2016 USA Presidential election thread II: And. Here. We. Go!

[kuronosan]

Even if people think KS is turning Red yet again this year, there's huge talk that they might lose the Senate/House and that if Trump wins, it won't be by much.

[Olo401]

"94,609,000 not in labor force" is trending on twitter as the idiots respond to the positive jobs report.

Of course, they ignore the fact that 44 million of that number is retirees and most of the rest is CHILDREN.

[dasva]

"94,609,000 not in labor force" is trending on twitter as the idiots respond to the positive jobs report.

Of course, they ignore the fact that 44 million of that number is retirees and most of the rest is CHILDREN.

"not in labor force" only counts 16 and older. So unless you think "children" 16-17 year old make up a good 1/6 of our population ( considering the most recent census I could find puts total under 18 as only around 24%) I'm somewhat dubious about the second half of your statement. Now if they were to include the entire population including all children not in the labor force (which is pointless but for the sake of seeing what it would be) the number would be ~ 159 million.

[archibaldcrane]

"94,609,000 not in labor force" is trending on twitter as the idiots respond to the positive jobs report.

Of course, they ignore the fact that 44 million of that number is retirees and most of the rest is CHILDREN.

Good recap of the report

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/11/05...ww.google.com/

[Zealot]

I'm trying to get a bead on that number and it seems like it DOES include retirees, so they wouldn't be in the work force anyway (which makes sense to include in the report for economic reasons), but it still seems high.

[dasva]

I'm trying to get a bead on that number and it seems like it DOES include retirees, so they wouldn't be in the work force anyway (which makes sense to include in the report for economic reasons), but it still seems high.

The 94,609,000 comes straight from BLS website

If you click around the BLS defines not "Not in labor force" As

Not in the labor force

Persons who are neither employed nor unemployed are not in the labor force. This category includes retired persons, students, those taking care of children or other family members, and others who are neither working nor seeking work. Information is collected on their desire for and availability for work, job search activity in the prior year, and reasons for not currently searching

Totally forgot (though obvious now that I think about it) that they don't include unemployed

[Dimmauk]

I voted early on Tuesday, I got there at 735am, doors opened at 8am, I wad 3rd in line and first out.

[Zealot]

The 94,609,000 comes straight from BLS website

Looking at that, the number makes a lot more sense. I guess people just want to find a reason to hate on a good jobs report.

[Olo401]

"not in labor force" only counts 16 and older. So unless you think "children" 16-17 year old make up a good 1/6 of our population ( considering the most recent census I could find puts total under 18 as only around 24%) I'm somewhat dubious about the second half of your statement. Now if they were to include the entire population including all children not in the labor force (which is pointless but for the sake of seeing what it would be) the number would be ~ 159 million.

The 94,609,000 comes straight from BLS website

If you click around the BLS defines not "Not in labor force" As

Totally forgot (though obvious now that I think about it) that they don't include unemployed

Ah okay.. so retirees, non-working students, caretakers that aren't doing it as a job, actually unemployed & seeking people, and NEETs.

[kuronosan]

ITT, people who don't understand the difference between "not working" and "unemployed". They sound so similar, yet there are so many differences that aren't semantic.

[BerenTebogo]

I'd put at least a $50 down that I and GF could get into Canada. Show me a FWC that doesn't want applied mathematicians or astrophysicist and I'll show you a stalled society.

[Dantrag]

I could get into Ireland. Hm...

[dasva]

Ah okay.. so retirees, non-working students, caretakers that aren't doing it as a job, actually unemployed & seeking people, and NEETs.

yes yes yes. No no. Yes

Unemployed defined as

Persons are classified as unemployed if they do not have a job, have actively looked for work in the prior 4 weeks, and are currently available for work. Persons who were not working and were waiting to be recalled to a job from which they had been temporarily laid off are also included as unemployed

are considered part of the labor force since the expectation is it's just a temporary thing (in theory) and they are in process of being employed again. Should note that employed counts basically anyone who did any work for pay (in theory could be an hour) or at least 15 hours unpaid for a business in the week referenced or have a steady job but were unable to work so doesn't really give a full picture on employment.

To add on to your exceptions I believe it also counts institutionalized population though that and military are factored out of the employed to population ratios.

ITT, people who don't understand the difference between "not working" and "unemployed". They sound so similar, yet there are so many differences that aren't semantic.

Statistics are great tools and BLS is an amazing resource with a lot of stats tables etc. But if you don't take the time to read what they actually mean you are going to look like a complete idiot... well at least to those that did read lol. Others you might be able to convince of whatever

[Mertron]

i guess if trump wins my phd applications could see some international action

[Quicklet]

The Eichenwald piece is out now.

http://www.newsweek.com/donald-trump...-europe-516895

It's interesting and paints a damning picture of how Western allies view Trump, but there are no salacious bombshells that will get attention (though it alludes to one that may be coming). Time's running out though.

[Cantih]

My mail- in ballot never came in, so now I have to actually wait in line. And there are no early voting places in my area.

Then schedule plenty of time on Tuesday, because if the roster at your polling place says you were issued a VBM ballot but you don't have it to surrender, you're going to have to vote provisional, and that invokes filling out a tiny form.

[Zealot]

I read that Eichenwald piece earlier, it's pretty damning even without some major bombshell. Basically every intelligence agency is saying "Russia is interfering with this election," Trump says none of them know what they're talking about, and Russia has even backed off at times because Trump's so erratic it's made them say "maybe it's not worth it."

[Quicklet]

I read that Eichenwald piece earlier, it's pretty damning even without some major bombshell. Basically every intelligence agency is saying "Russia is interfering with this election," Trump says none of them know what they're talking about, and Russia has even backed off at times because Trump's so erratic it's made them say "maybe it's not worth it."

Pretty crazy that even Medvedev thinks the operation got out of control.

It's stunning how specific some of the information is -- it's like reading a spy novel considering how much is revealed about Putin and various actors involved here.

I just hope we get the payoff (in the tape) so we can get some closure on this.

[Andalusian girls]

the nation's leading conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer wrote a piece that for the first time flat-out stated Trump is a worse option than Hillary. probably won't change any minds but he crystallizes the realpolitik objection to Donaldo as well as anyone ever has.

At a time of such tectonic instability, even the most experienced head of state requires wisdom and delicacy to maintain equilibrium. Trump has neither. His joining of supreme ignorance to supreme arrogance, combined with a pathological sensitivity to any perceived slight, is a standing invitation to calamitous miscalculation.

Two generations of Americans have grown up feeling that international stability is as natural as the air we breathe. It’s not. It depends on continual, calibrated tending. It depends on the delicate balancing of alliances and the careful signaling of enemies.

It depends on avoiding self-inflicted trade wars and on recognizing the value of allies like Germany, Japan and South Korea as cornerstones of our own security rather than satrapies who are here to dispatch tribute to their imperial master in Washington.

It took seven decades to build this open, free international order. It could be brought down in a single presidential term. That would be a high price to pay for the catharsis of kicking over a table.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/c...icle-1.2857335

[Olo401]

the nation's leading conservative columnist Charles Krauthammer wrote a piece that for the first time flat-out stated Trump is a worse option than Hillary. probably won't change any minds but he crystallizes the realpolitik objection to Donaldo as well as anyone ever has.

http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/c...icle-1.2857335

I'll admit.. I NEVER thought he would abandon that ship. Wow.

That said, he's still shoveling a pretty hefty load of crap in that op-ed.