by distributing Zandi’s national projections evenly among the states in proportion to their populations:

That methodology is bunk. Only real estimate is the overall job growth.
 

mb504

Word.
VIP Contributor
Joined
Aug 29, 2006
Messages
6,267
Reaction score
13,085
Location
Downtown Carrollton
Offline
Presidents are so overrated for their alleged impacts on the economy. Clinton's economy was based on the Internet exploding into a thing. Bush's economy was based on the real estate bubble, which was fabulous until it imploded. Obama's economy is sluggish because it didn't coincide with any fortuitous circumstance beyond not being an implosion. Are we really pretending that the last 24 years were the products of only three individuals taken out of the context of their times?
 

Saint_Ward

Don't be a Jerk.
Staff member
Administrator
Gold VIP Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2007
Messages
46,350
Reaction score
39,925
Location
Fort Lauderdale, FL
Offline
Presidents are so overrated for their alleged impacts on the economy. Clinton's economy was based on the Internet exploding into a thing. Bush's economy was based on the real estate bubble, which was fabulous until it imploded. Obama's economy is sluggish because it didn't coincide with any fortuitous circumstance beyond not being an implosion. Are we really pretending that the last 24 years were the products of only three individuals taken out of the context of their times?
Overall I'd agree, but government spending, where it is spend, taxes, and how taxes are levied really do matter.
 

WhoDatPhan78

Definitely not part of the deep state.
Joined
Oct 14, 2008
Messages
9,522
Reaction score
18,492
Offline
Projections like these are almost always useless. Just like budget projections from the CBO.
There are just too many unknown unknowns to project these type of variables.


Trump's plan is basically trickle down economics with tariffs.

Hillary's plan is basically Obamanomics with a dash of Bernie.
 

lapaz

Super Forum Fanatic
VIP Contributor
Joined
Mar 15, 2002
Messages
6,934
Reaction score
3,989
Age
57
Offline
Projections like these are almost always useless. Just like budget projections from the CBO.
There are just too many unknown unknowns to project these type of variables.


Trump's plan is basically trickle down economics with tariffs.

Hillary's plan is basically Obamanomics with a dash of Bernie.
I like the term Obamanomics. I've never heard anyone use that. I'm not sure whether there is anything that distinctive about Obama's approach that hasn't been advocated for decades by Democrats. He wanted to use public dollars to invest in creating jobs in America primarily in infrastructure, but was largely blocked. He did extend loans to industries such as the banks, but that was started under Bush, so I'm not sure it is Obamanomics, so perhaps it was the auto loans that represents Obamanomics. Now Hillary wants to do it, and it will depend on getting a friendly congress. She stands a good chance of getting a better congress than Obama ever had, so she should have a better chance to pass her agenda, which I think will have a great benefit to the economy, and will probably reduce the deficit in the process.
 

MGC

ALL-MADDEN TEAM
Joined
Sep 27, 2011
Messages
1,607
Reaction score
1,342
Offline
Another Hillary lie. Hillary's idea of jobs "Welcome to McDonalds."
 

Dre

More than 15K posts served!
Joined
Nov 18, 2000
Messages
16,704
Reaction score
4,754
Age
41
Offline
During the Olympics, Hillary had a commercial talking about her economic plan. Number 1 was making the wealthy pay their fair share in taxes. Now, divisive rhetoric aside, this will help with the budget deficit. But if that is her plan to grow the economy (and again, it's her #1 economic growth priority), I do not see us having much economic growth.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)



Headlines

Top Bottom