> conservashits
it trickles down
>Source: Bloomberg
Need I say more?
They actually have little to do with CEO pay, and household income doesn't take into non-financial compensation, purchasing power, and smaller households over time.
Now fuck off.
>>72201403
Source: Bloomberg
Something something job creators
>leftist policies pander to wall street and gloablists
>hurr muh conservashits
Blame federal involvement in giving out finacial aid to everyone. Demand increased, prices increased and more retards had degrees in bullshiiting. Shit would still be cheap if the Feds didn't get involved to begin with
Don't worry its gonna trickle down soon.
>>72201588
Holy crap. Is this real? How is she winning? This is depressing... :(
>Government increases since 1978
>College, medicine and food become more expensive
>The solution is more government
>>72201403
>Sigh
Fuck off, you faggy Redditor.
>>72201748
> economic and banking deregulation since the 80s has nothing to do with it !
>>72201403
yeah...but..erhm..that's the greatness of capitalism
>>72201748
Reaganomics
>>72201403
>Implying that conservatives, who want less goverment, are to blame.
The reason corporations run amok is because big government bails them out and kills their competition. The more regulation you have, the less small businesses are able to compete with corporations who can buy armies of lawyers to defend themselves and bend the rules. More government is NEVER the answer.
>>72201403
>occupy demoJEWS
>>72201855
>Stein
every fucking time
>>72201403
why are libshit professors overcharging their libshit students?
>>72201403
>liberals think taxing major corporations reduces CEO pay
If you dumb niggers knew anything about the tax laws you'd know that a Corporation can post losses while its CEOs are still rolling in money.
>>72201706
Yes it's real
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/14/us/politics/hillary-clinton-shifting-line-of-attack-paints-bernie-sanders-as-a-one-issue-candidate.html
>bloomberg
every
fucking
time
>>72201403
Average household income hasn't grown because immigration keeps the supply or workers inflated beyond demand.
>Since 1978 the US has gone from 90% white to 64%
liberals just dont get it do they. no non-white country has ever achieved the standards that liberals want so much. it's never going to happen folks, that utopia you want is impossible with the current demographics.
>>72201907
They are Soviet agents, they want to see America's demised
>>72201855
>there are 30,000 ISIS members
>the 1.59997 billion Muslims that aren't in ISIS can't stop them despite being "ideologically opposed"
this is what ((((((((Stein))))))))s actually want you to believe
>>72201901
or
>goldberg
>>72201403
Economic Red Pill incoming
>>72202093
Recently, research has counterintuitively indicated a need to scale back the financial aid we offer prospective students since such policies have thus far made higher education LESS affordable. [1]
In response, there has been one main criticism to that research: "How in the world could increased college assistance have come BEFORE increased tuition costs?" "Go ahead," exclaim the skeptics, "look at the historic record. Tuition increases came first! They were not CAUSED by expansions in financial aid!"
We decided to fact check this critique by doing precisely what was asked; looking at the historic record.
[The following dollar figures have all been adjusted for inflation.] From 1971 to 1981, annual tuition and fees for higher education only rose $2 for a public two year facility. [2] You read that correctly. ONLY two dollars. For a public, four year state school, in state tuition and fees had actually DECREASED $190. For the same period of time, a private four year institution, ALSO decreased by $304. [2] This is very important to note. It means that the cost of higher education was NOT rising at an alarming rate at this point in history. Rather, it had actually decreased or, at most, broken even. (depending on the circumstance) Since that time, however, tuition unfortunately inclined sharply.
>Part II next
>>72202178
So then, what is the record on financial aid for higher education? Unlike the claims from the critics, expansions in financial aid programs DID come BEFORE the start of the tuition crisis. Federal financial aid had its start in 1958, with the National Defense Student Loan Program for low-income students, the precursor to the Perkins Loan Program, and soon after with the Health Professions Educational Assistance Act of 1963 [a]. Note, however, these were relatively small programs and therefore didn't necessarily distort the market in any impactful way. They truly were helping low income individuals, and thus were not wide-scale programs.
It wasn't until later, in 1965, 1972, and 1978, when the financial aid that we recognize today began to take hold. In 1965, for instance, the precursors to the Pell Grant and Stafford Loans were created as part of the "Higher Education Act. [3] At that time, a key change occurred in the way federal tuition loan programs were financed. "Instead of using government money directly, the loans would be made by bankers. But if students defaulted, the government guaranteed that IT would cover the tab." [4] Think about this perverse incentive for a moment. It meant that capital could be offered in the form of student loans under the presumption that profit from said loans could be kept privately, but if and when losses arose, banks and investors wouldn't have to lose their money since TAXPAYERS would foot the bill. Effectively, this was socializing losses while privatizing gains. It would take years for this perverse incentive to grow into a large scale problem, but it eventually did.
>Part III next
>>72202229
In '72, the precursor to the Pell Grant was created, but more importantly, Sallie Mae was created by Nixon and the Congress. Sallie Mae was a firm that received help from the treasury to buy student loans off of banks, freeing the banks to then offer even MORE federally insured loans. [4] From that point forward, banks had nothing to lose by offering loans since they - quite literally - could ONLY profit from the exchange. That meant a bank's sound underwriting reasoning, which typically would lead them to decline risky or unreasonable loan requests, was no longer present. If that weren't bad enough, the most important change came in 1978 with the Middle Income Student Assistance Act, which expanded federal student assistance programs to include middle-income students in addition to low-income students. [3] This is where everything changed. From this point forward, most of these financial aid programs were no longer limited to a minority of low income applicants, but instead became the norm for nearly the entire populace. Under this arrangement, loans would eventually be made to nearly everyone regardless of the requested price of tuition, and tuition would therefore be free to rise unchecked since no financial institution was saying "no." It should be no surprise, then, that this was the last decade our nation enjoyed relatively affordable tuition. Since that 1978 expansion, the cost of higher education increased more than 13 fold; about 1,225 percent. [5] To put that into perspective, in the same time period, ordinary inflation (CPI) had only increased 279 percent. [5]
CONCLUSION:
NO, massive and alarming increases in tuition did not occur PRIOR to expansions in financial aid. The expansions in financial aid occurred PRIOR to the tuition crisis. We have a legitimate problem on our hands, and it's important that it be properly diagnosed if we are ever to fix it.
>Sources next
>>72202267
Sources:
[1]
http://www.nber.org/chapters/c13711.pdf
[2]
http://trends.collegeboard.org/college-pricing/figures-tables/tuition-and-fees-and-room-and-board-over-time-1
[3]
http://www.finaid.org/educators/history.phtml
[4]
http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/3622709
[5]
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-08-18/college-tuition-costs-soar-chart-of-the-day (also the source of the graph)
>>72201946
That's unbelievable. That just makes the whole divide-and-conquer plot behind the SJWs so transparent. How can people vote for this witch...
Occupy Democrats has really gotten intense lately
I'm pretty sure they used the absolute dollar values for everything except they adjusted for inflation for the median income.
>>72201748
But US gov has shrunk since 78
>>72201403
Thanks to government subsidies, dumb shit
>>72201403
I like how they source the first part, but not the income part. Because it pure bullshit that the average income has only increased by 7%
>>72202875
wages have gone down since the 70s due to outsourcing, mass immigration, and women entering the workforce.
>>72203004
>>72202875
it's not a source. a source would look like >>72202335
What they are doing is pointing in a vague direction of where to look. It is very shittily done sourcing that only either a college drop out would do or a high school retard would do.
>>72202988
> ... in the form of subsidies...
oops
>>72201855
>all Muslim terrorist are apart of Isis
Gee wiz
>>72203061
No I get that. I just found it odd that they didn't even try to fake a source for the income part.
>>72203004
CLAIM: “Look at how wages have grown in Japan, UK, and France versus the United States. That is why we need to raise the minimum wage.”
RESPONSE: Originally posted by “Fight for $15”, this graph uses comparative income growth to support their cause of raising the minimum wage. Now, there are many complicated ways to evaluate and compare countries to determine who is “better off” than others. Income is certainly one of them, but "income growth" alone means very little. No one would say they're "better off" because their income grew rapidly if someone else makes significantly more.
In keeping with their evaluation, here are some other income statistics which are especially relevant and do not coincide with the presented narrative.
HOUSEHOLD DISPOSABLE INCOME (1):
United States: $41,355
France: $28,799
United Kingdom: $27,029
Japan: $26,111
MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME (2):
United States: $43,585
Japan: $33,822
United Kingdom: $31,617
France: $31,112
MEDIAN PER CAPITA INCOME (2):
United States: $15,480
United Kingdom: $12,399
France: $12,445
Japan: $10,840
Notice anything? The United States median and disposable incomes far exceed the other three countries. Moreover, average annual wages adjusted for 2014 USD PPP and 2014 constant prices are still the highest in the United States (3).
>Part II soon
>>72201855
In fact, mathematically, the attacks in France and Belgium never even happened! Don't listen to the news!
>>72203250
But how do they claim that US incomes are flat? Their graph cites the Bureau of Labor Statistics for US income data. However, the BLS does not account for certain variables – such as post-tax, post-transfer income as well as an overstated measure of inflation (CPI). Moreover, they do not include benefits and other compensation, which has become a large part of employee compensation.
Conversely, the Congressional Budget Office uses an alternative measure for income. From 1979 to 2007, “real median after-tax household income grew by 37%” (4).
(1) http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/topics/income/
(2) http://www.gallup.com/poll/166211/worldwide-median-household-income-000.aspx
(3) https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=AV_AN_WAGE
(4) https://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/112th-congress-2011-2012/reports/10-25-HouseholdIncome_0.pdf
>>72203250
that doesn't take into account private debt, cost of living, or housing costs.
>>72203378
that was not apart of the original statement, which was "Wages have flat lined"
>Red Herring much?
>So we'll tax the CEOs and give it to niggers who don't work at all instead of you
>>72203472
I'm just trying to give context to how the middle class is getting fucked over.
Wages are flat, the only people making money are Wall Street executives creating housing bubbles who then get bailed out by Obongo.
>>72201588
>>72201588
i don't see any incorrect predications in here
maybe you're some retarded brocialist who thinks silly concepts like "racism" and "sexism" were invented by the bourgeouise to divide the working class, but that doesn't change the truth: income equality is not race/gender blind, a white man and a black woman of equally low income will have a radically different experience and "killing wall street" is a dubious activity that will likely have catastrophic effects for everyone
making an exception and unhiding this thread to give everyone a reminder that you're 2 minutes aways from never seeing these shitty ever again
>>72201403
>doesn't compare incomeless households due to the welfare state
I'm guessing that only the former numbers are not adjusted for inflation as well.
>>72203327
So what, American wages are only up because of tax cuts/welfare?
Either way, no one cares how much worse off other countries are if the statement that we're stagnating is still true. It's no excuse to say "shut up, you still have it (relatively) good." Not that I condone minimum wage hikes and welfare as the solution. But this is the essence of globalism: ship our industry elsewhere, open the borders wide so a bunch of poor shitskins can compete with us, create one big world economy where quality of life and reimbursement all fall into equilibrium - an equilibrium far lower than what past generations of Americans have enjoyed, all because a few subhumans bred like rodents for a couple centuries, voiding any self respect they once had.
>>72204066
>oy wall street provides a very useful service goy
like crashing the economy with no survivors via credit bubbles?
Banks have been centralized to the point they are a threat to the economy since the Carter administration.
http://cepr.net/documents/publications/dereg-timeline-2009-07.pdf
Pre 80s regulation needs to be brought back and the banking system needs to be decentralized.
If you disagree you're a literal retard.
>>72202336
Stop being a misogynists. Clinton is a strong indenpendant womyn.
>>72203806
again, since the 80's house hold income has gone up by 37%. Saying "only Wall Street is making money" is disingenuous. Now, based on the 2008 housing crash. You'd have a point that from 2008-2010 those who got bailed out by TARP and HARP bills have pretty much made back their money tax free. What you're doing is making a very bad point and one that is false until 2008. Now that has recovered but it took much longer than it normally should have.
>>72204218
I disproved the statement that "Wages have stagnated since the 70's," Global Trading has been a boon for every economy but I have nor will argue that point on /pol/ because of the consistent "JEW" or "NWO SHILL" cards that would be pulled against my arguments to make it worthless to even post it o here. Global trading is fine but global cultural defacement (Example is you must respect my culture because stupid bixnood reasons XYZ)
Either way, you're making more money now than you were then. Your money now having the same value as then is a bit of a different story.
>>72204474
The banks were given trillions of dollars for free that they could then gamble on overseas exchange rates.
It's a license to steal money. They used all the cash to shore up the toxic assets that they created in the bubble years. However them being solvent recquires there to be historically low interest rates.
Now though interest rates are still at historic lows and the economy is in the shitter because there is no demand.
http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/01/15/the-chart-that-explains-everything/
Saying that wall street paid back all the free money isn't saying much when you nuked the real economy in order to save the billionaire CEOs that ruined it in the first place.
>>72204066
the point is that she deflected criticism of big banks by bringing up a completely unrelated issue you dumb cunt
>>72204892
Interest rates are at historic lows to ensure all the banks with toxic assets stay solvent.
They also aren't lending meaning wall street is failing at the one job it is supposedly good for
http://www.cnbc.com/2015/02/18/banks-arent-lending-to-consumers-heres-who-is.html
Banks aren't lending
and hte only thing keeping hte stock market alive is stock buybacks, which are essentially another endless bubble where companies buy their own stock just to look better.
http://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/usa-buybacks-cannibalized/
http://money.cnn.com/2015/10/27/investing/stocks-dividends-buybacks-high-2016/
>>72201403
but how can CEOs pay for college then
>>72204892
Welcome to corporate politics where the government has become a lynch pin in the economy.
Also, I never said they "Paid it back." 2008/2009 they were bailed out via TARP and HARP bills. They maid their lost money back and then some tax free because government bailout laws and regulations. Taking away the risk factor in the market corporations went full retard because Uncle Sam had there backs with a wink and a smile.
>Staring at you Fanny May and Freddy Mac.
You're arguing against a point that I am not even making. Where are you going with this?
>>72205259
>made
fuck me
>>72205062
the whole point of the "Low interest rates" is to encourage demand again. Problem is, no body wants to take the risk because the writing is on the wall that a second crash maybe coming via student loan debt.
Now, if I was a financial fiduciary right now. I'd tell people to place their money into a safe money asset under the management of a CPA/CFO that is a small local man (Works with accounts under 2.5 million dollars) assets like Mutual Funds rather than Stocks or government bonds.
>>72205259
>They maid their lost money back
By using overseas exchange rates markets with the free trillions of dollars (thanks to low interest rates)
again that's a license to print money. And none of it has gone into the real economy, it's just going into an asset bubble on wall street.
>>72205557
>"Low interest rates"
But it's not working, banks are lending "less" despite having huge cash hoards
http://www.wsj.com/articles/big-banks-cut-back-on-small-business-1448586637
That's because the "real" reason interest rates are so low is that the toxic assets still on the banks' balance sheets are still there 'if' rates go up the banks are fucked. So we're now in a perpetual credit "stagnation" that is never going to end because if it did, wall street would be fucked.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/greatspeculations/2016/04/15/forget-deflation-and-inflation-slowflation-is-the-reality-for-investors/#70d93ea327ff
>>72201706
She's a terrible candidate. The Democrats have been making nothing but mistakes lately. No wonder they lost Congress. They will lose in 2016 too. The Democrats could have had this election easily if they had just fielded Joe Biden instead. They blew it so hard.
>>72205798
guy, can you read? I just agreed with you here >>72205557 because "nobody wants to take the risk because the writing is on the wall that a second crash maybe coming via student loan debt" I could also add to that by saying that a large portion of the forclosed houses have not been acted on because they will not be sold.
Like I have said before where are you going with this? You're arguing something not even relevant to the thread anymore. Which was College prices, to which I killed OPs pic starting here >>72202178
>>72201855
>Isis is the only group catering to radical islamists.
Wew lad. That math is about as hilarious as her second name.
>>72202033
Dubs don't lie
>>72206051
>a second crash maybe coming via student loan debt"
I think you're ignoring housing debt, auto debt, etc
Americans are in tons of debt while wages are stagnant (in comparison) and that's why the economy is going nowhere fast.
>>72201403
How long till progressives and liberals finally purge the world of conservashits?
>>72206379
I seriously hope you're trolling because you just ignored me here >>72206051
"I could also add to that by saying that a large portion of the forclosed houses have not been acted"
>>72206548
with what, Feels and picket signs? Chalking out safe spaces and grumpy passive aggressive pussy attitudes?
>>72207380
>safe spaces
/pol/ is literally a safe space.
>>72207380
Also we liberals control the government, that means we got the drones. Hicks tend to be disorganized and have low IQs.
>>72207467
people will deny this, that's the funny part.
>>72201489
Bloomberg is actually a very good source of financial information, you would know this if you weren't a NEET.
>>72207328
It's not just foreclosures though, if say interest rates went up there would be people who are doing fine today who couldn't afford payments.
That's why interest rates have to stay low for the rest of eternity.
>>72201403
>Computers now handle a majority of complex tasks
>Why aren't I paid more?
Because pressing 'enter' after doing data entry for three minutes is not a high paid skill.
>>72201403
As if every CEO is a conservative.
Christ I'm ashamed to be a Democrat these days.
>>72202093
>>72202178
>>72202229
>>72202267
>>72202335
Where did you get this
>>72205101
Dad's a CEO
>>72201403
So only conservatives are responsible for the economy? When did that power hand off happen?
>>72208770
shhh
>>72201403
>be conservative
>actually have the economic understanding to grasp why tuition and medical expenses have exploded(it's because of government subsidy and entitlement programs combined with federal reserve dollar devaluation)
>understand empirically with hard research, as in no opinions, what is causing the wealth gap
>DURF DURF IT'S THE RICH ANYONE WITH MORE MONEY THAN ME IS BAD
>let's ignore that the government fleeces people for 30-50% of their incomes and forces people under the poverty line with taxation
>lets ignore it's government and only government that is sucking the wealth and freedom away and making everyone poor
>Let's blame it all on anyone who is successful, because only straight white men have nice things
>>72210853
>understand empirically with hard research, as in no opinions, what is causing the wealth gap
>economic theory or research is capable of giving us this degree of surety
Opinion discarded.
Also, consider killing yourself.
>inb4 walls of semi-coherent circular reasoning seasoned with non-sequiturs
>>72201403
its just inflation :^)
>>72201403
>Sigh...
I'd bet that was written by a woman but it's hard to tell these days because numales have started to talk like women too.
>>72211018
Yeah because every historical instance showing this to be the case is just speculative, uh huh.
nevermind the 1000 years of history consistently showing central bank and government meddling do the exact same thing wherever it goes lol
>>72201403
Where's the inflation stat in the infograph?
>>72211170
If you think you can distill the complexities of human social and political life down to a simple rule of thumb like that you are fucking retarded.
The countries with the most powerful central banks and most meddlesome governments also tend to be the most politically powerful.
I'm not saying you are wrong about all the conclusions you draw, just that the overarching star wars tier narrative you put it into is an obvious crutch for a weak mind.
>>72211018
>never read books focusing on economic history.
just... just get out of the thread. just go. You don't even have to an hero.
>>72201403
>CEO pay has gone up 937%
Lets put this into perspective.
CEO of billion dollar company.
makes 1 million salary.
999 million goes to employees and other services and projects to keep the company profitable.
CEO is making less than .01% of the income.
But he's fucking CEO, he's top dog, at the very top, cus he gets shit done. Corporate hierarchy. Think you can do a better job? Prove it.
>>72201403
This means that even CEO children have more expensive college tuition than back in 1978. As % of their income.
This is really funny.
>>72211403
>The countries with the most powerful central banks and most meddlesome governments also tend to be the most politically powerful.
funny how their citizens also tend to go from being rich to being poor in unbelievably short periods of time. Argentina is a good example. They were considered 1st world before the IMF moved in and got them to sign onto fraud.
>>72211463
Why would you assume I haven't read books on economic history?
And why would you think that rteading books on economic history would give you a bias free and completely objective reading of profound economic truth? Unless you were a retard of course.
Are you a retard anon?
>>72212083
>Why would you assume I haven't read books on economic history?
Because you probably don't know who has been funding both sides of every war for the last 100 years. You don't know about how following the crusades the Templar first figured out they could use debt and interest as a means to consolidate all the wealth, which they promptly did before the king of france realized they were artificially putting everyone in debt and that all the physical gold was hoarded by them in one place, and promptly had them shut down.
A whole other multitude of things you simply do not know is making us think you don't read economic history.
>>72211931
The US hasd had the preemiant place in the glabal banking world since the end of ww2 and the creation of the bretton woods sisters (including the afforementioned IMF).
A significant part of your prosperity has come from this strength letting you have the petro-dollar and the default currency for world trade.
And of course it relies on the exact overarching and meddlesome structures you decry, endless pork barrel politics (such as with OPEC) and many of the other types of interactions between financial and political centers of power.
As I said, taking some examples and interpreting them as evidence of a simple black and white picture is fucking retarded.
>>72212326
>tinfoil pamphlets are economic history
>A whole other multitude of things you simply do not know is making us think you don't read economic history.
How do you know what I don't know anon?
And what relevance does the knights templars have to do with the fact that interpreting economic theory and research as providing complete and objective statements of truth is retarded as fuck.
Also, it seems I know enough to predict the bullshit damage control you would bring.
>inb4 walls of semi-coherent circular reasoning seasoned with non-sequiturs
>>72201403
>6 presidents from 1978 to now
>3/6 were Democrats
>I bet the REPUBLICANS did this!
>>72201946
>$112K for Perry
That's pretty kawaii.
>>72201855
>ISIS makes public threats that any group of refugees entering the country will have members within it
>"What do you mean we should turn away Muslim immigrants? What are you even basing this off of?!? CAN'T YOU SEE THAT'S WHAT THEY WANT?"
>>72201855
>0.00001875%
If they can't into math why should we leave them with politics?
>>72201855
>30,000 members
now that is a blatant fucking lie
The 30,000 members she's quoting are the foreign fighters that have joined ISIS from other countries, ISIS has around 200,000 blatant members with many many more acting as sleeper agents and support staff.
>>72207516
Hey asshole I'm the guy that puts the missles on your prescious drones. What do you think that there is some kind of freedom of speech suppression hotline you can call and a MQ-9 will just magically appear over the mean conservatives house. The people that actually make your prescious drones happen are almost unanimously conservative. I know you love the idea of dishing out hot liberal Justice at the snapping of your fingers without having to be in any danger or having to put any effort into it. But that's not fucking happening. In summary you are a faggot and we will not help you opress the American people. Every single person involved with their deployment has sworn an oath to defend the Constitution and the American people sadly that includes you too.
Median household income went up 240% from 1984 to now.
That image is full of shit.
>>72216520
You the "an at least 30 minute long montage of sandniggers getting blown away, no one video repeated" guy?
>>72201403
>sighing
>argument
Get gud queer
>>72201855
There's so much wrong in this I just can't fucking believe this shit
>>72201403
>>72217307
If we let somebody with that mentality rule continuously, we are pretty much guaranteed to get attacked because they don't even understand the threat is also largely outside the major named militant groups.
Rogue militants are a severe issue as well. There is no reason somebody has to be under the ISIS flag to also commit terrorism.
>>72217026
The best one was these two asshats who though they could play dead after their whole crew got their shit pushed in with with the 30mm. The 130 crew had eyes on them the whole time. They get up the second they didn't hear the props anymore and the aircrew hits them mid brofist with an AGM. There wasn't enough of them left to bury in a coffee can.
>>72202178
>>72202229
>>72202267
>>72202335
God bless you
>>72207550
Nobody is safe on /pol/, nigger.
>>72201855
>>72202091
OY GERVALT! MOISHE! PHONE SHLOMO AT OCCUPY DEMOCRATS AND TELL HIM TO STOP USING JEWS TO SHILL! THE GOYIM KNOW!
SHUT
IT
DOWN!
>>72202875
Shillary internet defense forcee really earning that million today.
>>72201403
>tuition skyrockets because we gave away free college we couldn't afford and then switched to loans nobody could pay back
>Medical science has advanced beyond our wildest dreams and now even the most minor injury is brought to overcrowded hospitals treating people for previously unknown diseases
>food has gone up 244%
A very drastic means of saying inflation is pretty standards
>average household income has gone up 6.9%
this is what you get for depending on strangers for your paycheck
>CEO pay has gone up 9x its previous amount
So we should start taxing the shit out of everyone and trust the government to mismanage MORE of our money?
>sigh...
Facebook-tier shit. I picked this sage just for you.
>>72201855
Well she also forgot about Al-Qaeda and Al-Shabaab and the Taliban, and Boko Haram and the Mujuadeen and Abu Sayyaf, and Hamas and Hezbollah and Houthis and Laishkar and like 20 other Islamic terrorist organizations in the world.
>>72207551
>Bloomberg
>berg
>>72201403
>Implying that the value of labor has remained the same or increased.
The value of things can only go up, right?
>>72219157
>20
Oh anon, the list is far longer than that
>>72201403
8 years of the magic nigger didn't change it, but its totes conservatives fault guise!!!!
>>72202267
based fucking economic libertarians
>>72201489
Bloomberg is THE source of financial information. Ever heard of a Bloomberg monitor?
>>72201403
The skill required to manage a multinational corporation has become significantly more difficult thanks to the age of the internet and you only need one person to be a CEO.
Typing up spreadsheets is easier than ever and more people can do it.
Maybe if you want better income you should reduce the supply of labor into the country.
>>72219157
>>72203175
>>72219157
http://edition.cnn.com/2014/09/26/opinion/bergen-schneider-how-many-jihadists/
CNN esimates 106,000 Islamic terrorists. Assuming 1.6 billion Muslims worldwide, that's 0.0006625% of Islam converted extremism.
Not sure why you're surprised. You do know that death tolls from extremism within Middle Eastern countries is way higher, right? And they have much smaller population ls.
>>72214143
ISIL is the entire group. ISIS( Islamic State in Iraq and Syria) refers to ISIL in Syria and Iraq. CIA does estimate around 30k fighters.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2016/02/03/isil-fighters-new-estimate-25000-iraq-syria/79775676/
>>72206186
We're talking about extremism here. Not what law people want in their own countries.
>>72201403
wouldn't this make the case that inflation of the dollar is the biggest issue and the feds monopoly money shenanigans and the federal governments concerted effort to obfuscate actual real inflation rates?
>>72201403
>flood country with fuckloads of immigrants who drive up the demand for everything, which in turn drives up the cost of everything
>flood universities with immigrants getting free or severely discounted tuition, and that school's gotta make up the cost somehow, so enjoy your "white privelege" tuition rates
>have CEOs like Mark Zuckerberg, Bob Iger, and other open liberals make more and more off of foreign labor
>blame republicans
>>72224339
Also nothing has made the cost medical care rise like Obamacare did, and conservatives didn't get a vote on it at all; to the contrary they've been trying to stop it while liberals insist it's for our own good whether we like it or not
>>72201403
>Occupy Democrats
>source: Bloomberg
>>72201403
>Sigh...
>>72201489
>>72201524
>>72207551
>>72223173
>>72201489
Michael Bloomberg is also a massive donor to Democrats, and the former Democrat Mayor of New York City.
He tries to get guns banned, and funds other leftist policies. He's basically George Soros Jr.
>>72201588
You do realise that many liberals hate Hillary for making such retarded statements, right?
>>72224616
And what has that got to do with the data? It's called an ad hominem when you attack someone's character instead of his argument.
