politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
The time during Bidens presidency has been fantastic for me and my family. Both my wife and I got huge pay raises, she then switched jobs for a much better hours and still making bank. We've been saving a lot of money and our investments have skyrocketed. Things are clearly more expensive, but I haven't had to worry about it too much. Also because I live in a fairly well off area, it appears everyone else is doing very well.
Because my personal situation has been so good, should I assume that this is true for everyone in our country? Or should I be smart and recognize that my personal experience is anecdotal and not representative of the whole economy? Should I blame the media too for reporting what's actually happening?
I’m glad things are going well for you, and I don’t mean this in any sarcastic way or anything.
I get my personal experience isn’t the average. I also get that, while a better representation, knowing the experiences that my friends and family are having isn’t the average.
My problem isn’t my experiences not matching the average. My issue is the metrics used by media are not a representation of average, and the pain of seeing these metrics show things are supposedly getting better where so many things around me are getting worse, at times in order to improve the metrics used by the media.
My issues are twofold:
I don’t think the metrics used by the media, ie the stock market, are wholly representative of whether or not things are going good for the average American. When things plummet, sure, I’d agree that’s a good metric, since companies will panic and then people will get screwed. But I don’t think markets doing well means things are doing well for the average American.
Sure, the line might be going up, that’s good for some people, but there are many reasons why that could be happening that have no impact, or even a negative impact on the average person. For example, a new technology could have been discovered that lets workers do double the work. A company that fires half their staff will now be making more profit, since they are paying less in wages, and therefore their stock values will rise. Half of their employees were sacrificed on the altar of the stock market for those gains. To use a more recent and frequent example of something that fucked me over: tech layoffs. Tech companies will often purge a lot of employees when doing things like preparing for an acquisition, or immediately following one. Sometimes, they will just thin out their staff following a completed project, or something similar. This often has a positive impact on stocks, but a dire impact on workers.
I also have an issue with the partisanship of the media and how the economy is presented to us differently based on who is in power and the bias of those, but that’s a whole new can of worms.
But things are getting better. This isn't to say we don't have a lot of catching up to do, because of the damage that inflation has done, but the overwhelming amount of the numbers make it pretty clear that we are going in the right direction.
This is not at all the metric we are using. You are specifically complaining about unemployment rate. Which is what this post is about. It's funny to bitch about the media being misleading, while complaining about the market not representing the average joe...when the number being discussed in the article is not the market and does represent something good for the average joe.