(05-02-2025 12:07 PM)b2b Wrote:  DJIA climbing

Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk

I heard it was doing pretty good today.

(05-02-2025 08:31 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 08:18 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 07:59 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Right...now who would spin positive job growth as a negative?

And like always under trump, you need to wait a month or two, right troll boy?

Quote:The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for February was revised down by 15,000, from +117,000 to +102,000, and the change for March was revised down by 43,000, from +228,000 to +185,000. With these revisions, employment in February and March combined is 58,000 lower than previously reported. (Monthly revisions result from additional reports received from businesses and government agencies since the last published estimates and from the recalculation of seasonal factors.)

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archive...022025.htm

lulz check out the government jobs. Going down.

Biden had horrible revisions to job numbers with incredibly high government hiring.

I know you don't quite understand this, like most things, but people who work for the government also pay taxes and their money also contributes to the economy just as those who work in the private sector.

Is it better to receive $20,000 in taxes from a person you paid $100,000 plus $40,000 in benefits, or $20,000 in taxes from a person you paid $0 plus $0 in benefits?

(05-02-2025 12:30 PM)banker Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 08:31 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 08:18 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 07:59 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Right...now who would spin positive job growth as a negative?

And like always under trump, you need to wait a month or two, right troll boy?

Quote:The change in total nonfarm payroll employment for February was revised down by 15,000, from +117,000 to +102,000, and the change for March was revised down by 43,000, from +228,000 to +185,000. With these revisions, employment in February and March combined is 58,000 lower than previously reported. (Monthly revisions result from additional reports received from businesses and government agencies since the last published estimates and from the recalculation of seasonal factors.)

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archive...022025.htm

lulz check out the government jobs. Going down.

Biden had horrible revisions to job numbers with incredibly high government hiring.

I know you don't quite understand this, like most things, but people who work for the government also pay taxes and their money also contributes to the economy just as those who work in the private sector.

Is it better to receive $20,000 in taxes from a person you paid $100,000 plus $40,000 in benefits, or $20,000 in taxes from a person you paid $0 plus $0 in benefits?

Nobody is arguing that question. But I'll ask you this, you do know that we do have things that require the government to have employees...and a LOT of them, right?

(05-02-2025 12:50 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 12:30 PM)banker Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 08:31 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 08:18 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 07:59 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Right...now who would spin positive job growth as a negative?

And like always under trump, you need to wait a month or two, right troll boy?

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archive...022025.htm

lulz check out the government jobs. Going down.

Biden had horrible revisions to job numbers with incredibly high government hiring.

I know you don't quite understand this, like most things, but people who work for the government also pay taxes and their money also contributes to the economy just as those who work in the private sector.

Is it better to receive $20,000 in taxes from a person you paid $100,000 plus $40,000 in benefits, or $20,000 in taxes from a person you paid $0 plus $0 in benefits?

Nobody is arguing that question. But I'll ask you this, you do know that we do have things that require the government to have employees...and a LOT of them, right?

Guess it was the private sector’s turn to figure out which government jobs were essential and non essential.

Full circle…

(05-02-2025 12:52 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 12:50 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 12:30 PM)banker Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 08:31 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 08:18 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  lulz check out the government jobs. Going down.

Biden had horrible revisions to job numbers with incredibly high government hiring.

I know you don't quite understand this, like most things, but people who work for the government also pay taxes and their money also contributes to the economy just as those who work in the private sector.

Is it better to receive $20,000 in taxes from a person you paid $100,000 plus $40,000 in benefits, or $20,000 in taxes from a person you paid $0 plus $0 in benefits?

Nobody is arguing that question. But I'll ask you this, you do know that we do have things that require the government to have employees...and a LOT of them, right?

Guess it was the private sector’s turn to figure out which government jobs were essential and non essential.

Full circle…

Sure, keep thinking that. How many did they have to hire back that they stupidly fired?

Elmo did the same thing at Twitter and it was a disaster. Thankfully, that didn't cost lives.

(05-02-2025 12:58 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 12:52 PM)WalkThePlank Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 12:50 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 12:30 PM)banker Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 08:31 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I know you don't quite understand this, like most things, but people who work for the government also pay taxes and their money also contributes to the economy just as those who work in the private sector.

Is it better to receive $20,000 in taxes from a person you paid $100,000 plus $40,000 in benefits, or $20,000 in taxes from a person you paid $0 plus $0 in benefits?

Nobody is arguing that question. But I'll ask you this, you do know that we do have things that require the government to have employees...and a LOT of them, right?

Guess it was the private sector’s turn to figure out which government jobs were essential and non essential.

Full circle…

Sure, keep thinking that. How many did they have to hire back that they stupidly fired?

Elmo did the same thing at Twitter and it was a disaster. Thankfully, that didn't cost lives.

I mean.. I was making a funny. It’s not that serious.

However, watching the lifelong government employees crying after having steady income for decades (even through COVID) while many of them wanted prolonged lockdowns is objectively hilarious to me.

(05-02-2025 12:50 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 12:30 PM)banker Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 08:31 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 08:18 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 07:59 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Right...now who would spin positive job growth as a negative?

And like always under trump, you need to wait a month or two, right troll boy?

https://www.bls.gov/news.release/archive...022025.htm

lulz check out the government jobs. Going down.

Biden had horrible revisions to job numbers with incredibly high government hiring.

I know you don't quite understand this, like most things, but people who work for the government also pay taxes and their money also contributes to the economy just as those who work in the private sector.

Is it better to receive $20,000 in taxes from a person you paid $100,000 plus $40,000 in benefits, or $20,000 in taxes from a person you paid $0 plus $0 in benefits?

Nobody is arguing that question. But I'll ask you this, you do know that we do have things that require the government to have employees...and a LOT of them, right?

To a troubling extent, government has resisted technology in the workplace in order to expand the number of employees required to do the work.

I know you probably won’t watch it, but Jesse Waters of Fox sat down with Musk and the DOGE kids to discuss what they have been seeing. It’s astonishing to listen to. This guys are in their 20s and going into agencies working on systems that are older than they are. I think we are all aware of the technological gains in the last 20 years and their impact on efficiency and productivity.

The problem is that power and status in government is directly tied to span of control. The more people you have working for you dictates how powerful you are. This leads to kingdom building, which equates to bloat in pursuit of power.

The Left doesn't believe anything DOGE says. It's their defense mechanism. They suffer from BWS (battered wife syndrome) as well as TDS.

(05-02-2025 08:31 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I know you don't quite understand this, like most things, but people who work for the government also pay taxes and their money also contributes to the economy just as those who work in the private sector.

It's called a parasitic load.

It's similar to a power station using some of its output to power the lights at the power station. If all you do is run your own lights you don't do anything productive outside and the system will collapse.

(05-02-2025 01:04 PM)banker Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 12:50 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 12:30 PM)banker Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 08:31 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 08:18 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  lulz check out the government jobs. Going down.

Biden had horrible revisions to job numbers with incredibly high government hiring.

I know you don't quite understand this, like most things, but people who work for the government also pay taxes and their money also contributes to the economy just as those who work in the private sector.

Is it better to receive $20,000 in taxes from a person you paid $100,000 plus $40,000 in benefits, or $20,000 in taxes from a person you paid $0 plus $0 in benefits?

Nobody is arguing that question. But I'll ask you this, you do know that we do have things that require the government to have employees...and a LOT of them, right?

To a troubling extent, government has resisted technology in the workplace in order to expand the number of employees required to do the work.

I know you probably won’t watch it, but Jesse Waters of Fox sat down with Musk and the DOGE kids to discuss what they have been seeing. It’s astonishing to listen to. This guys are in their 20s and going into agencies working on systems that are older than they are. I think we are all aware of the technological gains in the last 20 years and their impact on efficiency and productivity.

The problem is that power and status in government is directly tied to span of control. The more people you have working for you dictates how powerful you are. This leads to kingdom building, which equates to bloat in pursuit of power.

You honestly think those agencies don't want newer systems...IRS employees don't want updated systems? You're nuts. I deal with a lot of them...they're hamstrung by outdated technology and they hate it. It's like I've been saying for years...you need to put money into the agencies to modernize them...and to find and eradicate the waste. Just chopping the budgets and employees does none of that.

(05-02-2025 10:17 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

They can learn to code.

(05-02-2025 03:23 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 10:17 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

They can learn to code.

Have you noticed one single difference in the world?

(05-02-2025 03:25 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 03:23 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 10:17 AM)UofMstateU Wrote:  

They can learn to code.

Have you noticed one single difference in the world?

Sure. The Good Guys are finally back in charge.

I am worried...Trump is winning...all the polls have him losing...pleasr psyops work!

(05-02-2025 04:39 PM)hburg Wrote:  I am worried...Trump is winning...all the polls have him losing...pleasr psyops work!

Yeah and the drunk whore was gonna win Nebraska.

Polls at 100 days in is a sure sign of winning

(05-02-2025 05:38 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(05-02-2025 04:39 PM)hburg Wrote:  I am worried...Trump is winning...all the polls have him losing...pleasr psyops work!

Yeah and the drunk whore was gonna win Nebraska.

Polls at 100 days in is a sure sign of winning

And Iowa. She couldn't win Michigan.