What a Year. What an Amazing 8 Years. Thank you Obama.

>>1679938
How the hell do you maintain a portfolio that stable?

>>1679938
now the interest rates are rising and the inevitable crash begins.

>>1679964

Gains from AMZN, GLW, AGM, GK, others.

>>1679967
>now the interest rates are rising and the inevitable crash begins.
We've already had two rate hikes (December 2015, December 2016) and the bull market marches on. Making stupid predictions about the future of the markets just makes you look stupid, and poor.

>>1679978
Look at the signs.
The dollar has gained against almost every single currency during Obama's 8 years despite the fed setting interest rates at 0%. There is a bubble in US government debt and the dollar's value.

>>1680035
>Look at the signs.
Yeah, people said that in 2010. And 2011. And 2012. 2013. 2014. 2015. And throughout 2016.

It's amazing how you idiots never get tired of being wrong. And being poor.

>>1680052
> there will never be a recession again because the markets were bullish for a few years
> buy high, sell low

thank you obama for using telekinesis to improve dow jones!

>>1680078
>there will never be a recession again
Are you functionally retarded? No one said there will never be a bear market again, let alone a recession. Stop making up shit because you're too stupid to have an adult discussion.

The point is that you can't predict when any of these things are going to happen. You've been guessing for years, and you've been wrong for years. Will you be right next year? I don't know. Broken clocks, etc. But for fucks sake, stop deluding yourself that you have a clue.

>>1680095
>thank you obama for using telekinesis to improve dow jones!
I think it has more to do with Obama's creation of a historically strong labor market with the lowest unemployment rate in decades, together with his stimulus and industry support packages, and his reform of abusive banking regulations. And the FED helped too.

But if you want to be a jackass and claim it was telekinesis, then go ahead and be an ignorant clown.

File: 1481040941948.jpg (55KB, 720x275px) Image search: [Google]

55KB, 720x275px

>>1679978
>>1680052
This is how you know /biz/ is fucking underage and retarded. Over the past 300 years, Three hundred fucking years, there hasn't been a period longer than 20 or so years without some sort of socioeconomic catastrophe. It's going to be funny when this hyperinflated bull market capsizes and idiots like this are left slitting their wrists because they thougt that the fucking rules of nature stoped applying themselves just because they started investing. Don't be so fucking stupid. What goes up...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_stock_market_crashes_and_bear_markets

File: cotd-bull-markets.jpg (143KB, 1200x900px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 1200x900px

>>1680109
So you're actually so stupid that you read those posts and concluded that someone claimed that bear markets don't happen? Do you not speak English well? Were you dropped on your pointed head as a child? Because I don't see any such claims made anywhere.

Of course bear markets happen. They've happened in the past and they'll happen in the future. They tend to be short in duration and smaller in magnitude than bull markets, but that's another issue altogether,

You cannot predict when bull markets will occur. Let me repeat that for your dim brain to soak up. You. Cannot. Predict. Short-term. Market. Movements. While we can say with tremendous confidence that a bear market will happen at some point in the future, you cannot tell us that it will happen next month, next year or in the next five years. You've tried, and you've failed, 90% of the time. You have a terrible track record, and we're too smart to listen to you.

And by "you" I mean all the idiots who think there are "signs" and "signals" and "shapes" and "patterns" that predict the future. Just stop. We've been listening to you faggot calling for the end of the world since 2010 and we're tired of you crying wolf. We made a lot of money while you sat on the sidelines with your thumb up your ass. We don't care that you'll eventually be right, eventually, some day, because we'll ride through it like we always do. That's why we're rich and you're not.

Time to wake up kid. You don't get these years back.

>>1680109
>What goes up...
Can't let this pass unnoticed.

Are you under the impression that financial markets are subject to the physical laws of gravity? Care to explain exactly how that scientific notion works?

Isaac Newton is spinning in his grave.

>>1680105
well you can't really compare 2008 to 2016 because 2008 was the worst year ever so anything in comparison is amazing.

besides, obama has aid's that advise him on things he can do. its not like he is a financial genius, just made the right moves.

so when the banks give credit to everyone and the rating agencies work like a grey market then it has nothing to do with the market.
what happened to housing prices after 2008? literally nothing. the government didn't regulate dick.

>>1680180
>2008 was the worst year ever
Actually it wasn't.
>anything in comparison is amazing
I'm not comparing anything to 2008. I'm looking at 2009, 2010, 2012, 2013, 2014, and 2016 in comparison to 80-year historical norms.

>its not like he is a financial genius, just made the right moves
Why the fuck does this matter? Every president surrounds themselves with people they think are smart, and make what they think are the correct moves. You're going to hold it against Obama that he got it right? That's literally retarded.

>>1680147
>>1680153
I got you so heated you replied twice. I'm not even going to read your great wall of text.

>Black monday
1987
>Tech bubble
1999
>Housing crash
2008
>Now entering 2017
.......?
GUIES U CANT PURRRRDICT MARKET CRASHES. Only a fucking retard like you can't see the obvious PATTERN. No one knows the exact day or minute. That's impossible, but if the past THREE HUNDRED YEARS are any kind of indicator. Another catastrophe will strike sometime before the next decade. George Soros: the legendary super Jew didn't short the S&P 500 for no reason. He has insider insider knowledge. I forgot though, market crashes can't be predicted.

>>1680197
obama said there was 5% unemployment in 2016 which is ridicules. he gives himself lots of compliments about healthcare and economics. he should really shut up and stop being cocky. because some of his decisions were questionable.
lots of the debt under his term could be saved, but obama wanted to put america under european model of health and economy which didn't fit the country at all

>>1680205
Which didn't fit CORPORATE America

File: national_debt_by_president.jpg (150KB, 560x441px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 560x441px

>>1680201
>I'm not even going to read your great wall of text.
Not going to? Or can't?

I'm going with the later. Thanks for playing, Sally.

>>1680205
>obama said there was 5% unemployment in 2016 which is ridicules
Actually its not "ridicules" and it's not Obama that reports labor statistics. Its done by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor.

>lots of the debt under his term could be saved, but obama wanted to put america under european model of health and economy which didn't fit the country at all
Someone apparently forgot that budgets are passed by Congress, not the president. And that the Congress has been Republican since the last election.

But before you start blaming Obama for the national debt, let's remember which party is responsible for increasing that debt and which party has made efforts to reduce it.

Anon, stop living your life based on #fakenews. Your brain is literally a barren wasteland of lies right now. You're a puppet of conservatives, and its time you woke the fuck up.

>>1680212
oh right you wanna tell me that middle east policies have nothing to do with president executive order? ok
as for obamacare. the reason the prices gone up so much is because the healthcare companies had 100% supply of customers and also 100% demand for insurance. that can fuck with the prices by alot.

>>1680212
>Not going to? Or can't?

>I'm going with the later. Thanks for playing, Sally.

10/10 counter argument.
>#Fake news
>wake up

It all makes sense now. You're from /pol/. I'm sorry. I didn't know you were actually challenged.

>>1680226
>oh right you wanna tell me that middle east policies have nothing to do with president executive order?
You wanna connect the dots a this one, crazypants? Or is this a pizzagate thing, in which case don't bother.

>as for obamacare
The ACA has its flaws, primarily because its foundations in private insurance were the only thing that could be passed by a Republican Congress. Progressives prefer single-payer, which you would know if you had a rudimentary political education. But Republicans wouldn't go for that because they wanted to funnel money to their friends in the insurance industry.

So you think Republicans are going to fix it? Why would they? They're happy with the status quo, which is why they've already said they won't repeal the ACA on day one -- if ever.

The ACA has its problems, but you don't even know what they are let alone who created them. No wonder you're so confused.

File: 1458609427728.gif (2MB, 500x281px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 500x281px

>>1679938
I agree.
Republitards, when will they learn?

>>1680205
I admit it isn't 5%, it's more like 20%, but if you compare the US recovery to the rest of the world's recovery, we are doing excellent.

Prepare your anus for the Republicans though, they will fuck this up big time, they always do.

File: leafbtfo_ultra4.jpg (590KB, 1088x1774px) Image search: [Google]

590KB, 1088x1774px

>>1680322
>they will fuck this up big time, they always do.

>>1680180
I wish more niggers listened to their AIDS smdh

File: x48.gif.pagespeed.ic.eT1_qr-k6G.png (7KB, 450x375px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 450x375px

>>1680639
Nice #fakenews faggot. The best GDP growth happens when the government (Congress & White House) is all Democratic. The worst is when the Republicans are all in charge.

Prepare your anus. Republicans will fuck this up big time, they always do.

>>1680105
Unemployment rates are low because people stopped looking for work, you fucking self righteous retard. This isn't some right-wing conspiracy theory, the data is right on the BLS site.

>>1680678
>Unemployment rates are low because people stopped looking for work
Stop spreading #fakenews. Unemployment is down because the economy is strong and companies are hiring. Just because the president is a black man, you don't have to warp reality, you redneck cuck.

>>1680683
he's right.

his thing about congress being in charge when democrats are making the economy better is just cherry picking, but he's right about unemployment.

>>1680683
Whoa hang on a second. I've cited BLS, bls.gov, do you know what that is? What does a government-run labor statistics bureau have to do with fake news?

>>1680686
>he's right.
"He" is two different posters, unless he's samefagging. And no, the post about unemployment is wrong. While the labor participation rate is declining, there are many reasons for that (aging population, higher college enrollment, etc.). This has been happening since the 1920's, and long predates any living president.

It's not the government's role to find jobs for people NOT looking for jobs. Holding that against Obama -- or any president, for that matter -- is the definition of insanity.

Alt-right fags have seized this narrative because most people (including you, apparently) are too stupid to understand the real factors influencing modern labor markets. Stop getting your news from Facebook or /pol/, you worthless cuck.

>>1679938
That's called inflation

>>1680697
>"He" is two different posters,
very well.

you should probably look at the graph though.

unless you think 10% of the labor force decided to age into retirement or suddenly enroll in college in the fall of 2008.

and then just stayed there.

>>1680697
K, first of all.. I have pointed out this statistic here before alt-right was even a thing. Years ago.

You are correct in that he may have been replying to a different poster. I'm not sure who he is referring to.

I never blamed Obama. I do not use Facebook. I barely watch the news.

I'm looking at the data. I have not looked at it very recently, but since I visited it last year(takes a little math to decipher), this was not a steady trend from the 1920s. It was a harsh drop off after our last recession. Again, not saying Obama had anything to do with it, I'm just stating a fact.

Where I object is where we're trying to correlate the lack of participation to this concept of "creating jobs". It's simply not true.

I gave you my source. Go look it up and see for yourself rather than wasting your time calling people names. I only care about facts, not your opinion.

>>1680109

This based anon speaks the truth. Bubbles traced to their root are due to fundamental human psychology:

> Fear
> Reservation
> Reservation fades
> Attempt risk
> Success
> More risk
> More success
> Repeat risk cycle until bubble of failure forms
> Failure bubble pops
> Failure everywhere
> Fear permeates
> Money draws inward

The only factor worth discussing is how bad the collapse will be. Some are obviously small and other obviously big.

With Trump as president I predict a bullish market for a year or two followed by a series of events that brings things down. Not as bad as 08 though.

>>1680212

Can you post the version of this image that is not for ants?

>>1680706
>unless you think 10% of the labor force decided to age into retirement or suddenly enroll in college
Jesus, you're gullible as fuck. The labor participation rate has decreased about 2.5% between 2009 and 2016. It's a trend worth noting, but it hardly negates 50 consecutive months of jobs gains produced by the sitting president.

File: yahoo-inc-marissa-mayer.jpg (24KB, 620x465px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 620x465px

http://www.shadowstats.com/alternate_data/unemployment-charts

Unemployment is still very high, but it's at least 10-15% better under Obama.

>>1680714
>but it hardly negates 50 consecutive months of jobs gains produced by the sitting president.
I didn't say it did.

I said the other anon is correct, you are wrong, and you should look at the chart.

and you made fun of me and tried to insult me and impute to me motives and politics I don't possess, and all along I just sort of ignored you because I knew you were wrong and don't really care what wrong people think of me when they're being wrong.

>>1680721
>you should look at the chart.
What chart, retard? No one in this thread has posted a chart showing labor participation rates. You're so gullible you're arguing based on data you THINK you saw.

File: check my tabs dipshit.jpg (36KB, 1082x211px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 1082x211px

>>1680723
>doesn't know how to google a government statistics website
>calls others retarded

>>1680727
You posted a screenshot of my post? And still no chart in sight. You may be the dumbest cuck on the whole site, and I'm including ALL the boards in that statement.

>>1680733
it's ok, I'm pretty sure anyone else that looks at that will see it.

Typical liberal too lazy to do any work. Here, let me help you. I just grabbed the data from BLS and made a chart for you. Here is a combination of the participation rate with the underlying unemployment rate from BLS, to show the ACTUAL unemployment rate. Tell me this is a trend since 1920: http://imgur.com/a/pfaf9

We're not even caught up to Bush era yet. So what the fuck are you even talking about?

>>1680742
In case you're too stupid to see what is happening here(I suspect you are), the drops in "unemployment" can't even keep up with the workplace participation dropouts, else it would be a downward trend or at least flat. This isn't fake news. This is a fact reported by the government.

>>1680742
>unsourced
>unlabelled
>imgur
#fakenews

Fuck off kid. Some of us are too smart to fall for neocon bullshit.

>>1680749
>Some of us are too smart to fall for neocon bullshit.
I'm a liberal and you're literally retarded.

Its latter, you dimwit.

>>1680749
BLS.GOV

How many fucking times do I need to say it? Do you even know what that department is?

I just made that chart myself based on data from BLS.GOV, A GOVERNMENT WEBSITE. Are you really that retarded?

>>1680751
Fucking kids man. Can throw literal facts at them from a department that "black man" Obama supports and I'm still somehow a racist. Unreal

>>1680254
>republican congress

ACA passed with democrats controlling both houses, you blithering idiot.

>>1680749
I'm actually more pissed that I wasted the past 20 minutes of my time aggregating this REAL data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, THE government website for labor facts, to help you out, and that's the kind of lazy response I get. You're a real piece of shit.

>>1680751
>I'm a liberal and you're literally retarded.
I don't care what political party you claim allegiance too. I judge you retarded based on your posts and lack of logic, not the label you choose to apply to yourself.

I think this is called concern trolling or something like that. I don't really know and I don;t care. You're stupid, and until you show otherwise, that's what you remain.

Stop being triggered and start acting like a human with a functioning brain.

>>1680754
Don't post an unattributed photoshopped image on imgur and claim it comes from a government website, you stupid cuck.

#fakenews

>>1680756
>ACA passed with democrats controlling both houses
Republicans filibustered approval until compromises were made to serve their insurance industry masters. The ACA also had survive repeal attempts when the Republicans were in control.

You have a brain. Use it.

>>1680755
I think our first clue should've been when he googled the site and then denied it.

he admits that participation is down 2.5% since '09 in his reading of the charts.

which means he knows exactly what you're talking about and is just fucking with us. Probably because his delicate feelings got hurt when someone noticed his factual error.

it doesn't matter, next week he'll be on here telling everyone how unemployment numbers aren't real and you have to look at participation. Probably citing charts on Bureau of Labor Statistics websites.

>>1680763
Are you fucking retarded? I MADE the image. Here, I'll post the rest of the spreadsheet with the actual numbers just to make you happy:

http://imgur.com/a/speia

Here's my data source for labor force: https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS14000000

Here's my data source for labor participation:
https://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LNS11300000

The spreadsheet and chart were created from both of these sources. This isn't a copy and paste. I have a feeling that it won't matter to your tiny brain anyway.

>>1680105
you must be a nigger to be this deluded.

>>1680775
No, not next week. He won't cite them until Trump is in office. THEN it will matter. Or whenever his hivemind cronies have him say. I'm a moderate myself but holy shit is this guy a deterrent. I got off of Facebook because I couldn't deal with fucktards like this, but it seems they're spreading.

10/10 post if troll

>>1680777
>I MADE the image
And into the garbage it goes.

Next time put a pepe in it and head straight to /r9k/. No one here has time for your bullshit.

>>1680775
>he admits that participation is down 2.5%
Admit? What's to admit. Facts are facts. The real issue is why, and how it affects the real unemployment rate.

All you faggots want to do is argue. I'm tired of dealing with you Trumptards. kys with meth, please.

>>1680763
Maybe you should pull Obama's dick out of your mouth and actually listen to what the other posters are saying.

Constantly being butthurt about those who disagree with you isn't impressing anyone, you just sound like an angry child.

>>1680793
>isn't impressing anyone
I don;t care about impressing anyone. What's annoying is that you're too stupid to even understand the arguments, and you're apparently willing to accept manufactured statistics as long as it supports your #fakenews worldview.

You faggots are what's wrong with the country. I will NEVER stop calling you cucks and making you feel small.

>>1680787
LOL
I also posted the actual data behind the image. You can easily browse to BLS, which I directly linked to and confirm that my entry is true to what the government is reporting. FIND ONE ERROR, just one! Anyway, facts are inconvenient to you, so let's shelve them. You're the type of lefty that let Trump win the office. I hope you're proud of being a retard. What I can't understand is how you even figured out how to get on the Internet?

>>1680787
>What's to admit. Facts are facts.
I read the chart as 3% down over the same period, but let's not quibble over half a percent.

you deny anyone has cited a chart and then quote numbers from it.

but let's ignore that retardation for a moment.

Labor participation counts all adults of age to work. Workforce counts a fraction of labor participation. Roughly 1/3. So if labor participation drops 2.5% you've actually lost 7%-ish of the labor force. If it drops 3% you've lost closer to 10% of American workers.

I voted for Clinton. You're still retarded.

>>1680798
>I don;t care about impressing anyone
Lol.
>18 posts by this ID

>>1680803
I'm glad you're here. I did not vote for Clinton myself, mostly because of my experience with the types of crazies we're running into here. Clearly, your brain works. You're a breath of fresh air. Thank you

>>1680810
likewise.

a pleasure reading what you have to write.

>>1680803
>you deny anyone has cited a chart and then quote numbers from it.
Still looking for that chart. You'd think it'd be easier to find on an IMAGE BOARD, but oddly enough four of your faggots still can post a picture that supports whatever the hell you think is true.

>>1680803
>If it drops 3% you've lost closer to 10% of American workers
Nu math. Funny how you magically found a stat (uncited, unsourced, undocumented) that exactly fits the post you made an hour ago.

>>1680809
>18 posts by this ID
You dummies keep giving me more material. The quality of your posts is getting worse, but its still fun to mock you.

>>1680823
>Funny how you magically found a stat (uncited, unsourced, undocumented) that exactly fits the post you made an hour ago.

what's 2.5% of 33%?

it's no accident my first post matches one an hour later. We have this argument once a week. Probably with the same damn fool each time.

>>1680826
Do you even know what you're arguing for? Can you concisely state your thesis and support your argument? At this point you're just trolling for attention and I'm not going to bother anymore.

Take a position, make an argument, cite a source. Then we can talk. Until then, fuck off cuck.

>>1679967
Interest rates have been low long enough.

>>1680831
I am arguing that your statement:
>Unemployment is down because the economy is strong and companies are hiring.
is factually incorrect.

the citation has been given repeatedly and you know it because you've quoted the cited material.

File: madeforasshole.png (157KB, 1048x730px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 1048x730px

>>1680823
What part of "I created that image" and uploaded it don't you understand? Do you want me to post it here? Will that make you happy?

Here, I scrolled down a little bit to make a unique image, and I'm posting it here.

Look at the numbers on the left. Compare them to the government website. Find an error. You won't. Your silly arguments are weak. This isn't fake news. This is original research happening right now. You just don't like it.

>>1680831
>cuck
>cuck
>cuck
You use this word an awful lot.
Are you trying to sell others on you and your wife's lifestyle?

You have to remember BLS changed how they calculate unemployment.

The shadowstat link is more accurate than BLS data, which is more accurate than republitard poster.

>>1680851
Cite and I will be happy to adjust my numbers.

>>1679938
Yeah thanks for causing the Syrian war and the European migrant crisis

File: BN-DY742_rise08_G_20140804141651.jpg (46KB, 553x369px) Image search: [Google]

46KB, 553x369px

>>1680839
>I am arguing that your statement:
>>Unemployment is down because the economy is strong and companies are hiring.
>is factually incorrect.
You only support is that the labor participation rate has fallen, and by a much smaller percentage than any of you knew. And I had to go look that up because none of you was capable of posting an image or making an argument.

Meanwhile, let's look at the data support my position that economy is strong and companies are hiring:

* GDP is up
* earnings are up
* stock market values are up
* total payrolls are up
* total non-farm payrolls are up
* wage growth is up

So even conceding the trend in the participation rate, there remains overwhelming evidence that (a) payrolls have increased, and (b) its because of the strength of the economy.

Therefore my statement -- "Unemployment is down because the economy is strong and companies are hiring." is undeniably true based on objective evidence and fact.

>Thanks for an interesting an engaging debate, cuck.

>>1680839
I think they need to admit that BLS is bogus to move any further. That'd be quite a bind since the Obama administration continually cites only one of their metrics.

>>1680875
>there remains overwhelming evidence that (a) payrolls have increased
that doesn't indicate more people are working.

if payrolls have increased and participation is way down, what does that mean?

either fewer people are getting paid more or population growth has outstripped hiring. Or both.

>>1680875
Let's see that chart(which you obviously copied and pasted instead from doing original research) before 2009. I'm really curious.

I cited data sources for my chart. Government reported tables with links to the actual data. You just posted an image. And you have the audacity to call me out on bullshit? You are truly unreal.

CITE

>>1680876
liberals have their pet lies and talking points too.

an unfortunate blindness. Probably a big reason they don't have any power at all after January. The pendulum swings.

>>1680881
>that doesn't indicate more people are working.
Actually it does exactly that. Total payrolls is literally the number of people that are working. An increase in the total payrolls number LITERALLY means more people are working.

>if payrolls have increased and participation is way down, what does that mean?
It means that a larger percentage of a certain segment of population is not seeking full-time employment. There are many reasons for this. Some are economic, some are societal, some are political.

Now you apparently think this is some harbinger of doom and gloom. Which not only flies in face of history (the participation rate is currently materially higher than in past decades) but also flies in the face of all the evidence proving that the economy is strong and that more jobs are being created every day.

Now if your going to move the goalposts and pretend the participation rate is some holy grail, you can go fuck yourself. What matters is (a) Are more people working? and (b) Are people looking for jobs finding them? The answer to both is yes, uncontrovertibly.

Let's see where you move the goal posts now.

>>1680886
This guy...
Posts an unoriginal image he found somewhere... calls it fact.

I post an originally created image based on BLS tables. fakenews!

Help me come to the left. Tell me this guy is an outlier, cause I'm having trouble seeing it. Maybe the left doesn't understand how much these people are deterrents. I know there is a difference between liberal causes and these clowns, but lately it's becoming harder to draw the line.May be just the media.

>>1680890
You've spent the last twelve posts arguing that the participation rate is down, a fact that I stated two hours ago. If you're the face of the right, you can see why we hate you so much. Stupid is stupid, even if we share the same citizenship.

>>1680888
Move on, child. You've proven your intellect and it doesn't pass muster. There is nothing you can say now to redeem that.

My only advice: finish school, get a job and move out, come back in 10 years when reality sinks in. You'll realize your opinions are actually as petty as they've been treated here. Have a good life.

>>1680888
>Some are economic, some are societal, some are political.
kek

so you're saying we had a perfect storm of economic, societal, and political motives for a huge fraction of people stopping looking for work in 2008 and not even trying since then?
mkay.
>you apparently think this is some harbinger of doom and gloom
Nice of you to say "apparently" since I don't think that at all.
>if your going to move the goalposts and pretend the participation rate is some holy grail, you can go fuck yourself
that's not moving the goalposts.
that is the fact you ignored to begin with and continue to pretend doesn't matter. It's not some holy grail, it's actually a pretty unfortunate thing for people that need work and will never find it.

but you pretending it doesn't exist or doesn't matter is what I started arguing and what I will continue to argue.

>>1680895
>not a single substantive statement, fact or argument
Nice shitpost, cuck.

>>1680888
>more jobs are being created every day.
more people too.

>>1680893
K. Clearly nobody here cares about what you have to say, even people from the left and ardent Clinton supporters are attacking you. You're done, and officially classified as retarded. You can call me all you want, but that won't change anything. I know you won't give it up, so we'll just leave it at that. Good luck

>>1680897
Haha yes. In 2008, during the great repression, so many Americans, coincidentally, realized that they were doing just fine and did not need to work any longer. The biggest coincidence in the history of Earth, apparently! You can't make this stuff up.

>>1680897
>a huge fraction
Stop with the histrionics and drama. A 2.5% change in the participation rate over 8 years is neither unusual nor notable. If you're incapable of having a rationale discussion of the facts, we're done here, cuck.

>people that need work and will never find it
Great point. One problem: the participation rate bears zero relationship to the concern you've raised. If you don't even understand the import of the stats, how are you going to make it in the adult world?

By the way, the actual statistic that measures the percentage of people looking for jobs and whether they can find them is called the "unemployment rate" and its at historical lows.

/mic drop

>>1680907
>A 2.5% change in the participation rate over 8 years is neither unusual nor notable.
It wouldn't be if it went away.
>If you're incapable of having a rationale discussion of the facts, we're done here, cuck.
your insults would have more impact if you spelled them correctly.
>the actual statistic that measures the percentage of people looking for jobs and whether they can find them is called the "unemployment rate"
yes, ~10% of American workers flat out giving up on ever finding work and leaving the workforce isn't important at all.

>>1680907
<sticks fingers in ears>
NANANANANANANANANA I'M NOT LISTENING!

>>1680910
>It wouldn't be if it went away.
"Went away"? Wtf are you taking about? The labor participation rate will never "go away." There will always be some member of society not seeking full time employment. Expecting it to go to 100% is not just unreasonable, it's fucking retarded and naive. I've just realize I'm talking to a 14 year old.

>~10% of American workers
2.5%. Facts are important. And yes, when times are tough, many adults either (a) stay in college for longer, (b) turn to full-time education for retraining and improvement, and (c) retire due to systemic changes at their employment. None of those are inherently problematic, and some of them are highly desirable.

No matter how often you try to pretend a decline in the participation rate is the decline of western civilization, I'm going to make you look foolish because its not. But don't let that stop you. You apparently have no shame nor a functional education.

>>1680911
Interesting post, except that I've actually been responding to every attempt at an argument. Unlike you cucks.

/mic drop

>>1680910
I wish I had numbers on how many of those 10% "fell out" because their benefits wore off. Unfortunately, not that I know, BLS doesn't report such a thing. I would suspect it's a big chunk of it. The guy stated rightfully that there is a trend in downward participation since the 1920s, but the recent data is sharp and stark. This isn't an old trend. Also, KEK! haha

>>1680917
>I wish I had numbers on how many of those 10% "fell out" because their benefits wore off.
Don't let this stop you. You faggot make up facts every hour of every day. Why should this be different?

>>1680916
>No matter how often you try to pretend a decline in the participation rate is the decline of western civilization, I'm going to make you look foolish because its not.
I don't think it has anything to do with the decline of western civilization. The decline of one nation perhaps.

the real irony here is we liberals used the decline in labor participation originally to point out how badly President Boosh wrecked the economy.

you don't remember this because you were sucking tit at the time. Conservatives used a simple frame-shift to pass the blame on to Obama. Just like they will when Obama's efforts pay off during Trump's presidency and Trump gets the credit for Obama's work. Naïve? You're the child here.

>>1680919
>The decline of one nation perhaps.
Fucking drama queen. The economy is smoking, GDP is soaring, profits are up, and millions of new payrolls are created every month ... but faggots like you only see shit.

Your life must be horrible for you to project so badly.

>>1680919
>we liberals
Also, stop with the false flag bullshit, trumpster. No one's buying it.

>>1680922
When you can finally retire from your dishwashing job, maybe you'll get a clue. You are the cancer that is invading the liberal parties. Again, no wonder Trump won. Nobody agrees with you.

>>1680875
do u like hotdogs or biryani

>>1680922
>Your life must be horrible for you to project so badly.
I own a business. My personal wealth has increased exponentially since 2008. I see poor people getting poorer and rich people getting richer. This isn't sustainable.

That's why I support democrats even when they don't support my pocketbook. They want to bring balance back to the force and I think it could probably use a bit of adjusting.

>>1680925
i agree with him

u think america's week? go look at how big fucking google is. old white retardss just mad because retards in the rust belt are less productive than some middle class mexican dude

>>1680916
>/mic drop
You can't make this shit up.

>>1680924
>stop with the false flag bullshit, trumpster
that's exactly what I think of you.
your arguments are alt-right, not democrat.

>>1680925
>your dishwashing job
Um, those are the people that voted for Drumpf. I'm an intellectual elite ... you know, the people that make you mad because we remind you how stupid you are.

>Nobody agrees with you.
Other than the majority of the voting populace. But don't let those pesky facts get in your way, cuck.

>>1680927
An intelligent post. I wish it were true, but I'm still convinced you're a child. You don't have the logical skills of a business owner.

>>1680930
>your arguments are alt-right
I'm defending Obama's jobs record and you call me "alt-right." You really are a dipshit.

>>1680928
>go look at how big fucking google is
iirc that's a publically traded company that anyone can own, from any nation.

>>1680934
>You don't have the logical skills of a business owner.
dunning kruger
>I'm defending Obama's jobs record and you call me "alt-right." You really are a dipshit.
you're defending Bush's destruction of our economy. The fact that Obama wasn't able to fix it is neither here nor there.

>>1680938
>dunning kruger
That doesn't mean what you think it means. You should have quoted my statement about being an intellectual elite if you wanted to argue that I have dunning kruger syndrome. You're too dumb to even make a decent insult.

>The fact that Obama wasn't able to fix it is neither here nor there.
You seem to have missed the ENTIRE point of the thread (shocking). Here, let me point you to the OP: >>1679938

>>1680940
>You should have quoted my statement about being an intellectual elite
kek
I would love to read that one but I'm not skimming all your bullshit to find it.

which post was that?

>You seem to have missed the ENTIRE point of the thread
denying the economic collapse of 2008 and its consequences doesn't magically make Obama look like a better president.

>>1680940
Damn this nigga saltier than the Dead Sea

File: 1449265687918.jpg (45KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 625x626px

>>1679938
ITT OP triggers /biz/ with 'murica

>>1680934
>>I"m an intellectual elite
You've shown your cards, and it's a losing hand. I've seen enough. Thank you for the entertainment.

>>1680938
Businessman to businessman, even worth our time? It's fun, but we have actual work to do. Let this guy bitch and moan about whatever it is that ails him. It's not breaking through for me. He's just an uneducated "educated" prick.

>>1680934
There is nothing you can say now that won't make you less of a fool than you've already shown yourself to be. Have a good night, sir.

>>1680944
Don't even engage him. It's not worth it. He's a moron who knows nothing.

>>1680153
>>1680711
Reading about the deep roots of Fibonacci numbers and our laws of our universe and how they seem to apply on small and grand scales... Havent you noticed how atoms seem to behave similar to planets rotating around the sun? Or how traffic systems layout similar to arteries, veins, and capillaries? The market follows very basic and simple laws of our universe built upon more complex factors but at the root its all very similar. You have to be crazy to think that there will never be another market crash again.

People celebrated in the streets after world war 1 caliming that after such a horrendous event humanity had learned its lesson. There would never be another... But we as humans seem to repeat history over and over because its just our genetics to do so. Until we change our very selves the market will always rise and fall like the tides of the ocean.

>>1680949
>we have actual work to do.
nah, I'm just waiting for my sleeping pills to kick in. Nothing anyone says here matters, it will all be gone in a couple days.

>>1680955
Then more power to you, man! Have fun with that basketcase hah

>>1680949
>You've shown your cards
Yeah, I have. I've posted facts and cited them. It's a crazy new tactic called "making a logical argument." It causes you trumpsters to run back to your safespace echo-chambers. It's super effective. Buh-bye.

>>1680942
It's pretty clear that reading isn't your strong suit, cuck. Next time you'll know not to pick an argument when you have no fucking clue about the facts.

In your defence, you were the least insane poster of all the retards. But you were among the least well informed. That's a terrible place to be.

>>1680957
>Next time you'll know not to pick an argument when you have no fucking clue about the facts.
you ignore the facts to declare victory.

>you were the least insane poster of all the retards
so generous of you.
is this how you make friends?
how's that working out for you?

>>1680957
>echo-chambers
You do realize how hilarious it is to hear you talk about echo chambers, right?
Ah, never mind. The other guys were right, you're not worth the time.
Say hi to your poster of Barack & Michelle for us.

>>1680957
Actually, I have posted facts and cited them. You haven't cited a single thing. You called me out on posted pictures which I've created myself based on public government data. You disregard it as herr derr #fakenews. Then you post a picture which you obviously weren't even smart enough to make yourself, and post it as fact. Hypocrite much? Each time I reply to you, I ask myself, can someone be this stupid? It is mystifying to me. You haven't cited shit. I've challenged you to prove me wrong and you've failed at every post.

You haven't said a single original thought. I can't believe you're even allowed to vote.

>>1680962
>you ignore the facts to declare victory
What facts, exactly?

>is this how you make friends?
You seem to have forgotten where you are, cuck. The url should be a tip.

>>1680967
Make a substantive on-topic post or gtfo, cuck.

>>1680970
Every chart I've posted is sourced and cited. That's how evidence works. You made up a meme gif and pretended it was fact. That's called #fakenews.

This is not subject to argument, cuck. This is how the world works, and always will. This is also why you'll always be poor and why you'll always blame people like me for your shitty life.

>>1680976
>What facts, exactly?
the fact that unemployment dropped because labor force participation dropped, and if we adjust unemployment to reflect all the workers that have given up on finding a job it would rise dramatically.
>You seem to have forgotten where you are, cuck
no, I mean in real life.
do you use this pattern of abuse & lying followed by grudging favors to induce Stockholm syndrome in the people around you and try to get weak, damaged persons to admire you?

if so, how's that working out for you?

It was actually just a rhetorical question though. I'm aware you don't have any friends, I'm just curious if you know why not.

>>1680976
You can think what you want. Some people are born with something called a "brain". I did not create anything that the government did not report. There's no fudging of numbers, and I've included it.

The problem you're facing is that everyone can see what we've both posted. There is no daylight between my posts and what the government is reporting. So as much as you'd like to call it a "made up meme gif"(it's not even a gif you fucking moron), the data is there. Anybody can see the same data irrespective of my chart. There is no fakeness involved. If it's fake, then you must also declare the BLS statistics as fake. If you think I fudged the numbers, then anybody here can get the same data. There is nothing opaque here, only your ability to understand anything beyond basic math. For an "intellectual" like yourself, I would assume you'd be able to grasp at least that. Apparently not.

Enough of your strawmen. Give me something relevant to argue against. So far you have nothing.

>>1680976
>The url should be a tip.
but more to the point,
if your insults don't bother me,
why the fuck would you think your half-compliments would flatter me?

are you retarded?

>>1680988
is this guy genuinely retarded or just wasting our time as a troll? i'm going to bed

>>1680983
>he fact that unemployment dropped because labor force participation dropped
I already said that was true, in part. In fact, I was the FIRST person in the thread to even bring up the participation rate. So how exactly am I "ignoring facts" when I was the one who brought it up in the first place?

I take back what I said before. You are nothing more than a fucking retard. You're still uneducated and ill-informed, but you're also just plain retarded. I'm done with you. I don't have debates with children.

>>1680987
Post a chart from an objective source. That's how evidence works. Stop crying about it and just do it, you stupid faggot. I'm tired of your incessant whining.

>>1680988
Jesus, are your triggered or what? I'd feel bad if you weren't just a worthless sack of shit.

>>1680989
I'm wasting my time, he doesn't have that luxury.

have a good night, anon.

>>1680989
>>1680991
Stop pretending you aren't sharing a bed. You aren't fooling anyone.

>>1680990
I took data from an objective source, BLS.gov, and told Excel to make a chart of it.

I don't understand your problem. Am I not allowed to take data from a public government entity and create a chart based directly on the data, unaltered by my own input? Is that not legitimate enough for you? You're stupidity confounds me

>>1680994
>I took data from an objective source, BLS.gov, and told Excel to make a chart of it.
So you claim. Lot's of people use public data and post analyses of it. I trust them more than I trust you. You have an agenda, as retarded as it is. Not to mention, your chart doesn't prove anything or disprove anything I've said.

Stop fucking whining about your shitty chart. You already lost the argument when you admitted you can't refute my position. We're not giving you a sticker just because you made a chart, child. Go fuck yourself with your shitty meme chart, cuck.

>>1680990
>So how exactly am I "ignoring facts" when I was the one who brought it up in the first place?
feel free to link the post, like I said I didn't read any of your bullshit prior to the comment I replied to.

the comment in which you denied the fact that participation decline is the main reason for unemployment decline.

>I'd feel bad if you weren't just a worthless sack of shit.
I'm making fun of you. I'm a know-it-all asshole that treats people like shit and then tosses them a bone every now and then to keep them hanging on my every word like a whipped puppy.

Just like you. But it's funny to me when someone tries antisocial manipulation on another antisocial type. Like that'll work.

I care what you think of me, I really do
xoxoxo

>>1680998
I posted my data sources directly from the BLS website. They are just numbers, I reported raw numbers. There's no room for interpretation. Only you are imposing that. You just don't like what you hear.

>>1680999
>participation decline is the main reason for unemployment decline
I'm waiting for the evidence that this is true. You seem to think this is established fact, but as I've stated a dozen times, there's no evidence to support it.

You keep stating it, and I keep telling you that your position is baseless. But you're just too dumb to grasp it.

As for the rest of you post, it's pretty clear that you're desperate for my validation, considering how you keep debating me despite the fact that I've reaming you for hours. If someone called me a cuck I'd ignore them and move on. You keep coming back for more, because you're a pathetic beta.

>>1681001
>There's no room for interpretation.
said no one with a college education, ever. Just shut up dummy. You're done.

>>1680998
For the record, I don't even know what a "meme chart" is. Maybe you should come back here after you finish high school, move out of your parents home, and the world starts to make a little more sense. Your judgement sounds very clouded right now.

>>1681005
Stop it. You're starting to hurt my feelings. I don't think I can take it. Those people with a liberal arts degree. They're so strong. I wish I could be like them.

>>1681005
>there's no evidence to support it.
except for the huge drop in labor force participation that hasn't come back up despite all of Obama's best efforts.
> you keep debating me despite the fact that I've reaming you for hours.
I'm not debating and you're not winning.

you're denying facts and I'm waiting for my sleeping pills to take effect.

>>1681009
You're just so stupid, this is painful. I'm making one last post and then my charitable effort are done:

Drop in participation rate, true. But not always bad. Many reasons. Some bad, some good. Question hard. Too hard for you.

Sleep now, cuck.

>>1681013
>Many reasons. Some bad, some good
Old people are working longer because they can't afford to retire or just don't want to.

Young people are staying in school or their parent's basements far longer because there's no jobs waiting for them when they strike out on their own.

Tons of dual-income families bit the bullet and became single-income families after the great right-sizings of '08 and '09.

Less full time work is available, entry level positions have switched to a constantly rotating supply of part time workers fighting each other for not enough hours.

the dynamic is well understood and born out by facts. The cause could be argued, as could the blame. But what's happened is clear to anyone older than 20.

>>1681013
Unprecedented participation rate drop, fact. Not following a long trend(since 1920s, as you put it), fact.

There were no questions, just a moron like you who can't seem to figure out how life works, now a fact.

When you hold a job(I know you've never had one) for more than a month, I'd love to hear the story.

THANK YOU for your glorifying presence. You'll be missed.

>>1681013
>Sleep now, cuck
If only it were that easy.

have a good night, you stupid stubborn sack of shit. I enjoyed your hysterical denial of reality and overt cognitive dissonance.

>>1681021
I have to reiterate, so glad to hear someone on the left with a brain. These people are all too common in my state

>>1681021
I heard about the "fake news" phenomena, but I never knew it extended to inconvenient data points from a government labor website. That one just blows my mind. POOF! Tonight gave me a new perspective.

>>1681029
heheh

for me it was environmental 'science' like the great pacific garbage patch, the supposed incoming extinction of honeybees, and the 'sustainability' of organic farming.

The left goes too far in its excesses. Horseshoe Theory in full effect. The far left is more similar to the far right than it is to the middle.

>>1681018
about those full time jobs.

are those mostly published by pop up companies or they simply rotate employees to avoid seniority?

>>1681030
Moderates ftw. I hope these extremes will die down in time. This is not sustainable.

>>1681034
>they simply rotate employees to avoid seniority?
from what I've seen it's this.
I was born at a time when you could expect to work for one company your whole life and survive on what they paid you. Then retire on a pension you earned working 45 plus years there.

now I don't think that happens much at all.
>>1681035
I agree but there's no money to be made on peace and equality. The powers are fanning the flames because that's what works. So long as they can keep a leash on it.

>>1680935
guess what? their employees are mostly paid in USD. all their infrastructure is also in the states

>>1680671
This is nothing more than chance.

>>1680052
You sound like a shill. Why are you shilling /biz/?

>>1680105
Why are you shilling /biz/ with your obviously retarded political philosophy?
Commies and lefties need to get out already, take this shit to /pol/

>>1680201
You are one stupid fuck

>>1681115
>This is nothing more than chance.
I suppose its possible. We'd probably need a larger data set to be certain.

But still, the fact remains that Democratic governments produce GDP growth FIVE TIMES higher than Republican governments. That's a statistically significant fact. Just because its inconvenient to your stunted political views doesn't make it any less of a fact.

I'm not against asking "why" questions. It's important to understand why things are the way they are. But know this: the next time you lie and tell someone that Republicans are better for the economy than Democrats, you are spreading #fakenews. Its just that simple.

>>1681122
>Why are you shilling /biz/
Why is it "shilling" to post facts? Everything I said is 100% true:

* Obama presided over the strongest labor market in decades
* Obama passed stimulus and industry support packages that turned around the economy
* Obama passed comprehensive reform legislation for the banking industry

I know its painful for you uneducated white cucks to give any credit to a black president, but these are actual facts. Things that happened. It's not shilling or CTR tactics. It's reality.

The reason you get so triggered by it is because some (tiny, tiny) portion of your brain knows I'm right. But your head is so filled with #fakenews and propaganda that you actively deny reality. That conflict causes cognitive dissonance, and you lash out in anger and disgust.

Personally, I don't care what you believe. You're a small person of no importance in the world. Your intellect is so small that you violently fight to protect your bubble of ignorance and hate. Enjoy. Call anyone you disagree with a "shill." Deny reality and truth. Live in your echo-chambers. Die poor and alone. You will not be remembered or missed.

>>1679938

Thank you based Obama

File: united-states-interest-rate.png (23KB, 730x340px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 730x340px

>>1679978
>Two rate hikes

>>1681541
Don't even get this guy started again. He's a mental retard who is incapable of original thought.

File: 1249856.jpg (999KB, 1767x2675px) Image search: [Google]

999KB, 1767x2675px

>>1679938
>Being a communist/socialist.

Time to wake up kid, Liberty is a calling.

>>1680671

It's because the Dems give the economy the heroin it needs to stumble along.

But, sooner or later, you're fucked.

>>1679938
>Obama will get credit for the post-crash recovery
>Trump will get blame for the post-recovery crash
Like pottery.

>>1681580
Once you figure out the rules of the game shouldnt you strive to keep others dumb and complacent? I make so much money from the cattle. Give them UBI and inflate away any chance they may have.

>>1681625
No need to strive for it, they do it well enough on their own.

As a black man, I really thought voting in the first black president would be a sea change for our people... instead, black culture and lives are much, much worse off:

In the last 8 years, blacks have:
1) lower high school and graduation rates relative to whites and lower than 2008
2) lower real adjusted income compared to whites and every other race
3) lower employment rates. The 2008 recovery favored every other race, but has left blacks behind
4) lower labor participation rates: many young blacks are just giving up
5) 200% increase Black on Black murders & violent crimes. Why? because police have stopped patrolling black neighborhoods due to BLM activists.

Honestly, the last 8 years have been great for whites, Asians, and Indians.

The US black population has been further disenfranchised and left further behind.... under a black president.

I don't know if I'm angry or sad.

>>1681534
* Obama presided over the strongest labor market in decades
> this is just 100% factually untrue
* Obama passed stimulus and industry support packages that turned around the economy
> When Obama became president, the debt was at 12 trillion. Now, it's at 22 trillion. Obama spend 200 years worth of debt just to prop up the current economy. That's not a win. That's money misspent and lost.
* Obama passed comprehensive reform legislation for the banking industry
Patently false. With super pacs, the banking industry is enjoying unprecedented control and influence over the white house.

Obama is 100% a wall street yes man. Thinking that Obama actually fought wall street is just pure ignorance.

>>1681655
>As a black man

stopped reading there

>>1680678
>Unemployment rates are low because people stopped looking for work, you fucking self righteous retard. This isn't some right-wing conspiracy theory, the data is right on the BLS site.

And you can see it in our neighborhoods.

I can tell you for sure there are alot more young kids hanging out not doing anything all day around Richmond.

yeah, its anecodtal, but it's what we see in real life and what we read in the news.

>>1680683

You might want to check labor participation rates white faggot.

Stop trying to tell us how our fucking neighborhoods are all flowers and ponies.

I have to live in this world. Fuck you and your delusional liberal partisan politics.

Remember the market always comes back in spite of the government.

>>1681655
>have been great for whites
No. It has been steadily declining for whites since the end of the 1950s. Not implying it's been good for blacks or not, but Africans are biologically a less intelligent subspecies in terms of future planning so I can't help you there.

>>1681655

Don't forget Black Lives Matter & Kaeperdick, and Obama not telling them to shut the fuck up.

If I were a police officer I would hate Obama so much.

>>1680109

I'm in Exxon Mobil, Clorox, Johnson & Johnson, and some other natural gas shit.

How will I survive 2008 Recession: Part Deux?

>>1681655
> as a black man
masturbating to BLACKED isn't enough so now you're role playing?
kill yourself /pol/cuck

>>1680201
if you are so sure about the market crashing, why don't you try and profit from it?
we will soon see who was right.

>>1679938
>dow jones when obama leaves office
>20k
top kek, if it wasn't for Trump DOW would be like 18000 at best.

Trump in one month has done more for the stock market than obaba has in 2 years

>>1681644
>>1681625
This is why we will be extinct as a species before long. We will consume ourselves. It truly is shameful.

>>1680052
Did they also say it in 2008?

>>1681793

All those stocks will be fine, they make life essentials.

>>1681917

An end to humanity would be a return to normal for planet Earth.

>>1681703
Well yeah, I read that 98% of the police officers in the country supported Trump.

>>1681939

Yeah staples and shit. Thanks.

Should I have metals? Advisor said no, but if I'd had some last time I'd have made a fucking killing. I do have some BTC too, bought when it was at $400-something.

>>1681990
>if I'd had some last time I'd have made a fucking killing
yea dude and if you knew the lottery numbers for next week you'd be aswell.

don't buy gold/silver until there is a bottom/better news

I am going to miss Obama. He is an articulate, intelligent person unlike the idiot we'll be stuck with for the next 4-8 years.

>>1681942
Yes, that however is not justification for one human to live off the back of another.

For that there is no justification.

>>1682038
>For that there is no justification.
holy shit are you on the wrong board

>>1681541
>>Two rate hikes
Fact. (1) December 2015, and (2) December 2016.

I know you cucks are uneducated, but please tell me that counting to two is within your skillset.

>>1681598
>It's because the Dems give the economy the heroin it needs to stumble along.
>But, sooner or later, you're fucked.
A plausible argument if there was any evidence that Democratic spending has a delayed adverse impact on the economy. So far, in decades of experience, it hasn't happened -- principally because the dollar remains strong.

Government is about priorities. Democrats believe that growing the economy, producing jobs, and increasing wealth across the board are more important than some unproven bugaboo evil. You're welcome to continue arguing the opposite, but I've yet to see any evidence that you or the Republicans have a leg to stand on.

>>1681655
>As a black man
Shut up. The color of your skin has no effect on the function of your brain. Make an argument if you have one to make, but keep your fucking privilege cards in your pocket.

>>1681660
#fakenews

>>1681669
>You might want to check labor participation rates
You might want to read the thread before posting stupid comments. We've discussed participation rates at length. We've also discussed payrolls and non-farm payrolls. No matter what bullshit spin you try to put on it, the fact remains that Obama has created new payroll jobs month and month for FIFTY consecutive months.

>>1681927
>Did they also say it in 2008?
Yes, the perma-bears never stop crying wolf. Broken clocks, etc.

>>1681541
>9-year intervals
I want to punch you

>>1682391
>>1682399
>>1682406
>>1682412
Hey Cucky McCucklestein, glad to see you back.
How are Barack and Michelle?
Still godlike and awe inspiring?

>>1682406

Keep talking kid. You're going to get your face punched in one day. It won't be by me.... But you'll think of me.

>>1681030
> 'sustainability' of organic farming

Hm? I don't mean to start another retarded flamewar, but there are legitimate ways for sustainable organic farming. Of course it is not possible with around 60% of organic classifications, but definitely in the correct environment.

File: Funny-Internet-Tough-Guy-Image.jpg (32KB, 300x340px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 300x340px

>>1682443
>You're going to get your face punched in one day.
Tell me more about your views on the economy and politics, kid. It's funny watching the monkeys try to act human.

>>1682406
This is clearly bait.

>>1682478
>keep your fucking privilege cards in your pocket
Maybe it's Josh Earnest.

>>1681877
I don't see this as a good thing. It means more companies are becoming over valued. If it continues we will see a correction, which could trigger another recession.

File: 12489588.gif (253KB, 350x233px) Image search: [Google]

253KB, 350x233px

>>1682041
>holy shit are you on the wrong board
And you can't comprehend Liberty for all.

I'm not against you making HONEST money, but don't fool yourself into thinking the current system is honest. It's fraud. If you go along with it, you are part of the problem.

>>1679938
22k is pajeet money

File: 157.gif (101KB, 300x100px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 300x100px

>>1679938
>thanking King nigger for the normal long term expansion-contraction cycles of the market.
He was just lucky with his timing.

>>1682016
You don't have to sound like a condescending college professor to be a leader.

>>1683970
Truly low class

>>1683982
It's low class to be impressed by smooth talk from a forked tongue.

File: trump-pinocchio.jpg (21KB, 600x400px) Image search: [Google]

21KB, 600x400px

>>1684022
>It's low class to be impressed by smooth talk from a forked tongue.
Correct.

>>1684022
Very true.
Or by incessant babbling hero worship.
But that's where we are ITT.

>>1683096
>>1682038
>trumptards everybody
i bet you buy lotto tickets

>>1684528
>Thinks anon who is against the current economic system would be ignorant enough to believe in gambling, let alone state run gambling.

Bait more you silly Marxist, you will not win.

So far, it's be only ad hominem's, because what is stated in my original post simply cannot be refuted.

>>1684528
joke is on you, lotto tickets are not available in NV!

File: trudeau cowboy.jpg (53KB, 530x720px) Image search: [Google]

53KB, 530x720px

>tfw my portfolio is up ~137% this year, even though most of the money was invested in the summer.

Thank you, based weed man.