The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Politics => Topic started by: enslaved1 on August 22, 2024, 04:36:03 PM
-
Most GOP-devastating statistic in Bill Clinton's DNC speech confirmed by fact checker (https://www.rawstory.com/bill-clinton-dnc-speech/)
Former President Bill Clinton on Wednesday used part of his speech at the Democratic National Convention to hit back at the notion that Republican presidents were better on the economy than Democratic presidents.
In particular, Clinton pointed to the record of job creation since the end of the Cold War under both Republican and Democratic presidents.
"You’re going to have a hard time believing this, but so help me, I triple-checked it,” Clinton said in the speech. “Since the end of the Cold War in 1989, America has created about 51 million new jobs. I swear I checked this three times. Even I couldn’t believe it. What’s the score? Democrats 50, Republicans one.”
Washington Post fact checker Philip Bump decided to fact check Clinton's claim and found that it was 100 percent correct.
"There have been six presidents since 1989, three from each party," wrote Bump. "Under the three Democrats — Clinton, Barack Obama and Joe Biden — there was a cumulative increase of 50 million more people working between the starts of their terms and the ends. Under the three Republicans — George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush and Donald Trump — the cumulative total was, in fact, only 1 million."
The WaPo article (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/08/22/clinton-dnc-jobs-created-since-cold-war/)
There have been six presidents since 1989, three from each party. Under the three Democrats — Clinton, Barack Obama and Joe Biden — there was a cumulative increase of 50 million more people working between the starts of their terms and the ends. Under the three Republicans — George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush and Donald Trump — the cumulative total was, in fact, only 1 million. (That’s starting at the beginning of the elder Bush’s term, not the fall of the Berlin Wall a few months later that marked the start of the Cold War’s demise.)
There is an avalanche of caveats that apply here, certainly. One is that “increase in people working” is not fully equivalent to “jobs created,” nor is it necessarily a measure of the policies or administration of the presidents.
emphasis mine
(https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps/imrs.php?src=https://arc-anglerfish-washpost-prod-washpost.s3.amazonaws.com/public/ECQWSQLIZ5DD3IDRC72NHWWTPQ.png&w=540)
I quit caring about statistics a long time ago, because EVERYONE picks the ones that fit their narrative or tortures the numbers until they give the desired answer. Tell me Republicans created more jobs since the Cold War, still don't believe it, cause there will be a caveats attached to that as well. What amazes me is the impact of the presentation of statistics. People who don't know how to figure a 20% tip will be parading Clinton's commentary, while others who don't realize working 3 jobs just bumps up their taxable income will be decrying them. The few folks with a clue can't dumb things down to levels the rest understand, and everyone gets raked over the coals as a result. /end rant
-
This may be a fun fact, however governments create government jobs. These government jobs do not create wealth because they produce nothing. The real job creators are the entrepreneurs millionaires and billionaires that form companies that produced products from materials and labor that produce wealth.
However, presidents do create job loss like with Biden, shutting down the construction of the pipeline and banning drilling and exploration, making energy more expensive. Also outsourcing American manufacturing to foreign countries specially to our enemy China.
Another factor to consider is, what is the unemployment rate during these Democrat presidents time in office?
There may be more jobs, but are they good jobs or entry-level jobs? And what about inflation? Can you live off the wage you made from these jobs?
Obviously, as you mentioned, his figures really mean nothing
-
A fallacy of statistics is that it depends on the metric one uses. Considering I use facts and information hourly and daily and interpret them, I can arrange an argument that could make one believe the most ridiculous thing.
I'll point out the very most glaring fallacy here: The U.S. population has continued to grow exponentially (until the lib-turds finally abort all their babies).
(https://marketsize.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/USPop.jpg)
Not a perfect graphical representation but it says that U.S. population has expanded by about 70ish-100 million since that syphilitic addled Billy Jeff Clinton left office.
Whenever one hears that so-and-so is the highest of all-time, it is compared relative to the percentage of what actually existed previously. Sure the 2024 flick "Deadpool vs. Wolverine" might out-gross the 1977 movie "Star Wars", but adjusted to inflation it is a drop in the bucket and not even relatively comparable. (This has nothing to do with the content or enjoyment one might derive as I haven't seen the latter film)
-
Proof of my point. (https://preview.redd.it/numbers-dont-lie-v0-lye5vhe01akd1.png?width=1080&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=7280d4dff7fc68591e4038d5867dcb66172e1d04)
Image search shows the same meme across seven subreddits, including r/democrats, and r/economy among others, with 6.5k likes in r/economy and 1.4k likes in r/democrats.
It's sad watching the downward spiral our society is on and being aware of said spiral.