Winning...the economy under Trump

Too late ... it's been locked.

I saw that. What a surprise, huh?

Meh ... wasn't much going on, certainly no fireworks. I think the mods were just peeved that a locked thread was re-posted.

I'm sure we could agree and disagree on certain points you've made.

By many measures, regardless of who you think should gets credit, the economy is doing pretty well. This is the opposite of what was predicted by just about every liberal on the face of the planet.

You're correct that the economy has not imploded, but the gist of the articles was that the economy is on a different trajectory than prior to Trump, which doesn't appear to be the case.

So, I tried to fact check your claim that the Clinton Foundation used donations to pay for Chelsea's wedding, and could find nothing to prove it. The allegation came from Wikileaks, so I'm skeptical.

Wikileaks didn't produce allegations. Wikileaks provided the e-mails of Podesta, writing about the investigations that Chelsea Clinton was doing into the Clinton Foundation's money. Then further, the e-mail show that they were, I guess you could say making fun of, the thought of Chelsea Clinton investigating the money that the Clinton Foundation has, saying as if, yea, what is she going to investigate? Her "getting paid for campaigning, using foundation resources for her wedding and life for a decade, taxes on money from her parents" since they both know that Chelsea Clinton DID those things. And then that Chelsea needs to be spoken to and end the investigation.

WikiLeaks - The Podesta Emails

The Clintons have denied it and here's a little excerpt from Snopes about the Clintons involvement in Haiti.

Of course the Clintons would deny it, why would they admit to stealing money, it's a crime. Oh, snopes... This article is talking about decreasing Haiti's minimum wage, from the U.S. State Department, which HRC was secretary of. Not of the funds in the Clinton Foundation.

You must think Hillary Clinton is an extremely powerful woman to have singlehandedly destroyed an entire country.

I think she and the Clinton's stole from a country, thereby making difficult, if not impossible, to rebuild.

Maybe you could learn a little about the history of Haiti by reading how they won their independence and how they were exploited by the US and other countries for slaves. You can also read about the devasting earthquake they suffered in 2010. The 8th anniversary was 2 days ago. How presidential for Trump to commemorate the occasion by calling the country a ****hole.

Yes, exactly why I made the comment I did in an earlier reply, "People are more upset by President Trump allegedly calling Haiti a ****hole then by Hillary Clinton turning it into one." Sure the country was probably not in a good state before the earthquake, but the doesn't mean they needed someone else to make it worse.

Do you think it's good that a country with the resources of the US only ranks #10 in indicators? I think that's shameful. We should be in the top three, easily. Instead, we're ranked 17th in education, 26th in infant mortality, and 31st in life expectancy. I'm not sure how that brings us up to number 10, but that's what the link you posted says, so I'll go with it.

Yea, I'm good with #10. If you aren't, you're free to apply for citizenship else where. If you don't want to move, then I'll guess you'll just have to accept you're living in a shameful country. I don't know where you got you're rankings either.

You also have to look at topics such as education, infant mortality, and life expectancy in depth. As an example, infant mortality accounts for any child who dies before 1 year of age. The baby has to show signs of life to be called a live birth. But, even sources who collect this information, say that not all countries collect data as they are suppose to. They might say the "still birth" didn't really have signs of life, even though it might have. Also, the strides the U.S. goes to to get a pregnancy to viability has to be accounted for too. Other countries, who are not as advanced, don't have the ability to keep a pregnancy, so the still birth does not count, whereas in the U.S., we have saved the pregnancy and baby, with our resources, but the baby still died after 3 weeks. It counts against us that we tried to save a baby, where other countries can't save the pregnancy, thereby not saving the baby, so that country doesn't have another infant to add to the mortality rate, but the U.S. does.

Obviously, as I stated, this isn't in more advanced countries as they have MFM's/NICUs, but I don't know, based on your reply, who is 1-25 in infant mortality. Lastly, we have the 3rd largest population worldwide. There are a lot more people, with a wide cast of net for problems and issues to arise than in a country of 1 million.

As for life expectancy, #1 is Norway (from Wikipedia) with an age of 81 years old. The U.S., as you say is 31st, with an age of 79 years old. Not as scary as you make it out to be.

And don't forget BC that life expectancy in the US is dropping even lower given the rampant drug problem (especially among poor Whites). You know, the drug problem that Donnie Dotard paid lip service to, but is yet to give any real funding to combat. Yeah, that drug problem.

It is hard to have a world-class economy when entire pockets of a region, like Ohio, Kentucky and West Virginia have residents who can't pass a drug test in order to get a job.

But hey, Donnie Dotard is going to build the wall with Mexico so that people will finally stop throwing 60-pound bags of drugs over the current borders.

Right. Because that's how you move drugs. Good grief! It's laughable, if it wasn't so sad.

You mean like the Clinton Foundation? Who used resources collected for the Haiti relief efforts to pay for Chelsea's wedding. People are more upset by President Trump allegedly calling Haiti a ****hole then by Hillary Clinton turning it into one.

Oh, really. Okay. Well, according to the UN, the U.S. is #10.

| Human Development Reports

Haiti is #163.

| Human Development Reports

So...

There has yet to be any specific claims that money or other resources was funneled from the Clinton foundation to Chelsea's wedding, maybe you could clarify what you're referring to.

I don't know that there is much arguing that these countries are bad places to live, the issue is whether or not these are inferior people, as Trump was suggesting.

You know how else Norway is different? They have an EXTREMELY difficult immigration process, thus allowing all of their resources to go to THEIR citizens. Hence, free healthcare, extended vacation time, free/reduced education fees. They aren't paying for anyone else. Immigrants would rather travel to the EU, where immigration is easier, and where they can still get perks.

Additionally, are you aware more Norwegians live in the U.S. than Norway? I guess Norwegians would like to live in the U.S. after all. So are you calling Norwegians living in the U.S. (over 50%), non-thinking? That seems awfully disrepectful.

At any given time there are between a few hundred and a couple thousand Norwegian citizens living in the US, the population of Norway is over 5 million, how is a few thousand more than 5 million?

One email from a disgruntled staffer who didn't like Chelsea is not evidence of grand theft.

You could say that, but I think it is worth looking into.

I got my statistics from the CDC and WHO. Do you understand that rankings aren't based on raw numbers, and having a larger popular doesn't affect the rankings, since they are based on percentage of incidents in the population?

Yes, I do understand but you missed my point. Even if the statistics are 1:1,000 births, if your country only has a million people, 50% being women, and an even smaller number being pregnant; so lets say ~13,000 being pregnant and delivering during a single year. That's 13,000 people/babies born. Now, look at it on a grand scale of a 300 million. Same, 50% women, smaller amount who are pregnant and deliver in a year = ~4 MILLION. Don't you think that there will be more chances of issues if you are surveying 4 million people as opposed to 13,000? You only have 13,000 chances of something happening. In larger countries, you have 4 million chances of something happening.

If you're satisfied with our current situation on education and health, so be it. I'm not, but I have different priorities from you.

You can be satisfied and still work on making things better. I'm satisfied in my house, but I want a bigger one. But you know, all of the rankings didn't drop in a year right? They have all been pretty steady. But forgive me, I realize that it's only a problem NOW. Right?

As far as me leaving the country if I'm not happy, well, let me ask why you didn't leave during Obama's presidency? All of you neo-cons expressed your great dissatisfaction with America during that time, so what kept you here? You were free to go, too.

I didn't say anything about Obama and his time in office. I actually voted for him once, so don't pretend you know what satisfies me and doesn't. You know, you can get your point across without using you're little slurs, I've noticed you guys really like using them.

I never said the US lower life expectancy was "scary". But life expectancy and infant mortality are often used as markers for a country's economic well being. The US rankings are lower than one would expect to find in a nation of such supposed wealth. I'll let you think about why that might be.

As I stated, our rankings aren't that much lower, maybe by 1-2 points/years, again, with 300x the amount of people to account for. I know you didn't say it was scary, but you act as if the U.S. being 31st in life expectancy is anything worth noting, like we die 20, or 30 years earlier than those ranked before us. But the reality is 2 years. Not really note worthy. If you're referring to free healthcare, you might as well just get over it now, it's not going to happen.

And don't forget BC that life expectancy in the US is dropping even lower given the rampant drug problem (especially among poor Whites). You know, the drug problem that Donnie Dotard paid lip service to, but is yet to give any real funding to combat. Yeah, that drug problem.

It is hard to have a world-class economy when entire pockets of a region, like Ohio, Kentucky and West Virginia have residents who can't pass a drug test in order to get a job.

But hey, Donnie Dotard is going to build the wall with Mexico so that people will finally stop throwing 60-pound bags of drugs over the current borders.

Right. Because that's how you move drugs. Good grief! It's laughable, if it wasn't so sad.

Yea... We can thank NAFTA. Thanks Bill!

A wall, increased ICE, increased border patrol. I think we are on the right track to decrease illegal aliens and drug trafficking alike.