New York Jews tend to follow the democrat line to a fault, just like so many Irish democrats embrace all democrat sponsored corruption.

Lumping Jews together into one basket is kind of like liberals calling all conservatives misogynist, homophobic, racists.
The lies comfort the closed minded liberals but don't prove anything other than the shallow left really is clueless.

So where will y'all go to find that political satisfaction?  I can understand it when your choice of Party/President doesn't turn out as promised.

Libertarian?  Maybe they don't have cookies, but do have pot! 

Possibly a centrist Republican/Democrat?  That way you can criticize both sides (and take heat from both sides)??

I didn't vote for Trump in the Primary, but did in the General.  I am totally on board with him as our current President, and yes surprised I would ever say that.  Not on board with many of the Republicans in Congress, however.  My problem is the Republicans, except for Trump, and a few others, like their cushy, status quo, big government jobs. 

Agreed.  But here recently O'Reilly was really digging in on the Susan Rice scandal.

One of the Murdoch's wives really disliked O'Reilly which weighed in on his ouster.  That and Media Matters really wanted him gone.  It's a huge win for MM and has now empowered them to go after other targets. 

Like I said, this is much bigger than just O'Reilly.

I understand, and it is an indication of the Left's strategy which is to dominate the conversation, and not allow a different viewpoint from theirs.  It is the same as with MMGW, and saying the "debate is over".  We must fight these fascists.   

Ok, a lot to discuss here,  I'll try to hit it all.

Paul, I gave you a "Like" on that one because it's such a well argued and articulated position, not because I specifically agree with everything in there. I wish this site had different types of like/agree/dislike buttons. I'll respond more later, but traveling for the next couple of days.

The Mother Jones graph may be simplistic, but it clearly illustrates that wages for the bottom 80% of earners have remained flat for 40 some years.  Granted there are other factors involved but it is a fact.  Coupling that with inflation over time, the buying power of those in that bottom 80% have taken a big hurt. 

Glad that you recognize that upward mobility is far more difficult, particularly if a person doesn't own a specific skill. Personally think that has been going on for more than 25 years..  Agree that the stagnation isn't directly related to what the rich make.  So, why are there 90+ million discouraged workers? 

I'm "hoping" along with you.  We have a consumer society, without customers, that boom isn't going to happen.  With so many people living on the borderline, how is the President going to increase demand for products?  For the bottom 80%, there isn't a lot of disposable income available.  Without extra cash to spend, where are the customers?  Half of all tax filers pay little or no income tax, so a tax cut does nothing for them.  As previously mentioned, the top 20% of earners already pay most income tax.

Capital ALWAYS follows return. Companies will inevitably move to areas that allow them to produce goods at the lowest cost possible.  Our economy is global, whether we like it or not.  I'm all for making our businesses more competitive, and that competition is off-shore. Unlike the 1950's - 60's and maybe the 70's, we are not a self contained economy, capable of increasing growth without the rest of the world.

Can you point out the errors in the "foolish" graph?  How in the world is that being used to promote socialism??

Ok, a lot to discuss here,  I'll try to hit it all.  First of all, the graph is adjusted to 2012 dollars, wages have gone up in all the groups but inflation has taken a severe toll making the adjusted data more flat than rising.  So why hasn't purchase power increased with the wages?  Well, money policy for one, and the large  growth of government, which is taking new record amounts of capital out of the economy each year.   Money policy, especially over the last 8 years has resulted in the money supply expanding devaluing the money already out there.  If all your money is in the bank you are losing your shirt.   It baffles me how the government can claim that inflation is low when the price of everything is going through the roof.   Government has turned into a monster over the past 10 or so years.  Regulations make it impossible for companies to respond quickly to anything.  The tax code requires teams to analyze, manage and report.  Want to build a new building, it can take years to secure all the permits.   It goes on and on.  The companies just pass this cost along and the little guy is most affected.  It's ironic as the little guy tries to stick it to the corporations by voting for these things, or I should say voting for the  people who say they will go after the corporations ,  these little guys end up paying for it all.

The 90+ million workers?  They are out of work as a direct result of what I wrote about in the first paragraph.   Businesses are fleeing an oppressive business environment.  35+% corporate tax rates, double taxation on dividends, regulatory nightmares.... these all drive business out.  Plus disaster trade deals that allow other countries to essentially take over whole industries.  That was the mass appeal of Trump, he said he was going to level the playing field, I can't wait to see what he does, I hope he is successful.

Half the tax filers pay no tax, so why do they file?  Because pandering politicians use our tax money to buy their votes via credits.  That was an easy one, and is an example of part of the problem.  And I'm afraid the solution to that problem is going to be very painful.  The issue is by accepting this pandering, these people are enslaving themselves to a system that long term, can't take care of them.   What's the answer?  Get the economy rolling again and get these people back to work.  And we need to stop making not working so appealing, welfare is supposed to be a safety net, not a job.  I've read that 35% of the population lived in households that received subsidies (means tested supplements).  That's an awful lot of people.  Think about it, when you are in a room with 30 people, 10 of them are getting subsidies.  When was the last time, you were in a public place where 35% of the people were disabled?  Something is wrong.  Put the money that's going into these programs to pay free loaders, the able bodied, put it back in the hands of the taxpayers, who will spend it and boost the economy.

Capital always follows return....  were that really true we would probably be in better shape.   The other big part of our problem, and what probably accounts for the top 5% increased slope income on that graph is again created by government.   Some time ago, probably around 40 years ago, the fat cats, some of the people in that 5% group, via lobbying, wrested control of public companies from the shareholders and gave it to their boards by having corporate laws changed.   These boards are cross pollinated by other elites from other companies.  Capital that used to fund research and growth is now raided by these boards with their incestuous relationships.  They enrich each other with little fear of an uprising by shareholders who have had their power diminished.    So the capital follows the modern day robber barrons.    As far as outsourcing, I think that has been what has crushed many strong US manufacturers.  I can think of one example, Motorola, a powerful cell phone manufacturer in the 80's and 90's, decided that manufacturing was dragging them down, so they sold their manufacturing to a large contract manufacturer so they could focus on "marketing".  Long story short, Motorola isn't the powerhouse in phones they used to be.   Personally I don't think off shore manufacturing is the panacea the  MBAs thought is was going to be.  I think for certain products it works, but for most it doesn't.  I don't think manufacturing is dead in the US, far from it.  With a little support from government rather than the asskicking that has been going on for years I think we might see a renaissance in manufacturing unparalleled in history.  We'll see.

I don't think I said there were errors in the graph, just that it didn't support what he was saying.  We don't live in a caste system, millions if not tens or more millions of people have crossed those "boundaries"  or quintiles in that graph.  You can't look at that graph and conclude people aren't upwardly mobile.   Graphs like that graph, or different variations of it, are used as the main canard to promote civil unrest and class envy.  Listen to Bernie Sanders and his talks on "democratic socialism", talks like his always depict the unfairness of the differences in graphs like that.   And that is how socialism gets footing in society.

Yeah - 'a rising tide floats all boats'. Nice theory, but it doesn't happen in reality - under either democratic or republican rule:

If you took all the money from the top 20% and split it up evenly among the bottom 80%, in a short period of time, the graph would be back to where it is today. 

You can't legislate fairness.  Some people are going to succeed.  Some people are going to get by and some people are going to fail.  That's life.

As Neil Bortz said:

The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer,
because the rich keep doing what makes them rich,
and the poor keep doing what makes them poor.

Perhaps all the "social programs" that we have for the poor de-motivates them from getting ahead and "losing their benefits".

I think this is as much a test for China as it is for Trump, and that li'l Kim will lose regardless.

We saw this same build-up about Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi army, and then about fortress Baghdad - in a matter of days it was all over but for the crying.

China will blink and they will take Kim to heel, they are in no position to push Trump/the US as they are far more reliant on us than we are on them.  He gave them a carrot with backing away from the currency manipulator issue (a mistake IMO), they need to put up or he'll come back at them.

There will not likely be a shooting war, and if there is it will be over far more quickly than we are accustomed to, Trump strikes me as far more Sherman/Patton and much less Clinton/Obama - I'd expect Pyonyang and every other installation to be leveled with C&C removed in a surprisingly large, brutal (read that collateral damage be damned) and coordinated attack involving more than the US - just enough of the details to have been already shared with China, to share with li'l Kim, to get him to back off.

'Gimp