Russia Likely Did Swing Votes For Donald Trump

[Guest]

Markk, on this topic you're just not going to get our "economic Conservative" to change his mind. He's all about social Marxism, 3rd Wave feminism, and economic, uh, equanimity, despite his words to the contrary (you'll note virtually every fix of his involves more government intervention, more government spending, and more regulation). That's his choice, but to say that you don't know what your reality is, that you're a bigot, and that he knows better because he reads a few googled articles is the pinnacle of elitist hubris. It is what it is.

- Doc

Few will..that's why I respect your posts, you have common sense. Even when you are wrong, you are wrong because YOU are wrong...not because you are some clone to a predetermined ideology...I hope when I am wrong, which is often, it is the same way.

EA and others here just surf until they find something that they believe fits their view, and they seldom read or understand what they are pasting after a quick scan of what they pasted.

Remember the Movie "Blast from the Past", the father in a bunker was trying to explain baseball to his son that grew up in the bunker the game of baseball...he didn't get it until he actually came out of the bunker and saw a game. Sitting in a basement on a computer in a Wisconsin will not in any way show the real effects of illegal immigration and homelessness, drug abuse, etc where it has flooded or cities and economy...and expanding beyond belief...not even remotely. It would be like me telling him how to dress for cold weather with a study from the internet, or what it is like watching a game from Lambeau field by watching TV.

[_Markk]

I did read the chapter I linked before linking it. You're complaining that it is theoretical when you were asking for an underlying theoretical explanation. This is because you disagreed with empirical studies that relied on real-world data by expressing incredulity that those results would even make theoretical sense. Are you following your own arguments Markk?

Bull, you didn't read it with any depth and you know it. An dif you did read it, then you have nothing if all you can paste is a theory. What real world data is in the report, and what real world data is not in the report...what a are the variables taken into account...in other words back up your assertion with the article you provided EA.

Where did I ask for theoretical exclamations, I asked for an example and proof? You are so full of crap EA...Doc is 100% correct.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

EAllusion and others here just surf until they find something that they believe fits their view, and they seldom read or understand what they are pasting after a quick scan of what

It took me a second to figure out what EA's game is because I hadn't until recently paid attention to his posts. What he claims is his socio-political stance is akin to claiming to be a devout Wahhabi Femen Jewish Libertarian. It's just a mishmash of competing ideologies, nonsense, and smokescreens to distract you from what he really is which is a socialist along the lines of the Swedish model. He is a straight up subordinated male to a 3rd Wave Feminist Socialist ideology. That's who he is.

You have to remember he is valueless outside of his chosen belief system so for him to lie about who he is, which he's done, and urges others to lie about their political affiliation in order to advance a socialist agenda is as a natural to him as breathing is to everyone else.

The weird thing with these guys who post here they post as if they have the moral high ground, but we all know what they really are. They're intolerant control freak bullies who hide behind their professed tolerance, but they don't really believe what they post outside of more socialism. Their agenda is pretty clear which is to disempower what they view as the patriarchy in order to implement their socialist model. This requires men to completely abandon their autonomy and become servants to the state and a postmodernist world.

And they wonder why Trump won. Hrm. Weird. Sign me the [deleted] up!

I'd like to think the Democratic party could move to their professed egalitarian roots, but with people like EA embedded in the party it's unlikely. I think we'll see extremism become the norm, and that's sad.

- Doc

[_EAllusion]

Doc, just to remind, supported a literal non-Democrat socialist for the Democratic nominee for president. It is true that somebody here has no problem lying for argument's sake.

This libertarian is a secret supporter of Scandinavian socialism, which is a authoritarian philosophy that produces amoral, dishonest vipers bent on using trickery to rot the Democratic party from within to subjugate the people. Anyway, please vote for Bernie Sanders, the Scandinavian-style socialist looking to lead the Democratic party. I am a very smart person.

[_honorentheos]

But after adjusting for inflation, today’s average hourly wage has just about the same purchasing power as it did in 1979, following a long slide in the 1980s and early 1990s and bumpy, inconsistent growth since then. In fact, in real terms the average wage peaked more than 40 years ago: The $4.03-an-hour rate recorded in January 1973 has the same purchasing power as $22.41 would today.

So then, as I wrote, if illegal, or green card immigrants are working for around same rates as a carpenter (example)today, as I was in 1979...how does that fit into the conversation. If you took minimum wage in 79...around 3.00 and hour, and compare today with and average of 11.00, that is a 7.00 difference...there a 17.00 difference in your numbers above. I ask the question how does this support that immigration from Mexico helps native wages when they are willing to work for less, and keeps wages down.

Also none of the studies take into account the cash economy in places like LA...which is very real.

Also EAllusion's link stated in the conclusion that it was a theory and more or less chose which variables to use.

I was referring to Kevin's link. It was clearly making the point the benefits aren't to the number written on the paychecks of people competing with immigrants for the same jobs but to real wages across the economy. Your clients dollars have more purchasing power because they're getting more for that dollar than if labor cost more. The lower cost of labour in immigrant heavy sectors has that effect on real wages.

[_EAllusion]

I was referring to Kevin's link. It was clearly making the point the benefits aren't to the number written on the paychecks of people competing with immigrants for the same jobs but to real wages across the economy. Your clients dollars have more purchasing power because they're getting more for that dollar than if labor cost more. The lower cost of labour in immigrant heavy sectors has that effect on real wages.

Maybe try asking Markk if his wages would buy more or less if the United States was just 100 people.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

I was referring to Kevin's link. It was clearly making the point the benefits aren't to the number written on the paychecks of people competing with immigrants for the same jobs but to real wages across the economy. Your clients dollars have more purchasing power because they're getting more for that dollar than if labor cost more. The lower cost of labour in immigrant heavy sectors has that effect on real wages.

Maybe try asking Markk if his wages would buy more or less if the United States was just 100 people.

Try asking Markk how much land he would acquire if the US were just 100 people.

Hurr hurr derr. Jesus, this guy.

- Doc

[_EAllusion]

Try asking Markk how much land he would acquire if the US were just 100 people.

Hurr hurr derr. Jesus, this guy.

- Doc

The point of that thought experiment is to understand how productivity increases purchasing power.

Having a lot of land doesn't mean much when antibiotics are an unfathomable luxury.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Try asking Markk how many more NFL teams could LA hold if there were only 14 pharmacists in Orange county.

Try asking Markk how many more slices of blueberry pie 100 Arizonans could eat with 2 spoons.

You got any more retarded examples you want to offer up as an insanely bad analogy for the positive benefits of unrestrained illegal immigration on our country?

- Doc

[_EAllusion]

Try asking Markk how many more NFL teams could LA hold if there were only 14 pharmacists in Orange county.

Try asking Markk how many more slices of blueberry pie 100 Arizonans could eat with 2 spoons.

You got any more retarded examples you want to offer up as an insanely bad analogy for the positive benefits of unrestrained illegal immigration on our country?

- Doc

You're certainly doing wonders for combating the stereotype of liberals as not strong in economics. The point of the thought experiment is to understand that as labor is freed up to diversify into more productive sectors, that raises the value of equivalent wages. When you understand this concept, it becomes easier to understand why what honor was referring to would make sense.