Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Voters were right about the economy

politico.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 103 posts

Re: Voters were right about the economy

#81

Post by diffeomorphism »

theandrewbailey wrote: post #14
gigatexal wrote: post #4

So be it. But electing Trump to fix the economy is like opting to have the Joker operate on you instead of a competent doctor because you’re sick of incumbent doctors and their shit…

I'd like to point out that 2019 was a very good year for the economy. It worked well the first time, so why not again?

https://www.statista.com/statistics/187867/public-debt-of-th...

https://www.salon.com/2018/02/12/thom-hartmann-how-the-gop-u...

In brief: It worked very badly the first time and the only reason you were conned into thinking differently was massive debt.

Re: Voters were right about the economy

#82

Post by JKCalhoun »

bell-cot wrote: post #72
JKCalhoun wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That was for all of Michigan though, not Ann Arbor.

(No - I was looking at the Washtenaw Co. totals.) Here are the official precinct-by-precinct vote counts, in Ann Arbor : https://electionresults.ewashtenaw.org/electionreporting/nov... While you can find a precinct where the Greens got 3.5%, there are 52 precincts, and that number is an obvious outlier. There are far more where the Greens didn't even get 1%. Interestingly, looking back at the County-wide results, the…

Thanks, I was unable to find the precinct data — but the 2% aligned closely with state totals.

Re: Voters were right about the economy

#85

Post by sobellian »

lapcat wrote: post #73
sobellian wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The proposed measure is highly correlated with U-3, so as time-series they should basically tell the same story. If the assertion is "U-3 doesn't predict this phenomenon but this other measure does" it's likely to be wrong since the signals are roughly equal to a constant factor. For the entire data range depicted in the paper this property holds. Is it possible that back in $GOOD_OLD_DAYS this isn't true? Well I'd l…

The article isn't just about one statistic, unemployment. It's about multiple statistics, for example inflation too.

Okay but we were talking about the unemployment statistic in this thread. Does it add any information? It likely does not.

Re: Voters were right about the economy

#86

Post by nothercastle »

nradov wrote: post #62
edmundsauto wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Inflation doesn't typically cover cost of living, does it? A poverty line basket of goods is different than someone wealthy. And is rent/real estate cost increases and insurance covered?

Yes, the CPI includes rent (and owner's imputed rent).

Poorly, because of the owners imputed rent it lags a lot.

Re: Voters were right about the economy

#87

Post by nothercastle »

maximusdrex wrote: post #69
spdgg wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those economic gains are not felt by a majority of the population. That was clear by the election, and would be clear to you if you stepped out of your own echo chamber. Nobody wants to hear about U3 unemployment when they can't afford childcare, groceries, medicine, all of which have inflated significantly. For folks who were already living paycheck to paycheck, of which there are many, these explanations are both p…

I’d love to see some data supporting this argument because I’ve heard it over and over from people all over the political spectrum the past few years but it just doesn’t line up with any data. You act like they’re quoting abstract numbers which are meaningless compared to people’s “lived experience” but unemployment is a large part of people’s experience. Furthermore, inflation adjusted wages are up (with the highest…

If you can’t see the issues with the data you aren’t looking. If you examine the CPI basket and see that health care weighing vs what it is as a % of the economy and that doesn’t draw suspicion idk what will.

Re: Voters were right about the economy

#89

Post by ThrowawayR2 »

ryandrake wrote: post #50
ThrowawayR2 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh, believe me, I agree with you that the voters have made a spectacularly poor choice if they were hoping to get the economy improved. But that's not the topic; the question is how the Democrats failed to understand the economic hardship of the voting public when it's literally their job to be in tune with voters and why there's still some level of denialism hanging around with Democratic leaning voters about the st…

I don't think either major party denies the economy is bad or that the public is suffering economic hardship. One just repeats without evidence that only they can fix it, and the other probably can fix it but chooses to do nothing. The only people who think the economy is great are the top 0.01% who get richer and richer every year, regardless of "good" or "bad" times.

There's denialism going on in a variety of posts up above. Please go tell them that.

Re: Voters were right about the economy

#90

Post by radlad »

bell-cot wrote: post #47
radlad wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, having grown up in Ann Arbor, it's pretty clear that's the city you're talking about. Ann Arbor has had a big issue with NIMBY-ism preventing new developments for decades, and that's nothing new. Additionally, the entire city council and mayor are registered "Democrats" but that doesn't necessarily mean that they are progressive - or even if they are, that they care about housing as a primary issue. 70% of voters…

Un-rounded, county-wide, it was a ~1.5% drop in votes for the Dem presidential candidate (from 2020 to 2024). Along with that, the voter turn-out dropped by ~2.2%, in a heavily Democratic County. Nationally, the Dem's went from Biden's 2020 51.3% of the popular vote, to Harris' 2024 48.3%. Darn close to what you'd get by extrapolating the county numbers. (I agree with your comments on A2's local issues - but from cov…

I just want to point out that 51.3% - 48.3% = 3%, which is twice the difference that appeared in Washtenaw County (1.5%.) I wouldn't consider that to be equivalent myself, though I'm not sure what it tells us exactly.
Post reply on HN