Make the best choices for your Medicare needs with AARP’s Medicare Made Easy. Try it today!

Reply
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
146
Views

Re: Fact Checking Trump's State Of The Union Address

146 Views
Message 1 of 73

@aruzinsky wrote:

@sp362 wrote:

@aruzinsky wrote:

@sp362 wrote:



Where did you "explain" it?  Just stating it does not make it true.  Are there any studies that you can cite?


"Where did you "explain" it?" - Use your browser's search function (Ctrl+F) on the word "psychological" in this thread.  Unfortunately, unlike a good conservative, AARP doesn't give you the option to display the entire thread on one web page, so you will have to click 1, 2, 3, 4, ... and scroll past the same obnoxious advertising banner each time. 

Why don't you copy and paste where you supposedly "explained it", instead of being indignant and telling me something I already know. 

 

If this "Psychological causes have nearly instantaneous effects, especially when the psycological cause is anticipation.  I believe that corporate leaders found Obama's socialist behaviour so repugnant that it caused a nearly instantaneous increase in unemployment.  Similarly, corporate leaders found Trump's pro-capitalism behaviour so agreeable, that unemployment declined nearly instantaneously." is your explanation, than I suggest that you look up the definition of explanation, because that means absolutely nothing.

 

"Just stating it does not make it true."  - I know what you mean.  Several liberal celebrities said that, if Trump was elected, they would move to another country.

Changing the subject instead of responding to my point and still not explaining how you came up with your statement.

 

"Are there any studies that you can cite?"  - A psychologist tore the wings off of a house fly and, when the fly failed to fly, concluded that wing removal immediately caused the fly to lose its will to fly. 

 

So the answer is NO.  Is this something you made up to try to make yourself sound more intelligent?

 

By the way, if you are responding to somebody else's post by adding sentences to the end of what they have written, you should at least change your font color.  Would you like an explanation of how to do that?

 

 

 

 


 


My statement was based on anecdotal observations such as stock prices immediately changing in response to news.  For example, a stock price often changes when a company announces its earnings instead of when the earnings actually happen.  That news is is clearly psychological because the effect would be the same had that news been fake.   


Sorry, "anecdotal observations" are not evidence.  These observations are highly subject to bias and misinterpretation.  Anecdotal observations are used in science to start experiments (i.e. It appears that x+y=z, let's set-up an experiment to find out), but is never used to prove the hypothesis.

 

The overall stock market is not a good example of what you are talking about.  While individual investors will panic and buy and sell when they should not, the institutional investors (the professionals) are the ones who are driving the market.  Of course a stock price will change after earnings are announced (it also changes when dividends are paid) because of the formulas that are being used to determine which stocks to buy and sell.  This is real data that is being used to make their decisions, not a gut feel.  There is nothing psychological about it. 

Also, you have failed to factor in the time between a psychological response and actually making a decision.  The immediate response maybe panic, than after the initial panic, the decision is thought out before action is taken.  As I said before any business person who would act this way and actually make decisions before fully thinking them out usually have the adjectives of "ex" or "bankrupt" before their titles.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
146
Views
Trusted Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
155
Views

Re: Fact Checking Trump's State Of The Union Address

155 Views
Message 2 of 73

@sp362 wrote:

@aruzinsky wrote:

@sp362 wrote:

@aruzinsky wrote:

@Olderscout66 wrote:
..;.
When you compare Presidential impact on a problem, you must use a beginning figure from October of their first year in office because that's how long they're stuck with their predecessor's Federal Budget.
...

 

NBC chose inauguration day as the starting point therefore your argument should be with NBC instead of me or Republicans.  I followed NBC's lead to prove that they were liars.

 

As I explained elsewhere, psychological effects are almost immediate. The psychological effect on corporate leaders began on election day. 


Where did you "explain" it?  Just stating it does not make it true.  Are there any studies that you can cite?


"Where did you "explain" it?" - Use your browser's search function (Ctrl+F) on the word "psychological" in this thread.  Unfortunately, unlike a good conservative, AARP doesn't give you the option to display the entire thread on one web page, so you will have to click 1, 2, 3, 4, ... and scroll past the same obnoxious advertising banner each time. 

Why don't you copy and paste where you supposedly "explained it", instead of being indignant and telling me something I already know. 

 

If this "Psychological causes have nearly instantaneous effects, especially when the psycological cause is anticipation.  I believe that corporate leaders found Obama's socialist behaviour so repugnant that it caused a nearly instantaneous increase in unemployment.  Similarly, corporate leaders found Trump's pro-capitalism behaviour so agreeable, that unemployment declined nearly instantaneously." is your explanation, than I suggest that you look up the definition of explanation, because that means absolutely nothing.

 

"Just stating it does not make it true."  - I know what you mean.  Several liberal celebrities said that, if Trump was elected, they would move to another country.

Changing the subject instead of responding to my point and still not explaining how you came up with your statement.

 

"Are there any studies that you can cite?"  - A psychologist tore the wings off of a house fly and, when the fly failed to fly, concluded that wing removal immediately caused the fly to lose its will to fly. 

 

So the answer is NO.  Is this something you made up to try to make yourself sound more intelligent?

 

By the way, if you are responding to somebody else's post by adding sentences to the end of what they have written, you should at least change your font color.  Would you like an explanation of how to do that?

 

 

 

 


 


My statement was based on anecdotal observations such as stock prices immediately changing in response to news.  For example, a stock price often changes when a company announces its earnings instead of when the earnings actually happen.  That news is is clearly psychological because the effect would be the same had that news been fake.   

Old Witch
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
155
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
2
Kudos
190
Views

Re: Fact Checking Trump's State Of The Union Address

190 Views
Message 3 of 73

@rker321 wrote:

You know,  My take. on the State of the Union Address. I thought he mad a decent speech.  so having said that. NOw, he comes down with the stupidity of the "treasonous"  statement.

Ever since I have seen a State of the Union by any Administration the opposition party does not stand up and applaud. So by calling those people that they are committing treason is more stupid that perhaps them not applauding.
This President needs to understand the value of silence.


And truth, and integrity, and morality, and compassion......

 

Gee, I miss having a real president!

Report Inappropriate Content
2
Kudos
190
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
197
Views

Re: Fact Checking Trump's State Of The Union Address

197 Views
Message 4 of 73

@aruzinsky wrote:

@sp362 wrote:

@aruzinsky wrote:

@Olderscout66 wrote:
..;.
When you compare Presidential impact on a problem, you must use a beginning figure from October of their first year in office because that's how long they're stuck with their predecessor's Federal Budget.
...

 

NBC chose inauguration day as the starting point therefore your argument should be with NBC instead of me or Republicans.  I followed NBC's lead to prove that they were liars.

 

As I explained elsewhere, psychological effects are almost immediate. The psychological effect on corporate leaders began on election day. 


Where did you "explain" it?  Just stating it does not make it true.  Are there any studies that you can cite?


"Where did you "explain" it?" - Use your browser's search function (Ctrl+F) on the word "psychological" in this thread.  Unfortunately, unlike a good conservative, AARP doesn't give you the option to display the entire thread on one web page, so you will have to click 1, 2, 3, 4, ... and scroll past the same obnoxious advertising banner each time. 

Why don't you copy and paste where you supposedly "explained it", instead of being indignant and telling me something I already know. 

 

If this "Psychological causes have nearly instantaneous effects, especially when the psycological cause is anticipation.  I believe that corporate leaders found Obama's socialist behaviour so repugnant that it caused a nearly instantaneous increase in unemployment.  Similarly, corporate leaders found Trump's pro-capitalism behaviour so agreeable, that unemployment declined nearly instantaneously." is your explanation, than I suggest that you look up the definition of explanation, because that means absolutely nothing.

 

"Just stating it does not make it true."  - I know what you mean.  Several liberal celebrities said that, if Trump was elected, they would move to another country.

Changing the subject instead of responding to my point and still not explaining how you came up with your statement.

 

"Are there any studies that you can cite?"  - A psychologist tore the wings off of a house fly and, when the fly failed to fly, concluded that wing removal immediately caused the fly to lose its will to fly. 

 

So the answer is NO.  Is this something you made up to try to make yourself sound more intelligent?

 

By the way, if you are responding to somebody else's post by adding sentences to the end of what they have written, you should at least change your font color.  Would you like an explanation of how to do that?

 

 

 

 


 

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
197
Views
Trusted Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
207
Views

Re: Fact Checking Trump's State Of The Union Address

207 Views
Message 5 of 73

@sp362 wrote:

@aruzinsky wrote:

@Olderscout66 wrote:
..;.
When you compare Presidential impact on a problem, you must use a beginning figure from October of their first year in office because that's how long they're stuck with their predecessor's Federal Budget.
...

 

NBC chose inauguration day as the starting point therefore your argument should be with NBC instead of me or Republicans.  I followed NBC's lead to prove that they were liars.

 

As I explained elsewhere, psychological effects are almost immediate. The psychological effect on corporate leaders began on election day. 


Where did you "explain" it?  Just stating it does not make it true.  Are there any studies that you can cite?


"Where did you "explain" it?" - Use your browser's search function (Ctrl+F) on the word "psychological" in this thread.  Unfortunately, unlike a good conservative, AARP doesn't give you the option to display the entire thread on one web page, so you will have to click 1, 2, 3, 4, ... and scroll past the same obnoxious advertising banner each time. 

 

"Just stating it does not make it true."  - I know what you mean.  Several liberal celebrities said that, if Trump was elected, they would move to another country.

 

"Are there any studies that you can cite?"  - A psychologist tore the wings off of a house fly and, when the fly failed to fly, concluded that wing removal immediately caused the fly to lose its will to fly. 

 

 

 

 

Old Witch
Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
207
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
213
Views

Re: Fact Checking Trump's State Of The Union Address

213 Views
Message 6 of 73

@aruzinsky wrote:

@Olderscout66 wrote:
..;.
When you compare Presidential impact on a problem, you must use a beginning figure from October of their first year in office because that's how long they're stuck with their predecessor's Federal Budget.
...

 

NBC chose inauguration day as the starting point therefore your argument should be with NBC instead of me or Republicans.  I followed NBC's lead to prove that they were liars.

 

As I explained elsewhere, psychological effects are almost immediate. The psychological effect on corporate leaders began on election day. 


Where did you "explain" it?  Just stating it does not make it true.  Are there any studies that you can cite?

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
213
Views
Trusted Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
218
Views

Re: Fact Checking Trump's State Of The Union Address

218 Views
Message 7 of 73

Olderscout66 wrote:
..;.
When you compare Presidential impact on a problem, you must use a beginning figure from October of their first year in office because that's how long they're stuck with their predecessor's Federal Budget.
...

 

NBC chose inauguration day as the starting point therefore your argument should be with NBC instead of me or Republicans.  I followed NBC's lead to prove that they were liars.

 

As I explained elsewhere, psychological effects are almost immediate. The psychological effect on corporate leaders began on election day. 

Old Witch
Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
218
Views
Treasured Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
228
Views

Re: Fact Checking Trump's State Of The Union Address

228 Views
Message 8 of 73
 

Rker wrote-You know,  My take. on the State of the Union Address. I thought he mad a decent speech.  so having said that. NOw, he comes down with the stupidity of the "treasonous"  statement.

Ever since I have seen a State of the Union by any Administration the opposition party does not stand up and applaud. So by calling those people that they are committing treason is more stupid that perhaps them not applauding.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------So your take is that all the good things that has happen in the last year is bad news for the Democrats and they shouldn`t applaud. The glaring example was when the Democrats wouldn`t applaud for the lowest black unemployment in history in Trump`s speech. At least 8 other times they should have applauded but sat on their hands. One time a black Dem woman applauded and got scolded by teeth sucking Pelosi. I hope people remember this in November.

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
228
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
0
Kudos
228
Views

Re: Fact Checking Trump's State Of The Union Address

228 Views
Message 9 of 73

"And something I’m very proud of: African-American unemployment stands at the lowest rate ever recorded."

 

Did he lie?

Report Inappropriate Content
0
Kudos
228
Views
Valued Social Butterfly
1
Kudos
237
Views

Re: Fact Checking Trump's State Of The Union Address

237 Views
Message 10 of 73

@aruzinsky wrote:

Correction:

 

NBC Factcheck is Fake News!

 

Proof:

The quote from https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/2018-state-of-the-union-address/fact-check-how-some-trump-s-state-... ,

 

"President Barack Obama cut black unemployment in half, from 16.8 percent to 7.8 percent during his administration. Under Trump’s administration thus far, the black unemployment rate has fallen just one point, from 7.8 percent to 6.8 percent.", is a lie because, according to the same data that NBC referenced,

 

https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000006

 

from the table, African American Unemployment (AAU) was as follows:


12.7% (Bush 1/19/2009 and Obama 1/20/2009)
16.5% (Obama 1/19/2010)
15.8% (Obama 1/19/2011)
...
7.8% (Obama 1/19/2017 and Trump 1/20/2017)
7.7% (Trump 1/19/2018)

 

(12.7-7.8)/12.7 = 39% reduction which is less than "half." And, NBC’s “6.8%” is lower than NBC’s stated source's “7.7”which is an NBC lie in favor of Trump.

 

 


Republican ananysis, total lie. When you compare Presidential impact on a problem, you must use a beginning figure from October of their first year in office because that's how long they're stuck with their predecessor's Federal Budget.

 

So using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the "start point" for President Obama is 15.8% and his "end point" would be Oct 2009 when black unemployment was 7.3% for a reduction of (15.8-7.3/15.8=)

53.8% for President Obama. 

For Der Trumper the numbers are begin at 7.3%, cut to 6.8%, reduction (7.3-6.8/7.3=)

6.4% for Lemontop.

 

Der Trumper is still coasting along on the last Obama budget, and we're seeing the results of more Republican cutting taxes for the Uberrich - a 5% one-day drop in the Stock Market.

 

The big investors know THEY always do better with Republicans, but they also know the economy (the other 99%) always does much WORSE under Republicans. They also KNOW the tax cut will not raise workers wages, the bonuses will not even get most workers out of debt, and all the rest of the money that WOULD HAVE gone for salaries and wages of the 99% (that is where your taxes go - to fellow Americans' paychecks) will now go for sterile investments that only enrich the already very rich.

 

I call yesterday's Wall Street reaction The Trump Dump because that's what he's taken on the 99% since slithering into the White House.

Report Inappropriate Content
1
Kudos
237
Views