The employment numbers are broadly accurate, but the framing is misleading: Biden did not preside over a net loss of native-born jobs; most recovery from the pandemic occurred during his term.

Trump's early second-term gains for native-born workers and blue-collar wage growth are significant, but context and measurement periods matter.

Claims about government handouts and economic productivity are opinion, not supported by the cited employment data.

Thirdly, if everything that was good under Biden was Biden's fault and everything bad under Biden was Trump's fault as all Dems like to say, then everything good under Trump is Trump's fault. Thank you Trump!
#33 | Posted by humtake

Spoken like a true cultist! Nice self-own, cultist!

I hear tell everyone is starving other there because the U.S. is not throwing tax payer money around.
#20 | Posted by boaz

Are you -- ckin' drunk?

To the point, Trump let tons of food waste away in storage that was meant to feed starving people. Not a peep from you dip s h i ts screaming "waste, fraud, and abuse!" By the way, clearly ZERO fraud identified by DOGE, right? Where are the charges, BOAZ!?

This tracks even with Rasmussen Approval Index:

Epstein Prison Video Was Allegedly Modified' Before Being Made Public

The footage from outside of Jeffrey Epstein's prison cell around the time of his death in August 2019 was modified before it was released by the Department of Justice earlier this week, according to an analysis by WIRED and independent video forensics experts.

Republican Senator Calls For Hearings Over Hegseth Reportedly Going Behind Trump's Back On Weapons Order

Sen. Todd Young (R-IN) called on Friday for Senate hearings into reports that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth did not inform President Donald Trump of a pause in sending weapons to Ukraine last week, something Trump has since reversed.

Young told The Hill's Alexander Bolton, "We need to do our oversight here, ask our questions of this administration just as we have previous administrations. We need to hold hearings and ask questions and learn what's going on."

Bolton spoke to several Republican senators and their top aides who sounded the alarm on the issue. "To hear there may have been other pauses or this pause went on longer than any of us know, to me that's alarming," said a Republican senator who spoke to Bolton, requesting anonymity.

#62 | Posted by redlightrobot

BLS employment and unemployment numbers are not limited to people who qualify for unemployment benefits.

The main numbers are based on large, representative surveys of the U.S. population and businesses, not on state unemployment insurance data.

The household survey, which provides the official unemployment rate, is conducted by the Census Bureau for the BLS and includes people regardless of their benefit status.

If someone claims the U.S. is averaging 333,000 jobs per month for native-born workers, that is not supported by recent BLS data. The native-born employment numbers have fluctuated and, in some periods, declined, even as total employment has grown.

The total jobs added (from the payroll survey) have sometimes averaged over 300,000 per month, but this includes all workers, not just native-born.

#141 | Posted by humtake

That's a whole lot of BS posted without any legitimate suggestions provided. JFC, cultist, get a grip!

Undocumented immigrants contribute more than $55 billion in taxes every year. In 2023, households led by undocumented immigrants paid approximately $89.8 billion in total taxes, including $55.8 billion in federal taxes and $33.9 billion in state and local taxes.

Texas officials approved Camp Mystic's operating plan just days before the fatal floods in Kerr County. This approval occurred shortly before the disaster, as confirmed by multiple news sources.

Citations:

Immediate vs. Delayed Consequences of the Big Beautiful Bill's Impact on Health

Immediate Consequences (2025)

Several effects of the Big Beautiful Bill are already being felt in rural health care and among vulnerable populations:

- Rural Hospital and Clinic Closures:
Many rural hospitals and clinics are closing or reducing services now, especially those heavily reliant on Medicaid funding. These closures are a direct response to anticipated funding cuts and uncertainty, not just future policy changes[1][2].

- Service Reductions and Layoffs:
Hospitals and clinics are making immediate decisions to cut non-essential services, lay off staff, and delay capital improvements to brace for revenue losses[1][2].

- Increased Administrative Burden:
New paperwork and eligibility verification requirements for Medicaid are causing eligible people to lose coverage already, as states ramp up more frequent reviews and stricter documentation demands[3][1].

- Financial Instability:
Many facilities, especially in rural areas, are reporting immediate cash flow problems due to uncertainty about future Medicaid payments and the structure of new federal funds, leading to delays in vendor payments and hiring freezes[2][4].

- Coverage Losses Begin:
Some Medicaid enrollees are already losing coverage due to early implementation of eligibility redeterminations and administrative changes, even before the official start of new work requirements[3][1].

Consequences Delayed Until After the 2026 Elections

While many effects are immediate, several major provisions are designed to take effect after the mid-term elections in November 2026:

- **Medicaid Work Requirements:**
The new 80-hour-per-month work requirements for able-bodied adults on Medicaid do not begin until 2026. These are expected to significantly increase the number of people losing coverage due to the difficulty of meeting or documenting these requirements[1][5].

- Further Medicaid and ACA Cuts:
Some of the largest funding reductions and eligibility changes"especially those affecting provider taxes and ACA premium credits"are scheduled to phase in after the election, with the biggest impacts expected in 2027 and beyond[1][6][7].

- Tax and Budget Changes:
Many tax reforms and federal budget adjustments included in the bill are also set to start after the 2026 elections, delaying their full impact until the next presidential term[1].

- Many consequences are already happening, especially for rural health care, Medicaid recipients, and providers facing administrative changes and funding uncertainty.
- The most sweeping changes (work requirements, major funding cuts, tax reforms) are structured to take effect after the 2026 mid-term elections, meaning the full impact will be felt in the years following[1][7][5].
- Vulnerable populations - including rural residents, seniors, and low-income families"are experiencing both immediate disruptions and the looming threat of larger changes to come.

This staggered timeline is intentional, with some provisions delayed to minimize political fallout before the mid-term elections, even as communities begin to feel the early effects now[1][8].

Wonder why "they" are so interested in Mars.

And once again, JEFF runs away when proven wrong.

#14 | Posted by ScottS

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) is a nonpartisan agency respected by both parties for providing independent budget analysis. The federal deficit is driven by a combination of factors: rising spending on programs like Social Security, Medicare, and interest on the debt, as well as tax policy choices[1][2]. Both parties have contributed to these trends over the years.

Regarding mass deportations, multiple economic studies show they would actually shrink the economy and cost the government hundreds of billions of dollars, not save trillions[3][4]. Immigrants, including undocumented workers, contribute significantly to the labor force and economic growth[5]. Mass deportation would lead to labor shortages, higher prices, and a smaller GDP[3][4].

On poverty, research shows that targeted government aid, like the expanded child tax credit, has helped cut poverty rates dramatically in recent years[6]. The idea that helping people in need traps them in poverty isn't supported by the data; in fact, immigrant poverty rates fall faster than those of U.S.-born citizens as they gain a foothold in the economy[7].

Both parties have different approaches to spending and poverty, but the evidence doesn't support the claim that one side simply wants to give "free stuff" while the other only offers opportunity. The reality is more complex, and effective policy usually requires a mix of support and opportunity.

Where the fiscal conservatives pushing back on this? Are there any left? Or is Elon the only one left?

Liberals wouldn't admit that one country killing 1200 innocent citizens of another country is a bad thing.
#35 | Posted by humtak

You've convinced yourself of this to make yourself sleep at night, cultist?

#81 | Posted by ScottS

LOL, nope!

First, your specific claim about murder rates lacks credible sourcing.

The assertion that "rich Blacks commit murder at 2x+ the rate of poor Whites contradicts established data. The most comprehensive studies (e.g., U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics) show:
- Homicide offending correlates most strongly with neighborhood disadvantage, not race or individual income.
- When controlling for neighborhood conditions (e.g., poverty density, under-resourced schools, policing patterns), racial disparities in violent crime rates sharply decrease or vanish.
- No peer-reviewed study supports your exact claim. The closest data (FBI SHR) shows homicide rates are driven by community-level factors, not individual wealth.

--end thread--

#8

Sounds like a threat, cultist. You gonna follow it up with action? Or just keep ------- on your keyboard like all the other incels.

HI CULTIST!!!

And it's telling that you're solely focusing on violent crime when nonviolent crime is most significant. Just to, again, reiterate: Michelle Alexander's The New Jim Crow demonstrates that the explosion of Black incarceration rates in the U.S. is not primarily driven by violent crimes like murder, but by decades of racially targeted drug enforcement and low-level, nonviolent offenses. She shows that, starting in the 1980s, the War on Drugs was deliberately escalated in Black communities, even though research consistently finds White Americans use and sell drugs at similar or higher rates. This led to millions of Black Americans being arrested, charged, and labeled as felons for nonviolent drug offenses, not for violent crimes[1][5][7].

Alexander argues that this system of mass incarceration functions as a new form of racial caste, stripping Black individuals"often for minor, nonviolent offenses"of basic rights and opportunities in employment, housing, voting, and education. She emphasizes that these outcomes are not accidental or simply a byproduct of poverty or crime, but the result of intentional policy choices that disproportionately target and control Black communities[1][5].

By focusing only on murder rates, one ignores the central mechanism by which the criminal justice system has marginalized Black Americans: the mass criminalization and incarceration for nonviolent drug offenses. This policy-driven disparity (not a supposed cultural or inherent criminality) is what Alexander identifies as the New Jim Crow, perpetuating racial inequality under the guise of colorblind law enforcement[1][5][7].

#77 | Posted by ScottS

It's true that Black Americans are overrepresented in homicide statistics, but it's misleading to present these numbers as proof that crime is simply a matter of individual or "cultural" failings, or to ignore the broader context. While you are correct that homicide clearance rates are low, nationally, about half of murders go unsolved, it's important to note that in cities like Baltimore, murders involving Black victims are actually less likely to be solved than those involving White victims. Lower clearance rates in high-crime areas often reflect issues like under-resourced police departments, strained community trust, and the complexity of cases, not just the volume of crimes or the racial makeup of those involved.

The overrepresentation of Black Americans in crime statistics is a real phenomenon, but decades of research show it is closely tied to systemic factors such as concentrated poverty, residential segregation, underfunded schools, lack of economic opportunity, and the legacy of discriminatory policies. When any community, regardless of race, faces high rates of poverty and disadvantage, crime rates tend to be higher. This pattern is seen in poor White communities as well, both in the U.S. and around the world. Want to see the data (i.e., facts as you refer)?

Black communities have historically been over-policed for certain crimes and under-protected for others, leading to both higher arrest rates and lower clearance rates for crimes where Black people are victims. There is also well-documented evidence of wrongful convictions, disparities in sentencing, and differences in how crimes are investigated based on race. I can show you the data (i.e., facts).

Ultimately the idea that "everywhere is racist" should not be used to dismiss the reality of systemic racism. Insteads it highlights how global histories of colonization, segregation, and economic exclusion have shaped outcomes for Black populations in many countries. Crime statistics reflect far more than individual choices; they are shaped by generations of policy, economic inequality, and social conditions. Focusing only on the numbers without context ignores the root causes and leads to the wrong conclusions about both crime and solutions. If you're interested, I can share credible studies and sources that go deeper into these issues.