Trump victory: Good or bad for liberals ?

[IndependentProfessor]

[IndependentProfessor]

BTW, you still have yet to show a single shred of proof that I am wrong. Show me any proof that a divided government has a negative effect on the economy.

[exploited]

...You really don't understand anything about statistics at all, do you? You're literally operating at a grade school level here.

This is actually super embarrassing. Your chart takes one known number (amount of uneducated black men) and divides it by another known number (amount of imprisoned uneducated black men) and provides a percentage. It's a correlation, yes, but it doesn't establish causation.

If you were to say "this result was solely due to a lack of education," or attempt to attribute it solely or mostly to some other cause, you'd have to establish causation by controlling for other factors in a methodical way. You couldn't simply point at this chart and say "debate over." Hell, the chart itself dispels the idea that it is mostly or solely education, because uneducated whites weren't imprisoned at nearly the same rate. Therefore it could also be racism, poverty, nutrition, parenting, etc., and likely a combination of all of the above.

Not surprised to see a conservative totally befuddled by statistics though. It's hard to wrap your head around complex arguments when you spend all your time deluding yourself into believing an obsolete political philosophy. Look at your hilarious attempt to make this issue black and white, for instance. It either hurts or helps the economy, dur hur. What if it does neither? What if it hurts sometimes and helps others? This complexity doesn't even occur to you, and that's sad.

[exploited]

[IndependentProfessor]

[IndependentProfessor]

[exploited]

[IndependentProfessor]

You're not fooling anyone, Ex.

I've made an assertion, and posted at least a dozen articles that support it, that divided government is good for the economy. You have also made an assertion. The only difference is that you have been cagey about your assertion. You have yet to articulate your position.

Right now, you're the guy on the sidelines shouting insults at the players on the field. If you want to come onto the field and play, here's your chance.

One of these must be true:

A) Divided government is good for the economy.
B) Divided government is bad for the economy.
C) Divided government has no effect on the economy.

I've chose A. Which do you choose, and why?

[exploited]

...

Your articles are opinion pieces. They don't contain any research, evidence or statistics outside of correlations that don't prove anything.

The only assertion I've made is that you've failed to provide any evidence, and that gridlock is bad for legislative output, both quantitatively and qualitatively. I have proven both without any doubt whatsoever.

The simple truth is that A, B and C are all wrong. We are talking about the macroeconomic impact of gridlock over the course of three hundred years. Sometimes gridlock might help. Other times it might make things worse. Other times yet, it might have no impact. It is tremendously stupid to argue that it must be or is one of these options most of the time. Such an assertion is not only impossible to prove, but it defies all reasonable assumptions as well.

Gridlock during a boom period will be different than gridlock during a bust period. The specific composition of Congress and the specific qualities of the President will matter. The general legislative agenda will also matter - is the Democrat controlled Congress and Presidency pursuing a Sanders agenda or a Clinton agenda? Is economic uncertainty increased or decreased by addressing climate change or wage inequality?

The fact that I have to explain this is disheartening. You've got a brain, use it.

[IndependentProfessor]

If I remember correctly, you used to run a pizza place, right?

Let's say one party of your government is debating the implementation of a tax on imported dairy goods. You import the majority of your cheese. If that party controls the government, they it's likely that the tax will get passed. This means that you, expecting an increase in your costs to do business, will likely refrain from making decisions that will deplete your cash supply, so that you can save money to pay the increased taxes. You won't be expanding or hiring new people, in other words.

But, if the government is divided, you can be relatively sure that the tax won't pass. So, you go ahead with your expansion plans, which spurs the economy a tad.

BTW, I hope you don't respond to people in real life like this. It makes them not want to talk to you.