No he did not, but spin it how you need it to be.Originally Posted by Guisslapp
|
|
|
|
|
No he did not, but spin it how you need it to be.
Just get my info directly from the source rather than twisted by the fringe media.
Yes he most certainly did. Did you listen to the entire Q&A after the rate announcement?
you don't understand your source. You are a leftist robot.
https://twitter.com/bcheungz/status/...486601217?s=21
Watch this clip and hear it directly from Jay.
This is the same guy that stated inflation was transitory, right before he stated it wasn't.
Man, I hang on his every word!
No he didn’t. He said “we tend to use transitory to mean that it won’t leave a permanent mark in the form of higher inflation. I think I is probably a good time to retire that word and try to explain more clearly what we mean.”
Yes he did.
And he stopped using it when he finally figured out that continued inflation was the new normal. If he explained more what he meant, he would look like even more of a failure because his predictions were completely wrong.
Stop following spin.
You stated he said it wasn’t transitory. That is a lie.
I provided the quote.
You guys are the ones that are following the spin.
Then they did not just vote to raise rates to combat inflation? Transitory inflation requires no action by the Fed. We are in an inflation spiral (compounding inflation on top of inflation), which is anything but transitory.
Come on, man, use your brain.
You and your studies and quotes. Next you'll be believing that Trump colluded with Russia, Hunter's laptop is Russian disinformation, the three letter bureaucracies did not spy on Trump or his campaign, or other stupid bedtime stories for the easily led.
Sleepy claiming fiscal responsibility for reducing the deficit. Oh yeah, that happened only because Congress blocked Sleepy's spend-happy agenda from passing.
Carney: Joe Biden Identifies as Fiscally Responsible (breitbart.com)
The devil (as usual) is in the details.
New job creation (428,000) in the expected range (300,000-500,000), unemployment rate held at 3.6% as expected, but the labor participation rate unexpectedly dropped from 62.4% to 62.2%.
The U.S. Economy Added 428,000 Jobs in April, Unemployment at 3.6%, But Participation Rate Fell (breitbart.com)
Wages grew at an annual 5.5% rate, but real wages dropped due to annual inflation being at around 8.5%. Markets dropping as analysts see through the "good" news. Select the 1Y graph to see the continuing decline in real disposable income.
Real Disposable Personal Income (DSPIC96) | FRED | St. Louis Fed (stlouisfed.org)
Real wages, the labor participation rate and manufacturing jobs are the real benchmarks. The unemployment rate is rather meaningless.
At least manufacturing jobs were added, and I think they were the good ones (not tied to deficit government spending).
How many millions are actually unemployed and also not looking for work? That’s the real unemployment number. Are there really that many millions out there who legitimately can’t do ANY work?
So you want to count people on social security and people that have made enough money that they don’t need to work anymore?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote