CNN Now Warns Unemployment Is “Too Low” As Trump Administration Follows Through

[JBond]

Unemployment too low. Stock market too high. Too much winning is bad for you sez the perpetual losers.

Actually, there is a correction coming. You have two years, best case to get out. I'm selling soon. I'll buy later. There is a ten year predictive curve you can apply.

The Right have been predicting a "double dip" the entire Obama recovery.

Actually, I did well under Obama. If you understand business cycles (clearly you do not), you can clearly see the next dip coming. Try to educate yourself. Go back and track the last 4 recessions. You pretend to be a bright guy. Figure it out.

 

[JBond]

They didn't accuse the drivers of anything. They showed pictures of the load strewn across the highway (sometimes into oncoming traffic) and a statement from the driver that his load was properly tied down.

So how do you know it wasn't?

Drivers often cited DOT regulations not requiring stronger attachments. So I find it funny when someone complains about his company wanting to exceed DOT regs for safety. Or that DOT regs are a drain on the industry.

How many rigs are you running?

 

[radical right]

Everything with trucking is federal. There is only one CDL test and one set of CDL rules, so it can't be separated by state. Plus you only have one license when you get a CDL..

So the CDL saying not to drive at high speed on shoulders, giving it apples to all 50 states does make sense. As you said, one set of rules that has to apply everywhere.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Everything with trucking is federal. There is only one CDL test and one set of CDL rules, so it can't be separated by state. Plus you only have one license when you get a CDL..

So the CDL saying not to drive at high speed on shoulders, giving it apples to all 50 states does make sense. As you said, one set of rules that has to apply everywhere.

I never said drive at high speed, just to get enough speed to make it safe to merge onto the highway. Getting on the highway from a dead stop is the most dangerous thing anybody can do.

 

[radical right]

Drivers often cited DOT regulations not requiring stronger attachments. So I find it funny when someone complains about his company wanting to exceed DOT regs for safety. Or that DOT regs are a drain on the industry.

How many rigs are you running?

DOT only requires the rigging be able to lift 1 1/2 times the weight of the load. So in the event of a crash the load can break loose.

https://www.dot.state.pa.us/public/...rivers Manual/Comm Manual English/PUB 223.pdf

Tie-downs must be of the proper type and proper strength. The combined strength of all cargo tie-downs must be strong enough to lift one and one-half times the weight of the piece of cargo tied down. Federal regulations require the aggregate working load limit of any securement system used to secure an article or group of articles against movement must be at least one-half times the weight of the article or group of articles. Proper tie-down equipment must be used, including ropes, straps, chains, and tensioning devices (winches, ratchets, clinching components). Tie-downs must be attached to the vehicle correctly (hooks, bolts, rails, rings).

 

[radical right]

I never said drive at high speed, just to get enough speed to make it safe to merge onto the highway. Getting on the highway from a dead stop is the most dangerous thing anybody can do.

Let's look at what you said again.

It's kind of like the CDL driving test. What they say is that if you are stopped on the shoulder of a highway, you are to start moving and immediately get onto the highway instead of getting some speed up to merge back on. Now you tell me what sense that makes. .

It doesn't say dead stop (inconsistency 1) and you said getting up some speed to merge, meaning highway speed (inconsistency 2)

Would you like to try again?

 

[radical right]

you are to start moving and immediately get onto the highway
instead of getting some speed up to merge back on.

So they want truckers to wait for a large opening before getting back on the highway, instead of bouncing along the shoulder, hoping to merge before running out of room.

Hummmmmmm

 

[OKTexas]

Put a 10,000 load behind it and try again. You're just not very smart, are ya?
.

That's a crash into a barrier, which is 60% worse than hitting another vehicle horizontally. The sort of damage you described requires a head on driver to driver side impact. Or as I first predicted a T-bone into the driver side of your vehicle. The sort of damage you describe, at the speeds you describe aren't supported by any crash test data.

You wasn't there were you dumb ass. This is what the truck looked like after.

BTW the airbag didn't deploy, put that is your crash data.
I'll be waiting for your apology.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

you are to start moving and immediately get onto the highway
instead of getting some speed up to merge back on.

So they want truckers to wait for a large opening before getting back on the highway, instead of bouncing along the shoulder, hoping to merge before running out of room.

Hummmmmmm

When traffic is moving at 60 to 80 mph, it doesn't matter how large of an opening you find, a vehicle will be right on your ass in a matter of a few seconds. And that's IF you can find an opening. We have highways here that don't have any openings because of the volume of traffic.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I never said drive at high speed, just to get enough speed to make it safe to merge onto the highway. Getting on the highway from a dead stop is the most dangerous thing anybody can do.

Let's look at what you said again.

It's kind of like the CDL driving test. What they say is that if you are stopped on the shoulder of a highway, you are to start moving and immediately get onto the highway instead of getting some speed up to merge back on. Now you tell me what sense that makes. .

It doesn't say dead stop (inconsistency 1) and you said getting up some speed to merge, meaning highway speed (inconsistency 2)

Would you like to try again?

Try what again? I said the same thing twice. You are at a dead stop when you start moving forward and right into the right lane of traffic. Or do you think we have wheels that turn completely sideways and we can just go sideways into the lane without moving forward first?

 

[Dschrute3]

Democrat Fake News is imploding. And i'm lovin every every minute of it. No credibility.

 

[jon_berzerk]

Democrat Fake News is imploding. And i'm lovin every every minute of it. No credibility.

got that right

--LOL

 

[blackhawk]

 

[Theowl32]

I remember when Pelosi was yelling at Bush, asking him where the jobs were when the unemployment rate was 4.5%. Apparently, the left thinks the only acceptable rate is 4.4% because now that it's 4.3%, they are upset because it's too low.

And the fact that employers will raise wages on their own to keep people is also bad. As far as the people needed for the new jobs being created (another positive thing), perhaps we can get those people rioting in the streets to get a real job. Probably will pay better than what Soros is paying them now. Or companies can hire those able bodied people who are tired of waiting for government to hand them a life.

There is just no pleasing the left.


"CNN found analysts to explain this mind-boggling narrative;

“Chris Rupkey, chief financial economist at MUFG Union Bank in New York, notes that when the economy reaches full employment, that means there aren’t enough people out of work to find new jobs. And if employers can’t find more workers that they might need, they have to raise wages to retain their existing workers. This sounds great though, right? Why is it a problem of people are getting bigger paychecks? True, but the problem is that it will be harder for the economy to grow a faster pace if the number of new jobs added starts to slow.”

If you are still confused, you aren’t alone. They found a second expert to further unravel the mystery;
“‘I would say that full employment could present a headwind to the future pace of economic growth,’ says Sam Bullard, senior economist at Wells Fargo. ‘Firms continue to point out they’re having difficulty finding qualified labor.’”

They go on to explain that in 2001 when unemployment was this low, the U.S. went into a “brief recession.” But of course, things were much better back then all around, at least if you believe the left-wing dribble coming from the purveyor of fake news.

CNN Now Warns Unemployment Is "Too Low" As Trump Administration Follows Through

I did not think I would be able to be amazed at how stupid they can get. You really need to stand in awe. I don't think there is any limit to it. I know I have said it repeatedly that they have no control over how hypocritical they allow themselves to get and that has been proven over and over again.

 

[Clementine]

 

[edthecynic]

Plenty of able bodied people are sitting at home defrauding taxpayers collecting DI.

Like YOU!!!

What are you talking about? Your silly rant is telling. Please try harder.

I'm saying YOU speak from your own personal experience when you say, "able bodied people are sitting at home defrauding taxpayers collecting DI."

 

[JBond]

Plenty of able bodied people are sitting at home defrauding taxpayers collecting DI.

Like YOU!!!

What are you talking about? Your silly rant is telling. Please try harder.

I'm saying YOU speak from your own personal experience when you say, "able bodied people are sitting at home defrauding taxpayers collecting DI."

Really? Go on monkey, dance for me. What else do you know?

 

[blackhawk]

 

[saveliberty]

Plenty of able bodied people are sitting at home defrauding taxpayers collecting DI.

Like YOU!!!

What are you talking about? Your silly rant is telling. Please try harder.

I'm saying YOU speak from your own personal experience when you say, "able bodied people are sitting at home defrauding taxpayers collecting DI."

I suppose all the folks that just stopped looking may attempt a return at some point.

As unemployment rates have risen, so have the number of disability applications that SSA has received for Disability Insurance (DI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI). From 2007 to 2011, the number of DI applications for workers increased by 34 percent, and SSI disability applications increased by 18 percent.

A recent study suggests that this delay may have been a result of extensions in unemployment insurance benefits, while a second study from the White House found that unemployed persons aged 50 to 65 without access to $5,000 are more likely to apply for DI as their unemployment insurance benefits are about to expire.

Is Social Security Disability the "New Welfare"? | Office of the Inspector General, SSA

 

[edthecynic]

As unemployment rates have risen, so have the number of disability applications that SSA has received for Disability Insurance (DI) and Supplemental Security Income (SSI). From 2007 to 2011, the number of DI applications for workers increased by 34 percent, and SSI disability applications increased by 18 percent.

Again we see what slick professional liars the Right are!!! They falsely claim that DI has replaced UI, but if you notice they don't use the number of DI AWARDS to support their lie, which have DECLINED since 2010, but dishonestly use the number of applications that have increased while ignoring the fact that with the increase in applications came an increase in rejections. In fact, in Bush's last year 38.4% of applications for DI were awarded benefits, but under Obama that award rate DECLINED to 32%.

The Right ALWAYS lies about everything because they think lying proves them to be intellectually superior to honest people!!!

Any fool can tell the truth, but it requires a man of some sense to know how to lie well.
- Samuel Butler