# Q1 2019 watch - if under 3.0% - where is Trump’s economic miracle - can Trump beat O’s 2.9% ever?



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 8, 2019)

Here’s the record thru 2018:





U.S. - GDP growth by year 1990-2017 | Statista

Trump and Obama are tied a 2.9 Best full year of GDP growth.

Do you think Trump’s Q1 this year will break the tie and boost Trump to 3.0 or more?

Do you believe Trump will ever get a full year of GDP growth this high?





Some experts - The liberal fake news WSJ is forecasting 1.4% for Q1.


Economic Forecasting Survey - The Wall Street Journal.  Economist Q&A. Forecast Edition: March 2019 ..... Projected: Q1 2019. 1.4%. Projected: Q2 2019. 2.6%. Projected: Q3 2019. 2.2%. Projected: ...

Trump supporters tell us your forecast?

What happens if Trump’s third year ends (GDP-wise) anywhere below Obama’s 2.9% in 2015?

According to Trump 2.9 is anemic and weak.

"Obama is the first president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth," Trump said during an Oct. 28 campaign rally in Manchester, N.H.

Trump's claim about Obama's weak economic growth is limited

Do you think Trump will be the second president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth,"

What does an “anemic” Trump do for Obama’s legacy?

Moving forward, there are reasons to believe that growth will continue to be slower than was originally hoped. Annual U.S. GDP growth exceeding 3.0 percent, as experienced in the mid- to late 1990s and mid-2000s, is not expected to be attainable over the coming decade.
The U.S. economy to 2022: settling into a new normal : Monthly Labor Review: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics

Are we settling into a new normal that is not so horrible without 3% sustained GDP growth?


----------



## rightwinger (Apr 8, 2019)

Trump promised four or five


----------



## Thinker101 (Apr 8, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Here’s the record thru 2018:
> View attachment 254781
> 
> U.S. - GDP growth by year 1990-2017 | Statista
> ...



You fricken loons are, if nothing else, quite entertaining.  You piss and moan month after month for the last couple of years, resisting everything and anything possible.  Then you want to whine about GDP numbers not reaching a certain level.  Why the hell don't ya try contributing for once in your stinkin life.


----------



## Brain357 (Apr 8, 2019)

Thinker101 said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Here’s the record thru 2018:
> ...


Given trump is spending like we are in a recession we need a lot more growth than we are getting.  Deficits are huge.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 8, 2019)

Can Trump beat Obama's 1.6%?


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 8, 2019)

He will crush it if congress approves his trade deals


----------



## Thinker101 (Apr 8, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Thinker101 said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



Yep, so what the heck resist.  If you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem....I'm sure you've heard that before.


----------



## Brain357 (Apr 8, 2019)

Thinker101 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101 said:
> ...


He's done everything republicans said would lead to great growth.  So far it's just great deficits.


----------



## Thinker101 (Apr 8, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Thinker101 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



And liberals/democrats have done everything they could to hamper any growth.


----------



## easyt65 (Apr 8, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Here’s the record thru 2018:
> View attachment 254781
> 
> U.S. - GDP growth by year 1990-2017 | Statista
> ...


Trump has accomplished economic and employment successes not seen in decades and accomplished more in 2 years than Obama did in 8...

Yet poor sore loser butt-hurt, hate-driven, reality-denying snowflakes continue to whine, wail, lie, deny, justify, and attempt to minimize successes Obama NEVER accomplished while President.

BWUHAHAHAHAHA....

 poor little snowflakes...


----------



## Brain357 (Apr 8, 2019)

Thinker101 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101 said:
> ...


Which was about nothing the first two years.  Repubs had full control.  But it's funny you still try to blame dems.  Partisans are so very dumb.


----------



## Dragonlady (Apr 8, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> He will crush it if congress approves his trade deals



What trade deals?  NAFTA 2.0 is the only one's he's done.  Canada was the big winner in that one.  The US got nothing.


----------



## Brain357 (Apr 8, 2019)

easyt65 said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Here’s the record thru 2018:
> ...


Trump inherited a strong economy.


----------



## Brain357 (Apr 8, 2019)

Dragonlady said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > He will crush it if congress approves his trade deals
> ...


Yes slightly changed nafta will make a huge difference....


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 8, 2019)

Dragonlady said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > He will crush it if congress approves his trade deals
> ...


Are you allowed to vote scary lol


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 8, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Dragonlady said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


Lol another libtard


----------



## Brain357 (Apr 8, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Dragonlady said:
> ...


Another partisan with no brain....


----------



## Thinker101 (Apr 8, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Thinker101 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



Listen, how about I break it down to a level you may understand.  Let's say I was adding a room onto a house, I have a deadline.  Every third day you call the city to come out because you question something being done.  What happens to my deadline?


----------



## Brain357 (Apr 8, 2019)

Thinker101 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101 said:
> ...


Repubs have done everything to the economy they claimed would make it great again.  They did their big tax cuts.  They have eliminated regulations.  Nobody stood in their way for 2 years.   And even with huge deficits we didn't hit 3%.  Sad.


----------



## Thinker101 (Apr 8, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Thinker101 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



Idiot...


----------



## Brain357 (Apr 8, 2019)

Thinker101 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101 said:
> ...


Yes you are.  The repubs can do anything and you will follow.  Partisan idiot....


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 8, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


Ohhh I don’t have a brain lol who did you vote for?


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 8, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Thinker101 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


 Why are so many Americans struggling in cities run by democrats  with tons of money ??


----------



## Brain357 (Apr 8, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


When?  I've voted many times.  And I've voted repub more than dem.  But I'm not blind to failures.  Look at the deficits.....


----------



## easyt65 (Apr 8, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Trump inherited a strong economy.


Snowflakes who repeat this lie continue to be stumped by 1 question:

Barry declared Manufacturing plants were GONE FOREVER, NEVER TO RETURN. He declared those jobs were gone forever and that this was the 'New Norm'...and he stopped trying to woo them back.  In fact, his massive over-regulation helped drive them out of the country....

THIS is part of the failed policies Trump inherited.

So, after leaving office, how did OBAMA affect the return of all those manufacturing plants and manufacturing jobs to the US?

BWUHAHAHAHAHA.....

HE DIDN'T.

Trump abandoned Obama's failed policies.

Trump oversaw the elimination of Obama's over-regulation legacy.

Trump got the manufacturing plants and jobs to return.

The fact that snowflakes blamed Bush for every Obama failure for 8 years then have attempted to claim 2 years of Trump successes as Obama's is hilarious.

The fact that Democrats are claiming Obama is responsible for destroying their decades-old policy of 'economic slavery' which kept blacks unemployed, poor, and dependent on Democrats social program hand-outs in exchange for their votes is hilarious.


----------



## Brain357 (Apr 8, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101 said:
> ...


You mean all cities?  I thought trump made everything great again?  Who is struggling?


----------



## Brain357 (Apr 8, 2019)

easyt65 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Trump inherited a strong economy.
> ...


And trump spent like we were in a recession.  Huge deficits.  And still less than 3% growth. Sad.


----------



## 22lcidw (Apr 8, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Thinker101 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


False Pubs. And so many more. You Progs had total massive control the first two years of Obama. Somehow we ended up with the bastardization of Obamacare passed near Christmas of 2009 when they were on their way out. And the expansion of the tyranny Patriot Act and other right removal laws. At least they did it. Repubs did nothing when they were on they were on their way out before the last election.


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 8, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


Look at it..  entitlements  most are going to welfare to democrat run towns, and grants


----------



## easyt65 (Apr 8, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


Seems like someone is forgetting (intentionally) years of Democrat / Obama deficits.

Let me know when an all-GOP House, Senate, & WH passes a $1 trillion failed ''jobs' bill that contains over 7,000 pieces of GOP-Only pork, contains non-shovel-ready Shovel-Ready jobs, and ends up costing tax payers approx $774,000 PER JOB claimed to have been saved / created, like Obama and the Democrats did....

Let me know when Trump secures a credit-rating downgrade, like Obama did for the US, the 1st in US history...



.


----------



## Brain357 (Apr 8, 2019)

22lcidw said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101 said:
> ...


Sure.  And the last two years still haven't hit 3%, but we've had massive deficits.


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 8, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


Towns run by democrats will always stuggle until they are removed.. rich always get rich under democrat rule.. while the poor stuggle and get poorer


----------



## Brain357 (Apr 8, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


Oh?  So Repubs increased entitlements with record low unemployment?  Deficits were much lower the last few years of Obama....


----------



## Brain357 (Apr 8, 2019)

easyt65 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


I remember republicans claiming to be fiscally responsible.  Then with full control they ran deficits during a strong economy like we were in a recession.  Nothing worse than that.  And you applaud it!  Partisan hack.


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 8, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


Trumps investment will drive revenue never seen before. It’s onky year two.. don’t melt snowflake


----------



## Brain357 (Apr 8, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


Investments in more entitlements?  haha  He feeds you shit and you keep eating.  Good partisan.


----------



## easyt65 (Apr 8, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> And trump spent like we were in a recession.  Huge deficits.  And still less than 3% growth. Sad.


What is sad is Trump has achieved economic and employment successes in 2 years Obama never achieved in 8 years, and you are simultaneously trying to discredit those achievements AND falsely claim them as Obama's.

Bwuhahahaha....


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 8, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


Just reality


----------



## Brain357 (Apr 8, 2019)

easyt65 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > And trump spent like we were in a recession.  Huge deficits.  And still less than 3% growth. Sad.
> ...


I don't really much care about Obama.  Why do you guys keep talking about him?  We currently have less than 3% growth and huge deficits.  Trump is turning us into Greece.


----------



## Brain357 (Apr 8, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


You repubs do love deficits.  How about those growing trade deficits?


----------



## easyt65 (Apr 8, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Nothing worse than that.


Trying to discredit economic success while attempting to falsely claim them as Obama's at the same time is much worse ... and more humiliating, snowflake.


----------



## Brain357 (Apr 8, 2019)

easyt65 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Nothing worse than that.
> ...


You guys are the only ones talking about Obama.  I'm talking about less than 3% growth with huge deficits.  We are turning into Greece.


----------



## easyt65 (Apr 8, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> I don't really much care about Obama.


Then why do you continue to defend his failed economic record and falsely claim someone else's success as Obama's?

Bwuhahahaha


----------



## Dragonlady (Apr 8, 2019)

Thinker101 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101 said:
> ...



Once again you reveal your abject ignorance about all things related to the US economy and how it works.

What does your analogy have to do with Trump's economy?  Why would you call the city about work being done your house?  The city only comes out when the work is done, to inspect it and make sure its up to code.  If someone is calling the city about work you're doing to your house, the city will do nothing, unless you're working without a permit.


----------



## Brain357 (Apr 8, 2019)

easyt65 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > I don't really much care about Obama.
> ...


You are the one who keeps talking about Obama.  Are you that deranged?


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 8, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


Can you read?? Are you unaware of trumps new trade deals??  Almost all serious  economist agree that these trade deals will boost America’s economy and drive revenue .. 
listen maybe you know more.. hey we will see


----------



## Brain357 (Apr 8, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


So far trump has grown our trade deficits.  Nafta 2.0 is a joke.  Why would I expect more?  Economists agree free trade is best.  Trump is trying managed trade, and that fails.


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 8, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


Because America isn’t a market, we are a culture, we don’t need markets that hurt poor ordinary Americans.. don’t like it move


----------



## easyt65 (Apr 8, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> easyt65 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


Poor little snowflake.....


----------



## protectionist (Apr 8, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Here’s the record thru 2018:
> View attachment 254781
> 
> U.S. - GDP growth by year 1990-2017 | Statista
> ...


I'm not quite sure who this "Statistica" is that your numbers are relying on, or where they get THEIR information from, but I get my information from the US Commerce Dept, Bureau of Econmic Analysis.

And they say that the average GDP growth for 2015 was 2.0% not 2.9%.


----------



## protectionist (Apr 8, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> He's done everything republicans said would lead to great growth.  So far it's just great deficits.


No it's not. Trump took a sinking GDP (2.3 to 1.8) from Obama's last year, and raised it up to 4.2%.


----------



## rightwinger (Apr 8, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Can Trump beat Obama's 1.6%?


Trump was given the Great Obama economy
Obama got the Bush Recession


----------



## protectionist (Apr 8, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> Trump was given the Great Obama economy
> Obama got the Bush Recession


The_ "Great Obama economy"_ as you call it, was actually the great Obama 2016 SINKING SHIP,  (See Post # 51)


----------



## Thinker101 (Apr 8, 2019)

Dragonlady said:


> Thinker101 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



No, the city comes out if there is a complaint.  And it was an analogy because BrainTurd doesn't seem to understand.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 8, 2019)

Thinker101, post: 22164576 





Thinker101 said:


> You fricken loons are, if nothing else, quite entertaining.  You piss and moan month after month for the last couple of years, resisting everything and anything possible.  Then you want to whine about GDP numbers not reaching a certain level.  Why the hell don't ya try contributing for once in your stinkin life



I would have thought you would have contributed a thought in regards to the OP. But instead you resd it as a complaint

NotfooledbyW, post: 22164534 





NotfooledbyW said:


> Are we settling into a new normal that is not so horrible without 3% sustained GDP growth?



Does that sound like a complaint?

Given what TrumpO said about 3.0 GDP and Obama’s failure to get there. Does it mean Trumpo is a failure if he fails to get there.

This OP based in part in Trumpo’s *complaint*
against Obama’s economic record.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 8, 2019)

rightwinger, post: 22164549,





rightwinger said:


> Trump promised four or five



And apparently got real excited and tossed out the 6% potentiallity as well? 

And it looks like 3.0 or higher won’t happen while he is President.


----------



## Mike473 (Apr 8, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> rightwinger, post: 22164549,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If the Fed dropped rates back to zero and started the QE program, like things were under Obama, we would probably see 5% growth easy.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 8, 2019)

easyt65, post: 22164622





easyt65 said:


> Trump has accomplished economic and employment successes not seen in decades and accomplished more in 2 years than Obama did in 8...



Thats TrumpOcult talk, but what does the data show? What exactly has TrumpO accomplished in two years that’s better than Obama’s eight? Let’s stick to data please.

Why does data make you so angry?

I’m trying to help you because if TrumpO can’t get next yesr over 2.9 two things are going to happen to him.

People will know that his $1.5 trillion tax cuts will not bring in the revenue that a 3.5 or higher economy would produce.

And

These comparable no better growth numbers to Obama’s, but coming with the massive Trumpo contribution to the debt will be hitting TrumpO and Republicans hard in the 2020 national elections. Don’t you need to start thinking about the time when you can no longer blame our first African American President for what TrumpO can’t do.

And to your point about Trumpo’s accomplishments;

NotfooledbyW, post: 22164534


NotfooledbyW said:


> Obama is the first president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth," Trump said during an Oct. 28 campaign rally in Manchester, N.H.



TrumpO is failing to accomplish what in his own words said he would do. It’s not my standard or goal. it’s Trump0. And he got a $1.5 trillion tax cut that was supposed to take economic growth way beyond Obama's and pay for itself.

In 2015 when Obama hit 2.9 % growth revenue increased by 7% into the treasury.

In 2018 when TrumpO hit 2.9 % growth revenue decreased by 0.4% into the treasury.


U.S. Tax Revenues Fall, Deficit Widens in Wake of New Tax Law Feb 13, 2019 · Federal tax revenue declined 0.4% in 2018, the first full ... revenue lost over 10 years from the $1.5 trillion tax cut.


----------



## AntonToo (Apr 8, 2019)

Thinker101 said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Here’s the record thru 2018:
> ...



Moron, what the fuck makes you think we don’t contribute?

You are just making up bullshit because you know you can’t defend Trump selling 4-5% growth and talking about “best economy Eva!!!” while reality is that it’s same ol’ 2.X% growth he was blasting under Obama.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 8, 2019)

Mike473, post: 22165064 





Mike473 said:


> If the Fed dropped rates back to zero and started the QE program, like things were under Obama, we would probably see 5% growth easy.



The FED backed off Its Quantitative Tightening for 2019 & 20, Not because TrumpO’s tax cut and deregulation has been such a great whopping success.

Things were, under Obama, what has been defined as the end and aftermath of the worst recession since the Great Depression. QE was because of that recession and necessary for the times.

Tell me do you think Trumpo’s projections ...





..  were based upon the Fed dropping rates to zero when the economy is heading for the record longest economic expansion in US history and low unemployment is combined with low inflation?

If you do, I think you are admitting that the Great White MAGA Hope is even dumber about economics than I consider him to be.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 8, 2019)

antontoo said:


> Thinker101 said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



Yep, my wife and I just paid more in taxes again than the average deplorable MAGA hat wearing, beerbellied, can’t find work because illegals took all the jobs, deplorable, makes in his best year.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 9, 2019)

Jitss617, post: 22164600 





Jitss617 said:


> He will crush it if congress approves his trade deals



Maybe, but he is rowing against the strong current of not enough workers to keep up with increased opportunities for growth, Baby Boomers retiring, trillion dollar annual deficits, trade deficit growing, 

Maybe it’s time to think things through a little better and not make it so much about it all being about him and hie smart and tough he is.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 9, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22164598, 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Can Trump beat Obama's 1.6%?



He would still have to beat Obama’s 2.9 and he has not?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 9, 2019)

easyt65, post: 22164671 





easyt65 said:


> Trump got the manufacturing plants and jobs to return.



How many manufacturing plants have returned according to your source? How many jobs? 

Do you think any of these issues have anything to do with it?

Again, what’s driving companies back to the U.S.?


“Something everybody can agree on: Chinese wages and prices have gone up significantly in the last 10, 15 years,” said Mr. Moser.
Mr. Moser also cited increased tax duties, freight expenses and the costs of intellectual property risk and travel as factors that make reshoring more attractive.
Then there’s e-commerce. With many Americans now expecting packages delivered within 24 or 48 hours after they order online, distribution centers need to be replenished quickly, which means, for some products, the source material needs to be closer to the customer. “And all of a sudden, maybe 25 percent of what has been offshored makes sense to come back," said Mr. Moser.
Automation can also even the playing field between the U.S. and China as robotics make American factories increasingly competitive, but also less reliant on manufacturing workers.
Trump hypes jobs relocating back to the U.S. Are they?

Just wondering if TrumpO had much to do with any of those developments over the past decades.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 9, 2019)

protectionist, post: 22164815 





protectionist said:


> I get my information from the US Commerce Dept, Bureau of Econmic Analysis.
> 
> And they say that the average GDP growth for 2015 was 2.0% not 2.9%.



Show what you are looking at because whatever it is it is wrong. My guess is you are looking at s preliminary forecast and miss the third and final update.,

Not convinced?

https://www.bea.gov/system/files/2018-08/gdp2q18_adv_4.pdf







See another source below.  They reference the BEA as the source for their table:

*Resources for Table*

BEA, National Income and Product Accounts Tables: Table 1.1.5. Nominal GDP, Table 1.1.1. GDP Growth Rate. Table 1.1.6 Real Gross Domestic Product, Adjusted for inflation using 2012 dollars.





So now that you’ve been proven wrong, will you join the discussion or run away?


----------



## Aldo Raine (Apr 9, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> Trump promised four or five



  Even 6 percent, "beleev me".


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Apr 9, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> antontoo said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101 said:
> ...



if your wife has to work to supplement your lifestyle i doubt it ...besides we have those budgets to worry about TAXes are for the greater good


trumps a yuge exaggerator dont ever trust those people
they'll just make shit up .

Posted on March 11, 2011
Obama: "We Cannot Drill Our Way Out" Of Oil Crisis
President Obama says domestic oil drilling will not solve our energy crisis, but is open to the idea.
"We can't escape the fact that we only control 2% of the world's oil, but consume over 1/4 of the world's oil. T. Boone Pickens who was right when he said, this is one emergency we cannot drill our way out of. We cannot place our long-term bets on a finite resource that we only control 2% of, especially one vulnerable to hurricanes, war and political turmoil. Beyond increased domestic production, if we want to increase our long-term independence, we need to reduce our demand and break our independence on oil," President Obama said at a news conference on Friday.

what a Great man...if only he could of pulled a bloomberg Amended the constitution and gotten rid of term limits we'd hit that 3.0

ya kept dr bombay right ?


hopefully we can be more like Sweden and tax people @ 60% ......no refunds


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 9, 2019)

22lcidw, post: 22164681 





22lcidw said:


> Somehow we ended up with the bastardization of Obamacare passed near Christmas of 2009 when they were on their way out.



Isn’t Obamacare supposed to be s jobs killer and destroy the economy and repealed by Trumpo?

It’s still running and we have lowest unemployment rate in 40 years. And the great wonderful booming economy. 

How can this be?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 9, 2019)

Deplorable Yankee, post: 22165546, 





Deplorable Yankee said:


> if your wife has to work to supplement your lifestyle i doubt it ...besides we have those budgets to worry about TAXes are for the greater good



Our lifestyle is 19 years and running started out with not much but we paid off our townhome in 12 years and we bought a condo With cash four years ago, put our daughter through college and rent her the condo at a duscount IN THE DC area while she goes for her masters.

My wife is a Doctor. She works in research.

Any more questions?

Can you stay on topic or do you just post shit that you know you cannot know anything about.


----------



## skews13 (Apr 9, 2019)

Thinker101 said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Here’s the record thru 2018:
> ...



Obama took over a global recession with 800,000 jobs a month being lost, and a compete crash of the bank and real estate industries and achieved his growth.

Trump was handed a growing economy in all sectors with the largest employment boom since the 50’s.

He should be averaging 3% by accident/


----------



## Claudette (Apr 9, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Here’s the record thru 2018:
> View attachment 254781
> 
> U.S. - GDP growth by year 1990-2017 | Statista
> ...



You fools are pathetic.

We have a great economy, UE the lowest its been sinc 69 and jobs, jobs and more jobs around the country. Yet all you pathetic little shits can do is bring up a GDP??

You sure are whinny little shits without one ounce of common sense.

Pathetic.


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Apr 9, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Deplorable Yankee, post: 22165546,
> 
> 
> 
> ...





> Yep, my wife and I just paid more in taxes again than the average deplorable MAGA hat wearing, beerbellied, can’t find work because illegals took all the jobs, deplorable, makes in his best year.


and works for somebody  if lucky busting 6 figs an year.
well you were putting down the "deplorables" as ass scratching broke rubes
How dare i question your great wealth . A town house and a condo ...PAID cash
wow thats big time....zzzzzz


Suburban DC ROFLMAO so cosmopolitan
I was on topic and returning the put down ya backwards lightweight hick

your mentioning exaggeration and i paid more taxes this year like a braggart
very trump
low class middle class rat

I can demonize and brag to

WHY do all suburbanites think they're worldly sophisticated enlightened  cosmopolitans ...OH theyre better than you rubes
How dare you ignore their wisdom .

Wanna be a big shot ?I can redact and  post my last consulting jobs paycheck stub I guarantee you its more than your wife made this year BIG SHOT.
how that for braggin ...oh ya see im unemployed my self at the moment ...its called semi retirement ...just chillin

I owned more than 2 fucking buildings in one of the most expensive markets in the country and was in manufacturing for almost 30 years

I leave you to insulting the beer bellied trump voting rubes

a HICK  rube calling others rubes ...not the first time ive seen it


----------



## Hellokitty (Apr 9, 2019)

Dragonlady said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > He will crush it if congress approves his trade deals
> ...



Um, Canada got screwed with the USMCA deal...


----------



## McRocket (Apr 9, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> He will crush it if congress approves his trade deals



LOL...really?

Exactly which trade deals are you talking about and where is your link to unbiased, factual proof that to implement these 'trade deals' will radically ('crush') alter the Real GDP Growth?

This should be good for a laugh because I have read some of your posts and you appear COMPLETELY clueless about macroeconomic matters.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 9, 2019)

Claudette said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Here’s the record thru 2018:
> ...



Well, to be fair (not that you are ever fair)  the GDP and the inability to get it over 3% was a major attack topic by Trump during the election and by the GOP in general.  We were told that a GDP under 3% is pathetic and that Trump was going to get it back to 5 and 6 percent growth.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 9, 2019)

Hellokitty said:


> Dragonlady said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...



are you stupid?  Canada got everything they wanted and only had to open up about 5% of their dairy market to the US. 

One of the biggest complaints about Canada going into the negotiations was about their timber/lumber industry...it was not touched.


----------



## McRocket (Apr 9, 2019)

Hellokitty said:


> Dragonlady said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...



You just proved you do not have nary a clue what is actually in the deal.

_'Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. There might not be a lot of love lost between Trump and Trudeau, but in the end, Trudeau didn’t cave much on his key issues: dairy and Chapter 19, the treaty’s dispute resolution mechanism. Trudeau held out and got what he wanted: Canada’s dairy supply management system stays mostly intact, and Chapter 19 remains in place, a win for the Canadian lumber sector. On dairy, Canada is mainly giving U.S. farmers more ability to sell milk protein concentrate, skim milk powder and infant formula. On top of the substantive issues, Trump went out of his way to criticize the Canadian negotiating team in the final days of deliberations, which Trudeau can play up as a sign of just how hard his staff fought on this deal.'

Winners and losers of the ‘USMCA’ trade deal_

PLUS, it looks like Canada will not even ratify it.

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?


I suggest you stick to whatever the hell it is you do know.

Because USMCA AIN'T it.

Have a nice day.


----------



## McRocket (Apr 9, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Hellokitty said:
> 
> 
> > Dragonlady said:
> ...



I don't know if she is stupid or not...but she is ignorant on this.

She must get her news from Fox.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 9, 2019)

McRocket said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Hellokitty said:
> ...



More likely from the GOP talking points emails.


----------



## Lesh (Apr 9, 2019)

Claudette said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Here’s the record thru 2018:
> ...


You think GDP doesn’t matter dumbass? Talk about stupid shits


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 9, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22164598,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



He doesn't need to break 2.9% to beat Obama's 1.6% average.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 9, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot, post: 22164598,
> ...


----------



## Hellokitty (Apr 9, 2019)

McRocket said:


> Hellokitty said:
> 
> 
> > Dragonlady said:
> ...



Canadian Economy Halts – GDP Growth Drops to 0.1 Percent, and No-One Is Talking About Why…

Within the new USMCA the critically important NAFTA loophole was closed.

Over the past three decades both Canada and Mexico structured key parts of their independent trade agreements to take advantage of their unique access to the U.S. market.  Under the existing NAFTA, Mexico and Canada generate billions in economic activity through exploiting the NAFTA loophole.

China, Asia (writ large), and the EU enter into trade agreements with Mexico and Canada as back-doors into the U.S. market.  So long as corporations can avoid U.S. tariffs (and rules of origin that pertain to those tariffs), by going through Canada and Mexico they would continue to exploit this approach.

By shipping parts to Mexico and/or Canada; and by deploying satellite assembly facilities in Canada and/or Mexico; China, Asia and to a lesser extent EU corporations exploited a NAFTA loophole for rules of origin on finished goods.

Through a process of building, assembling or partially manufacturing their products in Mexico/Canada those foreign corporations could skirt U.S. trade tariffs and direct U.S. trade agreements.  The finished foreign products entered the U.S. under NAFTA rules.

Why deal with the U.S. when you can just deal with Mexico, and use NAFTA rules to ship your product directly into the U.S. market?

This exploitative approach, a backdoor to the U.S. market, was the primary reason for massive foreign investment in Canada and Mexico; it was also the primary reason why candidate Donald Trump, now President Donald Trump, wanted to shut down that loophole and renegotiate NAFTA.

At the conclusion of Round #6, just before giving up on Chrystia Freeland for good, this was the direct issue at the heart of a very frustrated U.S.T.R. Lighthizer’s strongly worded response to Canada:

[…]  In another proposal, Canada reserved the right to treat the United States and Mexico even worse than other countries if they enter into future agreements. Those other countries may, in fact, even include China, if there is an agreement between China and [Canada]. This proposal, I think if the United States had made it, would be dubbed a “poison pill.” We did not make it, though. Obviously, this is unacceptable to us, and my guess is it is to the Mexican side also. (read full remarks)

This loophole was the primary reason U.S. manufacturers relocated operations to Mexico.  Corporations within the U.S. Auto-Sector could enhance profits by building in Mexico or Canada using cheap parts imported from Asia/China.  The labor factor was not as big a part of the overall cost consideration as cheaper machined parts and imported raw materials.

If the U.S. applied the same tariffs to Canada and Mexico we apply to all trade nations, then the benefit of using Canada and Mexico -by those trade nations- is lost.

Corporations will no longer have any advantage, and many are likely to just deal directly with the U.S. This was the reason Trump, Lighthizer and Ross to retained Steel and Aluminum tariffs on Canada and Mexico until they agreed to the new USMCA rules.

When Trump took away the flawed NAFTA market access; and when Trump removed the ability of Mexico and Canada to broker themselves for economic benefit; there was no longer a financial benefit behind corporations investing in Canada.  Under a binding trade pact between the USMCA partners, the NAFTA flaw is closed.

As a direct outcome billions of investment dollars are now being removed from any future consideration into Canada.

That’s the overarching reason for the Canadian GDP to halt.

Here’s the proverbial $64,000 question:  Can Canada re-engineer their economy and actually begin to “make” products again, not just simply “assemble” foreign products from other nations?


Can Canada reverse three-decades of specifically structured economic policy decisions that were centered around this “assembly” (brokered) economy?
Can the environmentalists be put back into a box while heavy manufacturing and raw material development are reconstituted?
Can the environmentalists allow natural resource development?  Oil development, mining operations, lowered overall energy costs, etc?
Can Canada somehow lower national energy costs so that Heavy manufacturing might consider restarting? (NOTE: heavy manufacturing requires massive energy use.)
Can Canada find any industrial development investors who would be willing to take a chance on all the above?
See the problem?

The Canadian economy is not likely going to get better without a radical shift in Canadian political perspectives and outlook(s).

Then again, perhaps that’s really why Justin and Chrystia were so damned set on protecting their “cultural industries” (ie. media) from competition.

Think about it.

Canadian Economy Halts – GDP Growth Drops to 0.1 Percent, and No-One Is Talking About Why…


----------



## AntonToo (Apr 9, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot, post: 22164598,
> ...



Wow you are a total partisan asshole.

Why the hell else would you compare 2009 middle of recession economy Obama was handed off to what Trump was given?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 9, 2019)

antontoo said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



Middle of recession? The recession ended in June 2009.
Feel free to subtract Q1 2009 and Q2 2009 and get back to me with Obama's performance.


----------



## AntonToo (Apr 9, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> antontoo said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



Feel free to go fuck yourself and your completely partisan bullshit.

Economy had to digest 8 trillion dollar loss at the end of the recession, what loss did economy need to get through in the past two years?

The growth pattern since Trump got into office is not very different from what we’ve had under Obama, which is in total contradiction what Trump was promising when he ran and pushed for 1.5 Trillion dollar tax-cut stimulus.


----------



## Claudette (Apr 9, 2019)

Lesh said:


> Claudette said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



Of course it matters dumbass. And the fact that its not what was wanted isn't important. Shit happens and always will no matter who is in the WH.

You sure are a whinny little shit.


----------



## McRocket (Apr 9, 2019)

Hellokitty said:


> McRocket said:
> 
> 
> > Hellokitty said:
> ...



The Last Refuge is a joke of a site. They make FoxNews look like the Washington Post. Whatever they say means NOTHING to me.

_*'In review, The Last Refuge (Conservative Treehouse) reports news with a strong right wing bias with all stories favoring the right and denigrating the left.'*_

_*'Overall, The Last Refuge (Conservative Treehouse) far right biased and borderline questionable based on multiple failed fact checks. This source is one failed fact check from moving to the Questionable list.'*_

The Last Refuge (Conservative Treehouse) - Media Bias/Fact Check


I suggest you get a source that is UNBIASED...because if this is where you get your 'facts' - you are learning NOTHING.

Have a nice day.


----------



## McRocket (Apr 9, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot, post: 22164598,
> ...



Try 2.17% (no one in there right mind counts his first FY as he inherited GWB's GR).

The Strange Ups and Downs of the U.S. Economy Since 1929

So far Trump has averaged only 2.55%. Plus, he is sending the deficit SKYROCKETING. Right now, the deficit is on pace for a $1.3 TRILLION dollar deficit. During a growth period? That is absolutely pathetic.

https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/files/reports-statements/mts/mts.pdf

Plus the trade deficit is MUCH worse now then when Trump took office (so much for Trump and his trade 'brilliance' - he is a joke on trade).

https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/Press-Release/current_press_release/exh1.pdf

Plus the DOW has been flat for over a year and 2018 was the first down year for it since the GR.


Your messiah is a macroeconomic loser.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 9, 2019)

antontoo said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > antontoo said:
> ...



Weakest recovery since WWII, but Obama had no responsibility?
What a twat.


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 9, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Jitss617, post: 22164600
> 
> 
> 
> ...


We have many Americans for the job


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 9, 2019)

McRocket said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > He will crush it if congress approves his trade deals
> ...


I just listen to EXPERTS . Are you a expert? My roommate graduated from Harvard,, economics major.. do you know more then him?


----------



## McRocket (Apr 9, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> McRocket said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...



LOL...yeah, and I am the Postmaster General. Nice spin, pal.

I will ask again...

*exactly which trade deals are you talking about and where is your link to unbiased, factual proof that to implement these 'trade deals' will radically alter ('crush') the Real GDP Growth?*


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 9, 2019)

McRocket said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > McRocket said:
> ...


If you don’t know the trade deals I’m talking about,, why would I waste my time with a low iq person?? Bro turn on your internet or tv lol you are information deprived


----------



## Thinker101 (Apr 9, 2019)

antontoo said:


> Thinker101 said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



You do realize Obama had a ZERO percent interest rate, right?  Dumbass.


----------



## Brain357 (Apr 9, 2019)

I think we are all quite certain it will be under 3%...


----------



## Dana7360 (Apr 9, 2019)

protectionist said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Here’s the record thru 2018:
> ...




I don't know where you're getting those numbers because the bureau of economic analysis original estimated growth for 2015 was 2.6%. However by the end of the year it was revised up to 2.9%.

The BEA never said growth was 2% in 2015.

Here's the info from the BEA:

2015 economic growth strongest since 2005 - Reuters

The Bureau of Economic Analysis, the government agency that compiles gross domestic product data, said the economy grew 2.9 percent in 2015, an upward revision from the 2.6 percent it had estimated earlier. That was the strongest growth since 2005.


----------



## sartre play (Apr 9, 2019)

You can argue all day long over how Obama did his job, what you cant argue about is the over welling worst mess in 75 years that Obama was handed on day one.
how Trump has handled things from day one is now where the conversation go's.


----------



## sartre play (Apr 9, 2019)

Sorry spelling error, don't beat me to death over it.


----------



## Dana7360 (Apr 9, 2019)

22lcidw said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101 said:
> ...






Obamacare wasn't passed in 2009. It passed on March 23, 2010. 

No one was out the door in 2009. The election that changed the congress didn't happen that year, it was in 2010. 

No one was even thinking about being out the door in 2009 or March 2010. The election was in November 2010 so no one was "on their way out the door" in 2009. 

Learn when we have elections. 

Learn how to post without lying.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 9, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22166253 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Weakest recovery since WWII



The structural foundations of the economy have been transformed immensely since WWII. If you want to argue that the labor market, communication technology, automation, rust belt foundries and heavy industries, global trade, service economy vs manufacturing economy, women in the workforce. etc etc etc have not changed at all since WWII you go for it. 

Most know you are an idiot already anyway. But keep up with the good idiocy.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 9, 2019)

The National Association of Manufacturers estimates* the U.S. economy would lose $2.5 trillion in GDP over the next decade* if the 2.4 million jobs are not filled.

Jitss617, post: 22166254 





Jitss617 said:


> We have many Americans for the job



How many? 

*Why should we care?*The National Association of Manufacturers says the problem of not being able to hire qualified workers is getting worse as the unemployment rate drops and the labor market tightens and baby boomers retire.
Those are problems facing the economy at large, not just the manufacturing industry. And if jobs go unfilled, that's lost economic potential. 
The National Association of Manufacturers estimates the U.S. economy would lose $2.5 trillion in GDP over the next decade if the 2.4 million jobs are not filled.
Manufacturers say their worker shortage is getting worse. Here’s why


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 9, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> The National Association of Manufacturers estimates* the U.S. economy would lose $2.5 trillion in GDP over the next decade* if the 2.4 million jobs are not filled.
> 
> Jitss617, post: 22166254
> 
> ...


We have many. Look at African American neighborhoods and rural areas, look at Europe


----------



## Hellokitty (Apr 9, 2019)

McRocket said:


> Hellokitty said:
> 
> 
> > McRocket said:
> ...




LOL, MBFC is a joke, curious as to how many sites they bumped as far left based just based on their screw up on reporting the Covington Catholic story? That story alone should have bumped several left wing bias outlets to the Questionable list.


----------



## AntonToo (Apr 9, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> antontoo said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



Whoop there you go again moving the goal posts  because you don’t have any direct reply to what you quoted.

You could write a handbook on how to make dishonest arguments.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 9, 2019)

protectionist said:


> No it's not. Trump took a sinking GDP (2.3 to 1.8) from Obama's last year, and raised it up to 4.2%.



Economic activity fluctuates wildly from qtr to qtr. Yearly growth provides a much better look at an economic trend.



 

No sinking economy preceded Trumpo. 

The sinking is projecting to start in 2019. 

The topic of this thread. What do you think about that?


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 9, 2019)

What does trump have a magic wand?? lol


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 9, 2019)

easyt65, post: 22164734 





easyt65 said:


> Trying to discredit economic success while attempting to falsely claim them as Obama's at the same time is much worse ... and more humiliating, snowflake.



I’ve done neither. Why are you afraid to admit ttat Obama and Trumpo are currently tied at 2.9 % annual GDP growth for their best years to date?


----------



## AntonToo (Apr 9, 2019)

Thinker101 said:


> antontoo said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101 said:
> ...



Yes I realize our monetary policy appropriately looks to keep inflation (and deflation) in check.

But when Trump ran on the promise of 4-5% growth he SPECIFICALLY COMPLAINED ABOUT LOW INTEREST RATES, talking about how they are causing a massive bubble. Now that rates are up slightly (they are still low) he suddenly is running around like chicken without a head threatening to fire his Fed appointee, because he needs an excuse for his promises not panning out.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 9, 2019)

antontoo said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > antontoo said:
> ...



Poor Obama.....


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 9, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> easyt65, post: 22164734
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*Why are you afraid to admit ttat Obama and Trumpo are currently tied at 2.9 % annual GDP growth for their best years to date?*

Why are you afraid to admit that Obama has a lower average than Trump?


----------



## Brain357 (Apr 9, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > easyt65, post: 22164734
> ...


That is funny given obama was handed a recession.  Your dishonesty is impressive.


----------



## Aldo Raine (Apr 9, 2019)

skews13 said:


> Thinker101 said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...




  Unfortunately Tramp is the accident.  Don't you remember that the real unemployment rate before the election was actually over 40%? Tramp fixed that so fast that it was like 4.3% in his first month!
MAGA!


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 9, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



*That is funny given obama was handed a recession.*

Yeah, how did he ever survive that recession that ended in June 2009?

He really was magic!


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Apr 9, 2019)

Oh, gosh. Let me guess: You're going to ignore the Fed's raising of interest rates, right?


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Apr 9, 2019)

So never mind all the other good economic news, and never mind the Fed's raising of interest rates, right?


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 9, 2019)

mikegriffith1 said:


> So never mind all the other good economic news, and never mind the Fed's raising of interest rates, right?



The current interest rate is still historically low.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 9, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> mikegriffith1 said:
> 
> 
> > So never mind all the other good economic news, and never mind the Fed's raising of interest rates, right?
> ...



And only 9 times what it was for the first 7 years of Obama's tenure.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 9, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22168618, 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Why are you afraid to admit that Obama has a lower average than Trump?



Because Trumpo has not finished 8 years that can be averaged and compared to Obama’s eight years. We have reason to believe Trumpo will have a mental breakdown before Election Day or if he holds up, he can’t win Pa, Wi and Mi. We will have four years of older voters dearly departing  and four yearsof new young voters choosing 

When TrumpO’s best full year is compared to Obama’s best full year - The two president’s are tied at 2.9.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 9, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22168618,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Why can't you compare Trump's 2 year average to Obama's 8 year average?
Is it because Obama's number is lower?
Next year, you can compare Trump's 3 year average to Obama's 8 year average.

*We will have four years of older voters dearly departing  and four yearsof new young voters choosing *​
Youngsters are super excited about Biden, eh?​


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Apr 9, 2019)

the fed pulled off raising interest rates
real estate is still flat

NYc real- estate is another animal and bucks national trends ..not saying it doesn't go soft
glad i sold out in 14 an and 2015

weakest manufacturing last quarter was coming out of the north east but it was showing absolutely no signs of heading for contraction

errrrr
anyone who wants to work can find a job
even in communities where rural farmers have more money than suburbanite braggert twats


trump jumping at great economic activity and claiming we can see four 5 6 percent gdp growth is a nothing burger
ive listened to warren buffet call picks and say what are you out of your mind

derp and been right

the economy has some weak spots but we're not dead


----------



## McRocket (Apr 9, 2019)

Hellokitty said:


> McRocket said:
> 
> 
> > Hellokitty said:
> ...



LOL...lady, the fact that you a) read that con trash in the first place and then b) desperately try and knock anything that knocks it tells me ALL I need to know about your general knowledge.

My sources are Bloomberg and the Seattle Times. Yours is some con ding dong who types on a blog.

Guess which ones hold more weight with Wall Street?


You are some (I assume) Trumpbot gal who gets their news from some fickle, massively biased site. For goodness sake's lady - it's called the 'Conservative Treehouse'. You really are so naive as to think that makes it unbiased?

Whatever.


Show me a link to a RESPECTED, UNBIASED source who backs up your ridiculous statement above that _'Um, Canada got screwed with the USMCA deal...' (_which, BTW, almost ALL of Wall Street disagrees with_) _and I might read it.

Until then, we are done here.

Good day.


----------



## McRocket (Apr 9, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> McRocket said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...



Typical troll...makes up shit to get attention. And when someone calls him on it - he spins around like a top  because he knows he has got squat.

LOL.

Hey pal...you made the initial claim. It is up to you to back it up...not the rest of us to prove it is wrong.

Once again...

*exactly which trade deals are you talking about and where is your link to unbiased, factual proof that to implement these 'trade deals' will radically alter ('crush') the Real GDP Growth?

*
Either answer the question or at least be a man (if you are one) and admit you cannot.


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 9, 2019)

McRocket said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > McRocket said:
> ...


It’s every where look them up


----------



## Faun (Apr 9, 2019)

easyt65 said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Here’s the record thru 2018:
> ...


LOLOLOLOL

Unemployment under Obama went from Bush's recession high of 10% down to 4.7%. Under Trump, it's gone down to 3.8%

Obama: 5.3 point drop
Trump: 0.9 point drop
Rightard: _"Trump has accomplished economic and employment successes not seen in decades and accomplished more in 2 years than Obama did in 8"_


----------



## Wry Catcher (Apr 9, 2019)

Thinker101 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101 said:
> ...



How?


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Apr 9, 2019)

Blomberg is good  . its a really great news organization , just put on yer filter for some issues like gun control and "man made " global warming
reading it forever along with the times ny and london ......before the internet BOTH easily available at the majority  NYC news stands
WSJ
barons

blogs zero hedge is good

trade news from shipping to what i used to do for a living

the list is a quarter mile long  .


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 9, 2019)

Faun said:


> easyt65 said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...


When democrats took over congress that’s when it got real bad


----------



## Faun (Apr 9, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > easyt65 said:
> ...


So? Post the legislation you think they passed to cause it?


----------



## Dragonlady (Apr 9, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101 said:
> ...



Because local politics are all about keeping the streets clean and the water running.  The policies which determine whether the economy will continue to thrive are not decisions made at the local level.  Cities are struggling because far too many members of the gerrymandered House were Republicans who treat the cities as drains on the public purse, while pork barrelling vast sums of money for their home districts in rural America.

Republicans have basically eliminated infrastructure spending in their never ending effort to pay no taxes, and America's roads and bridges are crumbling and dangerous.  Since wireless data services were left to the private sector to build, much of rural America still has dial up internet, and can't compete with modern, well funded European and Canadian infrastructure.  There are areas of rural America where people don't have access to clean drinking water.  

63 million Americans exposed to unsafe drinking water

Americans value cheap goods over their own citizens.


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Apr 10, 2019)

progressive Stephine rhule BTW 

im surprised thiers no video of her going around when she worked for bloomberg LOL 

uh boy she gotz some splaning to do 
lil mrs republican lol 

I used to wake up the first thing i would do is turn on dabloomberg 
Blomberg every morning


----------



## McRocket (Apr 10, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> McRocket said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...



Hey Trumpbot, you posted it.

_'He will crush it if congress approves his trade deals'_
Q1 2019 watch - if under 3.0% - where is Trump’s economic miracle - can Trump beat O’s 2.9% ever?

It's up to you to prove it - not me.

Once again...

*exactly which trade deals are you talking about and where is your link to unbiased, factual proof that to implement these 'trade deals' will radically alter ('crush') the Real GDP Growth?

*
A little advice pal, next time you want attention on a chat forum - try not to blurt out something when you actually have no idea if it is true or not. That way guys like me won't make you look silly when they ask you to prove your statement - and you neither can prove it nor dare admit that you have no idea if the statement was true or not.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 10, 2019)

Jitss617, post: 22171398





Jitss617 said:


> When democrats took over congress that’s when it got real bad



When a tax cutter Republican President ends up fucking up the entire global economy into the worst recession since the Great Depression it’s blame Congress.

So knowing that does the following mean you are on record here that you will not be blaming Democrats control of the House when Trumpo’s tax cuts do not produce revenue never seen before and end up rather just another failure of the trickle down tax cuts for the rich Republican con game?

FOR THE RECORD Jitss April 2019:

Jitss617, post: 22164704,


Jitss617 said:


> Trumps investment will drive revenue never seen before. It’s onky year two.. don’t melt snowflake



Q1 2019  *Latest forecast: 2.3 percent — April 8, 2019
*
GDPNow -         Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta

Looks like the White House budget forecast is heading into a -1% hole to start the year. The WH needs probably at least 3.3% GDP growth for Q1 if they expect to finish 2019 well over 3.0% growth for the year and start seeing all that extra revenue to pay down the 1.5 trillion tax cut federal budget shortfall that is TrumpO’s gift to America.

So the rest of the year after Q1 Trumpo is gonna need some 4.0 qtrs in order to as you say “drive revenue never seen before”.

We have a TrumpOroid on record now.

Thank you very much for laying it all on the line for your cult master,


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 10, 2019)

easyt65, post: 22164622, 





easyt65 said:


> Yet poor sore loser butt-hurt, hate-driven, reality-denying snowflakes continue to whine, wail, lie, deny, justify, and attempt to minimize successes Obama NEVER accomplished while President.




My my, tRUMPo is a snowflake - minimizing his own 2.9 % GDP success:

According to Trump 2.9 is anemic and weak.

That’s quite minimizing.

"Obama is the first president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth," Trump said during an Oct. 28 campaign rally in Manchester, N.H.

Trump's claim about Obama's weak economic growth is limited

tRUMPo has not crossed his own line in the sand that he claims is the line between a weak an anemic economy vs a MAGA economy.

Trouble is Trumpo has not crossed his own line? Why is that OK with TrumpORoids?

NotfooledbyW, post: 22164534 





NotfooledbyW said:


> Do you think Trump will be the second president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth,"



And tRUMPo is not heading in the right direction in 2019.

Q1 2019  *Latest forecast: 2.3 percent — April 8, 2019*

GDPNow - Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta

What’s wrong?


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Apr 10, 2019)

Progressive are fucking morons we need more taxes for government
government took to much  WAHHHHHH
in one hole and out the other ....in reverse
Theyre not only complete idiots they're  insanely hypocritical ...as some may already be aware of.

will obama win the war of gdp average proving once and for all ?
that obama is the light and that trump is indeed a racist homophobic nazi who inspires hate.

oh yeah we're all holding on with baited breath .

Presidents dont really make the economy , they can instill confidence
and sometimes presidents and lawmakers have a way of putting the breaks on it .


bunch of fags ...president lawmakers and suburbanites

the other day Hillary team on wall st ?
70% think its Trump for the win in 2020
if it cant be Trump who likes to give them the finger they want a new puppet
that would be Biden
I GUARANTEE YOU they dont give a flyin fuck about your mothers suburban gorilla twat and obamas past gdp performance

NOT ONE


carry on dumb asses


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Apr 10, 2019)

if you're to stupid to understand
this is what i used to do to fuckin young dork salesmen ...or women

they'd talk about a complete order how much we made how smooth it went with the factor or customers banking ....blah blah blah wasn't it awesome

NO
whats up for tomorrow was always my fuckin question

lightweights


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 10, 2019)

Deplorable Yankee, post: 22171567 





Deplorable Yankee said:


> will obama win the war of gdp average proving once and for all ?
> that obama is the light and that trump is indeed a racist homophobic nazi who inspires hate.


.
I cannot find this question or any hint of it being found within the lines of my own OP on this thread.

“Will obama win the war of gdp average proving once and for all ? that obama is the light and that trump is indeed a racist homophobic nazi who inspires hate”

Here is my closing question for posters,

NotfooledbyW, post: 22164534 





NotfooledbyW said:


> Are we settling into a new normal that is not so horrible without 3% sustained GDP growth?



Where you get “obama is the light l” and “trump is indeed a racist homophobic nazi who inspires hate” from my OP shouid make you self reflect on the subject of your waning grasp on reality.

We all can help you if you wish but first you must show an effort to learn how to read.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 10, 2019)

Deplorable Yankee, post: 22171567





Deplorable Yankee said:


> I GUARANTEE YOU they dont give a flyin fuck about your mothers suburban gorilla twat and obamas past gdp performance. NOT ONE



Idiot! This one does:


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 10, 2019)

Dragonlady said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...


 Don’t filibuster here Lol answer the question you tard lol


----------



## Faun (Apr 10, 2019)

McRocket said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > McRocket said:
> ...


There are none. He was just trolling again.


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 10, 2019)

Faun said:


> McRocket said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


At Suki another lefty that doesn’t know about the two trade deals?? Wow the media is def not doing there job


----------



## McRocket (Apr 10, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


You don't know...you haven't got a clue.

That's why you are doing Troll 101a now. When caught, try to derail the conversation with insults.

I will ask again (and since you have not a clue about this - you will avoid answering again):

*exactly which trade deals are you talking about and where is your link to unbiased, factual proof that to implement these 'trade deals' will radically alter ('crush') the Real GDP Growth?*


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 10, 2019)

McRocket said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


Google trumps trade deals.. you might be surprised lol 
Wow!


----------



## McRocket (Apr 10, 2019)

Wry Catcher said:


> Thinker101 said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...



Hey, that's not fair.

He might know what 'trite' means. But 'insipid'?

Next to no chance.

Go easy on him.


----------



## McRocket (Apr 10, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> McRocket said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...



And again...he fails to answer because he has not a clue.

Lol...hey pal, you have already typed way more words trying to deflect then you would have if you just answered the question. You are just making yourself look ridiculous because a) you bviously do not know; and b) you have not got the guts to admit it.

Once again, you made the initial claim, it is u proud to you to back it up - not others.

Again:

*exactly which trade deals are you talking about and where is your link to unbiased, factual proof that to implement these 'trade deals' will radically alter ('crush') the Real GDP Growth?*


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 10, 2019)

McRocket said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > McRocket said:
> ...


If you don’t know about the two trade deals trump is working on,, why in the world would I waste my time talking to you? You are clueless... get some new sources for information they have failed you


----------



## whitehall (Apr 10, 2019)

Where were the economic critics when the Obama administration never hit 3% in eight freaking long long years? Where were critics when Black unemployment was in double digits and Barry told them to get used to food stamps because good factory jobs were gone forever? It's crazy but the current liberal fantasy seems to be based on economic disaster rather than what is best for the United States.


----------



## McRocket (Apr 10, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> McRocket said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...



Yup, folks...again, he tries to spin.

Now we are down to the 'if you don't know, why should I waste my time' nonsense.
 The classic way of trying to extricate oneself from a conversation that one is getting 'crushed' on.

Hey pal, naming them is one thing. Proving they will 'crush' the GDP (as you matter-of-factly stated) is another.

Once again (let's try bigger type):

*exactly which trade deals are you talking about and where is your link to unbiased, factual proof that to implement these 'trade deals' will radically alter ('crush') the Real GDP Growth?*


----------



## McRocket (Apr 10, 2019)

whitehall said:


> Where were the economic critics when the Obama administration never hit 3% in eight freaking long long years? Where were critics when Black unemployment was in double digits and Barry told them to get used to food stamps because good factory jobs were gone forever? It's crazy but the current liberal fantasy seems to be based on economic disaster rather than what is best for the United States.



Right here...I knocked Obama for his economy constantly. Just as I did for GWB's.

And where are Trumpbots who are knocking the insane fiscal deficit Trump is running? Or the fact the trade deficit is much worse then when Obama left office? Or the fact the DOW has been flat for over a year and had the first down year in 2018 since the GR?

Well?


----------



## protectionist (Apr 10, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> No sinking economy preceded Trumpo.
> 
> The sinking is projecting to start in 2019.
> 
> The topic of this thread. What do you think about that?


I think we are both seeing the FACTS.  In Obama's last year (4 quarters), just like I said, the economy SUNK from 2.3% to 1.8 %.  Some people have to be told twice.


----------



## protectionist (Apr 10, 2019)

McRocket said:


> Right here...I knocked Obama for his economy constantly. Just as I did for GWB's.
> 
> And where are Trumpbots who are knocking the insane fiscal deficit Trump is running? Or the fact the trade deficit is much worse then when Obama left office? Or the fact the DOW has been flat for over a year and had the first down year in 2018 since the GR?
> 
> Well?


Wanna show some FACTS about that trade deficit ? 

while noting that trade deals are still in process of being worked out.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Apr 10, 2019)

whitehall said:


> Where were the economic critics when the Obama administration never hit 3% in eight freaking long long years? Where were critics when Black unemployment was in double digits and Barry told them to get used to food stamps because good factory jobs were gone forever? It's crazy but the current liberal fantasy seems to be based on economic disaster rather than what is best for the United States.



Obama inherited the Great Recession, when he left office the economy was rolling along well.  Well, notwithstanding the Ministry of Truth which likes to rewrite history, and claim the Obama Administration actually created the Great Recession which began a year before he took office.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 11, 2019)

protectionist said:


> McRocket said:
> 
> 
> > Right here...I knocked Obama for his economy constantly. Just as I did for GWB's.
> ...



US Trade deficit....the yellow line is when Trump took office...


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 11, 2019)

protectionist, post: 22177340 





protectionist said:


> I think we are both seeing the FACTS. In Obama's last year (4 quarters), just like I said, the economy SUNK from 2.3% to 1.8 %. Some people have to be told twice.



This time I see your facts. But it’s interpreting those facts in a meaningful way that separates the knowledgeable scientific minded persons from the clowns. The main problem with your interpretation of this data is that:

(A) Obama was not President for only one year.

I can give you more but I will wait for your concurrence that (A) is indeed a fact. You may not.

That is why I presented to you this fact:






Scientific, facts based minds always look to the maximum relative data that is available.

What took place from July 2016 thru January 2017 does not reflect the much larger reality that TrumpO inherited, what soon will be, the longest record setting expansion in US history.






At First you were willing to compare Obama's best year to TrumpO’s best year. But you ran away from that.

Do you care to explain why?


----------



## McRocket (Apr 11, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> McRocket said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...



And again folks, he tries to spin it to try and derail the debate.

You brought it up pal. It’s up to you to prove it.

And again,

*exactly which trade deals are you talking about and where is your link to unbiased, factual proof that to implement these 'trade deals' will radically alter ('crush') the Real GDP Growth?*


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 11, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> McRocket said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...



Please lay out the ways that the new NAFTA will increase the GDP.  Which provisions in it will be a boon to our GDP?  In specifics please?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## CowboyTed (Apr 11, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Here’s the record thru 2018:
> View attachment 254781
> 
> U.S. - GDP growth by year 1990-2017 | Statista
> ...



Of Course Trump can beat 3%...

Just borrow $3 Trillion a year and 4-5% is on the cards

I say if you borrow $5 trillion 7-10% is possible


----------



## Lesh (Apr 11, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> antontoo said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


are you so dishonest as to claim that the second a recession is over we are back to prerecession numbers?

Do you know what the term recession means? Maybe you ought to quote a definition so we can see if you are lying or just stupid


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 11, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > McRocket said:
> ...


Same lay out every serious economist laid out for you to read.. like I said if you know more and don’t want to be embarrassed call cnn they would love to hear the negative side affects of this deal..


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 11, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...



Thank you for admitting your ignorance and offering your unconditional surrender.  


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 11, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...



There was no ad hominem.   Your plea to authority fails in two areas.

One as a logical fallacy and two in the fact that nobody outside of the White House claiming the new NAFTA will have an impact in the GDP.

None of the minor tweaks will do a thing.

I would be happy to discuss each provision with you if you need to be educated on the new deal.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 11, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...


You are suffering from Trump derangement syndrome


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 11, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...



Not at all.  I give Trump credit when it is due.  I have openly supported and cheered for his two SCOTUS picks, for his changes to the Fed Govt work guidelines, for his desire to pull the troops out of the ME and other areas.

So, are you ready to discuss specific provisions or will you just keep making your own ad hominem attacks?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## protectionist (Apr 11, 2019)

Wry Catcher said:


> Obama inherited the Great Recession, when he left office the economy was rolling along well.  Well, notwithstanding the Ministry of Truth which likes to rewrite history, and claim the Obama Administration actually created the Great Recession which began a year before he took office.


Obama did not create the 2008 recession, but it's also not true that _"when he left office the economy was rolling along well." _In Obama's last 4 quarters in office, GDP growth SANK from 2.3% to 1.8%.  Thankfully, he left, and Trump raised it significantly.


----------



## protectionist (Apr 11, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> US Trade deficit....the yellow line is when Trump took office...
> 
> View attachment 255232


Since when is the Census Bureau a source for facts about trade deficits ? And this chart doesn't even have a title.  Who knows what it represents ?


----------



## protectionist (Apr 11, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> This time I see your facts. But it’s interpreting those facts in a meaningful way that separates the knowledgeable scientific minded persons from the clowns. The main problem with your interpretation of this data is that:
> 
> (A) Obama was not President for only one year.
> 
> ...


I responded to your comment >> _"No sinking economy preceded Trump"
_
That comment was FALSE.  The word sink refers to something that is continually going down. That's exactly what the economy was doing, preceding Trump (from 2.3% GDP to 1.8)

And I did not run away from anything. I compared Obama's best (and only) year (2016) to Trump's best year.

Of course, I concur that Obama was not president for only one year. But only one year (2016) is attributable to his work.  The preceding years were natural recoil after a serious recession, whereby steady improvement typically occurs, on its own, regardless of any presidency.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 11, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > US Trade deficit....the yellow line is when Trump took office...
> ...



You people seem to get some sort of perverse pleasure out of showing your ignorance.  

Foreign Trade - U.S. Trade with World, Seasonally Adjusted

United States Balance of Trade | 2019 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast



Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## protectionist (Apr 11, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> You people seem to get some sort of perverse pleasure out of showing your ignorance.
> 
> Foreign Trade - U.S. Trade with World, Seasonally Adjusted
> 
> United States Balance of Trade | 2019 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast


1.  There still should be a TITLE to any chart that is posted in a computer forum.

2.  The Trump reign (8 years quite likely) is only 2 years into its possible length (1/4 of the time). Trade deals are still in process, and not even at halfway point.  Never judge an artists' painting, until it is DONE.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 11, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > You people seem to get some sort of perverse pleasure out of showing your ignorance.
> ...



You asked for information, I gave information.  I made no judgements.  

Personally I think the bluster about trade deficits is just bullshit to get the faithful riled up.  There is nothing wrong with a county running a trade deficit, which is why ours only drops when the economy tanks 


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 11, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...


Debate the economist not me


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 11, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...



There are no economist saying what you claim they are.   You are lying and are too stupid to even do a good job of it

But I must commend you on knowing your limits and not attempting to discus specifics with me 

Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 11, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...


Again why are you attacking me, attack all the amazing economist that love it


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 11, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...



I am not attacking you, quit whining like a baby.

I am stating he facts, nothing more.




Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## g5000 (Apr 11, 2019)

Thinker101 said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Here’s the record thru 2018:
> ...


How ironic.  All you pseudocon fuckwits did for eight years was whine about how laggard Obama's economy was.

Trump himself whined about it.

Karma's a BITCH!


----------



## g5000 (Apr 11, 2019)

Even though Trump has been trying to juice the GDP with the largest big government spending budgets in the history of the Universe, running up trillion dollar deficits in the process, he still hasn't been able to hit the magic 4.0 percent GDP he promised.

Sad.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 11, 2019)

Lesh said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > antontoo said:
> ...



*are you so dishonest as to claim that the second a recession is over we are back to prerecession numbers?*

I'd never claim that. I'll just continue to laugh at jokers who claim Obama's weak 8 year economic performance had nothing to do with Obama.

*Do you know what the term recession means? *

A *recession* is two consecutive quarters of declining gross domestic product (GDP)

Definition of RECESSION

Now you realize that the recession ended in Jun 2009, right?


----------



## Lesh (Apr 11, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Now you realize that the recession ended in Jun 2009, right?



So the third and fourth quarters would not be expected to be anything other than declining...

They could be zero GDP growth and still not be technically part of the Recession...right?  Right,

In fact including those quarters would actually be dishonest in evaluating Obama's performance...wouldn't it...

Yea


----------



## Lesh (Apr 11, 2019)

And then there's the fact that in trying to make Obama a one term President that Republicans fought the kind of spending that would have given us a robust Recovery (sequester, government shut down, battling the Stimulus)...

So there's that


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 11, 2019)

Lesh said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Now you realize that the recession ended in Jun 2009, right?
> ...



*So the third and fourth quarters would not be expected to be anything other than declining...*

If they were declining, the recession would have ended later than June 2009.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 11, 2019)

Lesh said:


> And then there's the fact that in trying to make Obama a one term President that Republicans fought the kind of spending that would have given us a robust Recovery (sequester, government shut down, battling the Stimulus)...
> 
> So there's that



Poor Obama, he only added $9.3 trillion to the debt. How much should he have added?


----------



## Lesh (Apr 11, 2019)

So on the one hand...you bitch that the Recovery wasn't fast enough or strong enough...and the other you bitch about debt which is the only real instrument that a President has to aid that Recovery.

One might think you were less than honest...and one would be right


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 11, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Lesh said:
> 
> 
> > And then there's the fact that in trying to make Obama a one term President that Republicans fought the kind of spending that would have given us a robust Recovery (sequester, government shut down, battling the Stimulus)...
> ...



Obama added an average of $2,848,864,083 to the debt daily for his 8 years.

So far Trump has added an average of $3,206,109,682 daily to the debt.  

That is a 12.5% increase over Obama.

Yet you kiss Trump’s ass daily


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 11, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...


Factually you are wrong .. are you a economist??


----------



## AntonToo (Apr 11, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Lesh said:
> 
> 
> > And then there's the fact that in trying to make Obama a one term President that Republicans fought the kind of spending that would have given us a robust Recovery (sequester, government shut down, battling the Stimulus)...
> ...



More blatant bullshit from you.

How did Obama add 9.3 Trillion exactly? You will NEVER be able answer that, because the premise is bullshit.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 11, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...



I am not, and no economist has stated the lies you are attributing to them.  


You are just pulling shit out of your ass and saying someone else said it.   But you are lying.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 11, 2019)

antontoo said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Lesh said:
> ...



By spending 9.3 trillion more than we brought in.  It is not a hard concept 


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 11, 2019)

Lesh said:


> So on the one hand...you bitch that the Recovery wasn't fast enough or strong enough...and the other you bitch about debt which is the only real instrument that a President has to aid that Recovery.
> 
> One might think you were less than honest...and one would be right



Nah, you're the one bitching that the Republicans didn't let Obama spend more.
Maybe Obama should have added another 100,000 pages of regulations.
That always helps the economy, eh?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 11, 2019)

antontoo said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Lesh said:
> ...



Obama made Bush look like a budget hawk.


----------



## jc456 (Apr 11, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> protectionist, post: 22177340
> 
> 
> 
> ...


trump has but one year.  So how does one do that?


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 11, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> antontoo said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



Using Budget years Bush II added a far higher percent than Obama did 


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 11, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > antontoo said:
> ...



Bush added $4.9 trillion (actually less). Obama added $9.3 trillion (actually more).


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 11, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...


No I know see them on Fox News all the time


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 11, 2019)

protectionist, post: 22179144 





protectionist said:


> I responded to your comment >> _"No sinking economy preceded Trump"
> _
> That comment was FALSE. The word sink refers to something that is continually going down. That's exactly what the economy was doing, preceding Trump (from 2.3% GDP to 1.8)



Can you tell us all here about your conclusion that the last year of the Obama Admin was ‘sinking’ or as you say ‘going down’ .



 


I’m just not seeing a 2016 economy going down.  Of course Im not in the TrumpOcult so perhaps you can explain why down is up.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 11, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...



Those are not real, they are paid actors hired by FoxNews


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 11, 2019)

jc456, post: 22180756 





jc456 said:


> trump has but one year. So how does one do that?



TrumpO has two years, Moron. And I don’t care if you add up 4 consecutive quarters to calculate his best full year, he still does not get a full year above 2.9% GDP.

 The lying sack of orange shit told you, and I guess you believed him, that his 1.5 $trillion tax cut for himself and rich pals wouid trigger plus 4% GDP - maybe even 6%. 


NATASHA BACH *December 7th, 2017 *On Wednesday, Trump told reporters that he expects to see a 6% annual growth rate. That might not sound like a wild number, until you consider that 6% more than doubles the 30-year average rate of 2.5%. Six percent is also more than triple what the Congressional Budget Office forecasts for the next ten years.
Trump Thinks the U.S. Could See GDP Growth of 6%. The Data Says Otherwise.

Surely Trumpo was feeling cocky about 2018. 

2018 will be Trumpo’s BEST YEAR on GDP. 

He’s tied with OBAMA at 2.9. 




If you think 2019 will be the year for TrumpO’s 6.0% GDP you are certified crazy, 



 

2.3% this quarter ain’t gonna get it.


----------



## Faun (Apr 11, 2019)

g5000 said:


> Even though Trump has been trying to juice the GDP with the largest big government spending budgets in the history of the Universe, running up trillion dollar deficits in the process, he still hasn't been able to hit the magic 4.0 percent GDP he promised.
> 
> Sad.


With his first fiscal budget, he spent a whopping $5½ trillion during a strong economy. Fucking conservatives can never again complain about spending.


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 11, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...


Ahhhh ok you are delusional lol


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 11, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> When democrats took over congress that’s when it got real bad



When Republicans had control of the House Senate and White House in 2017 -18  there were 29,000 fewer jobs created each month than were created under Obama’s second term.


The average monthly gain under Trump so far is 197,000 — compared with an average monthly gain of 217,000 during Obama’s second term.

Trump will have to pick up the pace if he is to fulfill his campaign boast that he will be “the greatest jobs president that God ever created.”
Trump's Numbers, April 2019 Update - FactCheck.org

Sounds like to me that as far as the past six years go, it is Obama that is the greatest jobs president that God ever created.


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 11, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > When democrats took over congress that’s when it got real bad
> ...


Lol well I hope so unemployment was at 10% ha soon as democrats took over Congress.. dems can’t govern with a republican president


----------



## Faun (Apr 11, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


You're fucking deranged. 

The unemployment rate was never near 10% as soon as Democrats took over Congress.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 12, 2019)

NotfooledbyW, post: 22182680 





NotfooledbyW said:


> The average monthly gain under Trump so far is 197,000 — compared with an average monthly gain of 217,000 during Obama’s second term.
> 
> Trump will have to pick up the pace if he is to fulfill his campaign boast that he will be “the greatest jobs president that God ever created.”
> Trump's Numbers, April 2019 Update - FactCheck.org
> ...



Jitss617, post: 22183295





Jitss617 said:


> Lol well I hope so unemployment was at 10% ha soon as democrats took over Congress.. dems can’t govern with a republican president



Your reply makes no sense, when you get past “We’ll I hope so” .... that Obama’s ‘weak and anemic’ economic policy created 20,000 more jobs a month than TrumpO’s policy does.

Sounds to me like you are admitting that TrumpO can’t govern even when his own god-damned Party Controlled both Houses.

How is your TrumpO gonna truly be “the greatest jobs president that God ever created.”
If he cannot create as many jobs a month as four years of the weak and anemic jobs growth period that preceded him has done. 

Trumpo has set himself into becoming “the WEAKEST jobs president that God ever created.” And you say you hope so. 

Jesus, TrumpO’s people are dumb.


----------



## Aldo Raine (Apr 12, 2019)

CowboyTed said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Here’s the record thru 2018:
> ...




Wanna bet?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 12, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22180016 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> I'll just continue to laugh at jokers who claim Obama's weak 8 year economic performance had nothing to do with Obama.



Obama had policies that had much to do with his 2.2 average GDP growth over seven years and reducing the unemployment rate  roughly from 10 to 5%. He created 20,000 more jobs per month than TrumpO is creating up to now. 

The point of this thread is that during Ovsma’s second the phrase you use ‘weak recovery’ has ajready been proven to be a false narrative      based on the current data coming from TrumpO’s current WEAK and ANEMIC economy. 

The modern day status quo for GDP appears to be 2.5%. TrumpO proves his big mouth with grandiose promises and attacks about the weakness that preceded him are alll completely.

Obama’s recovery is becoming normal not weak thanks to TRUMPO and his lying band of idiots.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 12, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...



Provide the names of the economist and prove me wrong 


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Pilot1 (Apr 12, 2019)

Why does the Left (Democrats, Progressives, Liberals, the Media) constantly ROUTE AGAINST America, and the economic well being of its citizens?  Yet they route for illegal aliens to take over our country.  It doesn't make any sense.


----------



## McRocket (Apr 12, 2019)

Pilot1 said:


> Why does the Left (Democrats, Progressives, Liberals, the Media) constantly ROUTE AGAINST America, and the economic well being of its citizens?  Yet they route for illegal aliens to take over our country.  It doesn't make any sense.



*And why do Trumpbots NEVER seem to complain about the pathetic, fiscal deficit or the trade deficit - both of which are far worse under Trump?

https://www.fiscal.treasury.gov/files/reports-statements/mts/mts.pdf
https://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/Press-Release/current_press_release/exh1.pdf*


And - BTW - I complained about the economy under Obama...plenty.

U.S. Adds 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6% - Page 2

(DA60 was my handle on that site).


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 12, 2019)

Pilot1 said:


> Why does the Left (Democrats, Progressives, Liberals, the Media) constantly ROUTE AGAINST America, and the economic well being of its citizens?  Yet they route for illegal aliens to take over our country.  It doesn't make any sense.



The word is “root” not “route”...


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## edward37 (Apr 12, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Pilot1 said:
> 
> 
> > Why does the Left (Democrats, Progressives, Liberals, the Media) constantly ROUTE AGAINST America, and the economic well being of its citizens?  Yet they route for illegal aliens to take over our country.  It doesn't make any sense.
> ...


And we're not rooting against America  We're rooting against the slob of a man you  and Putin put in our WH


----------



## Pilot1 (Apr 12, 2019)

But its OK for the American citizens to suffer in order to get back at Trump.  Nice.  I never rooted for the country to suffer to make Obama look bad. 

Oh, the Russian/Putin hoax has been debunked.  Grow up.


----------



## edward37 (Apr 12, 2019)

Pilot1 said:


> But its OK for the American citizens to suffer in order to get back at Trump.  Nice.  I never rooted for the country to suffer to make Obama look bad.
> 
> Oh, the Russian/Putin hoax has been debunked.  Grow up.


OK Pilot I'll take your word for that BUT SURELY you know the republican party voted for party and not the people during Obama's 8 years


----------



## Pilot1 (Apr 12, 2019)

The Republican Party tried to resist the absolute ludicrous Obama policies in order to save the country form his brand of more and bigger government control of everything include healthcare, and the economy.  His Energy and Regulatory policies alone were very destructive.  Thankfully Trump got rid of most of his destruction.

Fortunately, Obama was so lazy and inept that he only got Obamacare through and a few other, policies and EO's.


----------



## edward37 (Apr 12, 2019)

Pilot1 said:


> The Republican Party tried to resist the absolute ludicrous Obama policies in order to save the country form his brand of more and bigger government control of everything include healthcare, and the economy.  His Energy and Regulatory policies alone were very destructive.  Thankfully Trump got rid of most of his destruction.
> 
> Fortunately, Obama was so lazy and inept that he only got Obamacare through and a few other, policies and EO's.


Trump hates Obama  Obama made him look like an AH on TV  He'd do anything to get back at Obama including getting rid of all the protections Obama was responsible for


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 12, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> NotfooledbyW, post: 22182680
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No it means when democrats stopped  attacking George Bush they actually did there job, it wasn’t great but anyone could have take 10% unemployment and reduced it. 
Problem is democrats cant govern with a republican president. All they do is attack. Use the media as propaganda and sit back and wait for the election. 

So that means trump if he had  cooperation with democrats unemployment should be around 1% 
Absolutely amazing the job he is doing.. he was sent from god.


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 12, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...


Any economist on Fox News


----------



## edward37 (Apr 12, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW, post: 22182680
> ...


GOD is weeping


----------



## edward37 (Apr 12, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW, post: 22182680
> ...


Is that like all the cooperation Repubs gave Obama??


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 12, 2019)

edward37 said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...


Tears of joy America is back finally


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 12, 2019)

edward37 said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...


Republicans never obstrutucted like dems do to republicans not even close


----------



## edward37 (Apr 12, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> edward37 said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


Go back in time my friend  about 10 years and tell us what your AH McConnell said about how repubs will treat Obama  ,,,I dare you


----------



## Faun (Apr 12, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> edward37 said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


LOLOL 

You’re actually getting nuttier. 

_The Republicans' Plan for the New President

On the night of Barack Obama’s inauguration, a group of top GOP luminaries quietly gathered in a Washington steakhouse to lick their wounds and ultimately create the outline of a plan for how to deal with the incoming administration.

“The room was filled. It was a who’s who of ranking members who had at one point been committee chairmen, or in the majority, who now wondered out loud whether they were in the permanent minority,” Frank Luntz, who organized the event, told FRONTLINE.

Among them were Senate power brokers Jim DeMint, Jon Kyl and Tom Coburn, and conservative congressmen Eric Cantor, Kevin McCarthy and Paul Ryan.

After three hours of strategizing, they decided they needed to fight Obama on everything. The new president had no idea what the Republicans were planning._​


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 12, 2019)

edward37 said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > edward37 said:
> ...


I did and listened  to the context not the left wing propaganda you were feed poor little sheep lol


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 12, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...



Name one 


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 12, 2019)

Faun said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > edward37 said:
> ...


Lol yea fight him on socialism which they did


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 12, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...


Why??


----------



## Aldo Raine (Apr 12, 2019)

Pilot1 said:


> But its OK for the American citizens to suffer in order to get back at Trump.  Nice.  I never rooted for the country to suffer to make Obama look bad.
> 
> Oh, the Russian/Putin hoax has been debunked.  Grow up.




  No ewe routed remember?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 12, 2019)

Pilot1, post: 22184095 





Pilot1 said:


> Why does the Left (Democrats, Progressives, Liberals, the Media) constantly ROUTE AGAINST America, and the economic well being of its citizens?



Don’t know about you but I am rooting for the health and economic well being of middle working class Americans and all those who work and study hard but have not joined the middle class as of yet.

i don’t believe that TrumpO’s class need anything from me that could improve their well 
being including more breaks on their so-called tax burden.

This thread is in part about how the TrumpO tax cuts were much too generous to the wealthy and corporations and have failed to produce the touted success.

Once again Trickle Down is a code word for Pissing On.

That’s what I’m against. The little guy being pissed on over and over again as too many little guys keep falling for the dog whistle crap that  sucks in so many older white voters.

Can you discuss the subject of this thread or are you limited to making shit up about Democrats on and on.

Proud Democrat and I love my country,


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 12, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22180016
> 
> 
> 
> ...




*Obama had policies that had much to do with his 2.2 average GDP growth over seven years *

You bet. His policies had much to do with the slowest recovery since WWII.
​*The point of this thread is that during Ovsma’s second the phrase you use ‘weak recovery’ has ajready been proven to be a false narrative *​
Really? Who had a weaker recovery than Obama? Link?​


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 12, 2019)

Jitss617, post: 2218434 





Jitss617 said:


> So that means trump if he had cooperation with democrats unemployment should be around 1%



You have to be in the top 500 of stupidest deplorables out there. 

If TrumpO had a plan to get our country to 1% unemployment the Democratic Party has no way to block it. 

They didn’t stop the tax cuts and have not stopped TrumpO from cutting regulations. 

What else is TrumpO trying to do to get unemployment down to 1%


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 12, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Jitss617, post: 2218434
> 
> 
> 
> ...


They are blocking it lol illegals are taking 30 million jobs! Take them away the gdp is at 1% .. you aren’t good with math are you?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 12, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22184713 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Really? Who had a weaker recovery than Obama? Link?



I am not saying Obama has a stronger recovery and expansion than any of his predecessors. 

That has been explained to you a zillion times.. 

What do you want a link for? I agree with that.


----------



## AntonToo (Apr 12, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> antontoo said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



We BROUGHT IN LESS because of the tax-cuts and Great Recession, which accounted for about 40% of the defict compared to baseline projections - how is that Obama's fault?

And what did Obama spend on? +870 Billion dollars on Stimulus, what else significant did Obama spend on?


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 12, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...



Because you are lying about them, which is why you cannot do so


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 12, 2019)

antontoo said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > antontoo said:
> ...



When you are at the top, blame falls to you, that is the nature of being in charge.  


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 12, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22184713
> 
> 
> 
> ...



So you were lying when you said it was a false narrative. Thanks!


----------



## AntonToo (Apr 12, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



Actually thats BULLSHIT. Bush policies did not disapear when he left office.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 12, 2019)

antontoo said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...



Actually, it's reality.

Go here......

Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)

Look at Jan 20, 2001---Jan 20, 2009---Jan 20, 2017.

Do the math.


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 12, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...


No I’m not


----------



## AntonToo (Apr 12, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> antontoo said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...



Thats an answer for the intelectually lazy sheep that routinely conflate correlations and causations.

Correct answer is that Obama could do very little about the deficits in an already bad economy. Austerity out of Great Recession would be exactly the wrong policy response and I refuse to fault him for not taking it up. We needed expansionary policy and he did exactly that.

You could blame him for maybe failing to herd the Congress towards the Grand Bargain and tax reform after 2012, but again he at least tried unlike the ignorant asshole in the White House today who doesn't give a shit about anything past his time in office.

Trump sold himself on being able to achieve higher economic efficienies, but reality of what he is doing is converting small GDP growth bump in the middle of a healthy economy into big long term debt. Which is EXACTLY OPPOSITE of sound economic policy.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 12, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...



Yes you are, that is why you can’t name one.   You are just making shit up...which is all you ever do.  You never once support anything you post.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Faun (Apr 12, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


LOLOL 

Troll says, _obstruction is wonderful when his side does it._


----------



## Faun (Apr 12, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


So you say, but you can’t prove your claims.


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 12, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...


If you want to fight economist go right ahead I’m not an economist I just agree with them


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 12, 2019)

Faun said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


I would agree obstructing socialism is a great thing


----------



## Faun (Apr 12, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


No one’s fighting any economists since you can’t prove any of them said what you claim.


----------



## Faun (Apr 12, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


And I believe obstructing cults is good, which is what the right has become.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 12, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...



You are lying, no economist has said what you claim.  Until such time as you can provide proof you will forever be known as a proud liar. 


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 12, 2019)

Faun said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...


Def not


----------



## Faun (Apr 12, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...


That’s already been established.


----------



## AntonToo (Apr 12, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> antontoo said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



You didn't actually respond to what I said. (you've cut out the most important part of it)

Is chronic assholism preventing you from doing that?


----------



## Faun (Apr 12, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


You can deny it all you want, but the facts speak for themselves; and the facts reveal you can’t prove your claims.


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 12, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...


Peter morici


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 12, 2019)

Faun said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


Just did


----------



## Faun (Apr 12, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


LOLOL 

Where did you prove an economist said what you claim he said?

You’re lying again.


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 12, 2019)

Faun said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


Peter moric


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 12, 2019)

antontoo said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > antontoo said:
> ...



Yeah, love that bullshit chart from CBPP. 
So much better than the actual numbers.


----------



## Faun (Apr 12, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


Why would I argue with Peter Morici? He says, _“Mr. Trump’s focus on NAFTA is misplaced.”_

Peter Morici: How to fix the trade deficit ... and why it's critically important to do so

If you were gonna blindly throw out the name of an economist, don’t you think it would have been a good idea to choose one who actually said what you attributed to him?


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 12, 2019)

Faun said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


He also said it’s a great deal for he American people lol
Maybe he wants to change a piece of it he should run for president lol


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Apr 12, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Pilot1, post: 22184095
> 
> 
> 
> ...




if you were a democrat and loved your country you wouldn't be a democrat
my mothers a registered democrat and hadn't voted for one since JFK




I identify neither R or D
they can both go to hell THE LOT of em'

ya got 30 pages of  nutin here
Like i said earlier president do not make an economy you can cut regulations , over regulate
over tax, have bad tax laws blah blha blah
ya really wanna help the middle class and working poor ?
Do Gooder socialism and crony capitalism is not the answer. government,LAWYERS AND "INTELLECTUALS" WHO NEVER DID A HARD DAYS WORK  is never the answer .
More government is never the answer and that seems to be democrats answer for everything ...

ya want government to help the working poor ?
crack down on illegals wages will rise faster!

Not that im a fan of bush but during his admin an ice raid cracked down on a large chicken processing plant could of been in bama
what happened the next dew days ?

white and black Americans lined up for jobs

one thing the news has been reporting
People are working and finding higher paying jobs "the rubes "who are not wealthy farmers or business owners , or white collar middle class you like to put down mostly live in places where cost of living is lower were not talking east 81st st .. they can take 4,5,6,7 hundred dollar a week jobs and not have care in the world...some ARE ACTUALLY happy with a small steady paycheck or its a second income for a young  family ...and some day they may be that Walgreen or burger king manager or put themselves through school or start a lil business of thier own .

locally here i can go by a business without seeing a help wanted sigh ...thier was even a machine shop advertising ON THE RADIO WE NEED Machinists

come on in

when they hit that voting booth in 2020 theyre not going to be thinking about obamas vs trump GDP

Things they do remember LIke single working moms who made slightly to much money and were paying for their own health insurance ....who could no longer afford it ....after she was told shed save money every year .

Know what they do like ?they like that if they get fiired or quit that shit job they can get another one IMMEDIATELY
they love that!
which is going on right now

You wanna be elitist leftarded types sometimes yas live with yer heads in the clouds .

YA wanna help the "lil people "
the lil hvac guy with 8 employees keep government out of his way.

the little mill or parts factory that has 40 employees get off the little guys back and he usually shines and everyone around them benefits.

get off their backs .....ya want government to help protect them ? PROTECT THEM from the government cryonyism and do gooder socialism AND THE FUCKIN LAWYERS

 me and you are older and quite comfy ...we have white people problems.
you and your wife are getting closer to retirement ...you're probably going to leave those burbs you may sell that condo your daughter in or keep it as a rental property
probably got at least a half million to a million  stashed blah blah blah
youre looking forward to grand kids

ME should i buy the vette in black?  ...no black is hard to keep clean and oh yeah the guys are coming to start diggin the pool Monday or Tuesday ..weather permitting


wanna help the "less fortunate "
Stay outta the "little guys "way
Leave them alone ...leave the road open for opportunity

Some days Im sick of the lot yas
Eviscerate the proletariat!


----------



## AntonToo (Apr 12, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> antontoo said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



What are the actual numbers of Bush policy contribution VS Obama policy contribution VS Trump policy contribution?

You never posted those numbers, you posted about correlation, NOT CAUSATION. And thats why they are bullshit.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 12, 2019)

NotfooledbyW, post: 22183962 





NotfooledbyW said:


> The point of this thread is......



*(A) I wrote:* .....  during Obama’s second term the phrase that you use ‘weak recovery’ ...has already been proven...  to be a *false narrative.*

Thats as far as you were able to read:

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22184990


Toddsterpatriot said:


> So you were lying when you said it was a false narrative. Thanks!



(*B*) *The rest of what I wrote:  

It is a false narrative *..........based on the *current data* coming from TrumpO’s *current* WEAK and ANEMIC economy. 

*(C) Do you know what current data is? *
*
I*’ll give you a clue. It has nothing to do with what happened 70 years ago in Post Waf industrial economies. 

A+B+C=D

My point is:  (a) because Trumpo has established that the entire Obama economy below 3.0% annual GDP growth was weak and anemic. 

Plus (b) and we now know, with current data, that Trumpo did not get a full years growth above 3.0 during his first two years. And is not likely to get anywhere near it for the rest of his term.

Plus (c)  TrumpO is presiding over a peak US economy at 2.9 % GDP which is no where considered to be weak or anemic. 

EQUALS (d) If Trumpo’s economy is good or strong at max peak 2.9 GDP, then it must now also be true that Obama's 7 year recovery and share of the expansion was good or strong.

A trend of 2.5 average GDP is the new normal. 

Obama is right there with TrumpO. There is no separation by the big mouth.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 12, 2019)

Deplorable Yankee, post: 22185968 





Deplorable Yankee said:


> ya got 30 pages of nutin here



Since your only purpose here is to shit on everything, excuse me but who should give a damn about your rants, edicts and bitching.

I responded to you. You ignore intelligent discussion. 

Prove me wrong 



NotfooledbyW said:


> Deplorable Yankee, post: 22171567
> 
> 
> 
> ...




What do you say?


----------



## g5000 (Apr 12, 2019)

Jitss617 said:


> McRocket said:
> 
> 
> > Jitss617 said:
> ...


You made the claim.  You clearly can't back it up or you would have.


----------



## g5000 (Apr 12, 2019)

Trump's trade war cost U.S. economy $7.8 billion in 2018: study

_Authors of the paper said they analyzed the short-run impact of Trump’s actions and found that imports from targeted countries declined 31.5 percent while targeted U.S. exports fell by 11 percent. *They also found that annual consumer and producer losses from higher costs of imports totaled $68.8 billion.


*_
Not to mention the total stoppage of the Dow's momentum after a steady nine year climb.


.


----------



## g5000 (Apr 12, 2019)

Jitss617

Our trade deficits are skyrocketing. Our trade deficit with China is at the highest in history. Our trade deficit with Mexico is also exploding.

Our federal deficit has gone nuclear, rising 77 percent higher than last year!

Federal spending is at record highs, and the fake tax cut has reduced federal revenues.


President Hillary Clinton is an unmitigated disaster.


Oh wait...


U.S. trade gap with China reaches all-time high under Trump

Mexico can thank the US for its record-high trade surplus

Mexico sure is paying for TH3 WALLE, eh?



U.S. Trade Gap Surged to $621 Billion in 2018, Highest in Decade

.


----------



## g5000 (Apr 12, 2019)

...trade wars are good, and easy to win...


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 12, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> NotfooledbyW, post: 22183962
> 
> 
> 
> ...



_*It is a false narrative *..........based on the *current data* coming from TrumpO’s *current* WEAK and ANEMIC economy. _

Liar. Trump's data doesn't change Obama's weak recovery.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 12, 2019)

antontoo said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > antontoo said:
> ...



*What are the actual numbers of Bush policy contribution VS Obama policy contribution VS Trump policy contribution?*

Well, if Obama thought a Bush policy was going to cost too much, he was free to reverse it.
Unless he was too stupid to know that........


----------



## AntonToo (Apr 12, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> antontoo said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



Which one specifically?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 12, 2019)

antontoo said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > antontoo said:
> ...



Which ones did Obama think were too expensive?
Or which ones do you think were too expensive?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 12, 2019)

*I’m saying: *
_*
It is a false narrative *..........based on the *current data* coming from TrumpO’s *current* WEAK and ANEMIC economy._


Toddsterpatriot, post: 22187168 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Liar. Trump's data doesn't change Obama's weak recovery.



Trumpshit!!! We know from current TrumpO economic GDP data that he, so far and most likely will remain THE SECOND PRESIDENT In US HISTORY to FAIL to ACHIEVE a FULL YEAR of GDP GROWTH ABOVE 3%.

The first president to fail, as Trumpo pointed out, to ACHIEVE a FULL YEAR of GDP GROWTH ABOVE 3% was President Obama.

The best full year for both leaders is 2.9%.

So you may wish to call both Presidents weak and their economic record anemic if that is your preference.

But TrumpO's data means you cannot call one weak and the other strong. If you do you are dishonestly unreasonable. Basically truly a liar.

My interpretation of the data is honest. If you cannot prove my data is wrong then you need to join the real world and admit that Obama and TrumpO have presided over a very long run of a very good economy.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 12, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> *I’m saying: *
> _*
> It is a false narrative *..........based on the *current data* coming from TrumpO’s *current* WEAK and ANEMIC economy._
> 
> ...



*We know from current TrumpO economic GDP data that he, so far and most likely will remain THE SECOND PRESIDENT In US HISTORY to FAIL to ACHIEVE a FULL YEAR of GDP GROWTH ABOVE 3%. *

Even if that is the case, it doesn't change the fact that Obama had the weakest recovery since WWII.

*So you may wish to call both Presidents weak and their economic record anemic if that is your preference*

Obama.....1.9% definitely weak. Trump, to date, about 2.5%, definitely stronger. Low bar, I know.

* you cannot call one weak and the other strong. *

I can, correctly, call Obama's recovery weak. 
We'll have to wait to see if Trump's economy does better than Obama.
So far, it is.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 12, 2019)

*I’m saying: We know from current TrumpO economic GDP data that he, so far and most likely will remain THE SECOND PRESIDENT In US HISTORY to FAIL to ACHIEVE a FULL YEAR of GDP GROWTH ABOVE 3%.*

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22187894 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Even if that is the case, it doesn't change the fact that Obama had the weakest recovery since WWII.



I am not arguing that Obama did not have the weakest recovery since WWII. You are stuck like a dumbass on a broken escalator and don’t know you can use your feet and legs to get off.  

The global economy transformed itself a dozen times since then and every economist and business and market expert I have read is saying 2.5 GDP is the new normal. Obama maintained about a 2.2 GDP average if you leave out 2009 due the lingering effects of The Great Bush Recession for that entire year. 

The New Normal 2,5 can no longer be considered weak. Had Trumpo hit his stated goal for 2017 at 4% GDP, he’d be right. But he didn’t. His tax cut policy failed to deliver.

So now it’s time for his dipwads to face reality. Trumpo is no better than Obama based upon GDP data.

He has time to finish a four year term much much lower and therefire much worse than Obama. 

TrumpO’s downturn is into its third month.



 


You best be preparing for disappointment in your Cult master to take GDP above three.


----------



## dudmuck (Apr 12, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > *I’m saying: *
> ...


Odd to call it "Obama's recovery" when republicans controlled congress during nearly all of Obama's turn.
The "party of no", wasnt any help in the recovery.
But at least Obama didnt just pump money into the military-industrial complex.


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Apr 12, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Deplorable Yankee, post: 22185968
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I had to really explain that ?thats exactly what yer doing with meaningless old gdp .
all you guys who play economic analysis all spew the same theme
its meaningless

its like reading a nobel prize wining NY time writer ...who is never right about anything anyway

your whole thread is trump bashing

and calling hard working people rubes

derp

they voted for the democrat his name was Donald J Trump
youre a democrat RIGHT ?


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Apr 12, 2019)

you can put me on ignore big shot 
cause youre an idiot
dime a dozen well read suburban half a fag idiot who could give a rats ass about the people or the economy 

trumps fault


----------



## airplanemechanic (Apr 12, 2019)

Can Trump beat Obama's 10% unemployment? Yea, 3.7%
Can Trump beat Obama's black unemployment? Yea, best in 50 years.
Can Trump beat Obama's womens unemployment? Yea, best in the history of the nation.
Can Trump beat Obama's foreign policy? Yea. Already sat down the KJU twice. KJU wouldn't give the oreo a minute of his time. And Trump has managed to go 2 years without apologizing for America even once.
Can Trump beat Obama's Hispanic unemployment? Yea, best in over 50 years.
Can Trump beat Obama in manufacturing jobs? Yea, hands down way better. 6 times better.


I'd say Trump is beating Obama candidly in every single category.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 12, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> *I’m saying: We know from current TrumpO economic GDP data that he, so far and most likely will remain THE SECOND PRESIDENT In US HISTORY to FAIL to ACHIEVE a FULL YEAR of GDP GROWTH ABOVE 3%.*
> 
> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22187894
> 
> ...



*TrumpO’s downturn is into its third month.*​




Obozo's first quarter in year three was -1.0%.

Real Gross Domestic Product | FRED | St. Louis Fed


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 12, 2019)

*I’m saying: We know from current TrumpO economic GDP data that he, so far and most likely will remain THE SECOND PRESIDENT In US HISTORY to FAIL to ACHIEVE a FULL YEAR of GDP GROWTH ABOVE 3%.*

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22187894 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Even if that is the case, it doesn't change the fact that Obama had the weakest recovery since WWII.



Compared to GDP prior to 2005 Obama’s recovery is weak. But if the MAGA brilliant and businessman genius TrumpO can’t hit 2004 2005 GDP growth with massive tax cuts and deregulation, it does not appear that anyone will. Obama’s numbers need to be compared moving forward from 2005 rather than prior to 2005 even if there were no Great Recession that carried through 2009,

The last time we had GDP over 3.0 was in 2005 while ramping up the war in Iraq. That is Thirteen years ago.





More important is that Obama’s recovery
will become the longest expansion in US history in a few months.


It is also important to put the economic performance in global context. During President Obama's presidency, the United States' GDP growth beat the GDP growth of the other original NATO member countries by the widest margin of any president since World War II.
Economic Record: President Obama

Look at this;





Surely the global slow recovery affected US GDP quite a bit.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 13, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22188973 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Obozo's first quarter in year three was -1.0%.



TrumpO’s *year three* is ten years removed from the year of the Great Bush Recession. TrumpO has a huge advantage because his workforce is 9% larger than the workforce Obama was handed one year removed from
TBR2008.

Try to pay attention to the bigger picture:





Forecast now stands at 2.23 for TrumpO’s third  year.

The GDP for Obama’s first year was -2.9.

You point out that five quarters beyond that deep recession hole in 2009 the GDP was at -1.0.

*GDP went up 1.9% in Q1 2011 from Obama’s first full year, *

The GDP for TrumpO’s first year was at 2.2.

I will point out that five quarters beyond that new normal growth year in 2017 the GDP is projecting to come in at around 2.0.

*GDP may go down -0.2% in Q1 2019 from TrumpO’s first full year, *

I realize you prefer to add apples to oranges in order skew the numbers falsly in TrumpO’s,

Because you need to invoke the disaster negative GDP of -2.5 that devasted the global economy and had adverse and negative impacts on Obama’s first term and the recovery.

We know now as TrumpO data comes in that you cannot expect to ever see the GDP rise above 3.0 under TrumpO economic policy.

Never above 3.0 % seasonably adjusted annual growth rate.

Which most importantly means.

Bottom Line:

Trump's claim about Obama's weak economic growth is limited

“Trump will be the second president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth,"

According to TrumpO that means his economy is weak and anemic.

I disagree.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 13, 2019)

Deplorable Yankee, post: 22188297 





Deplorable Yankee said:


> thats exactly what yer doing with meaningless old gdp .
> all you guys who play economic analysis all spew the same theme
> its meaningless



Should the Bureau of Economic Analysis be shut down? Bureau of Labor Statistics too? What the hell - shut down every goddam bunch of dumbass bureaucrats that work in a dumbass bureau in the goddam dumbass bureaucracy. 

Why can’t everybody know everything one needs to know like DeplorYank does?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 13, 2019)

*I wrote: you cannot call one weak and the other strong.*

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22187894 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> I can, correctly, call Obama's recovery weak.
> We'll have to wait to see if Trump's economy does better than Obama.
> So far, it is.



You are correct only by comparison to economic growth data prior to 2005.

Since then we know according to Trump anything below annual 3.0% GDPis anemic and weak.

"Obama is the first president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth," Trump said during an Oct. 28 campaign rally in Manchester, N.H.

Trump's claim about Obama's weak economic growth is limited

So when you limit your comparison to pre-2005  historical data only, you must ignore the changes in what defines ‘normal’ or ‘good’ GDP averages over the long term since the peak of US troops were fighting in the quagmire in Iraq.

Ignoring the current definition of normal GDP renders your conclusion that the post recession recovery is weak is a conclusion that no longer should be considered to be valid or correct.

Live in the past if you must. That is what ignorant people do.


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 13, 2019)

g5000 said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > McRocket said:
> ...


I did


----------



## Jitss617 (Apr 13, 2019)

g5000 said:


> Jitss617
> 
> Our trade deficits are skyrocketing. Our trade deficit with China is at the highest in history. Our trade deficit with Mexico is also exploding.
> 
> ...


Going to get worse before it gets better.. now be a good American


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 13, 2019)

airplanemechanic, post: 22188402,





airplanemechanic said:


> Can Trump beat Obama's 10% unemployment? Yea, 3.7%



Which President reduced unemployment from 10% to 4.8% so the next President wouid inherit much more stable conditions to further reduce unemployment from 4.8% to 3.7%.

TrumpO will never ever be able to lay claim to reducing unemployment by 5.2% in seven years.

So besides showing how stupid TrumpOroids are in these desperate attempts to have their white president crush the black president on unemployment, it’s obvious that they want no part of this discussion using GDP as the best measure we have.

That’s because it is not looking good for the Great White MAGA Hope.






TrumpO is looking at 2.33 % for 2019 after the  big mouthed  moron said this:





So, AirMech do you think TrumpO has an evangelical white Christian prayer of getting to 6.0%?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 13, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22188973
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*year three is ten years removed from the year of the Great Bush Recession.*

Obama's year three started with -1.0%. You think 2019Q1 is going to be negative?

*You point out that five quarters beyond that deep recession hole in 2009 the GDP was at -1.0.*

Only because you're whining about the start of Trump's third year.

_*GDP may go down -0.2% in Q1 2019 from TrumpO’s first full year, *_

FFS, stop double counting.


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Apr 13, 2019)

Progs are mathematically and logically challenged.  When an economy rapidly dips its followed by rapid increase.  That's just how shit works.  You progs should start slowly, get a basketball and bounce it.

"Trump's" economy is one of the best in history.  "Obama's" was one of the worst.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 13, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22191859 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> _*GDP may go down -0.2% in Q1 2019 from TrumpO’s first full year, *_
> 
> FFS, stop double counting



There is no double counting there - idiot.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 13, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Obama's year three started with -1.0%. You think 2019Q1 is going to be negative?



Nope you are an idiot. Pay attention to the equation I wrote. Obama GDP rose and Trumpo’s is projected to go down


----------



## ph3iron (Apr 13, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Here’s the record thru 2018:
> View attachment 254781
> 
> U.S. - GDP growth by year 1990-2017 | Statista
> ...


Hilarious.
Knees news doesn't tell our rubes Obama created more jobs in his last 2 years than the con did in his first 2


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 13, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Obama's year three started with -1.0%. You think 2019Q1 is going to be negative?
> ...



Obozo's GDP shrank in the first quarter of his third year.
Do you feel 2019Q1 GDP will shrink?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 13, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22193070. 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Obozo's GDP shrank in the first quarter of his third year.
> Do you feel 2019Q1 GDP will shrink?



Shrink from what baseline?

Notice how I phrased it;

NotfooledbyW, post: 22189864


NotfooledbyW said:


> *GDP went up 1.9% in Q1 2011 from Obama’s first full year,*
> 
> *GDP may go down -0.2% in Q1 2019 from TrumpO’s first full year, *



The baseline is the ‘*inaugural year’ *because it indicates where the GDP stood before each president’s economic policy could have an impact.

(O-a) GDP growth during Obama’s inaugural year, 2009, was -2.9%

(O-b) Q1’2011 GDP was at -1.0%

(O-a) minus (O-b) = 1.9% up from baseline.

(T- a) GDP growth during Trump’s inaugural
year, 2017, was +2.2%.

(T-b) Q1’2019 projected to be +2.0

(T-a) minus (T-b) = -0.2%

Copy that entire formula if you feel the need to dispute the accuracy of my calculation.

With projected GDP% at 2.0 for Q1’2019:

Obama *raised* GDP in Q1’2011 x 1.9 points from his inaugural year baseline.

Trump *will have lower* GDP in Q1’2019 x -0.2 points from his inaugural yesr baseline.

Trump has less GDP growth from his inaugural year to the fifth quarter of his presidency. With current projections for Q1’2019 TrumpO lags behind Obama by 2.1 points on the basis of this comparison.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 13, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22193070.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*Shrink from what baseline?*

From the previous quarter, moron.

*Notice how I phrased it;*

Yes, I noticed your moronic phrasing. I mocked your moronic phrasing.

*O-a) GDP growth during Obama’s inaugural year, 2009, was -2.9%*​​*(O-b) Q1’2011 GDP was at -1.0%*​​*(O-a) minus (O-b) = 1.9% up from baseline.*​
Yes, I'm still laughing at your double counting. And at your math error.

-2.9 - (-1.0) = -1.9
​*(T- a) GDP growth during Trump’s inaugural*​*year, 2017, was +2.2%.*​​*(T-b) Q1’2019 projected to be +2.0*​​*(T-a) minus (T-b) = -0.2%*​
2.2 - 2.0 = 0.2​​*Trump has less GDP growth from his inaugural year to the fifth quarter of his presidency. *​
No. Wrong. Trump's Q1 growth this year, unless it is worse than -1.0%, is better than Obama's Q1 2011 GDP.
​* lags behind Obama by 2.1 points on the basis of this comparison*​
Your stupid comparison is stupid. ​


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 13, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22193836,  





Toddsterpatriot said:


> *(O-a) minus (O-b) = 1.9% up from baseline.*
> 
> Yes, I'm still laughing at your double counting. And at your math error.
> 
> -2.9 - (-1.0) = -1.9



I realize that you are a real life dumbass TrumpO voter, so you may never get it. But here goes.

*O-a) GDP growth during Obama’s inaugural year, 2009, was -2.9%
(O-b) Q1’2011 GDP was at -1.0%
(O-a) minus (O-b) = 1.9% up from baseline.*

Is -1.0 % GDP lower or higher than -2.9 % GDP

So if Obama starts improving the economy when GDP -2.9% and five quarters later the GDP is at -1.0% did the economy go up 1.9 or did it go down 1.9.

Can you tell me which?

So if Trump starts improving the economy when GDP +2.2% and five quarters later the GDP is at +2.0% did the economy go up 0.2  did it go down 0.2 .

I say Obama is up 1.9 and Trumpo is down 0.2


*I asked: Shrink from what baseline?*

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22193836 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> From the previous quarter, moron.



Of course “from the previous quarter”. That is because you can’t admit that Obama started from a lower base line than TrumpO.

If you care to base the comparison on a starting point based on reality you have to do it my way.

Your way is random and does not factor in such things as the Great Bush Recession driving negative GDP -2.9% during Obama’s inaugural year. And of course it buries the reality that during Trumpo’s inaugural year the GDP was at 2.2%.

If both Presidents were to get to 3.0% GDP in five quarters following their respective inaugural year and using the data we have been using how much does each President need to grow the economy.

I say Trumpo at 0.8%.  
I say Obama at 5.9%

Who wouid be the better president if they both accomplished it?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 13, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22193836,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*So if Obama starts improving the economy when GDP -2.9% and five quarters later the GDP is at -1.0% did the economy go up 1.9 or did it go down 1.9.*

If the economy went down 1.0% in Q1 2011, it means the economy is smaller than it was in Q4 2010.
That's because it went down 1.0%.

*I say Obama is up 1.9 and Trumpo is down 0.2*

Of course, because you're bad at math.

*If both Presidents were to get to 3.0% GDP in five quarters following their respective inaugural year and using the data we have been using how much does each President need to grow the economy.*

3.0%.


----------



## AntonToo (Apr 13, 2019)

WTH_Progs? said:


> Progs are mathematically and logically challenged.  When an economy rapidly dips its followed by rapid increase.  That's just how shit works.  You progs should start slowly, get a basketball and bounce it.
> 
> "Trump's" economy is one of the best in history.  "Obama's" was one of the worst.



Maybe you should go play with that ball and leave economics to non-stupid.

There is no such general dynamic to recoveries. Recessions are caused by different issues that result in different recovery rates. Specifically for the real estate and finance near-collapse we’ve had that under-lied Great Recession, there was a lot of bad debt that needed to be cleared off the books even after the recession was technically over. 8 trillion dollar damage doesn’t just get made up over night.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 15, 2019)

whitehall, post: 22177192 





whitehall said:


> Where were the economic critics when the Obama administration never hit 3% in eight freaking long long years?



Where are the TrumpO voters when the Trump administration did not hit 3% in 2018? His best year and never will get close the rest of his term.

airplanemechanic, post: 22188402 





airplanemechanic said:


> I'd say Trump is beating Obama candidly in every single category.



Not getting above 3.0% full year GDP.

WTH_Progs?, post: 22191880 





WTH_Progs? said:


> "Trump's" economy is one of the best in history.



If that were true, why is TrumpO attacking the FED?

*Trump Ridiculously Argues that Fed Wiped 40% Off Dow Rally*
*Trump Ridiculously Argues that Fed Wiped 40% Off Dow Rally*

*

 *

TrumpO obviously is aware that he said Obama would be the first president never to have a full year GDP average above 3.0.

TrumpO knows he will be the second president to never to do it as well.

Now he has to blame the Fed.


----------



## Faun (Apr 15, 2019)

Deplorable Yankee said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Deplorable Yankee, post: 22185968
> ...


What's not to bash? Trump is producing similar economic figures as the ones he trashed when Obama achieved them.


----------



## Faun (Apr 15, 2019)

airplanemechanic said:


> Can Trump beat Obama's 10% unemployment? Yea, 3.7%
> Can Trump beat Obama's black unemployment? Yea, best in 50 years.
> Can Trump beat Obama's womens unemployment? Yea, best in the history of the nation.
> Can Trump beat Obama's foreign policy? Yea. Already sat down the KJU twice. KJU wouldn't give the oreo a minute of his time. And Trump has managed to go 2 years without apologizing for America even once.
> ...


LOL

That's the dumbest shit I ever saw. For example....

_"Can Trump beat Obama's black unemployment? Yea, best in 50 years."_​
The previous record for black unemployment was ... *7%*

It peaked at *16.8%* following Bush's Great Recession. It was *7.7%* when Obama left office. It was *7.1%* just 5 months later.

Meaning to go from 16.8% to the record, it dropped *9.1* points under Obama but only *0.7* points under trump.

And here you are, dissing Obama and shaking your tits for trump.


----------



## Faun (Apr 15, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> *I’m saying: We know from current TrumpO economic GDP data that he, so far and most likely will remain THE SECOND PRESIDENT In US HISTORY to FAIL to ACHIEVE a FULL YEAR of GDP GROWTH ABOVE 3%.*
> 
> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22187894
> 
> ...


So much for the rightwingnut bullshit that tax cuts spur economic growth.


----------



## Aldo Raine (Apr 16, 2019)

Faun said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > *I’m saying: We know from current TrumpO economic GDP data that he, so far and most likely will remain THE SECOND PRESIDENT In US HISTORY to FAIL to ACHIEVE a FULL YEAR of GDP GROWTH ABOVE 3%.*
> ...




  And revenues were down for the year in 2018, even though Tramp and the Rethugs said the tax cuts would increase revenues.   It doesn't work and was proven yet again.


----------



## airplanemechanic (Apr 16, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> airplanemechanic, post: 22188402,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It took Obozo almost a decade to drop the unemployment rate by a few percentage points. When you're at 10% the economy is begging to get better. It got better despite him not because of him. The slowest economic recovery ever is not a bragging right. 

By all means if it was Obozo, please quote Obozos economic policies, and the facts to back it up, that had anything to do with the economy improving. What was his trademark accomplishment? Obozocare. What did that do? Tank the economy.


----------



## Faun (Apr 16, 2019)

airplanemechanic said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > airplanemechanic, post: 22188402,
> ...


Takes time after the economy craters and leaves little tools available to fix it.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 16, 2019)

Faun said:


> airplanemechanic said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



Ironically, the main cause of the recession, the housing bubble pop, was also a major reason for the slower return job growth as people were underwater with their houses and could not to go where the jobs were. 


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Faun (Apr 16, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > airplanemechanic said:
> ...


No one could have recovered much faster, if at all faster, given the structural damage to the economy. Obama did what needed to be done, which was to dump a shit load of money into the economy to keep it from slipping into a depression; to give time to the private sector to get back on its feet. At the same time, the Federal Reserve did what they had to do by dropping the federal fund rate to its lowest possible rate. All that helped turn the economy around, which began climbing out of the crater in 2010.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 16, 2019)

airplanemechanic, post: 22207809 





airplanemechanic said:


> The slowest economic recovery ever is not a bragging right.



Obama’s recovery is also an expansion and is about to become the longest running expansion in US history.

You call the Obama recovery a slow expansion. Slower than what? The 1980s?

Obama’s 7 years of avg GDP growth around 2.2 percent is close to what the economists are calling the new normal.

TrumpO won’t hit 3.0 GDP for full year.

Week Ending April 12, 2019:The New York Fed Staff Nowcast stands at 1.4% for 2019:Q1 and 2.0% for 2019:Q2.
FEDERAL RESERVE BANK of NEW YORK

We only have two years of TrumpoO but it will soon be certain that with respect to GDP growth TrumpO will be lucky to finish ahead of Obama if there is no recession during his second two years. A recession and TrumpO is done.

Here’s the question. Will you stop calling the record long economic expansion that started in  2010 ‘SLOW’ if TrumpO never has a full year of growth above 3.0 GDP?

That’s what TrumpO considers to be slow. Why won’t he apply it to himself?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 16, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> airplanemechanic, post: 22207809
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*You call the Obama recovery a slow expansion. Slower than what? The 1980s?*

Yes. And the 1950s. The 1960s. The 1970s. The 1990s. The 2000s.

*2.2 percent is close to what the economists are calling the new normal.*

Sure, if we keep making the government ever larger. 
If we add 200,000 new pages of regulations, will that make the "new normal" higher or lower?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 16, 2019)

I wrote: *2.2 percent is close to what the economists are calling the new normal.*

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22209309


Toddsterpatriot said:


> Sure, if we keep making the government ever larger.
> 
> If we add 200,000 new pages of regulations, will that make the "new normal" higher or lower?



Let TrumpO answer you question. Huge tax cuts for rich and corporations and wiping out regulations left and right - what do we get?

The same new normal that Obama got after two flash in the pan high TRUMPO GDP Quarters last year.

Below 3.0 GDP in the deregulation and low tax era plus a recession coming in about a year.

Trumpo is proving the new normal is here to stay right in front of your blindfolded eyes.

We had seven years since 2009 of results at 2.2 GDP with regulations in place and more revenue to fund the Governnent. 

You keep forgetting TrumpO is getting the same results as Obama except your idiot promised 4.9 GDP per year - maybe 6.0.

Nowcasting Report - FEDERAL RESERVE BANK of NEW YORK
Apr 12, 2019: New York Fed Staff Nowcast. The New York Fed Staff Nowcast stands at 1.4% for 2019:Q1 and 2.0% for 2019:Q2.

Whatcha gonna do if TrumpO comes in below 1.5 for Q1 2919?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 16, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> I wrote: *2.2 percent is close to what the economists are calling the new normal.*
> 
> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22209309
> 
> ...



*Huge tax cuts for rich and corporations and wiping out regulations left and right - what do we get?

The same new normal that Obama got after two flash in the pan high TRUMPO GDP Quarters last year.*

We'll have to see how Trump's eight years compares to Obozo's weak ass eight years.

* New York Fed Staff Nowcast. The New York Fed Staff Nowcast stands at 1.4% for 2019:Q1*

That would be better than Obozo's -1.0% for 2011:Q1.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 16, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22210405 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> We'll have to see how Trump's eight years compares to Obozo's weak ass eight years.



Weak-assed TrumpO hasn’t pulled away from weak-ass Obama after two years.

We can of course compare Obama’s second four years to TrumpO’s first four years since Obama’s second term is three years removed from the Great Bush Recession. Trumpo’s four years are seven years removed from the GBR.

That will be the most equitable comparison and more than likely the only inaugural to finished term comparison we will ever see.

You might as well admit that TrumpO is weak on the economy if Obama is weak. That is because Trumpo won’t get over 3.0 GDP in 2019 with a start as being forecast we’ll below 3.0 already.,and very likely that 2020 is lower yet and maybe the TRUMPo recession begins.

Apr 12, 2019: New York Fed Staff Nowcast:
1.4% for 2019:Q1.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 17, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22210405
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'll be happy to admit, Obama had the weakest recovery since WWII.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 17, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22213299 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> I'll be happy to admit, Obama had the weakest recovery since WWII.



So you are happy to be admitting that TumpO’s economic expansion during his first two years is tied with what you call the weakest recovery and expansion since WWII.

That certainly puts Obama’s and TrumpO at the same level as measured by GDP no matter what TrumpOroids decide to call them.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 17, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22213299
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I'm happy to admit Obama had a really weak recovery. Really. Weak.
I'm also happy to admit that Trump's average growth is higher than Obama's average, not tied.
Also, Obama's 9th quarter was -1.0%.
Your previous posts predict Trump's 9th quarter might be +1.4%.

Do you think that +1.4% is larger than -1.0%?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 17, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22216930 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> I'm also happy to admit that Trump's average growth is higher than Obama's average, not tied.



If TRUMPo resigned today you could compare the full term average of each President. But unfortunately he didn’t. So if you were an honest person you would accept TrumpO’s definition of what made Obama’s weak, weak weak. 

NotfooledbyW, post: 22164534 





NotfooledbyW said:


> "Obama is the first president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth," Trump said during an Oct. 28 campaign rally in Manchester, N.H.



Trump was *not referring *to Obama's eight year average GDP as the bar. TrumpO said *not having* “a single year” of 3 percent growth is weak weak weak. Anemic. 

So as of this moment of truth in the reality of time, TrumpO does *not have* “a single year” of 3 percent growth just like Obama. (Actually Obama’ does but more in that later) And no such year is in any forecast for the next two years.

Why do you ignore your cult-masters’ words?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 17, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22216930 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> I'm also happy to admit that Trump's average growth is higher than Obama's average, not tied.



You don’t know what TrumpO’s eight year average growth is. Why do you lie about that?

The best years 2015 and 2018 are tied. 

However more, Obama has a full year above 3.0. TrumpO Does Not.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 17, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22216930
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*You don’t know what TrumpO’s eight year average growth is*

Yeah, thanks for the moronic strawman.

Obozo's average is lower than Trump's current average. 
You're the one who keeps bring up Trump's (non-existent) eight year numbers.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 17, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22216930
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*not having “a single year” of 3 percent growth is weak weak weak*

It's certainly possible that Trump could have eight years without ever breaking 3 percent
and still have much better numbers than Obozo. We'll have to wait and see.

In the mean time, you never said whether +1.4% was higher than -1.0%......


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 17, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22217673 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> It's certainly possible that Trump could have eight years without ever breaking 3 percent
> and still have much better numbers than Obozo. We'll have to wait and see.



Then TRUMP’s economy will be weak. that’s according to Trumpo? weak. Nothing near what tax cuts and deregulation were supposed to produce.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 17, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22217673
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's certainly possible.
Be sure to ping me when that happens. 

In the mean time, keep whining about Obama's weak ass recovery.


----------



## Dick Foster (Apr 17, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> Jitss617 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



According to them and what they say, democrats are suffering. And they can't suffer enough to make me happy. And they're gonna suffer some more come 2010. Can't wait!


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 17, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22217655,





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Obozo's average is lower than Trump's current average.



TrumpO said nothing about full term average. He said no *single year above 3.0 avg gdp *
Is weak.

Trumpo has had 8 quarters and has failed to put 4 quarters together over 3.0 GDP.

Obama has put 4 quarters together well above 3.0.

I get 3.23.



 

Trump’s current record is weak according to Trump. Obama’s is not.

That is the current reality moron.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 17, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22217655,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yes, Obozo's weakest recovery since WWII was awesome!!!


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 26, 2019)

*Q1 2019 watch - if under 3.0% - where is Trump’s economic miracle*

_US first-quarter GDP rose 3.2%, vs 2.5% growth expected_

US economy grows by 3.2% in the first quarter, tops expectations

Hehe.

Help me out, is +3.2% more than Obama's -1.0% in his 9th quarter?


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 26, 2019)

Brain357 said:


> easyt65 said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



What were PRIME and Libor during Obama’s 8 yrs vs Trump’s two yrs? Obama was playing with cheap monies, low borrowing costs and started with near 9% unemployment. Spent $10trn. 

Trump inherited a tougher economy to sustain and he did it. You have to give him some props. His spending is still too high and that is because both sheep won’t let our politicians cut entitlements.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 26, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Help me out, is +3.2% more than Obama's -1.0% in his 9th quarter?



Will Trumpo ever have this many quarters at 3.2 or higher? 




 
Any at 5.1?

You are still an idiot. Comparing quarteres in consecutive order?  Jesus you are stupid.


----------



## Slade3200 (Apr 26, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> *Q1 2019 watch - if under 3.0% - where is Trump’s economic miracle*
> 
> _US first-quarter GDP rose 3.2%, vs 2.5% growth expected_
> 
> ...


Obama had quarters in the 4%s didn’t he? And Trump has yet to break 3% annual growth in his first two years after campaigning that he would get 4 maybe 5%... right?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 26, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Help me out, is +3.2% more than Obama's -1.0% in his 9th quarter?
> ...



Damn look at all those big numbers......what was Obama's average again? LOL!


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 26, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > *Q1 2019 watch - if under 3.0% - where is Trump’s economic miracle*
> ...



*Obama had quarters in the 4%s didn’t he? *

Did he? Wow! His weakest recovery since WWII must have been awesome!


----------



## Meathead (Apr 26, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Obama had quarters in the 4%s didn’t he? And Trump has yet to break 3% annual growth in his first two years after campaigning that he would get 4 maybe 5%... right?


It's like a baseball manager taking over a team that lost 100 games and then boasting about losing only 95 at the end of the season.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 26, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22270662,  





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Damn look at all those big numbers......what was Obama's average again? LOL!



Why ask? TrumpO hasn’t surpassed Obama’s highest two years or fewer average.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 26, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22270662,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*Why ask?*

Despite those huge numbers you posted, his average still sucks.
For instance, the 1st quarter of Obozo's third year was -1.0%.
What was the same quarter for Trump again?


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Apr 26, 2019)

and i dont even care about gdp ...or recessions 
when youre in business ya snowplough through and adjust to conditions 
the tenured dont teach that shit at Boston university 
they should teach it to bartenders


----------



## Slade3200 (Apr 26, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Did he or did he not have quarters in the 4%s?

Has trump exceeded 3% in his first two years? Answer the questions


----------



## Slade3200 (Apr 26, 2019)

Meathead said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Obama had quarters in the 4%s didn’t he? And Trump has yet to break 3% annual growth in his first two years after campaigning that he would get 4 maybe 5%... right?
> ...


Except in this case Trump took over a team that had been groomed and growing for 8 years and now is taking all the credit for its successes


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 26, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22272329 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Despite those huge numbers you posted, his average still sucks.



You won’t ever know what Trumpo’s two term average will be unless he does it. And if he does it, we don’t know how deep his recession will be and for how long. 

We do know now that TrumpO and Obama are tied at a full year GDP at  2.9%.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 26, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




Obama tears TrumpO up on GDP growth per quarter.






Yes that is a 4.9 and 5.1 back to back..


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 26, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



*Did he or did he not have quarters in the 4%s?*

Did he? Did Trump?

*Has trump exceeded 3% in his first two years?*

Nope. Did Obama in eight?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 26, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



*Obama tears TrumpO up on GDP growth per quarter.*

Is that why Obozo's average was lower?

*Yes that is a 4.9 and 5.1 back to back..*

With a -1.0% before and a 1.9% after. 
What does that average out at?


----------



## Markle (Apr 26, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Obama's year three started with -1.0%. You think 2019Q1 is going to be negative?
> ...



How did that forecast work out for you?


----------



## Markle (Apr 26, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> *Obama tears TrumpO up on GDP growth per quarter.*
> 
> Is that why Obozo's average was lower?
> 
> ...



Perhaps this will help you.


----------



## Markle (Apr 26, 2019)

Faun said:


> No one could have recovered much faster, if at all faster, given the structural damage to the economy. Obama did what needed to be done, which was to dump a shit load of money into the economy to keep it from slipping into a depression; to give time to the private sector to get back on its feet. At the same time, the Federal Reserve did what they had to do by dropping the federal fund rate to its lowest possible rate. All that helped turn the economy around, which began climbing out of the crater in 2010.



No, our economy began its recovery in 2nd quarter of 2009.  In previous recessions, we recovered much quicker than the 2007/2008 recession.  President Obama's recovery brought back a word used to describe the economy of President Carter, malaise.


----------



## Thinker101 (Apr 26, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Here’s the record thru 2018:
> View attachment 254781
> 
> U.S. - GDP growth by year 1990-2017 | Statista
> ...



Dang, didn't this thread come back and bite you in the rear.


----------



## Markle (Apr 26, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22217655,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That leads me to believe that you don't understand that you do not get to pick which 12 months in a row constitute a years growth...don't you?


----------



## deanrd (Apr 26, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot, post: 22217655,
> ...


You would think it would be better with all the help he got from Republicans.




































You know we are able to look things up, don't you?


----------



## Markle (Apr 26, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Obama had quarters in the 4%s didn’t he? And Trump has yet to break 3% annual growth in his first two years after campaigning that he would get 4 maybe 5%... right?



Did you really review that before pressing the "POST REPLY"?  You're so desperate that you don't even slow down when throwing the years growth with that of quarters.  Wow!


----------



## Markle (Apr 26, 2019)

For my Progressive good friends who seem to demand that our revenues from income taxes has dropped since the Trump Tax Cuts. 

The Balance
Current US Federal Government Tax Revenue

US ECONOMY  FISCAL POLICY
*Current US Federal Government Tax Revenue*
*Who Really Pays Uncle Sam's Bills?*
BY KIMBERLY AMADEO
 Updated March 27, 2019

The U.S. government's total revenue is estimated to be $3.643 trillion for Fiscal Year 2020. That's the most recent budget forecast from the Office of Management and Budget for October 1, 2019, through September 30, 2020.

Tax receipts fell off during the recession but started setting new records by FY 2013.

FY 2020 - $3.64 trillion, budgeted.
FY 2019 - $3.44 trillion, estimated.
FY 2018 - $3.33 trillion.
FY 2017 - $3.32 trillion.
FY 2016 - $3.27 trillion.
FY 2015 - $3.25 trillion.
FY 2014 - $3.02 trillion.
FY 2013 - $2.77 trillion.
FY 2012 - $2.45 trillion.
FY 2011 - $2.30 trillion.
FY 2010 - $2.16 trillion.
FY 2009 - $2.10 trillion.
FY 2008 - $2.52 trillion.
FY 2007 - $2.57 trillion.
Who Really Pays Uncle Sam's Bills?


----------



## Slade3200 (Apr 26, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Yes, Obama had quarters in the 4 and 5%s and never eclipsed 3% annually. Same goes for trump. Y’all are over blowing the difference between Obama’s last years and Trumps first two. But the numbers don’t back you up.


----------



## Slade3200 (Apr 26, 2019)

Markle said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Obama had quarters in the 4%s didn’t he? And Trump has yet to break 3% annual growth in his first two years after campaigning that he would get 4 maybe 5%... right?
> ...


whats wrong with looking at quarters and years? they are both relevant to this discussion. Maybe u misunderstood my post


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Apr 26, 2019)

What's interesting is the economy continues to expand without initiating war.  Just think, so far Trump is the only POTUS in MANY decades to not declare war.  Another reason for progs to hate him.


----------



## Markle (Apr 27, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> whats wrong with looking at quarters and years? they are both relevant to this discussion. Maybe u misunderstood my post



In my prior life, I made a lot of money bowling.  I have a number of 300 games (a perfect game, all strikes).  In an important tournament, I rolled 17 strikes in a row.  Did I have another 300 game?  No, I had two very high games with the 17 strikes starting in the third frame of one game.  You don't get to make up your own rules.


----------



## Slade3200 (Apr 27, 2019)

Markle said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > whats wrong with looking at quarters and years? they are both relevant to this discussion. Maybe u misunderstood my post
> ...


Do you think I’m trying to make up rules?


----------



## Bruce_T_Laney (Apr 27, 2019)

deanrd said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



Hey Dean,

Obama was not President in 2008 and it was George W. Bush.

Obama took office in 2009 and had a 60 Democrat Vote Senate and the House, so what a Republican was told matter not back then....

Maybe next time you should not put up meme's stating 2008...


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 27, 2019)

Bruce_T_Laney, post: 22273830 





Bruce_T_Laney said:


> Obama took office in 2009 and had a 60 Democrat Vote Senate ....



Maybe next time you won’t lie:

On January 20th, 2009, 57 Senate seats were held by Democrats with 2 Independents (Bernie Sanders and Joe Lieberman) caucusing with the Democrats...which gave Democrats 59 mostly-reliable Democratic votes in the Senate, one shy of filibuster-proof “total control.” Republicans held 41 seats.         An aside....it was during this time that Obama’s “stimulus” was passed. No Republicans in the House voted for the stimulus. However, in the Senate.....and because Democrats didn’t have “total control” of that chamber.....three Republicans.....Snowe, Collins and Specter, voted to break a filibuster guaranteeing it’s passage.

Did President Obama have “total control’ of Congress during his first two years as president? Absolutely not and any assertions to the contrary.....as you can plainly see in the above chronology....is a lie.

The swearing in of Kirk finally gave Democrats 60 votes (at least potentially) in the Senate. *“Total control” of Congress by Democrats lasted all of 4 months.* From September 24, 2009 through February 4, 2010...at which point Scott Brown, a Republican, was sworn in to replace Kennedy’s Massachusetts seat.                                                        

When Obama Had "Total Control of Congress"


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 27, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Help me out, is +3.2% more than Obama's -1.0% in his 9th quarter?



The point of this thread is that Trumpo is going to be the second president in US history to not have a full year above 3.0 percent GDP.

You are all aglow with a 3,2 quarter for TrumpO

Those were a dime a dozen under Obama. When TrumpO hits 5.1 let us know. Because Obama did.


----------



## NoVote (Apr 27, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Trump supporters tell us your forecast?



My forecast is, in 2020, we are going to put you fucktards in a dark hole and cover it over. If it were not for you dumbfucks fighting your own president that 0bozo caused to get elected in the first place, our GDO would be 0ver 4%. But, not to worry, despite all the resistance from you traitors, Trump has put everything in place to wipe your stinking asses out next cycle. LOL, better get your tear bucket ready, there's more on the way, HAHAHAA


----------



## Markle (Apr 27, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Markle said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



No, you're trying to make up your own game.  It just makes you look foolish.


----------



## Markle (Apr 27, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> The point of this thread is that Trumpo is going to be the second president in US history to not have a full year above 3.0 percent GDP.
> 
> You are all aglow with a 3,2 quarter for TrumpO
> 
> Those were a dime a dozen under Obama. When TrumpO hits 5.1 let us know. Because Obama did.



The benchmark is for a years AVERAGE above 3.0 percent.  Not all four quarters above 3.0 percent.


----------



## Bruce_T_Laney (Apr 27, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Bruce_T_Laney, post: 22273830
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Alright, so I was one off from the 60 mark but at least I knew what year Obama took office unlike your boy Dean there.

Also it must suck to hear those numbers yesterday about the Economy...

Again, I will admit I was one off on my comment and will not deny it, but will Dean admit he was wrong about the year Obama took office?

Of course not and why?

Simple, Dean is never wrong even when he is most of the time!


----------



## Bruce_T_Laney (Apr 27, 2019)

Markle said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > The point of this thread is that Trumpo is going to be the second president in US history to not have a full year above 3.0 percent GDP.
> ...



Back in Feburary they were praying for bad job numbers for March, and their prayers went unanswered...

Now more bad news came out and now the left is getting frantic because if no failed Economy then what can they run on?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 27, 2019)

NoVote, post: 22273923 





NoVote said:


> If it were not for you dumbfucks fighting your own president that 0bozo caused to get elected in the first place, our GDO would be 0ver 4%.



Wouid you mind explaining how exactly Democrats have been successful at knocking GDP down 1.1% for the past two years. Thus keeping TrumpO below 3.0 in 2018. 

Remember according to Trump 2.9 is anemic and weak.

"Obama is the first president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth," Trump said during an Oct. 28 campaign rally in Manchester, N.H.

Trump's claim about Obama's weak economic growth is limited

If Dems have that much power over the economy they certainly shouid be able to knock the economy down enough in 2020 to guarantee that TrumpO loses.

Could you fill us in on how they did it, so I can feel even more confident that TrumpO and his goons will be gone by the end of January 2021.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 27, 2019)

Bruce_T_Laney, post: 22274202 





Bruce_T_Laney said:


> Now more bad news came out and now the left is getting frantic because if no failed Economy then what can they run on?



The economy is currently ‘Failed’ according to TrumpO. 

According to Trump 2.9 is anemic and weak.

"Obama is the first president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth," Trump said during an Oct. 28 campaign rally in Manchester, N.H.

Trump's claim about Obama's weak economic growth is limited

Why are TrumpOroids so massively impressed with TrumpO’s 2.9 GDP banner year but continue to demean the same from Obama as pitiful and weak?

You owe some kind of explanation.


----------



## Remodeling Maidiac (Apr 27, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Here’s the record thru 2018:
> View attachment 254781
> 
> U.S. - GDP growth by year 1990-2017 | Statista
> ...


Oops!


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 27, 2019)

Grampa Murked U, post: 22274436 





Grampa Murked U said:


> Oops




Why oops?   Obama had many more individual quarters above 3.0 than Trumpo has.


----------



## Remodeling Maidiac (Apr 27, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Grampa Murked U, post: 22274436
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Considering what Obama started with that should have been an easy feat. What goes down always comes up. Not to mention the billions he pumped into the economy.
Obama was his own roadblock


----------



## Slade3200 (Apr 27, 2019)

Markle said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Markle said:
> ...


How so?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 27, 2019)

Grampa Murked U, post: 22274697 





Grampa Murked U said:


> Considering what Obama started with that should have been an easy feat.



Not really. TrumpO by far had the best economic conditions on Inauguration Day, not just domestically by globally as well. And then TrumpO cut taxes that benefited those at the top. Now we have a trillion dollar annual deficit as opposed to declining yearly deficits that Obama’s 2.3 AVG GDP had been recording.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 27, 2019)

Bruce_T_Laney, post: 22274179





Bruce_T_Laney said:


> Again, I will admit I was one off on my comment and will not deny it, but will Dean admit he was wrong about the year Obama took office?



That’s a huge one off because it blows a gaping hole in your entire point. 

One more seat and the DEMS were filibuster proof. 

And if you read the report and counting Blue Dogs and Joe Lieberman Obama started with about 57 to 58 party line Senators which is why a few Republicans that did not obstruct could be the only way Obama had a path to getting legislation passed. 

As for the 2008 thing. Obama was ejected in 2008 so the office was clearly his in waiting until Inauguration Day. 

Quite the nitpicking on  your part


----------



## ph3iron (Apr 27, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



Obozo, say no more.
Upitty nixxer with your KKK zero college rubes?
We know the Q numbers, I'm just quoting overall stats.
You'll be having an orgasm about the cons 3 % months as if the uppity nixxer never had one.
Again O created more jobs in his last 2 years than the orange did in his first 2?
This Q is nothing special.
Do I have to list the graph for you again?
Sigh


----------



## ph3iron (Apr 27, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Obozo?
Hilarious
Do you ever look at actual data?
Real Gross Domestic Product | FRED | St. Louis Fed

I'm still looking for the cons explosive growth.
All his economics just follows the uppity nixxers.
Irritating isn't it?
Not worried about our record trade deficits and deficits period?
How's your KKK buds btw?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 27, 2019)

deanrd said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



Just think how much more debt Obama would have piled on if the Dems hadn't lost 63 seats (holy shit!) in the House in 2010.

Maybe Obama needed to add another 100,000 new regulations?


----------



## ptbw forever (Apr 27, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Grampa Murked U, post: 22274436
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Not for long.

LOL

Obama had NEGATIVE quarters.


----------



## ptbw forever (Apr 27, 2019)

ph3iron said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...


Are you blind?

You can clearly see a NEGATIVE “growth” in 2010 while Trump’s growth is a staircase.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 27, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Bruce_T_Laney, post: 22273830
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*On January 20th, 2009, 57 Senate seats were held by Democrats with 2 Independents (Bernie Sanders and Joe Lieberman) caucusing with the Democrats...which gave Democrats 59 mostly-reliable Democratic votes in the Senate,*

Obama had a huge majority in the House and 59 votes in the Senate and you guys are still whining like little bitches about the Republicans? LOL!

*The swearing in of Kirk finally gave Democrats 60 votes (at least potentially) in the Senate. *

You probably mean Franken, Kirk was a Republican.

*“Total control” of Congress by Democrats lasted all of 4 months.*

How long did Trump have 60 Senate votes since he was elected?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 27, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Help me out, is +3.2% more than Obama's -1.0% in his 9th quarter?
> ...



*You are all aglow with a 3,2 quarter for Trump*

Yes, Trump's +3.2% is much better than Obama's -1.0%


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 27, 2019)

ph3iron said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 27, 2019)

ph3iron said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



*How's your KKK buds btw? *

I don't have any Dem buds.


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

Markle said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > No one could have recovered much faster, if at all faster, given the structural damage to the economy. Obama did what needed to be done, which was to dump a shit load of money into the economy to keep it from slipping into a depression; to give time to the private sector to get back on its feet. At the same time, the Federal Reserve did what they had to do by dropping the federal fund rate to its lowest possible rate. All that helped turn the economy around, which began climbing out of the crater in 2010.
> ...


Bush's Great Recession was far worse than any other since the Great Depression.


----------



## buckeye45_73 (Apr 29, 2019)

Faun said:


> Markle said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


Oh please you guys are so full of shit, Bush inherited a bad recession after silicon valley imploded in the late 90s......calm down bro


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

buckeye45_73 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Markle said:
> ...


You mean the recession that started after Bush became president? The one that likely wouldn't have even been a recession if not for 9.11?


----------



## AntonToo (Apr 29, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



A fucking liar is what you are and you prove it in every economic thread.

Have you no shame at all?

-1% Q1 growth is a cherrypicked number from 2014 and 2011 and those were the ONLY negative growth Qs since the end of recession.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 29, 2019)

antontoo said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



*-1% Q1 growth is a cherrypicked number from 2014 and 2011*

The whiney OP was discussing Trump's 9th quarter predicted GDP.
Said that if it was below 3%, it was proof of Trump's failure.
Obama's 9th quarter was -1.0%. Trump's ended up at +3.2%.

Which number was better?


----------



## AntonToo (Apr 29, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> antontoo said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



...there is ZERO connection between "Obama's 9th quarter" and Trump's 9th quarter - THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT ECONOMIES. 

Trump didn't start on 1st Q in the middle of Great Recession, he started on Obama's last Q - a heathy, growing economy,


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 29, 2019)

antontoo said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > antontoo said:
> ...



You don't want to compare their performance? That's a shocker!


----------



## Edgetho (Apr 29, 2019)

antontoo said:


> ...there is ZERO connection between "Obama's 9th quarter" and Trump's 9th quarter - THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT ECONOMIES.
> 
> Trump didn't start on 1st Q in the middle of Great Recession, he started on Obama's last Q - a heathy, growing economy,



Actually, the Great Recession started in Dec of 2007 and ended less than 5 Months into the Lying Cocksucker's disease-ridden term in office.

Great Recession - Wikipedia

_According to the nonprofit National Bureau of Economic Research (the official arbiter of U.S. recessions), the recession in the U.S. began in December 2007 and ended in June 2009, thus extending over 19 months._

His/her/it/xer's (The Lying Cocksucker) politicies had absolutely nothing to do with ending it.  

Anybody with an IQ understands that.  Which disqualifies dimocrap scum completely.

Of course, they'll lie about it, but that's what dimocrap scum do.  Lie.  And steal.  That's about it


----------



## AntonToo (Apr 29, 2019)

Edgetho said:


> antontoo said:
> 
> 
> > ...there is ZERO connection between "Obama's 9th quarter" and Trump's 9th quarter - THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT ECONOMIES.
> ...



And you think saying that contradicts....what?

Obama started out with a Great Recession on his hands and it would have been a whole lot deeper if he wasn't on board with the bailouts Bush adminsitration started, QE on monetary side and Stimulus on fiscal side.


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 29, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


What's the source of that garbage?


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 29, 2019)

antontoo said:


> Edgetho said:
> 
> 
> > antontoo said:
> ...


Horseshit.  Obama's schemes made it worse, not better.


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> antontoo said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Sure, one led us out of a recession and into the longest streak of job growth in U.S. history while the other is riding that wave.


----------



## AntonToo (Apr 29, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> antontoo said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



Like any honest, inteligent person I want to compare THEIR POLICY, not simply underlying economy that belive it or not exists with or without some one guy in the WH.


----------



## AntonToo (Apr 29, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> antontoo said:
> 
> 
> > Edgetho said:
> ...



Expansionary policy is expansionary. Should be a fairly obvious point, but needs reapeating for some heavily invested politicos loosing touch with reality.


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> antontoo said:
> 
> 
> > Edgetho said:
> ...


It's always amusing when the USMB's fucking moron chimes in.


----------



## Slade3200 (Apr 29, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


Those are real numbers dude. Look it up


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 29, 2019)

antontoo said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > antontoo said:
> ...


Just because politicians call something "expansionary," that doesn't mean it is.  We had a couple dozen recessions before 1929, and somehow the country recovered without any so-called "expansionary policy."


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...


I have.  Those numbers don't resemble the ones I've seen.


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 29, 2019)

Faun said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > antontoo said:
> ...


A moron is someone who believes that graph supports your claim.


----------



## AntonToo (Apr 29, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> antontoo said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...



Nothing to do with politicians, its basic macroeconomics.

When you burrow money to buy economic activity that is an expansionary policy (untill the bills are due anyway). Thats is what Stimulus spending, grants and tax-cuts did. That is also what Trump tax cuts did.

When you lower interest rates that is an expansionary policy (unless inflation gets out of control)

When you reasure failing markets with Bailouts and oversight, that is an expansionary policy (unless it incourages risk taking long term)


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Apr 29, 2019)

Trump is seen as a business friendly POTUS. While borrowing rates have skyrocketed, companies are still borrowing, merging, acquiring. You may dislike the man but you have to acknowledge this is a fact. He had been very good for the economy.


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 29, 2019)

antontoo said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > antontoo said:
> ...


That's what the leftwing demagogues claim.  BTW, so-called "macroeconomics" is abracadabra.


----------



## AntonToo (Apr 29, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> antontoo said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...




No no, you are severely confused, this is what any serious economist, left or right will tell you.

This is not more controversial in macro economics than 1+1 = 2 is controversial in mathematics.


----------



## buckeye45_73 (Apr 29, 2019)

Faun said:


> buckeye45_73 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


Technically the recession didn't start until Bush, but I meant when Silcon Valley started to implode BEFORE Bush became President

Dot-com bubble - Wikipedia

The burst of the bubble, known as the *dot-com crash*, lasted from March 11, 2000, to October 9, 2002.[
March 11, 2000, who was the President of the United States?


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 29, 2019)

antontoo said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > antontoo said:
> ...


It's utterly controversial.  However, there's nothing surprising about a bunch of witch doctors on the government payroll all agreeing that government can expand the economy.  Refer to my signature for the reason.


----------



## Slade3200 (Apr 29, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


Oh good, then maybe you can help us out by providing a more accurate source. Please show is what your source has for 2014 Q2 and Q3 GDP numbers.


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


ROFL!  Sorry, but It's not my job to disprove a source you haven't even named.


----------



## Slade3200 (Apr 29, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


It is your job if you want to win the argument. But I’ll name the source so you don’t have any more excuses.

You can waive the white flag now.

U.S.: real GDP growth by quarter 2011-2018 | Statista


----------



## deanrd (Apr 29, 2019)

Bruce_T_Laney said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Bruce_T_Laney, post: 22273830
> ...


 Wrong about what?


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 29, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...



So now that the source has been presented, can you give us your source that you claimed had different numbers?


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 29, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > antontoo said:
> ...



*Sure, one led us out of a recession*

Yeah, that weak recovery was weak.....


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 29, 2019)

antontoo said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > antontoo said:
> ...



*Like any honest, inteligent person I want to compare THEIR POLICY,*

Excellent idea. What Obama policies prevented the next Great Depression?


----------



## AntonToo (Apr 29, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> antontoo said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



...I really don't know what the fuck is going on in that little politico rat brain of yours but it ain't healthy.

On regulatory side Obama passed 
Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act - Wikipedia

Will it prevent all recessions here on out? No one knows....now what did Trump do?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 29, 2019)

antontoo said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > antontoo said:
> ...



I always see liberals claiming that Obama's economic policies saved us from a second Great Depression.

Are you smarter than the typical liberal?


----------



## AntonToo (Apr 29, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> antontoo said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



No you don't always and I've never claimed that we would have an all out Great Depression level of contraction. But like I said, if he didn't embrace expansionary policies he did we would have considerably less growth and a lot more pain out of the recession.


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


No, it' snot my job.  Your job is to provide an actual source.  Otherwise, shut the fuck up.


----------



## AntonToo (Apr 29, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...



...He just did dummy.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 29, 2019)

antontoo said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > antontoo said:
> ...




*No you don't always *

I do.

* I've never claimed that we would have an all out Great Depression level of contraction.*

You're smarter than the typical liberal. Low bar, I know.


----------



## AntonToo (Apr 29, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> antontoo said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



Alrighty, let me know when you are done talking to imaginary liberals and want to respond to something I said.


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


It shows a steady rise in employment for the last 9 years. You know, what fucking morons call a slow recovery.


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

buckeye45_73 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > buckeye45_73 said:
> ...


Wikipedia??



Regardless, at least you show Bush didn't inherit a recession. Even you admit it started after he became president and you can't inherit something that didn't exist before your presidency.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Apr 29, 2019)

All we know for certain is that Trump's economic miracle is the democrats "Armageddon"


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


If this is a weak recovery, how come the rate of growth is no greater now under trump than it was under Obama?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 29, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



*If this is a weak recovery,*

Weakest recovery since WWII.


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Your refusal to answer my question already answered for you.


----------



## imawhosure (Apr 29, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...





Faun said:


> buckeye45_73 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



On this front, they are SCREWED!  Why do you people even argue with them?  They haven't got a leg to stand on, use propaganda, and are STILL LOSING, lol!

Let them talk their crap.  Americans know what is going on, and are feeling it.

If any of the LEFTISTS try and run on the Obysmal economy, they are going to get laughed out of the auditorium, lol.

You know what the LEFTISTS have?

Neither do I, lol.  And what is even funnier, is neither do they!  Just hammer them!  They are incompetent, irrelevant, and immaterial.

They deserve what they are going to get, and that is a political HOSING!  CYA Leftists, wouldn't want to be ya-)


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 29, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...









Yes, this is the slowest U.S. recovery since WWII


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


All you've shown is that GDP has been declining for decades.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 29, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> View attachment 258519



So, the slow steady decline of the GDP growth for the last 30 years is Obama's fault?   

Has nothing to do with the simple mathematics that the larger some thing gets the harder it is to get high percentage changes.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 29, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > View attachment 258519
> ...



*So, the slow steady decline of the GDP growth for the last 30 years is Obama's fault?*

Obama should be congratulated for the slowest recovery since WWII?


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


No, he should be congratulated for ending Bush's Great Recession.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 29, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



Obama was a terrible POTUS, 2nd worst ever...and so far his replacement has not been but just a smidgen better as far as the economy goes, and worse in some areas of the economy.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 29, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...



In 5 months! His slow recovery was awesome!


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Again, you were shown the rate of employment growth and saw how it's been steady for the last 9 years and you were unable to explain why that rate hasn't increased since trump's been in office.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 29, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



How many people are available to be hired with unemployment at 3.8%

Why was Obama's GDP growth so weak?
Not enough burdensome regulations?


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Millions are available.

As far as GDP, you already demonstrated it's been declining for decades following a recession.


----------



## Slade3200 (Apr 29, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Slade3200 said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


I posted a source dumbass. Now your turn


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


He clearly is afraid to show his source.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 29, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



So the overnight rate is 9 times higher under Trump but the employment growth is about the same?


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 29, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



Why is Trump's GDP growth so weak?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 29, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Still cleaning up Obama's assclownery.


----------



## Markle (Apr 29, 2019)

Faun said:


> Bush's Great Recession was far worse than any other since the Great Depression.



Your point being?


----------



## Markle (Apr 29, 2019)

Faun said:


> buckeye45_73 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Are you denying that the bursting dot.com bubble led to a recession?


----------



## Markle (Apr 29, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Compared to...?


----------



## Mike473 (Apr 29, 2019)

Economy is good. After 8 increases in the Fed rate and no QE. Obama's economy was on life support for almost his entire Presidency. I don't think rates moved much off zero the whole time. Too be fair, that is not his fault coming off the Clinton/Bush years. He did ok.


----------



## Rustic (Apr 29, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Here’s the record thru 2018:
> View attachment 254781
> 
> U.S. - GDP growth by year 1990-2017 | Statista
> ...


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 29, 2019)

Markle said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



Compared to Obama...Trump's best year is no better than Obama's best year


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 29, 2019)

Faun said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


What it needs to show is that this result was better than doing nothing, and the record of past recessions indicates it isn't.


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 29, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Markle said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...


Have you totally dropped your pretense being a libertarian?


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 29, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Since the Great Depression.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 29, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Markle said:
> ...



How does starting a fact remove me from being a libertarian?

This might be a shock to you, but libertarians do not kiss Trump's ass like you sheep do.


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 29, 2019)

Faun said:


> buckeye45_73 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


Actually, he did.  The stock market bubble burst during the Clinton administration.


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 29, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...


It's an irrelevant fact.  You're defending Obama's economic policies.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 29, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > buckeye45_73 said:
> ...



Technically the recession did not start till March. 

https://www.nber.org/cycles.html


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 29, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...



No, not at all.  I think Obama sucked.  I just do not think Trump is very much better than Obama was...and so far that has been proven correct.


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 29, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


We all know what caused it: the bursting of the dot.com stock market bubble, and that happened in the last quarter of the Clinton administration.


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 29, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > View attachment 258519
> ...


Who says that?


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 29, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...


How can that be when he has repealed everything Obama did?


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 29, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...


That recession ended before Obama was inaugurated.


----------



## Markle (Apr 29, 2019)

antontoo said:


> No you don't always and I've never claimed that we would have an all out Great Depression level of contraction. But like I said, if he didn't embrace expansionary policies he did we would have considerably less growth and a lot more pain out of the recession.



I take it you are aware that all the spending and policies forced on us by FDR extended the Great Depression by seven years?


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 29, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



Wrong again...https://www.nber.org/cycles.html


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 29, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



who says what?


----------



## Markle (Apr 29, 2019)

antontoo said:


> ...I really don't know what the fuck is going on in that little politico rat brain of yours but it ain't healthy.
> 
> On regulatory side Obama passed
> Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act - Wikipedia
> ...



Most amusing isn't it?  Barney Frank and Chris Dodd had their fingerprints all over the mortgage/housing/financial meltdown and that's who failed former President Barack Hussein Obama appointed to solve the problems.  Does that sound like the fox guarding the hen house?

What did the Consumer Protection Act do to improve the economy?  Nothing, it was detrimental and has harmed the economy.


----------



## Markle (Apr 29, 2019)

Faun said:


> If this is a weak recovery, how come the rate of growth is no greater now under trump than it was under Obama?



As you know, the rate of growth is indicated by the GDP which is above that of failed former President Barack Hussein Obama.

Are you serious?  Once you get down to full employment it is extremely difficult to push it down further below that level.  That makes sense, doesn't it?  Today we have far more job openings than we do jobs.  Unemployment for blacks is the lowest in history and wages are beginning to increase.


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


There is no rate 9 times higher under trump. And yes, the growth rate is the same.


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


You mean the 4.7% unemployment rate (and dropping) Obama handed Trump? Or the record high stock market?


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

Markle said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Bush's Great Recession was far worse than any other since the Great Depression.
> ...


That means it was a much deeper hole to climb out of.


----------



## Thinker101 (Apr 29, 2019)

Faun said:


> Markle said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Yes indeed....thank you President Trump.


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

Markle said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > buckeye45_73 said:
> ...


It didn't lead to a recession. It did slow the economy down but not enough to send it into a recession. The NBER stated if not for 9.11, they possibly wouldn't have declared a recession at all.


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

Thinker101 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Markle said:
> ...


LOLOLOL

Only an abject idiot could possibly think Trump pulled us out of that hole.


----------



## Markle (Apr 29, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Where does that appear in the post?


----------



## Markle (Apr 29, 2019)

Faun said:


> Markle said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



The DotCom bubble bursting did NOT lead to the recession which began the month after President Bush took office?  Come on, you're being facetious, aren't you?


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

Markle said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


LOLOL

Those aren't even actual GDP figures.


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

Markle said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Markle said:
> ...


Again, the NBER stated it was possible the decline from the dot com bubble was too mild to be a recession and that 9.11 deepened the contraction and may have been an important factor in it becoming a recession.


----------



## deanrd (Apr 29, 2019)

antontoo said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...


 But trumps trillions in tax cuts for needy billionaires was going to give us 5% and 6%. Trump promised. 
 You Don’t think he lied, do you?


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

Markle said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


If you can't notice the bars get shorter as the years pass, I can't help you.


----------



## Thinker101 (Apr 29, 2019)

Faun said:


> Thinker101 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Evidently someone was getting use to the pathetic performance of the previous administration.


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


So? Reagan's recession was much milder and was intentionally induced to reduce inflation.


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > buckeye45_73 said:
> ...


Who said it didn't? It just didn't cause a recession. At least not by itself. 9.11 expanded the contraction into a recession.


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


You may think you know that but you're a fucking moron.


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Fucking moron, the recession ended in June, 2009.

https://www.nber.org/cycles/


----------



## Markle (Apr 29, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Markle said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...



The average?


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

Markle said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > If this is a weak recovery, how come the rate of growth is no greater now under trump than it was under Obama?
> ...


Black unemployment dropped from 16.8% to 7.7% under Obama. That was not much higher than the record low when Trump became president. within a few months, it was already down to 7.1%, 0.1 point above the record.


----------



## airplanemechanic (Apr 29, 2019)

Faun said:


> Markle said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Raw numbers don't tell the whole story.

Why Credit for the Decline in Black Unemployment Goes to Trump, Not Obama | People's Pundit Daily

Under Obama, people were dropping out of the labor market at record rates, thus black unemployment was down. Under Trump, labor participation is at record highs, meaning unemployment rates are actual indicators of the number of unemployed. Or at the very least, aren't simply a reflection of a dead job market and nobody bothering to look for work.



> The unemployment rate will decline if people exit the labor force, meaning workers retire or give up on the American Dream. As the labor participation rate declines, unemployment will decline.
> 
> That’s how BLS methodology works.
> 
> ...



Labor market is thriving far better under Trump than under Obama

Record 95,102,000 Americans Not in Labor Force; Number Grew 18% Since Obama Took Office in 2009

Obama Economy: 9.9M More Employed, But 14.6M Left Labor Force

At no point under Obama's 8 years was there a time when we had more job openings than we had people looking for work. Trump hit that point long ago.


----------



## Markle (Apr 29, 2019)

Faun said:


> Markle said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



So what?  Did the other recessions not recover much faster than failed former President Barack Husein Obama?

Are you aware that the Socialist policies implemented by FDR extended the Great Depression by seven years,  Former President George Bush made the same mistake and failed former President Barack Hussein Obama doubled down on the mistakes.


----------



## Markle (Apr 29, 2019)

==========================================]]]


airplanemechanic said:


> Labor market is thriving far better under Trump than under Obama
> 
> Record 95,102,000 Americans Not in Labor Force; Number Grew 18% Since Obama Took Office in 2009
> 
> Obama Economy: 9.9M More Employed, But 14.6M Left Labor Force



Which, as all Progressives wish to ignore, is what led to the drop in the unemployment rate.  Today the labor force is beginning to creep up.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 29, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Fed Funds.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 29, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...



Yes, the rate that's lower now, the market that's higher.
With better GDP growth.


----------



## basquebromance (Apr 29, 2019)

Americans pay double in taxes than they pay for food and clothing, according to THE DATA!


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 29, 2019)

deanrd said:


> antontoo said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



I'm not a millionaire, I got a decent cut.
Still waiting for the $2500 a year savings on my insurance that twat Obama promised.


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

airplanemechanic said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Markle said:
> ...


LOLOL

*93%* of the drop in black unemployment to hit the record low of 7.0% occurred under Obama. *7%* occurred under trump. And you're dumb enough to think you can erase that with a bullshit page on a rightwing website?



Watch as I dismantle their nonsense.

They attribute much of the drop under Obama due to the drop in the labor force participation rate, which does lower unemployment as it drops. From your link...

_Black unemployment was as high as 14.2% as recently as June 2013, hitting resistance at around 8%. It only broke resistance levels as labor force participation declined._​
 But their argument gets squashed under the reality that *black* participation grew during that period. In June, 2013, black participation was 61.6 while the black unemployment rate was 14.2%

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data
Bureau of Labor Statistics Data

But by the time Obama left office, black participation was 62.3% while the black unemployment rate was 7.7%. With a rising participation rate, that makes the drop under Obama even more impressive since a rising labor force participation raises the unemployment rate.

Now under Trump, the black unemployment rate has gone from 7.7% to 6.7%. Meanwhile, that drop is aided slightly by the black participation rate also dropping from 62.3% to 62.1%.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 29, 2019)

Faun said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Obama ended such a deep recession in only 5 months? He really was magic!!!


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

Markle said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Markle said:
> ...


None were as deep since the Great Depression. And yes, I'm well familiar with rightarded revisionism.


----------



## Faun (Apr 29, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Moron.

The federal fund rate has slightly more than tripled since Trump became president. That's nowhere near 9 fold. And it's only 2.5%, which is still low.


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Apr 29, 2019)

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
if i lived in the past i would go shoot karl marx in the face

speaking of the past and faces 
Ill repeat see what the average voter is gonna care about at the polls. 
they certainly didnt forget their doctor or 2500.00 dollar savings while the irs threatened them with a fine for non compliance
that they remembered ..

Carry on arguing till you guys are blue in the face !


----------



## Markle (Apr 30, 2019)

Faun said:


> If you can't notice the bars get shorter as the years pass, I can't help you.



The chart posted indicates average GDP during the recovery.


Faun said:


> None were as deep since the Great Depression. And yes, I'm well familiar with rightarded revisionism.



Why do you feel the need to slur Republicans?  Did I call you names?

What revision are you talking about?  Are you calling UCLA a conservative institution?  Really?

*FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate*
By Meg SullivanAugust 10, 2004
Category: *Research*

Two UCLA economists say they have figured out why the Great Depression dragged on for almost 15 years, and they blame a suspect previously thought to be beyond reproach: President Franklin D. Roosevelt.

*After scrutinizing Roosevelt's record for four years, Harold L. Cole and Lee E. Ohanian conclude in a new study that New Deal policies signed into law 71 years ago thwarted economic recovery for seven long years.*

"Why the Great Depression lasted so long has always been a great mystery, and because we never really knew the reason, we have always worried whether we would have another 10- to 15-year economic slump," said Ohanian, vice chair of UCLA's Department of Economics. *"We found that a relapse isn't likely unless lawmakers gum up a recovery with ill-conceived stimulus policies."*
[…]
*As union membership doubled, so did labor's bargaining power, rising from 14 million strike days in 1936 to about 28 million in 1937. By 1939 wages in protected industries remained 24 percent to 33 percent above where they should have been, based on 1929 figures, Cole and Ohanian calculate.*

Unemployment persisted. By 1939 the U.S. unemployment rate was 17.2 percent, down somewhat from its 1933 peak of 24.9 percent but still remarkably high. By comparison, in May 2003, the unemployment rate of 6.1 percent was the highest in nine years.

Recovery came only after the Department of Justice dramatically stepped up enforcement of antitrust cases nearly four-fold and organized labor suffered a string of setbacks, the economists found.

"The fact that the Depression dragged on for years convinced generations of economists and policy-makers that capitalism could not be trusted to recover from depressions and that significant government intervention was required to achieve good outcomes," Cole said. "Ironically, our work shows that the recovery would have been very rapid had the government not intervened."

-UCLA-
LSMS368

Read more:  *FDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate*


----------



## Faun (Apr 30, 2019)

Markle said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > If you can't notice the bars get shorter as the years pass, I can't help you.
> ...


_*"The chart posted indicates average GDP during the recovery."*_

And that average got smaller as time went on.

As far as your right wing revisionism, that's not by UCLA, it's by 2 economists from UCLA. Not everyone from UCLA is a Liberal. Regardless, what they published is nonsense. They point to 1938 as an indication of a drawn out recovery; but that was the one year unemployment shot up after declining steadily for years. And the reason it shot up was because the government tightened spending the previous year. They also don't count people working thanks to the WPA, just so they could say the unemployment rate was higher than it actually was.


----------



## Deplorable Yankee (Apr 30, 2019)

The fact that the Depression dragged on for years convinced generations of economists and policy-makers that capitalism could not be trusted to recover from depressions and that significant government intervention was required to achieve good outcomes," Cole said. "Ironically, our work shows that the recovery would have been very rapid had the government not intervened."


in 2007 they should of let it all crash n burn ..we'd be in a better place today .
cause by what? government policies  that were  tweeked in  90's
EVEN NEO CON GW  stood up and said we're gonna pop 
no one listened


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 30, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



The rebound started before Obama's inauguration.  It doesn't matter what government bureaucrats determine.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 30, 2019)

Markle said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Markle said:
> ...



If you take the recession year out of the equation the average is not all that different. Trump's is only slightly better and last year may end up being Trump's best year


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 30, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...



Bullshit.  Just admit you were wrong and move on.


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 30, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...


Who says GDP growth gets harder as the economy gets bigger?  That certainly hasn't proved to be true in the cases of China and India.


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 30, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...


Nope.  economists on the government payroll define the end of a recession as the point where GDP becomes positive, not the point where it stops declining.


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 30, 2019)

Faun said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


His recession was much worse.  Unemployment went to 10.4%


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 30, 2019)

Faun said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


ROFL!  It immediately preceded the recession, but that didn't cause the recession?  What do you imagine caused it?


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 30, 2019)

Faun said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


The rebound occurred long before that.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 30, 2019)

airplanemechanic said:


> Raw numbers don't tell the whole story.
> 
> Why Credit for the Decline in Black Unemployment Goes to Trump, Not Obama | People's Pundit Daily
> 
> Under Obama, people were dropping out of the labor market at record rates, thus black unemployment was down. Under Trump, labor participation is at record highs, meaning unemployment rates are actual indicators of the number of unemployed. Or at the very least, aren't simply a reflection of a dead job market and nobody bothering to look for work.



Record highs?  Really?  Does not look like record highs to me.   Jan 2017 the LPR was 62.9% this month the LRP is 63.0%.  Since you seem to struggle with math..that is a change of 0.1%.








> Put plainly, it’s real.



Put plainly, you are full of shit. 



> At no point under Obama's 8 years was there a time when we had more job openings than we had people looking for work. Trump hit that point long ago.



Trump hit that point because every economic measure kept going the same direction it was when he took office.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 30, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...



Basic math, something that seems to escape you.

If you add $10,000 to $100,000 you have a growth rate of 0.09 or 9%.  If you add 10,000 to 1,000,000 you have a growth rate of 0.0099 or roughly 1%.  

That is why a 100 point rally for the DJI is not a big deal like it was 20 years ago.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 30, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...



Well, yes that is what a recession is.  Words have meanings whether you like them or not.

The worst of the job losses did not end until Jul 09...which is after the inauguration

The DJI did not start back up till March 09....which is after the inauguration

The low point for the GDP was the end of Jun 09...which is after the inauguration


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 30, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...



10.4% is much worse than 10.0% ??  Really?


----------



## Mac1958 (Apr 30, 2019)

We'll never do what Trump promised.  His "4% to 6%" claim was his standard mix of bullshit and ignorance.

The macro economy is changing right under our feet and we're not paying enough attention to it.  A large and growing number of our workforce does not have the skillset required for what's already here, let alone what's coming.  Other economies are catching up.

We're too busy watching the Kardashians™,  playing political gotcha and screaming at each other to notice.  We'll pay for it.
.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 30, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



The effective Fed Funds rate was below 0.25% for the first seven years of Obama's presidency.
In March 2019, it was 2.41%. More than 9 times as high.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 30, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...



*If you add $10,000 to $100,000 you have a growth rate of 0.09 or 9%.  *

Ummmm...10%.


----------



## Faun (Apr 30, 2019)

Deplorable Yankee said:


> The fact that the Depression dragged on for years convinced generations of economists and policy-makers that capitalism could not be trusted to recover from depressions and that significant government intervention was required to achieve good outcomes," Cole said. "Ironically, our work shows that the recovery would have been very rapid had the government not intervened."
> 
> 
> in 2007 they should of let it all crash n burn ..we'd be in a better place today .
> ...


We would still be in a depression had they let it "crash & burn."


----------



## Faun (Apr 30, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Dumbfuck, you said it increased 9 fold under trump. But it actually increased from 0.75% to 2.5%.

That is not a nine fold increase, I don't care how conservative you are.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 30, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Asshole. It's now more than nine times as high as it was for the first 7 years of Obama's weak economy.


----------



## Faun (Apr 30, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


And again, it was up to 0.75% under Obama. It's only tripled under Trump, just like it did under Obama.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 30, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



No, the effective Fed Funds rate never touched 0.75% under Obama.
7 years under 0.25%. Two months over 0.50%.


----------



## Faun (Apr 30, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


LOL 

Your ignorance knows no boundaries. Even the effective rate did not increase 9 fold under trump. The effective rate in January, 2017, was 0.66%.

Typical conservative; shouldn't play with numbers.


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 30, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...


Here's some basic math for you:

If $100,000 grows by 10%, then it grows by 10%.

If $1,000,000 grows by 10%, then it grows by 10%.

China's economy grows by 10%/yr, and it has the 2nd largest economy on earth.  Obviously, shear size is not a constraint on growth.


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 30, 2019)

Faun said:


> Deplorable Yankee said:
> 
> 
> > The fact that the Depression dragged on for years convinced generations of economists and policy-makers that capitalism could not be trusted to recover from depressions and that significant government intervention was required to achieve good outcomes," Cole said. "Ironically, our work shows that the recovery would have been very rapid had the government not intervened."
> ...


Prove it.


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 30, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


GG was giving me a math lesson.  Isn't that rich?

Apparently he believes that 9% = 10%.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 30, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Less than 0.25% to 2.41%, it was actually more than 10 times the first 7 years of Obama's weak economy.


----------



## Markle (Apr 30, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Markle said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 30, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...



You are correct, that is what I get for trying to think before coffee.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 30, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...



China's GDP has not hit 10% growth in almost 9 years and likely never will again...because it has gotten so big.  






This is not some radical idea, everything works this way.   

Which is easier to do, go from 10% to 8% unemployment or from 4% to 2%?

10 years ago a gain of 150 points was a 2% jump for the DJI, today a gain of 150 points is .56% jump.


----------



## Faun (Apr 30, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Numbnuts, it's only been this high since January.  And it's still not high.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Apr 30, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Yes, after spending 7 years below 0.25% under Obama, it is now, since January, at least 2.40%.

*And it's still not high.*

Compared to the sub 0.25% Obama had for 7 years (holy shit!) it is high.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 30, 2019)

And as we have this discussion we go into day 464 of stagnation of the major financial markets.

In that time:

DJI up 1.98%
S&P up 4.82%
NASDAQ up 13.86


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Apr 30, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...




Why did you question my source?


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 30, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...


The real reason is that it has caught up to the West in terms of technology and capital accumulation. It can no longer grow simply by stealing technical knowhow from the West.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Apr 30, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...



The real reason is that the larger it gets, the harder it is for it to rise by large percentage points.


----------



## bripat9643 (Apr 30, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...


The historical evidence indicates otherwise, and you have failed to provide any justification for such a claim.


----------



## Faun (Apr 30, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


It's typically higher.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (May 1, 2019)

Rustic, post: 22289807





Rustic said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Here’s the record thru 2018:
> ...



Capitalism is not a problem. Lying and ignorant Americans who cannot respond truthfully to a post us the problem.


----------



## Slade3200 (May 1, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...


Hey bripat9643 I've posted a source. Where are your “real” numbers?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (May 26, 2019)

easyt65, post: 22164622 





easyt65 said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Here’s the record thru 2018:
> ...




Not so fast TrumpOroid. April sucked and forecasts for Q2 GDP are tanking. It’s the exact opposite of Q1 forecasting.

JP Morgan slashes second-quarter GDP forecast to just 1%

J.P. Morgan economists said they now see much slower second-quarter growth of just 1%, down from their prior forecast of 2.25% and way off the 3.2% reported in the first quarter.

"The April durable goods report was bad, particularly the details relating to capital goods orders and shipments. Coming on the heels of last week's crummy April retail sales report, it suggests second quarter activity growth is sharply downshifting from the first quarter pace," the economists wrote.

The Atlanta Fed's GDP Now tracker has GDP growth for the first quarter at 1.3% for the quarter.
TrumpOroids need TrumpO to sustain a GDP for Q2 above 3% in order for TrumpO to beat Obama’s record one annual GDP growth.

Not looking good got the Great White MAGA Hopesters to get their economic miracle outta TrumpO.

The April durable goods report was bad,


----------



## easyt65 (May 26, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> easyt65, post: 22164622
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Did you really think the economic stand-off that needs to be done against China was not going to have an impact on the economy?  Surely you are not that fiscally / economically ignorant...

Let me guess...you are glad to see the success for America Trump has brought take a hit, you are glad to see America take a hit as long as you can attack Trump, and / or you would rather go back to being China's bit@h, allowing them to continue to steal our technology and take advantage of us through the same old unfair trade deals?


----------



## easyt65 (May 26, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Here’s the record thru 2018:
> View attachment 254781
> 
> U.S. - GDP growth by year 1990-2017 | Statista
> ...


Trump did more in his 1st 2 years than Obama did in 8.

Strongest economy in decades

Lowest unemployment in decades

Lowest minority unemployment in recorded history

Most Americans working at one time...


If they aren't trying to claim Trump's economy / success as being Barry's then they are trying to re-write history...



.


----------



## DBA (May 26, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> easyt65, post: 22164622
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Liberals are either economic imbeciles or they want to stimulate more government dependency. There is no other explanation.  My guess is the few smart ones are pushing for the latter and the ignorant, childish masses fall into the first category. 

Didn't you guys say the markets would tank if Trump was elected? Weird, they jumped the day following the election and have been on an upward trend since that time despite congressional opposition.  I will go on record that if Biden gets elected in 2020, the markets will slide as will the entire economy.  If one of the even further leftist kooks makes it in, hold on to your wallets.


----------



## Faun (May 26, 2019)

DBA said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > easyt65, post: 22164622
> ...


DJIA
1/2018 ... 26,616.71
Now ........ 25,585.69


----------



## NotfooledbyW (May 26, 2019)

DBA, post: 22440128 





DBA said:


> Didn't you guys say the markets would tank if Trump was elected?



You responded to a post about GDP. 

We know TrumpO said in 2016 that Obama was the first president not to have a full year with GDP over 3% for one full year and that was a failure. 

TrumoO has not had a full year above 3% as well. 

So why refer to the stock market? 

TrumpO’s economy is no better than Obama’s when measured by GDP. 

By his own words his economy is a failure so you change the subject.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (May 26, 2019)

easyt65, post: 22440016 





easyt65 said:


> Trump did more in his 1st 2 years than Obama did in 8.
> 
> Strongest economy in decades



No he didn’t. Obama reduced unemployment far more than TrumpO ever will.

TrumpO economy is thus far no stronger than Obama’s in terms of GDP

We know TrumpO said in 2016 that Obama was the first president not to have with GDP over 3% for one full year and that was a failure.

TrumoO has not had a full year above 3% as well.

If Q2 comes in under 1.5% TrumpO will NEVER see 3% growth for 2018

If you need to say Obama’s economy was a failure based on GDP then TrumpO’s is a failure too.

Stop lying.


----------



## Mac1958 (May 26, 2019)

He promised 6% (Trump Thinks the U.S. Could See GDP Growth of 6%. The Data Says Otherwise.) and exploded the deficit to pay for it.

We'll see.


----------



## Markle (May 26, 2019)

Slade3200 said:


> Markle said:
> 
> 
> > Slade3200 said:
> ...



Obviously.


----------



## Markle (May 26, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> he point of this thread is that Trumpo is going to be the second president in US history to not have a full year above 3.0 percent GDP.
> 
> You are all aglow with a 3,2 quarter for TrumpO
> 
> Those were a dime a dozen under Obama. When TrumpO hits 5.1 let us know. Because Obama did.



President Donald J. Trump has six more years.  as you know, the economy is booming!







How much did the Fed. pump into the economy during the failed administration of former President Barack Hussein Obama?


----------



## Bush92 (May 26, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Here’s the record thru 2018:
> View attachment 254781
> 
> U.S. - GDP growth by year 1990-2017 | Statista
> ...


Standing- up to China in favor of American workers. But you can’t see that because your CNN, MSNBC, hate the United Statests of America ass can’t see it. Donald J. Trump= Great President...Great American Citizen


----------



## NotfooledbyW (May 26, 2019)

Bush92, post: 22442807, 





Bush92 said:


> Standing- up to China in favor of American workers.



This thread is about comparing TrumpO’s GDP  record compared to Obama’s. TrumpO is doing no better than the previous president.

Even if it were true that TrumpO is standing up for American workers it does not change the fact that in terms of GDP growth over 3% for one full year TrumpO has not done any better than Obama. So according to TrumpO his economic policy is a failure.

A failing economy below 3% GDP (per TrumpO himself) cannot benefit American workers.

Not my opinion it’s TrumpO’s


----------



## NotfooledbyW (May 26, 2019)

Markle, post: 22442805 





Markle said:


> President Donald J. Trump has six more years. as you know, the economy is booming!



TrumpO has about 1 1/2 years if he makes it to the end of his term. 

If Q2 GDP this year comes in under 1.5% it will be pretty much impossible to record a full year of GDP above 3.0%. And by TrumpO’s standards his will be a failed presidency because of that.


----------



## Markle (May 26, 2019)

Faun said:


> You mean the recession that started after Bush became president? The one that likely wouldn't have even been a recession if not for 9.11?





Faun said:


> You mean the recession that started after Bush became president? The one that likely wouldn't have even been a recession if not for 9.11?



You remind me of a politician who forgets that video exists.  You believe there are no easily obtained records.  How quaint!


----------



## Markle (May 26, 2019)

Faun said:


> And again, it was up to 0.75% under Obama. It's only tripled under Trump, just like it did under Obama.



That is a lie, it was 0.25%, zero as far as the economy is concerned.  That was for the majority of failed former President Barack Hussein Obama.  In addition to that, the Fed. pumped TWO TRILLION DOLLARS into the economy.


----------



## Markle (May 26, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> This thread is about comparing TrumpO’s GDP record compared to Obama’s. TrumpO is doing no better than the previous president.



Really?  Where did you find that fact?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (May 27, 2019)

Markle, post: 22443772 





Markle said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > This thread is about comparing TrumpO’s GDP record compared to Obama’s. TrumpO is doing no better than the previous president.
> ...



TrumpO didn’t use GDP average in 2016 when he said Obama will be the first president never to have GDP above 3% for a full year. And TrumpO called that failure anemic.

You can see by the chart that you posted that TrumpO achieved 2.9% in 2018. That was his first full year starting with a very good economy.

Obama’s best full year was 2015 at 2.9 %.

You asked: “Really?  Where did you find that fact?”

That’s where I found the facts.

If you were paying attention you wouid understand what fact I have been using.

Average means nothing in this comparison because you are comparing eight years to two years. If TrumpO made it through 8 years he may have his own recession in all probability.

Then his average slides way down.

That’s  important because the averages you cited put the negative 2.8% year of 2019 on Obama. That is a fake average since the 2008 recession is on Bush.

Are you saying Bush left American in better shape than Obama? That is what your stupid conclusion based on average is telling us.

Do you get the fact now.

TrumpO and Obama are tied at 2.9% for a full years economic growth.

TrumpO will be the second president to never achieve 3.0% GDP.  So according to TrumpO’s own standard, his economy is anemic and thus a failure. It’s no better than Obama’s.


----------



## Markle (May 27, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Markle, post: 22443772
> 
> 
> 
> ...



All that to say nothing.  Inspiring!  

Come back when you have something worthwhile to post.


----------



## Faun (May 27, 2019)

Markle said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > You mean the recession that started after Bush became president? The one that likely wouldn't have even been a recession if not for 9.11?
> ...


Thanks for showing the last 3 recessions all started under Republican presidents. Wasn't necessary since most folks already know that, but thanks just the same.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (May 28, 2019)

Markle, post: 22448453 





Markle said:


> All that to say nothing. Inspiring!
> 
> Come back when you have something worthwhile to post.



It was inspiring to demonstrate what a dumbass TrumpO devotee you are by confronting you with the facts.

You pushed average GDP into this discussion when it was about full year GDP growth.

The FACTS are that there is nothing inspiring about TrumpO’s  GDP record if you do not consider Obama’s record inspiring just the same.

So when you admit ttat TrumpO was wrong to call a full year of GDP growth in 2015 at 2.9% anemic then I can begin to see a little hope that TrumOroids are becoming facts based citizens and are giving up their lies and right wing propaganda and hatred of Obama. 

Do you understand why 2.9 % GDP in 2015 and 2918 should not be considered “anemic” and a failure.

If you do understand that, let me know and that will be an inspiration to us all.

But you can’t can you?

Sad really sad.


----------



## Faun (May 28, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Markle, post: 22448453
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You don't understand,  2.9% under trump is better than 2.9% under Obama. Kinda of like how the unemployment rate was really 42% under Obama but is now under 4% under trump. And the jobs now are better than the jobs while Obama was president.


----------



## Meathead (May 28, 2019)

Faun said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Markle, post: 22448453
> ...


If Obama weren't an idiot, he could have boasted 6% coming of the Great Recession in 2010. A 2.9% recovery at that time was nothing to brag about. Not even liberals were impressed until Trump demonstrated what could be done.

By any measure, Obama failed. Get over it.


----------



## Faun (May 28, 2019)

Meathead said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...


LOL 

Thanks for proving me right... 2.9% under trump is better than 2.9% under Obama.


----------



## Old Yeller (May 28, 2019)

Trump is trying to take on the elephant (China) causing short term hit to GDP & market numbers. He is doing what the last four cowards should have done.   It is a monumental task to straighten out the mess in place.  We'll see.


----------



## Likkmee (May 28, 2019)

i don't give a rats ass about GDP and neither should you. I don't live i that fourth world shithole but my buddies that do have shitloads of work and sales are rocking.
Home values not so much but they got so hypered up during that Bush asshole you fools elected they've almost recovered-leveled........over a decade later


----------



## deanrd (May 28, 2019)

Markle said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Markle said:
> ...


 Because jobless and hungry people have always been good for the country. 
 So Republicans would have you believe.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (May 28, 2019)

Old Yeller said:


> Trump is trying to take on the elephant (China) causing short term hit to GDP & market numbers. He is doing what the last four cowards should have done.   It is a monumental task to straighten out the mess in place.  We'll see.



Whatever the cause TrumpO says if a President does not have a full year GDP above 3.0% its a failure. 

He is failing. According to him.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (May 28, 2019)

Meathead, post: 22451215 





Meathead said:


> If Obama weren't an idiot, he could have boasted 6% coming of the Great Recession in 2010.



So you are saying TrumpO is an idiot for boasting that he will hit 6% GDP for a full year knowing full well that he was not coming off the Great Bush Recession, but never getting above 2.9% and never will.


----------



## Meathead (May 28, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Meathead, post: 22451215
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Are you really that stupid? You don't need to answer. It is a rhetorical question.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (May 28, 2019)

Meathead, post: 22454294,





Meathead said:


> Are you really that stupid? You don't need to answer. It is a rhetorical question.



It is not a rhetorical question/ it is a stupid question by someone so stupid they are stilled duped by TrumpO. 

It’s not being stupid to criticize a President who bragged his tax cuts will produce a full year GDP at 6% and then that President fails to produce an economy with 3.0% or higher annual GDP when we know as a candidate that very same President said that not having 3.0 % or higher annual growth is a presidential failure. 

It’s stupid to prentend that it does not matter what TrumpO does and what TrumpO says.


----------



## Meathead (May 28, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Meathead, post: 22454294,
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You didn't need to answer yes or at all. I was not out to embarrass you any more than necessary.


----------



## Faun (May 28, 2019)

Meathead said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead, post: 22454294,
> ...


When are you going to start?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (May 28, 2019)

Meathead, post: 22454444 





Meathead said:


> You didn't need to answer yes or at all. I was not out to embarrass you any more than necessary.



I’m not the one giving TrumpO a pass for promising 6% GDP for a year because his tax cuts wouid do that and then never getting GDP above 3% just like Obama didn’t.

For doing the same as Obama you TrumpOroids glorify TrumpO as the greatest President that ever lived because TrumpO says he is. That is embarrassing.

And what’s more embarrassing than even that is you right wing deficit hawks bitching and moaning during the recovery from your rightwing Great Recession is that now you don’t give a damn that TrumpO's tax cuts not only do not produce a GDP above 3% they are giving the US Treasury trillion dollar deficits for years to come. You don’t care.

When Obama put a huge payroll tax cut for workers into the stimulus plan you bitched and moaned about that.

TrumpO's tax cuts went mostly to corporations and wealthy folks like the TrumpO clan.

I’m not out to embarrass you. You are an embarrassment to hinest, moral, free-thinking rationak, facts based human beings world wide.

I’ve been in Portugal now for 11 days.

TrumpO is most often brought up by locals.

I have to explain that I voted against the idiot embarrassment we have as President right now.

And they are glad to hear that over here.


----------



## Meathead (May 29, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Meathead, post: 22454444
> 
> 
> 
> ...


We got it. Compounding your own stupidity with untruths and trite nonsense is not going to help you. Better to shut up and be  thought a fool than ...


----------



## jc456 (May 29, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Meathead, post: 22451215
> 
> 
> 
> ...


he set a bar to reach.  why do you have a problem with that?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (May 29, 2019)

jc456, post: 22457015 





jc456 said:


> he set a bar to reach. why do you have a problem with that?



No. He set the bar for Obama at anything below 3.0% GDP to be presidential failure. Now since he can do no better the very same bar is a magnificent success. 

That is called lying. 

I do realize lying is now respectable behavior when you are a TrumpO cult member. 

I have a problem with that.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (May 29, 2019)

Meathead, post: 22456028,  





Meathead said:


> Compounding your own stupidity with untruths



Cite one ‘untruth’ let alone more than one in any of my posts. 

If you don’t you are a liar. We can leave it at that,


----------



## Meathead (May 29, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Meathead, post: 22456028,
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Trump promising 6% growth. You're a bit of a low-life, and I'm not saying that because you're only ignorant.


----------



## jc456 (May 29, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> jc456, post: 22457015
> 
> 
> 
> ...


it's a bar to reach, no?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (May 29, 2019)

Meathead, post: 22458134. 





Meathead said:


> Trump promising 6% growth. You're a bit of a low-life, and I'm not saying that because you're only ignorant.



That is not a lie you TrumpO duped fool. My God you could have at least googled;


*Trump + 6% Growth:*


On Wednesday, Trump told reporters that he expects to see a 6% annual growth rate. That might not sound like a wild number, until you consider that 6% more than doubles the 30-year average rate of 2.5%. Six percent is also more than triple what the Congressional Budget Office forecasts for the next ten years.  Trump Thinks the U.S. Could See GDP Growth of 6%. The Data Says Otherwise.

So far you are still a liar. There are no untruths in my posts. 

You said you had plural ‘untruths’ on me. That is a lie.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (May 29, 2019)

jc456, post: 22458360 





jc456 said:


> it's a bar to reach, no?



It is a bar to reach and TrumpO will never reach it. According to Him his economy is “anemic” and therefore a failure.

Why lie that it is more magnificent than Obama’s?


----------



## Meathead (May 29, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Meathead, post: 22458134.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Promise and expect are different words. Kinda like sleaze and integrity.


----------



## McRocket (May 29, 2019)

Trump is the definition of both ‘liar’ and ‘manchild’.

This is the ‘stable genius’ who started massive tariffs - yet did not even know what they were.

What a complete and total turd.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (May 29, 2019)

Meathead, post: 22459896 





Meathead said:


> Promise and expect are different words. Kinda like sleaze and integrity.



Sleaze and integrity are not close to being synonyms, idiot. 

Dumbass....... Trump claimed that he sees “no reason why we don’t go to 4, 5, even 6%.”

If there is “no reason” we don’t go to 6% there is no possibility that it won’t hit 6%. That’s a promise, fool. That’s an expectation, fool. That’s a prediction, fool. All synonyms.  No ‘untruth” from me. 

The asshole clown can’t even get above 2.9% and he is out there saying there is no reason he won’t take the economy to 6%. 

You want to quibble semantics because you are a TrumpO duped fool.

Give it up TrumpOroid, you lied.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (May 29, 2019)

Meathead said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead, post: 22458134.
> ...



Trump claimed that he sees “no reason why we don’t go to 4, 5, even 6%.”

Ohhhh Oooooo. Another inverted yield curve. Specter of recession.

Maybe TrumpO meant negative 6%.

*Dow Jones Today: Trade War, Specter of Recession Are Toxic for Stock *
Stocks tumbled again on the *Dow Jones* today as the long-running trade dispute between the U.S. and China intensified. Adding to the carnage, recession fears are being stoked by plunging 10-year bond yields, which again led to an inverted yield curve.
Dow Jones Today: Trade War, Specter of Recession Are Toxic For Stocks
TrumpO just forgot to throw in that little negative detail. Is that it?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (May 29, 2019)

On GDP Trump claimed that he sees “no reason why we don’t go to 4, 5, even 6%.”

Old Yeller, post: 22451290 





Old Yeller said:


> Trump is trying to take on the elephant (China) causing short term hit to GDP & market numbers. He is doing what the last four cowards should have done. It is a monumental task to straighten out the mess in place. We'll see.



Do you think the “four last cowards” had negotiiating weaknesses such as this in mind.


*Dow slides to three-month low, briefly slips below 25,000 *By Matt Egan, CNN Business Updated 4:16 PM EDT, Wed May 29, 2019

One worry is that Beijing will place restrictions on rare-earth exports, elements crucial to the production of smartphones, missile systems and other high-tech devices. About 80% of all rare earth minerals imported into the United States are from China. Dow sinks 300 points as fears mount - CNN
Are you sure about the trade war TrumpO started is actually just a short term hit to GDP?

This could end up being s long term hit to more than GDP if TrumpO has backed his dumbass self into a corner with election year being just six months away.

TrumpO says there is no reason US GDP
won’t go to 6%. 

Why do you now accept TrumpO’s trade war as a reason TrumoO can’t get the GDP above 2.9?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (May 31, 2019)

Meathead, post: 22451215 





Meathead said:


> By any measure, Obama failed.



Your Great White MAGA Hope,  last year at 2.9 GDP growth, did not measure past Obama.

Now so far in 2019 your GWMAGAH eked past 3.0 in Q1 but not looking good for W2:

*U.S. Q2 GDP Growth Outlook Continues To Slide*
May 31, 2019 7:18 AM

At this point, using data published to date, it appears that the US is headed for a period of slower growth.
The economy is expected to expand 1.8% in Q2, based on the median for a set of GDP estimates compiled by The Capital Spectator.
U.S. Q2 GDP Growth Outlook Continues To Slide | Seeking Alpha

By Trumpo’s own measure he is heading for failure on growing the economy.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 2, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22184713,  





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Really? Who had a weaker recovery than Obama? Link?



Which Post WWII president had to recover from a recession as bad as the Great Bush Recession of 2008? 

Tell us. 

So what recovery are you comparing Obama’s. recovery to? 

How can you call Obama’s recovery weak since TrumpO has not grown the economy during either of his two full years any more than two of Obama’s Best years.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 2, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> How can you call Obama’s recovery weak since TrumpO has not grown the economy during either of his two full years any more than two of Obama’s Best years.


Wow.You must have been watching a lot of CNN/MSNBC. Couldn't be farther out in space on this.  This is the greatest and longest economic expansion in USA history.


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 2, 2019)

Which Post WWII president had to recover from a recession as bad as the Great Bush Recession of 2008?

Tell us.

So what recovery are you comparing Obama’s. recovery to?

How can you call Obama’s recovery weak since TrumpO has not grown the economy during either of his two full years any more than two of Obama’s Best years.


NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22184713,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Which Post WWII president had to recover from a recession as bad as the Great Bush Recession of 2008?  Obama.  Actually slid on his watch, he didn't have public confidence.   *What goes down must come up, that's USA economics.  Historically low interest rates saved us.  BTW, the Democrats controlled congress when we dove into the "Great BUSH Recession". *

Tell us.  *Mouse in your pocket? (JK)*

So what recovery are you comparing Obama’s. recovery to? *Couldn't tell you. *

How can you call Obama’s recovery weak.  *It was slow going, topsy turby.  Recovery was slowed by things like Obamacare. *

 since TrumpO has not grown the economy during either of his two full years any more than two of Obama’s Best years.  *You just said it......Trump years matched Obama's best years.  Best two of three years to be exact.  After this year it should match or exceed 3 of Obama's best 3.  Against higher interest rates too. The GDP was 1.6 when Trump took over.  Trump is consecutive 2.2 & 2.9.........Back to my point about recovery following recession.  There was more room for recovery under Obama than Trump. Basic mathematics, economics and logic generally missed by the talking heads.  Fuck I didn't even finish grade school - the talking heads just suck.  Obama was  an underachiever.  All while putting a strain on society with identity politics.   Shit those were the good old days.  Now progs want open borders, free stuff on free stuff, mass poverty, wealth disparity (they're mostly progs), inflation, compromised wages, high taxes on middle class and business, drug abuse. A big fucking party. *


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 2, 2019)

protectionist, post: 22645522 





protectionist said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > How can you call Obama’s recovery weak since TrumpO has not grown the economy during either of his two full years any more than two of Obama’s Best years.
> ...




Yes and about seven of the ten year expansion was Obama’s.

Thank you. I have been making that point for months. 

You are an idiot if you think this historic expansion started with the inauguration of the Great White MAGA Hope. 

TrumpO is the second president in this historic. ten  year expansion not to have a single year of GDP rise above 3.0%. 

Each have a single high year at 2.9%.

TrumpO set the bar at 3.0%.

*"Obama is the first president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth," *Trump said during an Oct. 28 campaign rally in Manchester, N.H.

Does TrumpO need to get GDP higher than Obama’s single year at 2.9 before running around bragging that his economy is so much greater than Obama’s? 

If not why the double standard?


----------



## protectionist (Jul 2, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Yes and about seven of the ten year expansion was Obama’s.
> 
> Thank you. I have been making that point for months.
> 
> ...


FALSE!  POTUS has nothing to do with economic recovery after a severe recession. economies naturally rebound on their own. The 2009-2015 years were not Obama's, and he cannot take the credit.  The first year that really can be attributed ti Obama is 2016, which was a continual decline.

You are an idiot if you fall for the liberal media BS, and think this historic expansion did NOT start with the inauguration of the President Trump.

And your claim that Trump has no_ "single year of GDP rise above 3.0%"_ is not exactly accurate.

From the second quarter of 2018, through the second quarter of 2019, Trump's GDP averages out to 3.2 %​


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 2, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22184713,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*Which Post WWII president had to recover from a recession as bad as the Great Bush Recession of 2008? *

It was horrible! Obama had to suffer thru 5 months of a recession.....how did he survive? DURR


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 2, 2019)

I asked: So what recovery are you comparing Obama’s. recovery to?

WTH_Progs?, post: 22645554, 





WTH_Progs? said:


> *Couldn't tell you.  *



Then how in the hell does ToddsP claim it was the weakest recovery since WWII?

You can call it weak all you want which means nothing coming from a partisan hack, but admitting there has been no comparative research to previous presidents during post recession economies makes  the “weakest since WWII “  claim a fiat out lie. 

Thanks for admitting it.,



I asked: How can you call Obama’s recovery weak. 

WTH_Progs?, post: 22645554, 





WTH_Progs? said:


> *It was slow going, topsy turby.  Recovery was slowed by things like Obamacare. *



Of course it was slow going but all long term positive trends were steady for seven years. 

About Obamacare slowing the recovery?

You fling shit on the wall and hope some of it sticks. 

Goldman Sachs' analysis found that the nationwide 5.4 percentage point increase in the number of insured people since 2012 "could explain roughly 40 percent of health-care job growth, or 500,000 additional jobs in the sector over that period."  That projection is based on an estimate that every 1 percentage-point increase in insurance coverage is associated with a 0.6 percent rise in health-care employment and health-care.500,000 jobs added to health-care sector under Obamacare, Goldman Sachs estimates
Why do you think you can get away with lying and making shit up whenever you mention Obama?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 2, 2019)

I asked *Which Post WWII president had to recover from a recession as bad as the Great Bush Recession of 2008?*


Toddsterpatriot, post: 22645684





Toddsterpatriot said:


> *. *It was horrible! Obama had to suffer thru 5 months of a recession.....how did he survive? DURR




You said Obama’s recovery was the weakest since WWII. 

You need to have some precedent to make a claim about “weakest”

You have nothing - I understand. You lied. You had no basis other to put that out there for other stupid people to believe.


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 3, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> I asked: So what recovery are you comparing Obama’s. recovery to?
> 
> WTH_Progs?, post: 22645554,
> 
> ...



Ha ha ha ha ha..........So a 40 percent job growth in healthcare makes up for stagnation in other sectors you failed to mention?  Including cutting people's hours, high increases in costs to many consumers and higher taxes.  And I'm the fucking liar?  Fuck off already.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 3, 2019)

WTH_Progs?, post: 22645887B





WTH_Progs? said:


> .....So a 40 percent job growth in healthcare makes up for stagnation in other sectors you failed to mention?



You lied when you declared that the ACA slowed the economy. I didn’t fail to mention anything.

You lied about the negative impact the ACA had on the recovery.

It had a positive impact. I like to straighten liars out with facts.

Your response shows how ignorant and baseless your rants are.

Since the ACA created half a million health sector jobs while stagnation in other sectors continued to exist as a result of the massive Great Bush Recession, then those who got those jobs as a result of the ACA had money to spend. Many health care jobs are higher paying.

So you ignorant TrumpO twit. Anything that increases consumer spending benefits other sectors as well.

Yet you lied that the ACA slowed the economy.

WTH idiot?


----------



## Dragonlady (Jul 3, 2019)

protectionist said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > How can you call Obama’s recovery weak since TrumpO has not grown the economy during either of his two full years any more than two of Obama’s Best years.
> ...



Yes it is, and it is Obama's greatest achievement.  Trump has ridden Obama's coattails for two years, and was only able to keep it going with massive tax cuts and the largest deficits in history.  What happens when the inevitably economy contraction hits?  He can't cut taxes or increase spending as a stimulus?


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 3, 2019)

protectionist said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Yes and about seven of the ten year expansion was Obama’s.
> ...



Then the claim about Obama not having a year above 3% is equally false as he had 12 months that came out to above 3% twice. 

But we do not measure GDP growth that way.


----------



## Dragonlady (Jul 3, 2019)

WTH_Progs? said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > I asked: So what recovery are you comparing Obama’s. recovery to?
> ...



Try dealing with reality:

Dispelling Eight Myths on ObamaCare’s Eighth Anniversary


----------



## Pilot1 (Jul 3, 2019)

Obama had the Fed drop rates to ZERO.  Even with that he still had an ANEMIC 1.6% GDP growth over his eight year reign of terror.  

With Trump we see what an economy can do with lower taxes, lower energy prices, and less regulation.  Even with the Fed raising interest rates FOUR TIMES since his election.  So while Obama got easing from the Fed, Trump has gotten tightening, and still is kicking ass!


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 3, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> I asked *Which Post WWII president had to recover from a recession as bad as the Great Bush Recession of 2008?*
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22645684
> ...



*You said Obama’s recovery was the weakest since WWII. *

Only because it's the truth.

*You need to have some precedent to make a claim about “weakest”*

You'd have to look at all the other recoveries since WWII. I understand your reluctance.


----------



## DBA (Jul 3, 2019)

Pilot1 said:


> Obama had the Fed drop rates to ZERO.  Even with that he still had an ANEMIC 1.6% GDP growth over his eight year reign of terror.
> 
> With Trump we see what an economy can do with lower taxes, lower energy prices, and less regulation.  Even with the Fed raising interest rates FOUR TIMES since his election.  So while Obama got easing from the Fed, Trump has gotten tightening, and still is kicking ass!



Don't confuse them with facts.  The Fed helped Obama's economy stay afloat while it has done everything to pull down the Trump economy. Just imagine if the Fed gave Trump the pass they gave Obama.   My only hope is that intelligent Americans understand this and vote for Trump in 2020. Sheep will be sheep...can't fix them.


----------



## Dragonlady (Jul 3, 2019)

Pilot1 said:


> Obama had the Fed drop rates to ZERO.  Even with that he still had an ANEMIC 1.6% GDP growth over his eight year reign of terror.
> 
> With Trump we see what an economy can do with lower taxes, lower energy prices, and less regulation.  Even with the Fed raising interest rates FOUR TIMES since his election.  So while Obama got easing from the Fed, Trump has gotten tightening, and still is kicking ass!



BUSH cut the fed to zero.  

Fed Cuts Rates Near Zero to Battle Slump


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 3, 2019)

Dragonlady said:


> Pilot1 said:
> 
> 
> > Obama had the Fed drop rates to ZERO.  Even with that he still had an ANEMIC 1.6% GDP growth over his eight year reign of terror.
> ...



And Obama's economy was so shaky, they kept rates there for 7 years.


----------



## Pilot1 (Jul 3, 2019)

DBA said:


> Pilot1 said:
> 
> 
> > Obama had the Fed drop rates to ZERO.  Even with that he still had an ANEMIC 1.6% GDP growth over his eight year reign of terror.
> ...



The Feds policy MOSTLY DURING OBAMA, not Bush, was Quantitative Easing over his entire two terms.  You are correct in that Trump has had to fight the Fed since the beginning as his good economy has given them ammunition to raise rates and TIGHTEN so far during his term, yet the stock markets continue to rise.  This is opposite to what normally happens when the Fed raises rates.


----------



## Markle (Jul 3, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Which Post WWII president had to recover from a recession as bad as the Great Bush Recession of 2008?
> 
> Tell us.
> 
> ...



Simple, the malaise of failed former President Jimmy Carter.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 3, 2019)

Dragonlady said:


> Yes it is, and it is Obama's greatest achievement.  Trump has ridden Obama's coattails for two years, and was only able to keep it going with massive tax cuts and the largest deficits in history.  What happens when the inevitably economy contraction hits?  He can't cut taxes or increase spending as a stimulus?


FALSE!  Obama has nothing to do with it. His first 7 years were natural recoil from a bad recession. His last year was continual falling GDP.

Trump reversed the Obama 2016 free fall, and brought GDP up to 4.2%.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 3, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Then the claim about Obama not having a year above 3% is equally false as he had 12 months that came out to above 3% twice.
> 
> But we do not measure GDP growth that way.


One can measure it however one sees fit.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 3, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Then the claim about Obama not having a year above 3% is equally false as he had 12 months that came out to above 3% twice.
> ...



That is fine, if that is the case than you have to give Obama credit for 2 "years" over 3%.  

but you will not, because you are a mindless partisan sheep


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 3, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...



Which 4 quarter strings of over 3% did he have?


----------



## The Purge (Jul 3, 2019)

Unemployment lowest in 50 years....and the Surrender Monkey???... ROTFLMFAO!!!


----------



## Faun (Jul 3, 2019)

Thinker101 said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Here’s the record thru 2018:
> ...


So the left shouldn't treat trump like the right treated Obama?


----------



## Faun (Jul 3, 2019)

easyt65 said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Here’s the record thru 2018:
> ...


*"Trump has accomplished economic and employment successes not seen in decades and accomplished more in 2 years than Obama did in 8..."*

He lowered the unemployment rate about *one percentage point* after inheriting a good economy. You freaks act like he's the second coming of Christ.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 3, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > protectionist said:
> ...



Did Obama never have a whole year of 3% economic growth?

_But if the data is used to compare one quarter to the same quarter from a year ago, there were two periods during Obama’s tenure in which growth exceeded 3 percent. Between the third quarters of 2009 and 2010, GDP growth was about 3.1 percent; and between the first quarters of 2014 and 2015, the economy grew by 3.3 percent, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis._


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 3, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...



Thanks!

*Between the third quarters of 2009 and 2010, GDP growth was about 3.1 percent; *

The first summer of recovery.

_*and between the first quarters of 2014 and 2015, the economy grew by 3.3 percent, *_

0-0.25% Fed Funds and $1.7 trillion in QE3 still working its way thru the economy.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 3, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



And?   I am not here defending Obama, just trying to keep things honest.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 3, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...



And nothing. If he hadn't been such a bozo, he'd have had much better growth. That's all.

Not accusing you of defending his weak economy.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 3, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



I agree, he was terrible.  The fact that Trump can only do slightly better should tell you something...but it does not seem to.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 3, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...



Well, the recovery is old. And don't fight the Fed.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 3, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> That is fine, if that is the case than you have to give Obama credit for 2 "years" over 3%.
> 
> but you will not, because you are a mindless partisan sheep


You give Obama credit for 2009-2015, which are nothing more than recession recoil years. And you don't give him blame for the only awful year 2016, that is connected with him, because you are a mindless partisan sheep.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 3, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> I agree, he was terrible.  The fact that Trump can only do slightly better should tell you something...but it does not seem to.


Obama's best (2016-2nd quarter) was 2.3. Trump's best so far is 4.2.  Much more than "slightly"


----------



## protectionist (Jul 3, 2019)

Faun said:


> *"Trump has accomplished economic and employment successes not seen in decades and accomplished more in 2 years than Obama did in 8..."*
> 
> He lowered the unemployment rate about *one percentage point* after inheriting a good economy. You freaks act like he's the second coming of Christ.


FALSE! Here is the SINKING/STINKING economy Trump inherited >>






The unemployment rate went from 4.7% to 3.6.  with unemployment, that's quite a bit. And that includes the lowest unemployment for blacks, Hispanics, and disabled, EVER.


----------



## SassyIrishLass (Jul 3, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...



The fact you're trying to defend Ears's tepid economy speaks volumes too.

The present economy vs Ears's is night and day


----------



## protectionist (Jul 3, 2019)

SassyIrishLass said:


> I agree, he was terrible.  The fact that Trump can only do slightly better should tell you something...but it does not seem to.



The fact you're trying to defend Ears's tepid economy speaks volumes too.

The present economy vs Ears's is night and day[/QUOTE]
Of course, but that is the difference between getting a multi-billionaire POTUS with decades of industrial experience, and an airhead who was a "community organizer"


----------



## SassyIrishLass (Jul 3, 2019)

protectionist said:


> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> > I agree, he was terrible.  The fact that Trump can only do slightly better should tell you something...but it does not seem to.
> ...


Of course, but that is the difference between getting a multi-billionaire POTUS with decades of industrial experience, and an airhead who was a "community organizer"[/QUOTE]

Ears was in over his head and the Fed saved his gay ass


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 3, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > That is fine, if that is the case than you have to give Obama credit for 2 "years" over 3%.
> ...



Acutally, I think that Obama sucked, was the 2nd worst POTUS ever in my opinion.  I just do not think Trump is much better...which makes me anything but partisan.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 3, 2019)

SassyIrishLass said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



I have no defended anything, do try and keep up.  

I said Obama was terrible, that is not a defense of someone one...fuck I hate idiots.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 3, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > That is fine, if that is the case than you have to give Obama credit for 2 "years" over 3%.
> ...



GDP growth is always in a state of flux, with ups and downs.   The drop in late 15 and early 16 was already changing before the election.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 3, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > *"Trump has accomplished economic and employment successes not seen in decades and accomplished more in 2 years than Obama did in 8..."*
> ...



What say you we look at the whole picture, not just a tiny piece of it.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 3, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > I agree, he was terrible.  The fact that Trump can only do slightly better should tell you something...but it does not seem to.
> ...



Obama's best quarter was 5.1, not 2.3


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 3, 2019)

protectionist, post: 22648390 





protectionist said:


> Here is the SINKING/STINKING economy Trump inherited >>



What Obama was only president for nine months. 

The economy went up and down over seven years during Obama’s term, 

It’s gone up and is already going down under two years of TrumpO. It never went higher than 2.9 single year GDP under both Presidents. 

You gonna show a bar chart for this year?

Just in today. 

*percent — July 3, 2019*
The GDPNow model estimate for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the second quarter of 2019 is *1.3 percent* on July 3, down from 1.5 percent on July 1


1.3.  TrumpO SlumpO my!


----------



## edward37 (Jul 3, 2019)

Thinker101 said:


> Brain357 said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101 said:
> ...


The same as republican scum McConnell promised for Obama   NO HELP


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 3, 2019)

SassyIrishLass, post: 22648396 





SassyIrishLass said:


> The fact you're trying to defend Ears's tepid economy speaks volumes too.



Is this tepid, TrumoO twit? 

*percent — July 3, 2019*
The GDPNow model estimate for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the second quarter of 2019 is *1.3 percent* on July 3


----------



## SassyIrishLass (Jul 3, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> SassyIrishLass, post: 22648396
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Gfy, Foo you've always been an econ illiterate and had an"O" ring around your piehole. Stupd SOB


----------



## Thinker101 (Jul 3, 2019)

edward37 said:


> Thinker101 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



Wow, how petty, which is no surprise.


----------



## edward37 (Jul 3, 2019)

Thinker101 said:


> edward37 said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101 said:
> ...


yes thinker , it's a bitch when your own stink comes back to slap you in the face


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 3, 2019)

edward37 said:


> Thinker101 said:
> 
> 
> > Brain357 said:
> ...



Thank goodness, think how much more damage Obama could have done to our country and economy if
McConnell went along with Obama's horrible ideas.


----------



## Aldo Raine (Jul 3, 2019)

Dragonlady said:


> Pilot1 said:
> 
> 
> > Obama had the Fed drop rates to ZERO.  Even with that he still had an ANEMIC 1.6% GDP growth over his eight year reign of terror.
> ...




  Do not use facts on Tramptards.  It is like kryptonite to Superman, it is lethal!!!


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 3, 2019)

Aldo Raine said:


> Dragonlady said:
> 
> 
> > Pilot1 said:
> ...



Dippylady thinks Bush cut the Fed Funds rate......I don't think fact is a word you should use about her posts.


----------



## Aldo Raine (Jul 3, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Aldo Raine said:
> 
> 
> > Dragonlady said:
> ...




  So your saying Obama cut them?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 3, 2019)

Aldo Raine said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Aldo Raine said:
> ...



Where did I say that? Why would I say that?


----------



## Pilot1 (Jul 3, 2019)

Santa cut them.


----------



## Aldo Raine (Jul 3, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Aldo Raine said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...




  Trying to get a clear picture on what it is you are saying.  What are you saying?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 3, 2019)

Aldo Raine said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Aldo Raine said:
> ...



I'm saying dippylady made a stupid claim. Do you not see her stupidity?


----------



## Aldo Raine (Jul 3, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Aldo Raine said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...




  Please explain


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 3, 2019)

Aldo Raine said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Aldo Raine said:
> ...



Presidents don't control the Fed Funds Rate. Sheesh.


----------



## Aldo Raine (Jul 3, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Aldo Raine said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



  Gotcha, so we are on the same page as far as that goes!


----------



## protectionist (Jul 3, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Acutally, I think that Obama sucked, was the 2nd worst POTUS ever in my opinion.  I just do not think Trump is much better...which makes me anything but partisan.


Trump is FAR better, and might be the best POTUS, ever.  How could anybody be not much better than a Muslim jihadist ?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 3, 2019)

Aldo Raine said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Aldo Raine said:
> ...



Glad you finally understand dragonlady's stupidity.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 3, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> GDP growth is always in a state of flux, with ups and downs.   The drop in late 15 and early 16 was already changing before the election.
> 
> View attachment 267564


Obama's GDP dropped for his entire last year (2016)


----------



## Dragonlady (Jul 3, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Aldo Raine said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



Pilot1 said Obama had the Fed drop the rates to zero. That rate drop came in 2008, when Bush was President.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 3, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> What say you we look at the whole picture, not just a tiny piece of it.
> 
> View attachment 267565


I say that you must not have been reading any of my posts for the past 3 years, when I have repeatedly stated that 2009-2015 are not a "picture" of Obama's economic prowess, they are a picture of a typical, ordinary,natural recoil of all economies after a severe recession, that would occur no matter who was POTUS at the time.

Only year we can really associate with Obama himself is his last year - 2016 (with sinking GDP) (for the 200th time I've posted this)


----------



## protectionist (Jul 3, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Obama's best quarter was 5.1, not 2.3


No.  See the previous Post (# 644)


----------



## Dragonlady (Jul 3, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > GDP growth is always in a state of flux, with ups and downs.   The drop in late 15 and early 16 was already changing before the election.
> ...



GDP growth was 1.6% in 2016. Lower than 2015, but certainly not in need of the double barrelled stimulus Trump applied.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 3, 2019)

Dragonlady said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Aldo Raine said:
> ...



Feel free to correct his error, rather than post your own.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 3, 2019)

SassyIrishLass, post: 22649349 





SassyIrishLass said:


> Gfy, Foo you've always been an econ illiterate and had an"O" ring around your piehole. Stupd SOB




How econ literate does one need to be to read and understand this: 

*Latest forecast: 1.3 percent — July 3, 2019 *The GDPNow model estimate for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the second quarter of 2019 is *1.3 percent* on July 3, down from 1.5 percent on July 1.
I see you have not advanced beyond sixth grade insult flinging - but what else can you say now that your Great White MAGA Hope’s economy has entered it TEPID stage .


----------



## protectionist (Jul 3, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> What Obama was only president for nine months.
> 
> The economy went up and down over seven years during Obama’s term,
> 
> ...


1.  Again for the 201st time. That 7 years is not attributable to Obama, See Post # 644.  Ho hum.

2.  GDP growth is UP over the past 2 quarters >  2.2 to 3.1 (Trump Bump )


----------



## protectionist (Jul 3, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> How econ literate does one need to be to read and understand this:
> 
> *Latest forecast: 1.3 percent — July 3, 2019 *The GDPNow model estimate for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the second quarter of 2019 is *1.3 percent* on July 3, down from 1.5 percent on July 1.
> I see you have not advanced beyond sixth grade insult flinging - but what else can you say now that your Great White MAGA Hope’s economy has entered it TEPID stage .


And whose illustrious "forecast" HA HA , is this ? The same glunks who "forecasted" Hillary Clinton to win the presidency ?  

EARTH TO NFBW:   Anyone can "forecast" anything.   Stick to the GDP reports, if you want credibility around here.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 3, 2019)

Dragonlady said:


> [Q]
> 
> GDP growth was 1.6% in 2016. Lower than 2015, but certainly not in need of the double barrelled stimulus Trump applied.


Whatever it needed, it got it, from Trump.  GDP quickly rose up to 3% in 2017, and to 4.2% in 2018.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 3, 2019)

protectionist, post: 22650704 





protectionist said:


> 2. GDP growth is UP over the past 2 quarters > 2.2 to 3.1



Sorry

. It’s July 3. The second quarter ended three days ago. >>> 3.1 to 1.3. TrumpO will not see 

TrumpO and Obama will share in the distinction of being the first two president in US history not to have  single year GDP above 3.0.


----------



## Pilot1 (Jul 3, 2019)

Dragonlady said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Aldo Raine said:
> ...



No you are wrong DL.



> Beginning in 2009, the Fed began its multi-stage program of quantitative easing through large-scale purchases of Treasury and other securities. In the aftermath of the financial crash, the agency had quickly lowered the targeted federal funds rate to between zero and 0.25 percent. In early 2009, the bank's leaders, especially Ben Bernanke, sought to provide further monetary stimulus to the national economy and settled on large-scale asset purchases as the most viable way to expand the monetary base with interest rates already at the lower bound.



Quantitative Easing means a program of lower and lower interest rates.  

The Fed and Fiscal Policy During the Obama Years | RealClearMarkets


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 3, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Dragonlady said:
> 
> 
> > [Q]
> ...



Here’s an updated chart for ya.



 

Quite the early fizzle for the Great White’s Economy.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 3, 2019)

protectionist, post: 22650752 





protectionist said:


> And whose illustrious "forecast" HA HA , is this ? The same glunks who "forecasted" Hillary Clinton to win the presidency ?
> 
> EARTH TO NFBW: Anyone can "forecast" anything. Stick to the GDP reports, if you want credibility around here.



The Atlanta Fed is not just anybody.

1.3 is not 3.1 and it means: 

Trump will not see a GDP above 3.0. for 2019.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 3, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Sorry
> 
> . It’s July 3. The second quarter ended three days ago. >>> 3.1 to 1.3. TrumpO will not see
> 
> TrumpO and Obama will share in the distinction of being the first two president in US history not to have  single year GDP above 3.0.


Sorry.  I see nothing about 1.3, except your unsubstantiated post.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 3, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Here’s an updated chart for ya.
> 
> View attachment 267640
> 
> Quite the early fizzle for the Great White’s Economy.


Quite the great horsefeathers.  Come back when you have something legit, with a source to confirm it.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 3, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> The Atlanta Fed is not just anybody.
> 
> 1.3 is not 3.1 and it means:
> 
> Trump will not see a GDP above 3.0. for 2019.


I still see no legit source with your posts.  All I see is you blabbering, what looks like "forecasting" nonsense.

This chart remains the legitimate source of GDP growth for 2019 >>


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 4, 2019)

protectionist said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > The Atlanta Fed is not just anybody.
> ...



We will find out in 22 days.  I am sure if it comes in under 2 you will be the first one to blame on Trump and start a thread about how shitty the economy is.


----------



## Mac1958 (Jul 4, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> We will find out in 22 days.  I am sure if it comes in under 2 you will be the first one to blame on Trump and start a thread about how shitty the economy is.


No doubt that would be Obama's fault.
.


----------



## Mac1958 (Jul 4, 2019)

Definitely some clear weaknesses beginning to show up.  The bond market thinks the chance of a real slowdown is increasing.  The Fed has signaled, however, that's it's open to dropping rates to provide a little stimulus to provide a spark.  The slowdown appears to be real.  The market loves the notion of a non-recessionary stimulus and is responding positively to that.

Trump's 5% to 6% GDP promises were just fantasy that only the most gullible bought into.  They're the folks you're seeing crowing about the "great economy", data notwithstanding.  A good China deal sure would help, and the Fed's rate stimulus might too.  Here's hoping.  The foundation for growth is certainly there if there's enough of a spark.

So that's where we are.  Maybe a bit of an inflection point here.  I'm assuming the above will be considered "fake news", which is the simplistic label applied to all data and facts that are avoided in the alternate universe.
..


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 4, 2019)

protectionist, post: 22651862, 





protectionist said:


> I still see no legit source with your posts. All I see is you blabbering, what looks like "forecasting" nonsense.



It’s a very legitimate and respected forecasting source. 

Do you think Q2 will be above 3.0 when BEA publishes its initial report later this month.

If yes based on what? 

The Atlanta Fed crunches all numbers and Indicators as they are reported.. such as the April durable goods report being bad. 

They put all new data in and their computers that spit out the forecasts without human judgement.

JP Morgan slashes second-quarter GDP forecast to just 1% - CNBC.com. 
J.P. Morgan economists said they now see much slower second-quarter growth of just 1%, down from their actors prior forecast of 2.25% and way off the 3.2% reported in the first quarter.   "The April durable goods report was bad, particularly the details relating to capital goods orders and shipments. Coming on the heels of last week's crummy April retail sales report, it suggests second quarter activity growth is sharply downshifting from the first quarter pace," the economists wrote.   The Atlanta Fed's GDP Now tracker has GDP growth for the first quarter at 1.3% for the quarter.


----------



## Deno (Jul 4, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Here’s the record thru 2018:
> View attachment 254781
> 
> U.S. - GDP growth by year 1990-2017 | Statista
> ...




Ask obozo what he thinks about this economy,

he's the one with a magic wand shoved up his ass....

Drop the flucking mic.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 4, 2019)

protectionist, post: 22650896 





protectionist said:


> Whatever it needed, it got it, from Trump. GDP quickly rose up to 3% in 2017, and to 4.2% in 2018.



Perhaps you understand jobs growth.

The average monthly increase of 210,291 jobs per month for Obama Jan  2009 to Jan 2017

The average monthly increase of 205,720 jobs per month for TrumoO Jan  2017  to Jan 2019


And that does not include last May when only  75,000 jobs were  created.

And you still don’t accept that TrumpO’s economy is slowing done.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 4, 2019)

“Looking at trade data, the four biggest sources of the U.S.-China merchandise trade deficit are cell phones, toys, furniture and apparel.

U.S. apparel makers have actually *cut* 5,300 jobs in the last year, to 110,600. Furniture makers *cut* 1,500, to 390,700.”
‘
Etc ETC

See link below:

Deno, post: 22652581 





Deno said:


> Ask obozo what he thinks about this economy,
> 
> he's the one with a magic wand shoved up his ass....



Do you have facts to back your magic wand bullshit up. Obama cited Trump's promise to bring manufacturing jobs back to US from overseas.

I won’t bother to try to explain reality to a TrumpOroid, but if you read this report you’d see why TrumpO is lying about Obama’s magic wand statement.



> . Looking at trade data, the four biggest sources of the U.S.-China merchandise trade deficit are cell phones, toys, furniture and apparel.
> 
> U.S. apparel makers have actually cut 5,300 jobs in the last year, to 110,600. Furniture makers cut 1,500, to 390,700.
> 
> ...



Trump’s tariffs didn’t bring back all those factory jobs he promised

In a nutshell domestic manufacturing job growh went higher during TrumpO's first couple years but it was not because TrumpO’s trade wars and tariffs convinced any companies to give up cheap overseas labor costs and pay high wages in the US.

TrumpO has no magic wand for that..

He’s a liar.

Obama was right.


TrumpO lies and waves his magic propaganda wand that sparkles so many fools into belieing him.


----------



## Deno (Jul 4, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> “Looking at trade data, the four biggest sources of the U.S.-China merchandise trade deficit are cell phones, toys, furniture and apparel.
> 
> U.S. apparel makers have actually *cut* 5,300 jobs in the last year, to 110,600. Furniture makers *cut* 1,500, to 390,700.
> 
> ...





It’s called REALITY you Dumb Ass Tard...

Pull your head out of your ass...….


----------



## Deno (Jul 4, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> protectionist, post: 22650896
> 
> 
> 
> ...




What is slowing "done" you dumb ass Tard?

You Tards can't even put together a simple sentence.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 4, 2019)

Deno said:


> You Tards can't even put together a simple sentence.



Only losers waste a post on typos.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 4, 2019)

Deno said:


> It’s called REALITY you Dumb Ass Tard...



Trump’s a liar - you are correct.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 4, 2019)

Mac1958 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > We will find out in 22 days.  I am sure if it comes in under 2 you will be the first one to blame on Trump and start a thread about how shitty the economy is.
> ...



*No doubt that would be Obama's fault.*

Nah, Obama already blamed it on Bush.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 4, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> The average monthly increase of 210,291 jobs per month for Obama Jan 2009 to Jan 2017




Correction: The average monthly increase of 210,291 jobs per month for Obama Jan 2015 to Jan 2017


----------



## protectionist (Jul 4, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> It’s a very legitimate and respected forecasting source.
> 
> Do you think Q2 will be above 3.0 when BEA publishes its initial report later this month.
> 
> ...


Your whole post went down the drain with the word _"forecasting" _ I told you that before.  Nothing's changed.  These laughingstock leftist forecasters have been making forecasts about Trump's economy for 2+ years now.  Wrong, almost every time.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 4, 2019)

protectionist said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > It’s a very legitimate and respected forecasting source.
> ...



Well, we will find out in 22 days.  Will you be willing to blame Trump if the number is 2 or below?


----------



## protectionist (Jul 4, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Correction: The average monthly increase of 210,291 jobs per month for Obama Jan 2015 to Jan 2017


Jobs FOR WHOM ?  How many went to illegal alien foreigners ? and how many Billions$$$ were sent out of the country by them, in remittances$$$ ?


----------



## protectionist (Jul 4, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Well, we will find out in 22 days.  Will you be willing to blame Trump if the number is 2 or below?


Probably not, since it will, in part, be a reflection of the shutdown.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 4, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Well, we will find out in 22 days.  Will you be willing to blame Trump if the number is 2 or below?
> ...



The shutdown ended Jan 25th.  The current quarter did not start till April 1st.  That is the dumbest excuse I have heard yet.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 4, 2019)

protectionist said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > It’s a very legitimate and respected forecasting source.
> ...



GDPNOWCAST is self-described as a 

“running estimate of real GDP growth based on available data for the current measured quarter. There are no subjective adjustments made to GDPNow—the estimate is based solely on the mathematical results of the model”


Do you have any other evidence that: 

GDPNow -         Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta

Is run by leftists:


You are are paranoid idiot.,

According to their website “There are no subjective adjustments made to GDPNow—the estimate is based solely on the mathematical results of the model”

Do you dispute their claim?

Even WSJ & JPMorgan are Commies to you TrumpOroids .  

Again. Do you have any indicators that Q2 2019 GDP will be higher than 2.0.


----------



## Deno (Jul 4, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Deno said:
> 
> 
> > You Tards can't even put together a simple sentence.
> ...



Only losers are Tards….


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 4, 2019)

Deno, post: 22656125 





Deno said:


> Only losers are Tards….



Only retarded losers can’t answer a simple question,



NotfooledbyW said:


> Again. Do you have any indicators that Q2 2019 GDP will be higher than 2.0.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 4, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> The shutdown ended Jan 25th.  The current quarter did not start till April 1st.  That is the dumbest excuse I have heard yet.


And can you show that their are no after effects of the shutdown extending well into the April quarter (and beyond) ?  I'll answer that >>No.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 4, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> GDPNOWCAST is self-described as a
> 
> “running estimate of real GDP growth based on available data for the current measured quarter. There are no subjective adjustments made to GDPNow—the estimate is based solely on the mathematical results of the model”
> 
> ...


I don't watch forecasts. You shouldn't either.  

Again, If you want credibility, stick with the GDP reports.   Looks like you don't want credibility.  

Great that we have a booming economy, after the fiasco-joke of 2016.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 4, 2019)

protectionist said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > GDPNOWCAST is self-described as a
> ...



Less than 3% average GDP growth and you call that booming!  

no wonder you are a Trump worshiper


----------



## protectionist (Jul 4, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Less than 3% average GDP growth and you call that booming!
> 
> no wonder you are a Trump worshiper


Look at how low those bars are in 2016, compared to the ones 2017 and after.  Looks like Death Valley compared to midtown Manhattan.









Compared to the 2016 sinking ship, it's more than just booming. It' making America GREAT AGAIN.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 4, 2019)

protectionist, post: 22657091 





protectionist said:


> Great that we have a booming economy, after the fiasco-joke of 2016.



2015 was not a joke was it? GDP was 2.9%

2018 was a booming economy you say. GDP was 2.9%

So we had a ‘booming economy’ in 2015.

We had a downturn in 2016. Shit happens.

We are having a downturn in 2019. Shit is happening.

TrumpO’s first two years are much the same as the two years that preceded him.

Saying “we have a booming economy, after the fiasco-joke of 2016” is a lie.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 4, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> 2015 was not a joke was it? GDP was 2.9%
> 
> 2018 was a booming economy you say. GDP was 2.9%
> 
> ...



2.2 to 3.1 is not a "downturn"
​


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 4, 2019)

protectionist, post: 22657766 





protectionist said:


> Compared to the 2016 sinking ship, it's more than just booming. It' making America GREAT AGAIN.



2015 was not sinking ship was it? GDP was 2.9%

2018 was a booming economy making America Great Again you say. GDP was 2.9%

So we had a ‘booming economy’ in 2015.

We had a downturn in 2016. Shit happens.

We are having a downturn in 2019. Shit is happening.

According to you, Obama’s booming economy already made America Great Again. 2.9 is equal to 2.9.

TrumpO’s recovery from the 2016 downturn is nothing compared to Obama’s recovery from the Great Bush Recession.

TrumpO is making America the Same (as 2015 - 2016) Again.

That’s it - nothing more.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 4, 2019)

protectionist, post: 22657900,





protectionist said:


> 2.2 to 3.1 is not a "downturn"



Ah but 4.2 to 3.4 to 2.2 to 3.1 to NowCast 1.5 is a downturn. 

Anyway sticking to yearly GDP not quarterly, 2019 will be down from 2018.

TrumpO peaked in 2018. One and done. 

That’s it.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 4, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Ah but 4.2 to 3.4 to 2.2 to 3.1 to NowCast 1.5 is a downturn.
> 
> Anyway sticking to yearly GDP not quarterly, 2019 will be down from 2018.
> 
> ...


_"Will"_ = Weakness. You still haven't got that. 

Nobody cares about your pipe dream fantasies.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 4, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> 2015 was not sinking ship was it? GDP was 2.9%
> 
> 2018 was a booming economy making America Great Again you say. GDP was 2.9%
> 
> ...


For the 3rd time (or is it 4th or 5th - you're obviously choosing to ignore this), Obama DID NOT HAVE a "recovery".  2009-2015 was natural, normal recoil after a bad recession.  Obama just happened to be there. Giving him credit is like giving Reagan credit for the Soviet Union collapse. Both guys just happened to be there at the time. 

Stop pretending you don't know what I've been drilling into your BS head all through this thread.  Get a grain of honesty.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 4, 2019)

protectionist, post: 22658065, 





protectionist said:


> Nobody cares about your pipe dream fantasies



4.2 to 2.2 to 3.1 is an economic slowdown.

You call TrumpO’s 2018 with 2.9 GDP a booming economy. 

You pretend 2015 GDP at 2.9 did not happen, 

These facts are not a dream. 

I care about liars who vote for liars, 

If TrumpO’s one shot at GDP in 2018 is a booming economy, then so
it was in 2015 - a booming economy. 

TrumpO WILL *not* see GDP growth above 2.9 for the rest of his term. 

He has already been browbeating the Fed Chairman to bail his ass out of the weak GDP numbers he is getting to cut rates. 

A protracted booming economy with low unemployment and low inflation would never need the already low Fed rates to be lowered some more. 

Why does TrumpO want Jerome Powell to cut rates in a ‘booming economy’ 

You make no sense.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 4, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> You make no sense.


I do, and you know it.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 4, 2019)

protectionist, post: 22658105 





protectionist said:


> Obama just happened to be there.



Does cutting taxes boost the economy? 

Who in the hell professes the existence of an economic phenomenon such as a “natural, normal recoil after a bad recession”.

Rush Limbaugh and other right wing Obama hating dumbasses do not count.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 4, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Does cutting taxes boost the economy?
> 
> Who in the hell professes the existence of an economic phenomenon such as a “natural, normal recoil after a bad recession”.
> 
> Rush Limbaugh and other right wing Obama hating dumbasses do not count.


1.  Yes cutting taxes boosts the economy. Especially the corporate tax.  As we've been seeing for the past 2 years.  

2. I profess it. (as well as millions of others)


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 4, 2019)

protectionist said:


> 1. Yes cutting taxes boosts the economy. Especially the corporate tax. As we've been seeing for the past 2 years.



Obama cut $300 bn payroll taxes in the 2009 Stimulus Bill. 

So Obama did not just happen to be there. His tax cuts contributed to the recovery among many things, like the ACA. 

So you lied.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 4, 2019)

protectionist said:


> . I profess it. (as well as millions of others)



The idiot that you are and the millions of TrumpOroids don’t count either. You might as well be professing that the earth is flat.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 4, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Yes cutting taxes boosts the economy. Especially the corporate tax. As we've been seeing for the past 2 years.



How can that be? The economy hit 2.9 GDP in 2015 without TrumpO’s tax cuts. 2.9 is what the economy produced in 2018.

Whatever contribution that tax cut contributed to the 2.9 GDP IN 2018 it only lasted a year and may not be worth the lost revenue to the US Treasury for years to come.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Yes cutting taxes boosts the economy. Especially the corporate tax. As we've been seeing for the past 2 years.
> ...



*The economy hit 2.9 GDP in 2015 without TrumpO’s tax cuts.*

It helps when the Fed boosts their balance sheet by $1.7 trillion with the Fed Funds rate near 0%


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 5, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22658794 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> *The economy hit 2.9 GDP in 2015 without TrumpO’s tax cuts.*
> 
> It helps when the Fed boosts their balance sheet by $1.7 trillion with the Fed Funds rate near 0%



TrumpO was supposed to get sustained 4.0 GDP growth when he helped himself with huge Corp tax cuts in an already growing economy with with full unemployment. The TrumpO tax cuts were not supposed to need the Fed to also cut rates to boost GDP that way.

Why did genius businessman TrumpO’s tax plan fail.

I don’t recall Obama ever threatening or begging the Fed to act on his behalf to boost the ecinomy for a partisan political cause.

TrumpO has no such boundaries.


----------



## Deno (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Deno, post: 22656125
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Glad you admit you're a retard...…..


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 5, 2019)

Deno said:


> Glad you admit you're a retard...…..



Liar. 

What is your question that I have not answered?


----------



## protectionist (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Obama cut $300 bn payroll taxes in the 2009 Stimulus Bill.
> 
> So Obama did not just happen to be there. His tax cuts contributed to the recovery among many things, like the ACA.
> 
> So you lied.


No, any YOU LIE now, by saying I lied. Liberals routinely get things backwards. Ho hum.

Psst... is he actually needing to have me mention the recoil yet AGAIN?  Pheeeew! (high-pitched whistle)


----------



## protectionist (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> The idiot that you are and the millions of TrumpOroids don’t count either. You might as well be professing that the earth is flat.


In the 1970s, As an economics teacher in 4 colleges of the City University of NY, I taught about economic recoil after recessions. Now, you get the benefit, free of charge.  It's a well known concept to those who are well educated, To those who aren't..well that's their problem.


----------



## Third Party (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Here’s the record thru 2018:
> View attachment 254781
> 
> U.S. - GDP growth by year 1990-2017 | Statista
> ...


Things seem better than 3%-at least they seem much better than under Obama.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> How can that be? The economy hit 2.9 GDP in 2015 without TrumpO’s tax cuts. 2.9 is what the economy produced in 2018.
> 
> Whatever contribution that tax cut contributed to the 2.9 GDP IN 2018 it only lasted a year and may not be worth the lost revenue to the US Treasury for years to come.


2015 was a recoil year...REMEMBER ?  And no, the tax cuts have not lasted a year only. The economy is still doing well, more than halfway into 2019.  You get a lot of things wrong.


----------



## SassyIrishLass (Jul 5, 2019)

protectionist said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > How can that be? The economy hit 2.9 GDP in 2015 without TrumpO’s tax cuts. 2.9 is what the economy produced in 2018.
> ...



RECORD 157,005,000 EMPLOYED


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jul 5, 2019)

1st/2019:  +3.1%
2018: +2.9
2017: +2.2
--
2016: +1.6%
2015: +2.9
2014: +2.5
2013: +1.8
2012: +2.2
2011: +1.6
2010: +2.6
2009: -2.5 

Guess that answers that question.
Apps Test | U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 5, 2019)

If employment is so great why does TrumpO want Jerome Powell fired if he doesn’t cut rates. 

Trump reportedly discussed firing Fed chair Jerome Powell over rate hikes | Business ...
Jun 18, 2019 · Donald Trump has reportedly discussed firing the Federal Reserve chairman, Jerome Powell, .....

And why in the hell is this coinciding will record employment numbers. 

Appears to be an amazing fail.....


SassyIrishLass, post: 22659983,





SassyIrishLass said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



Some intellectual perspective and sober context in US EMPLOYMENT.

In 2009, the first year of Obama’s presidency, unemployment hit 9.9 percent, its highest level since the Great Depression. But starting in 2010, the unemployment rate fell for eight straight years, namely the eight years when the economy was essentially under Obama policy. By 2016, Obama’s last year in office, unemployment measured 4.7 percent (down from 9.9 percent.) In 2017, the first year of Trump’s term (but before many of his policies were implemented) it fell to 4.1 percent. 

In 2018, with the Trump tax cuts and other magical elements of Trumpism on the books, it fell again to 3.9 percent. So, depending on how you count those swing years, unemployment fell by a 5.8 percentage points under Obama policy over eight years and 0.2 percentage points under Trump’s policies through the end of 2018.  
On the economy, Obama owns Trump | MinnPost

..considering a comparison after the respective president’s policies could take effect Obama kicked ass on increasing employment in a major assist to TrumpO’s July 5 not so remarkable records.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 5, 2019)

SassyIrishLass said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



Wow, would would have ever thought that as the population got larger the number of people working would also grow!   I bet we are the only country in the history of the world to experience this and it is all because of Trump!!!

Fuck you people are stupid


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## SassyIrishLass (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> If employment is so great why does TrumpO want Jerome Powell fired if he doesn’t cut rates.
> 
> Trump reportedly discussed firing Fed chair Jerome Powell over rate hikes | Business ...
> Jun 18, 2019 · Donald Trump has reportedly discussed firing the Federal Reserve chairman, Jerome Powell, .....
> ...



Wipe that "O" ring from around your mouth, old fool. I'm not about to take you serious on any economic matter. Surely you realize that by now


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jul 5, 2019)

So never mind that so far under Trump we have:

* Growth in manufacturing jobs that hasn't been since since the 1990s.
* Record black and Hispanic unemployment rates.
* A substantial drop in the U-6 rate, whereas under Obama it stayed over 10% for most of his presidency.
* The lowless jobclass claims rate since the 1969.
* An enormous drop in the number of persons employed part-time for economic reasons--a drop of 299,000 in May alone.
* A solid jump in wages, at least 15% more than under Obama, as I've documented in detail in another OP.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> If employment is so great...


Does the news of low unemployment / record employment numbers upset you?
Make you mad?  Sad?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 5, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> 1st/2019:  +3.1%
> 2018: +2.9
> 2017: +2.2
> --
> ...




Where has TrumpO presided over a single year with GDP above 3.9%?

And why is TrumpO presiding currently over a forecasted GDP at 1.3%?


*Latest forecast: 1.3 percent — July 3, 2019 *The GDPNow model estimate for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the second quarter of 2019 is *1.3 percent* on July 3, down from 1.5 percent on July 1.
GDP is headed in the wrong direction for TrumpOroids to be bragging about TrumpO’s economy being a greater economy than Obama’s. But TrumpOroids repeat that lie every day.


----------



## SassyIrishLass (Jul 5, 2019)

mikegriffith1 said:


> So never mind that so far under Trump we have:
> 
> * Growth in manufacturing jobs that hasn't been since since the 1990s.
> * Record black and Hispanic unemployment rates.
> ...



You're wasting your time. In a left loon's mind Ears gets the credit. Goofy tards


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> I
> Some intellectual perspective and sober context in US EMPLOYMENT.
> 
> In 2009, the first year of Obama’s presidency, unemployment hit 9.9 percent, its highest level since the Great Depression. But starting in 2010, the unemployment rate fell for eight straight years, namely the eight years when the economy was essentially under Obama policy. By 2016, Obama’s last year in office, unemployment measured 4.7 percent (down from 9.9 percent.) In 2017, the first year of Trump’s term (but before many of his policies were implemented) it fell to 4.1 percent.
> ...


At what point is Trump responsible for US economic/employment progress?
At what point will you stop giving Obama credit?


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > 1st/2019:  +3.1%
> ...


The topic refers to 1st/2019 and if it will meet or beat 3.0%
Did it?


----------



## Camp (Jul 5, 2019)

SassyIrishLass said:


> mikegriffith1 said:
> 
> 
> > So never mind that so far under Trump we have:
> ...


Well, thread has been running since early April and has over 713 posts and the OP has knocked down every challenger with indisputable data and documentation.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 5, 2019)

mikegriffith1 said:


> So never mind that so far under Trump we have:
> 
> * Growth in manufacturing jobs that hasn't been since since the 1990s.
> * Record black and Hispanic unemployment rates.
> ...



The U6 dropped 42.6% under Obama and 22.6% under Trump.

People employed part time for economic reasons dropped 36.2% under Obama and 24.4% under Trump.

You are such a fraud!  Lol


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 5, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > If employment is so great...
> ...



No if you read my post all it ‘makes’ me do is post the truth facts and context behind low unemployment.

It makes me sad that there are so many ignorant Americans that do not value truth facts and context anymore of in favor of defending their cult. 

A cult originated in birtherism.

That truly does bring sadness to the majority of Americans.  It’s truly a national disgrace.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...


So, the low unemployment rate / record employment number is good news.
Right?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 5, 2019)

M14 Shooter, post: 22660415 





M14 Shooter said:


> The topic refers to 1st/2019 and if it will meet or beat 3.0%
> Did it?



Learn to read - that is  not even close to the topic.

Here is the OP:

NotfooledbyW, post: 22164534 





NotfooledbyW said:


> Trump and Obama are tied a 2.9 Best full year of GDP growth.
> 
> Do you think Trump’s Q1 this year will break the tie and boost Trump to 3.0 or more?
> 
> Do you believe Trump will ever get a full year of GDP growth this high?



Here is the topic, idiot:

Trump and Obama are tied a 2.9 Best full year of GDP growth.

Do you think Trump’s Q1 this year will break the tie and boost Trump to 3.0 or more?

Do you believe Trump will ever get a full year of GDP growth this high?


Do you want to try again, idiot?


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > The topic refers to 1st/2019 and if it will meet or beat 3.0%
> ...


The Topic:

*Q1 2019 watch - if under 3.0% - where is Trump’s economic miracle - can Trump beat O’s 2.9% ever? *

Did 1st/2019 come meet/exceed 3.0%
Yes.
Thus, the attached question about Trump's economic miracle is moot.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Some intellectual perspective and sober context in US EMPLOYMENT.
> 
> In 2009, the first year of Obama’s presidency, unemployment hit 9.9 percent, its highest level since the Great Depression. But starting in 2010, the unemployment rate fell for eight straight years, namely the eight years when the economy was essentially under Obama policy. By 2016, Obama’s last year in office, unemployment measured 4.7 percent (down from 9.9 percent.) In 2017, the first year of Trump’s term (but before many of his policies were implemented) it fell to 4.1 percent.
> 
> ...


At what point is Trump responsible for US economic/employment progress?
At what point will you stop giving Obama credit?


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 5, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



A single quarter’s growth number is meaningless.  


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 5, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> So, the low unemployment rate / record employment number is good news.
> Right?



Of course it’s good news that


Camp said:


> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> > mikegriffith1 said:
> ...




Thanks - and this has been fun, and entertaining and educational.

Well, educational for those outside the cult.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jul 5, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> A single quarter’s growth number is meaningless.


Talk to the OP: -I- didn't make the topic about 1st/2019.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 5, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Some intellectual perspective and sober context in US EMPLOYMENT.
> ...



How about we quit giving the POTUS credit for what the private sector does.  


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > So, the low unemployment rate / record employment number is good news.
> ...


Why, then, are you complaining about good news?


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jul 5, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...


How about you address the questions:
At what point is Trump responsible for US economic/employment progress?
At what point will you stop giving Obama credit?


----------



## SassyIrishLass (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > So, the low unemployment rate / record employment number is good news.
> ...



Says the old fool who belongs to the "O" ring cult. You fool absolutely nobody you old jackass


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 5, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter said:
> ...



I have never given Obama credit for anything but fucking up the healthcare system more than it was. 

Once again, I do not worship the government so I do not give it credit for what the private sector does.  


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 5, 2019)

M14 Shooter, post: 22660490 





M14 Shooter said:


> The Topic:
> 
> *Q1 2019 watch - if under 3.0% - where is Trump’s economic miracle - can Trump beat O’s 2.9% ever? *
> 
> ...




I realize cult followers don’t read beyond headlines but if you read the OP you would knew that 2.9% is in reference to Obama’s single year growth in 2015.

It is not about beating Obama’s highest quarter. If that were the case TrumpO wouid have to beat a 5.1 and a few more above 2.9.

Give up. You are an idiot and have nowhere to go except proving it more.

Go shoot at some beer cans or something.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> I realize cult followers don’t read beyond headlines but if you read the OP you would knew that 2.9% is in reference to Obama’s single year growth in 2015.
> It is not about beating Obama’s highest quarter. If that were the case TrumpO wouid have to beat a 5.1 and a few more above 2.9.


I'm sorry you don't like the fact the OP did a piss-poor job at creating a topic, and the 1st/2019 growth number met the challenge offered in and by same.

Now then:
At what point is Trump responsible for US economic/employment progress?
At what point will you stop giving Obama credit?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 5, 2019)

M14 Shooter, post: 22660499





M14 Shooter said:


> At what point is Trump responsible for US economic/employment progress?
> At what point will you stop giving Obama credit?




Idiot. I told you exactly where I stop giving Obama credit.

It’s not about that anyway.

Trump said.


NotfooledbyW said:


> "Obama is the first president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth," Trump said during an Oct. 28 campaign rally in Manchester, N.H.



So I “exactly” give “credit” to Obama for “single year” 2015 which had GDP growth at 2.9%

So I “exactly” give “credit” to TrumpO for “single year” 2018 which had GDP growth at 2.9%

If you understand numbers they are the same. 

Conclusion:

TrumpO will be the second president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth.

In my understanding of language math and reality TrumpO’s economy is essentially NOT different or better or greater than Obama’s. Thus far they are essentially the same. 

When you joined the discussion, albeit way over your head, it had advanced to discussing whether TrumpO will ever see GDP above 3.0.

I am convinced and believe that It won’t happen. 

Based on the record to date through 2018 you can disprove your ignorance based on all I just told you by admitting that so far TrumpO’s economy is no better or worse than Obama’s.

That is the reality that you must embrace or remain in the ignorant column. 

Your choice.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> M14 Shooter, post: 22660499
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So, the economic growth and gains in unemployment / employment numbers  since Trump took office - you credit Trump?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 5, 2019)

Shooter, post: 22660608, 





M14 Shooter said:


> I'm sorry you don't like the fact the OP did a piss-poor job at creating a topic, and the 1st/2019 growth number met the challenge offered in and by same.



Of all the TrumpO cultists and non-cultists that have engaged this thread why are you the only one that had so much difficulty comprehending the OP? 

Think about it. 

Now we get the Typical TrumpOroid escape  plan. Blame the opposition for their own failings. 

Man up. You were wrong. Take responsibility for your behavior. 

It’s part of growing up and acquiring wisdom in life.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Shooter, post: 22660608,
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I'm sorry you don't like the fact the OP did a piss-poor job at creating a topic, and the 1st/2019 growth number met the challenge offered in and by same.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > 1. Yes cutting taxes boosts the economy. Especially the corporate tax. As we've been seeing for the past 2 years.
> ...



*Obama cut $300 bn payroll taxes in the 2009 Stimulus Bill. *

You're lying....or stupid.


----------



## SassyIrishLass (Jul 5, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > protectionist said:
> ...



Both...


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 5, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> So, the economic growth and gains in unemployment / employment numbers since Trump took office - you credit Trump?



You can include GDP too. 

Here are the numbers again:

Track record of unemployment reduction


(9.9 percent) starting in 2010 under Obama policy the unemployment rate fell for eight straight years. 

(4.7 percent) Obama’s last year in office

(4.1 percent) In 2017, the first year of Trump’s term (but before many of his policies were implemented)

(3.9 percent) In 2018, with the Trump tax cuts and other magical elements of Trumpism on the books, it fell again to 3.9 percent. 

Per the above time line unemployment fell by a 5.8 percentage points under Obama policy over eight years and 0.2 percentage points under Trump’s policies through the end of 2018.

If you want to object to not crediting TrumpO for all of In 2017 U will go there as unrealistic as that is. 

Per that scenario unemployment fell by a 5.6 percentage points under Obama policy over eight years and 0.8 percentage points under Trump’s policies through the end of 2018.

Obama kicks TrumpO’s ass on unemployment reduction. 

That’s why the TrumpO cult can only get excited by record lows. 

Knowing where each President started and TrumpO being the successor of course TrumpO has the ONLY possibility to set historic  lows. 

But the fact remains TrumpO could not set those records in two years had Obama not reduced unemployment to somewhere between 4.7 and 4.1 from 9.9 in 2009.

A little appreciation would mean a lot.


----------



## Deno (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Deno said:
> 
> 
> > Glad you admit you're a retard...…..
> ...






You are dumber than the average Tard and that’s saying something...

I said I was glad you admit that you are a RETARD...

No question involved....


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > So, the economic growth and gains in unemployment / employment numbers since Trump took office - you credit Trump?
> ...


Ok - just so we're clear, you credit Trump for the economy, unemployment, etc,  since he took office.
Thanks!


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> WTH_Progs?, post: 22645887B
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You lied when you declared that the ACA slowed the economy. * I didn't stutter, you're just a prog thus unable to execute a rational thought. *

 I didn’t fail to mention anything.  Yes you did MFer.  *You clearly said the ACA didn't harm the economy due to increase in healthcare jobs.  You left out all other industries and you're lying again.*

You lied about the negative impact the ACA had on the recovery.  *How neat, the prog figures if he repeats himself he comes more credible.  *

It had a positive impact. I like to straighten liars out with facts. * LOL*

Your response shows how ignorant and baseless your rants are. *LOL*

Since the ACA created half a million health sector jobs while stagnation in other sectors continued to exist as a result of the massive Great Bush Recession....*Ah I see, it's Bush's fault again, makes perfect sense.  I noticed your fragile spine ignored the fact the Democrats controlled congress when we dove into a recession.  *

then those who got those jobs as a result of the ACA had money to spend. Many health care jobs are higher paying.   Blah blah blah blah blah.  *Many are overpaid, ask me how I know.  I was in the industry.  The government spent many many BILLIONS just establishing ACA, and those are tax dollars.  Way to go Obummer. *

So you ignorant TrumpO twit. Anything that increases consumer spending benefits other sectors as well.  *Gosh really?  You could be a prog-economist. *

Yet you lied that the ACA slowed the economy.  *Wholly fuck we're back here again?  You forgot to say I lied.  Lay off the bong dude, you sound very high and insecure too. *


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> WTH_Progs?, post: 22645887B
> 
> 
> 
> ...



* Anything that increases consumer spending benefits other sectors as well.*

And when consumers spend more of their money on Obamacare, they have less for consumer spending.


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> M14 Shooter said:
> 
> 
> > So, the economic growth and gains in unemployment / employment numbers since Trump took office - you credit Trump?
> ...




(9.9 percent) starting in 2010 under Obama policy the unemployment rate fell for eight straight years.  *You mean to tell me the U.S. economy saw a more rapid recovery following a recession?  First time that's ever happened.  Pretty please cite the Obama policy that reduced the unemployment rate.*

(3.9 percent) In 2018, with the Trump tax cuts and other magical elements of Trumpism on the books, it fell again to 3.9 percent.  *I recognize you're uneducated and unwise, but the greater the recovery the less room for improvement.  In other terms, the greater the fall the greater the initial increase.  It's like bouncing a ball, velocity slows the higher it goes.  It's basic logic, but you're a prog and I sympathize. *
Per the above time line unemployment fell by a 5.8 percentage points under Obama policy over eight years and 0.2 percentage points under Trump’s policies through the end of 2018.  *LOL, read my last point. *

If you want to object to not crediting TrumpO for all of In 2017 U will go there as unrealistic as that is.  * It's not unrealistic at all, demonstrated by the stock market.  The market increased 2000 points from the day Trump won the election to the day he took office.  The market gained confidence with his arrival and Obama's departure. *

Per that scenario unemployment fell by a 5.6 percentage points under Obama policy over eight years and 0.8 percentage points under Trump’s policies through the end of 2018.  *Wholly shit, are you 12, do you have ADD? You repeat yourself over and over again, my second point above shows you're a confused individual. *

Obama kicks TrumpO’s ass on unemployment reduction.  *Ah shucks, still?  If only Trump matched Obama, his unemployment rate would be minus 1.7%, makes perfect sense. *

That’s why the TrumpO cult can only get excited by record lows.  Right?  Cuz record lows suck, Obama was WAY better without record lows.   *Incidentally, I mentioned before how the economy recovered primarily because of historically low interest rates.  Rates that have risen on Trump's watch.  What does that mean to your tiny Obama'head?*

Knowing where each President started and TrumpO being the successor of course TrumpO has the ONLY possibility to set historic lows.   *Wait.........you're saying unemployment couldn't possibly have risen on Trump's watch, thanks to Obama?  Seriously dude, lay off the bong some*.

But the fact remains TrumpO could not set those records in two years had Obama not reduced unemployment to somewhere between 4.7 and 4.1 from 9.9 in 2009.  *I feel like it's groundhog day. *


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jul 5, 2019)

Faun said:


> *
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You probably ought to get more up to date data.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 5, 2019)

I wrote; Knowing where each President started and TrumpO being the successor of course TrumpO has the ONLY possibility to set historic lows.

WTH_Progs?, post: 22661215 





WTH_Progs? said:


> *Wait.........you're saying unemployment couldn't possibly have risen on Trump's watch, thanks to Obama? *



I’m not saying that at all. Why are you lying and avoiding what I actually said?

TrumpO had the ONLY possibility to set historic lows.

Could TrumpO drive unemployment up? Certainly. I never said or implied or suggested he couldn’t. You are a liar. 

That is absolutely true. If Obama did not set a new record low before leaving office it is indeed a fact that ONLY TrumpO between the two presidents could set new record lows.

TrumpO was in an excellent position to do so having started at 4.9.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 5, 2019)

Faun said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...



These idiots don’t know when to quit.


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> I wrote; Knowing where each President started and TrumpO being the successor of course TrumpO has the ONLY possibility to set historic lows.
> 
> WTH_Progs?, post: 22661215
> 
> ...



Don't look now, but Trump could only set historically low unemployment rates.  In fact it was worth repeating three times.  Must be cuz Obama.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 5, 2019)

M14 Shooter, post: 22662051 





M14 Shooter said:


> You probably ought to get more up to date data.



TrumpO has seen better than 5.1? When? 

Let’s see your updated data.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 5, 2019)

WTH_Progs?, post: 22662192 





WTH_Progs? said:


> Don't look now, but Trump could only set historically low unemployment rates. In fact it was worth repeating three times. Must be cuz Obama.



Did TrumpO teach you the best way to handle getting caught in a lie is to keep repeating it 

Explain to the readers how Obama could have set record low unemployment having started at 9.9 and not setting the record low before leaving office.


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 5, 2019)

Say not fooled by truth, I have a question.  Do you know how the unemployment rate is determined?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 5, 2019)

WTH_Progs? said:


> Say not fooled by truth, I have a question. Do you know how the unemployment rate is determined?



You are lying about what is in writing on this thread. It doesn’t matter if I understand the full  process. I know what the results are. And I know what I wrote is absolutely true.

I what you are writing is absolutely false.

I’m not following the detour suggested by a liar.


----------



## Faun (Jul 5, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > *"Trump has accomplished economic and employment successes not seen in decades and accomplished more in 2 years than Obama did in 8..."*
> ...


*Not false, ya flamin' loon. The unemployment rate under trump has gone from 4.7% to 3.7%, a one point drop just as I said.

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data*


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 5, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22661191 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> And when consumers spend more of their money on Obamacare, they have less for consumer spending.



You are such a dumbass TrumpO gOOer it wouid be hilarious if you hadn’t helped put the lying con clown in the highest office in the land.

The ACA has saved taxpayers.and health care consumers billions

Fast forward to December 2018, when that same office released the official tabulation of health care spending in 2017. The bottom line: cumulatively from 2010 to 2017 the ACA reduced health care spending a total of $2.3 trillion.

In 2017 alone, health expenditures were $650 billion lower than projected, and kept health care spending under 18 percent of GDP — basically a tad over where it was in 2010 when the ACA was passed. It did all of this while expanding health coverage to more than 20 million previously uninsured Americans.  The Affordable Care Act has saved billions in health care costs - STAT
It’s too bad ignorance is not a treatable health care condition.

I’d contribute to get you treated.


----------



## Faun (Jul 5, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > GDP growth is always in a state of flux, with ups and downs.   The drop in late 15 and early 16 was already changing before the election.
> ...


*Nowhere near as bad as the last Republican president's entire last year...




*


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22661191
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Try to stay consistent with your silly claims...….

_Since the ACA created half a million health sector jobs while stagnation in other sectors continued to exist as a result of the massive Great Bush Recession, then those who got those jobs as a result of the ACA had money to spend. Many health care jobs are higher paying._

Either there was more spending, due to ACA, which created more jobs, or there was less spending.


----------



## Faun (Jul 5, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > *
> ...


Why? There's no quarter under trump where GDP was as high as 5.1%.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jul 5, 2019)

Faun said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


Were you expecting him to decrease it by 6% points?


----------



## Faun (Jul 5, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > protectionist said:
> ...


Of course not. But it's beyond rightarded to describe a president who presided over a 1 point drop in unemployment as someone who's , _"accomplished economic and employment successes not seen in decades and accomplished more in 2 years than Obama did in 8,"_ when the last president presided over a 5.3 point drop.


----------



## Meister (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Here’s the record thru 2018:
> View attachment 254781
> 
> U.S. - GDP growth by year 1990-2017 | Statista
> ...


Apples and Oranges, you buffoon.  Obummer had the pleasure of having the fed rates at 0


----------



## Faun (Jul 5, 2019)

Meister said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Here’s the record thru 2018:
> ...


And trump had the pleasure of having minority unemployment not far from record lows handed to him.


----------



## Meister (Jul 5, 2019)

Faun said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...


If I remember correctly (and I do), Trump was supposed to tank the economy and the market would never recover.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jul 5, 2019)

Faun said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...


In reality, having good economic numbers is not an advantage for a president because making further improvements is that much more difficult the better they are.


----------



## Faun (Jul 5, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...


Not that difficult while the job market is sizzling hot, posting some 83 consecutive months of job growth.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> M14 Shooter, post: 22662051
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Here you go:


----------



## Faun (Jul 5, 2019)

Meister said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Meister said:
> ...


And many on the right predicted Obama would cause a double dip recession, which never happened. What's your point?


----------



## Faun (Jul 5, 2019)

M14 Shooter said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > M14 Shooter, post: 22662051
> ...


Great, thanks for proving me right when I said Trump has not yet had a quarter as high as Obama's 5.1% growth.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> You can include GDP too.
> 
> Here are the numbers again:
> 
> ...


You insist on falsely crediting Obama with economic recovery in the rebound years (2009-2015). That's ridiculous and you know it.  

Do you likewise credit Reagan for the fall of the Soviet Union ?  All you're doing is making yourself look silly.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 5, 2019)

Faun said:


> Great, thanks for proving me right when I said Trump has not yet had a quarter as high as Obama's 5.1% growth.


Obama did not have 5.1% growth. That growth would have been attained if Joy Behar was president, or Snoop Dog. Obama's best was 2.3, and that sunk to 1.8. 

Trying to point to Obama as economically successful is a laughingstock.

This whole thread is leftist loons trying to BS the forum.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 5, 2019)

Meister, post: 22663564





Meister said:


> If I remember correctly (and I do), Trump was supposed to tank the economy and the market would never recover.



TrumpO said his tax cuts would produce sustained 4.0 GDP and up to 6.0. If you want to bitch about predictions gone awry you can focus on the many times TrumpO has done it.


----------



## Faun (Jul 5, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Great, thanks for proving me right when I said Trump has not yet had a quarter as high as Obama's 5.1% growth.
> ...


*Dumbfuck...




*


----------



## protectionist (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> These idiots don’t know when to quit.


That describes YOU and your Obama record BS.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 5, 2019)

Faun said:


> *Dumbfuck...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


IRRELEVANT.  (but nice try)


----------



## Faun (Jul 5, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > *Dumbfuck...
> ...


*LOLOLOL 

Reality is "irrelevant" to lunatic trump cultists. 

Meanwhile, the high under Obama is 5.1% and the high under trump is 4.2%.*


----------



## protectionist (Jul 5, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> TrumpO was in an excellent position to do so having started at 4.9.


4.9 to 3.6 is a long way down.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 5, 2019)

Faun said:


> *LOLOLOL
> 
> Reality is "irrelevant" to lunatic trump cultists.
> 
> Meanwhile, the high under Obama is 5.1% and the high under trump is 4.2%.*


FALSE!  High under Obama was 2.3.  under Trump 4.2.  Trump rescued us from Obama's 2016 sinking ship.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 5, 2019)

Faun said:


> *Not false, ya flamin' loon. The unemployment rate under trump has gone from 4.7% to 3.7%, a one point drop just as I said.
> 
> Bureau of Labor Statistics Data*


Have you been drinking ? Unable to think straight ? 

I was saying FALSE! to your statement about Trump having allegedly_ "inheriting a good economy."_  The bar graph represents GDP, not unemployment, you dunce.

Liberals never get things right.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 5, 2019)

Faun said:


> Why? There's no quarter under trump where GDP was as high as 5.1%.


Nor attributable to Obama either.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 5, 2019)

Faun said:


> Of course not. But it's beyond rightarded to describe a president who presided over a 1 point drop in unemployment as someone who's , _"accomplished economic and employment successes not seen in decades and accomplished more in 2 years than Obama did in 8,"_ when the last president presided over a 5.3 point drop.


There might have been a big drop, but to claim that Obama _"presided over"_ it, is a laughingstock.  It's like saying I presided over the killing of Osama bin Laden. I was alive at the time.  

I guess I have to post about ordinary economic recoil after recession, about 100 times a day. Liberal loonies are going to keep on trying to connect Obama with the 2009-2015 rebound, and pass it off as Obama's credit. They don't know how silly they look.


----------



## Meister (Jul 5, 2019)

Faun said:


> Meister said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


Well, it probably would have happened if not for the fed reserve keeping rates at near 0% for 8 YEARS.  Obama's policies sure in the hell didn't help him.


----------



## Meister (Jul 5, 2019)

Faun said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


Who ya gonna believe?






Looks like Obummer's GDP was starting to stagnate


----------



## Meister (Jul 5, 2019)

Faun said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


Well, his policies hadn't kicked in....looking towards the end, of his term, things had stagnated
as his policies were slowing his economy.


----------



## Faun (Jul 5, 2019)

protectionist said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > TrumpO was in an excellent position to do so having started at 4.9.
> ...


*
You're fucked in the head, gramps.

Jan/2017... 4.7%
Jun/2019... 3.7%

Bureau of Labor Statistics Data*


----------



## Faun (Jul 5, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > *LOLOLOL
> ...


*You're fucked in the head, gramps. The BEA says Obama's high was 5.1% during the second quarter in 2014...






... and I'll take the word of the Bureau of Labor Statistics over a senile old loon like you every single time.*


----------



## protectionist (Jul 5, 2019)

Faun said:


> *You're fucked in the head, gramps.
> 
> Jan/2017... 4.7%
> Jun/2019... 3.7%
> ...


Th 4.9 came from NotfooledbyW,  and the numbers you cited are very close to 4.9 to 3.6.   Please post when you have something substantial, bigot boy.


----------



## Faun (Jul 5, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > *Not false, ya flamin' loon. The unemployment rate under trump has gone from 4.7% to 3.7%, a one point drop just as I said.
> ...


*You're fucked in the head, gramps. GDP is only one economic indicator and it wasn't awful. Employment and inflation are other primary economic indicators and they were strong.*


----------



## Faun (Jul 5, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > *You're fucked in the head, gramps.
> ...


*"very close" is not what they were. I educated you as to what the actual figures are.*


----------



## protectionist (Jul 5, 2019)

Faun said:


> *You're fucked in the head, gramps. The BEA says Obama's high was 5.1% during the second quarter in 2014...
> 
> 
> 
> ...


NO!...the BLS did NOT say that.

They said that *5*.1% was the GDP during the second quarter in 2014... They didn't say it was OBAMA's GDP.  YOU said that.   And I instructed you that that was inaccurate.

*YOU'RE WELCOME.  *


----------



## protectionist (Jul 5, 2019)

Faun said:


> *"very close" is not what they were. I educated you as to what the actual figures are.*


  You didn't educate. You merely showed off what an assclown poster you are.  

I'm the economics teacher, and I'll take care if the education around here, bigot boy.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 5, 2019)

Faun said:


> *You're fucked in the head, gramps. GDP is only one economic indicator and it wasn't awful. Employment and inflation are other primary economic indicators and they were strong.*


it was AWFUL.  2.3 is bad to begin with, and then dropping to 1.8 ?  AWFUL.


----------



## Faun (Jul 5, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Why? There's no quarter under trump where GDP was as high as 5.1%.
> ...


*LOL 

You're fucked in the head, gramps. You're in no position to cherry pick which quarters for which Obama does or doesn't get credit. *


----------



## protectionist (Jul 5, 2019)

Obama's GDP >>>








Trump's GDP >>>


----------



## protectionist (Jul 5, 2019)

Faun said:


> *LOL
> 
> You're fucked in the head, gramps. You're in no position to cherry pick which quarters for which Obama does or doesn't get credit. *


Actually I am. I taught economics in 4 colleges of the City University of New York.  I don't mean to brag, but you used the word_ "position"_, not me.

And simply reporting that post recession years rebound is primarily automatic and not a causation of a POTUS, isn't "cherry picking".


----------



## Faun (Jul 5, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > *You're fucked in the head, gramps. The BEA says Obama's high was 5.1% during the second quarter in 2014...
> ...


*You're fucked in the head, gramps.  You're in no position to cherry pick for which quarters Obama does or does not get credit. *


----------



## Faun (Jul 5, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > *"very close" is not what they were. I educated you as to what the actual figures are.*
> ...


*LOL 

You're senile, gramps, you're ignorant of economics. You posted incorrect unemployment statistics and I educated you as to what the actual figures are. Something a real economics teacher would have known without any help.*


----------



## Faun (Jul 5, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Obama's GDP >>>
> 
> 
> 
> ...


*LOLOL 

Real GDP growth under Obama after Bush's Great Recession ended ... 2.3%; under Trump ... 2.8%.*


----------



## Faun (Jul 5, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > *LOL
> ...


*LOL 

The ignorance you display on economics belies your ridiculous claims. *


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 6, 2019)

protectionist, post: 22663904 





protectionist said:


> Obama did not have 5.1% growth. That growth would have been attained if Joy Behar was president, or Snoop Dog. Obama's best was 2.3, and that sunk to 1.8.



Get mental heslth help immediately. You have created your own TrumpOroid reality.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 6, 2019)

protectionist, post: 22664287, 





			
				member: 45665 said:
			
		

> They said that *5*.1% was the GDP during the second quarter in 2014... They didn't say it was OBAMA's GDP.



The following Fox and Friends quote is dated *April 2016..*

2016 is the only year that you in your own private little retarded reality accept that Obama had anything at all to do with the economy and unemployment and GDP growth. Something insane like the recovery was normal and natural (rebounding) on its own until 2016 when suddenlly and arbitrarily it became entirely all Obama’s fault.

_*April 2016: *_Kilmeade and Varney making the claim that Obama is “the only U.S. president who could not deliver a single year of three percent growth.”
Thie above is obviously where TrumpO picked up the idea for his clam:

*October 2016*. "Obama is the first president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth," Trump said during an Oct. 28 campaign rally in Manchester, N.H.[/QUOTE]
The complete data was not in for 2016 when this line of deraugatory attack against Obama was ginned up.

Explain why you believe that Stuart Varney, Brian Kilmead and candidate TrumpO were not assailing Obama’s GDP legacy for every year of his presidency from 2009 through 2015.

According to you Obama is only responsible for 2016 and that is it.

I’m curious to learn about this absurd conclusion that floats around entirely alone inside one and only one rightwinger’s oddball head.


----------



## Meathead (Jul 6, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> The complete data was not in for 2016 when this line of deraugatory attack against Obama was ginned up.
> 
> Explain why you believe that Stuart Varney, Brian Kilmead and candidate TrumpO were not assailing Obama’s GDP legacy for every year of his presidency from 2009 through 2015.
> 
> ...


The economy was the least of Obama's failures. It's over so get over it.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 6, 2019)

Meathead, post: 22664679





Meathead said:


> The economy was the least of Obama's failures. It's over so get over it.



Do you see your fellow TrumpOroid has lost control of his faculties therefore you are making an attempt to divert away from the topic,

Ain’t gonna happen,

I know it’s embarrassing to the TrumpOroid movement when a TrumpOroid exposes their ignorance and depravity so openly and without shame as this one.


----------



## Meathead (Jul 6, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Meathead, post: 22664679
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Get over it anyway. Obama was the least consequential president since Jerry Ford.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 6, 2019)

Meathead said:


> Get over it anyway. Obama was the least consequential president since Jerry Ford.



According to the GDP and the topic of this thread Obama is no more inconsequential than TrumpO.

If you showed up just to post your inconsequential partisan groundless opinion why are we to care and what in the hell do you want me to do with it.

One so obsorbed in hatred of Obama need not go around telling folks to get over something,


----------



## Meathead (Jul 6, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > Get over it anyway. Obama was the least consequential president since Jerry Ford.
> ...


Calling Obama inconsequential is hatred?! My, you really are a snowflake.


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jul 6, 2019)

Uhhhh, you might wanna check this out:

https://www.bea.gov/system/files/gdp1q19_3rd.png

Furthermore, under Trump, since March 2017, wages have risen by 3.2%. In February 2017, they rose by 2.8%, and from March 2017 until this April, they have risen by 3.2%.

February 2017: 2.8%
March 2017 – March 2018: 3.2%
April 2018 – April 2019: 3.2%

Those numbers are substantially higher than they were under Obama. Here are the increases under Obama—I chose several 12-month ranges to give a fair picture:

March 2010 – March 2011: 1.7%
June 2010 – June 2011: 1.9%
December 2010 – December 2011: 2.1%
December 2011 – December 2012: 2.1%
December 2012 – December 2013: 1.8%
December 2013 – December 2014: 1.7%
December 2014 – December 2015: 2.5%
January 2016 – January 2017: 2.5%


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 6, 2019)

Meathead said:


> Get over it anyway. Obama was the least consequential president since Jerry Ford.



This is false.  ObamaCare is still fucking up our healthcare system and still driving hospitals bankrupt.


----------



## Deno (Jul 6, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Here’s the record thru 2018:
> View attachment 254781
> 
> U.S. - GDP growth by year 1990-2017 | Statista
> ...





You Tards never tire of making fools of yourself do you?

Do you look like an idiot now or what?

Trump just keeps showing how stupid and ate up with hate you really are.....


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 6, 2019)

Deno said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Here’s the record thru 2018:
> ...



you should not post when you are still drunk from the night before.


----------



## Deno (Jul 6, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Deno said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...




Tards like you are drunk with hate....

You just keep making fools of yourselves...……...


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 6, 2019)

Deno said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Deno said:
> ...


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jul 6, 2019)

I do not say that Obama did a bad job on the economy. Overall, Obama did a pretty decent job on the economy, certainly better than Bush did. My point is that Trump is doing considerably better on the economy than Obama did.

One of the reasons that Obama did a fairly good job on the economy is that he ignored the radical wing of his party and made most of the Bush tax cuts permanent. He also signed off on preserving over $700 billion in tax breaks and lifted the ban on oil exports in the 2015 two-year budget deal.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 6, 2019)

mikegriffith1 said:


> I do not say that Obama did a bad job on the economy. Overall, Obama did a pretty decent job on the economy, certainly better than Bush did. My point is that Trump is doing considerably better on the economy than Obama did.
> 
> One of the reasons that Obama did a fairly good job on the economy is that he ignored the radical wing of his party and made most of the Bush tax cuts permanent. He also signed off on preserving over $700 billion in tax breaks and lifted the ban on oil exports in the 2015 two-year budget deal.



Obama did do a bad job with the economy and Trump is only marginally better. The best thing you can say about Trump is that he kept the momentum going.


----------



## mikegriffith1 (Jul 6, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> mikegriffith1 said:
> 
> 
> > I do not say that Obama did a bad job on the economy. Overall, Obama did a pretty decent job on the economy, certainly better than Bush did. My point is that Trump is doing considerably better on the economy than Obama did.
> ...



I know you have this myth programmed into your hard drive, but it's just not true. Trump has done much more than just keeping the momentum going. He has significantly improved on Obama's numbers--in wages, in manufacturing jobs, in persons employed part-time for economic reasons, in jobless claims, in GDP growth, in the U-6 rate, etc.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 6, 2019)

mikegriffith1 said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > mikegriffith1 said:
> ...



What I have programmed is the math, not the myth. 

The U6 dropped 42.6% under Obama and 22.6% under Trump.

People employed part time for economic reasons dropped 36.2% under Obama and 24.4% under Trump.

Initial jobless claims...been dropping for 10 years






manufacturing jobs going up for 9 years.





Annual GDP growth..best Trump has is 2.9%, which was the best Obama had.

These are the facts, the cold hard facts. 

Just accept the fact that your god is only marginally better than the second worst POTUS ever


----------



## basquebromance (Jul 6, 2019)

Trump is wrong. Wall Street didn't build america, my friends.

the middle class built america. and unions built the middle class


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 6, 2019)

protectionist, post: 22663904 





protectionist said:


> Obama did not have 5.1% growth. That growth would have been attained if Joy Behar was president, or Snoop Dog. Obama's best was 2.3, and that sunk to 1.8.




*OCTOBER 28 2016* Obama is the first president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth," Trump said during an Oct. 28 campaign rally in Manchester, N.H. Trump's claim about Obama's weak economic growth is limited

So for purposes of discussing the topic of this thread we are to accept your translation of your cult leader’s exact words in 2016 to mean that “single year“  was 2016 and only 2016 and that Obama had no impact on the naturally ‘rebounding’ recovery of the Great Bush Recession of 2008. 

Why must we accept thought instructions from a deranged nentalky unfit cult victim? 

I see no reason to voluntarily accept absurdity as reality. 

Obama’s 2.9 GDP in 2015 is a dead assed tie with TrumpO’s 2.9 GDP in 2018. 

It’s reality. It’s a fact. It’s in all official records and charts. Obama was President in 2915.

There was no natural rebound to the economy primarily because of what Obama signed into law.


The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, nicknamed the Recovery Act, was a stimulus package enacted by the 111th U.S. Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama in February 2009. Wikipedia
That hastily passed law (because if the global financial crisis)  CUT PAYROLL TAXES effective immediately. 

A prominent real estate tycoon praised President Obama for cutting taxes and building infrastructure. 

*That Time Donald Trump Praised The Stimulus Package On Fox News *"This is a strong guy knows what he wants, and this is what we need."By Ilan Ben-Meir Posted on July 20, 2015, at 2:03 p.m. ET
On cutting taxes Mr TrumpO was very clear:

“Well, I have analyzed the bill as closely as it can be analyzed in this quick a period of time, but he's really got a combination of both," Trump replied. "He is *doing the taxes*, he is doing rebates, and he is also doing lots of public works."

Now that you can see that your cult master understood at time that Obama had a solid impact on the economic recovery do you renounce the entire line of bullshiy you have been dumping on this thread?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 6, 2019)

Thinker101, post: 22164601,





Thinker101 said:


> . If you're not part of the solution you're part of the problem..



Why is pointing out that TrumpO’s highest GDP was 2.9 in 2018 and Obama’s highest GDP
Was 2.9 in 2015? 

They are tied for highest GDP.

And pointing out that TrumpO said Obama’s economy was anemic because. 

"Obama is the first president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth," Trump said during an Oct. 28 campaign rally in Manchester, N.H.

Trump's claim about Obama's weak economic growth is limited

So if the two president’s are tied on highest GDP at 2.9 why is one economy anemic and the other the greatest economy there ever was.?

Why is it being part of the problem to ask such a question. 

Why are the TrumpOroids so butt hurt over a question based on the fact the the two president’s are in a tie on the major indicator of economic performance?.

Why don’t you just answer the simple question if you have an answer. 

Why is one economy anemic and the other the greatest economy there ever was.?


----------



## Thinker101 (Jul 6, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Thinker101, post: 22164601,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Regulations, dumbass....and lazy slugs such as yourself.


----------



## dannyboys (Jul 6, 2019)

CEA's Kevin Hassett discusses the economy


----------



## protectionist (Jul 6, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Get mental heslth help immediately. You have created your own TrumpOroid reality.


Try taking a college economics course. You probably fall prey also to the scare talkers who claim prices will go up because of this or that.


----------



## Faun (Jul 6, 2019)

Thinker101 said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101, post: 22164601,
> ...


So more regulations in 2015 and fewer regulations in 2018.... higher taxes in 2015 and lower taxes in 2018 ... both produced annual growth of 2.9%. The big difference was the FY2015 deficit increased _only_ $300b while the FY2018 deficit increased one trillion dollars more than that at $1.3t.

Government - Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 2000 - 2018


----------



## Thinker101 (Jul 6, 2019)

Faun said:


> Thinker101 said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



Yep, Obama sure made up for it.
Obama’s real debt and deficit legacy


----------



## Faun (Jul 6, 2019)

Thinker101 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101 said:
> ...


The nice thing about rightwingnut sites like that is they conveniently attribute debt from Bush's final budget and Bush's Great Recession to Obama.


----------



## dannyboys (Jul 6, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> mikegriffith1 said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...


Suuuuuuuuure!
CEA's Kevin Hassett discusses the economy


----------



## Thinker101 (Jul 6, 2019)

Faun said:


> Thinker101 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...




Yep, with Obama, it's always someone else's fault.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 6, 2019)

dannyboys said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > mikegriffith1 said:
> ...



Once again I give facts and you people give talking heads.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 6, 2019)

Thinker101, post: 22665587, 





Thinker101 said:


> Regulations, dumbass...



Quote unquote “unquote” cannot be the answer. The question is why is one president’s highest GDP at 2.9 in 2015 anemic while the other president’s 2.9 GDP in 2018 the greatest economy in US history?

I’m assuming you believe Obama’s GDP stifled GDP and TrumpO’s cancelation of regulation energized GDP.

But the result is the same despite the underlying factors. 

With regulations 2015 produced 2.9 GDP
And supposedly without some regulations 2018 produced 2.9 GDP. 

My understanding of math tells that the regulated economy and the deregulated economy are the same. The deregulated economy is not in fraction of a percentage point greater or better than the regulated one.


----------



## Faun (Jul 6, 2019)

Thinker101 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101 said:
> ...


LOL 

So  you really are stupid enough to _think_ the deficits from Bush's final budget and from Bush's Great Recession are Obama's fault. 

See that? Those rightwingnut sites you rely on are not wasted on idiots like you.


----------



## Thinker101 (Jul 6, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Thinker101, post: 22665587,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I see, so you want to just focus on the percentages, nothing that affects those percentages.  By the same token, at the end of the month and you have no money, you want to just focus on the fact you have no more money, who cares if you pissed that money away on useless things throughout the month.


----------



## Thinker101 (Jul 6, 2019)

Faun said:


> Thinker101 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Great, then you would admit this is Trumps economy?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 6, 2019)

mikegriffith1, post: 22664969





mikegriffith1 said:


> My point is that Trump is doing considerably better on the economy than Obama did.



That’s subjective opinion. Which is fine. I disagree because TrumpO started in a better position - there was no crisis to deal with - the Fed was doing its proper monetary tightening based on low inflation and low unemployment that was handed to TrumpO.

TrumpO’s tax cuts were a deviation from norms and necessity, they failed to do in terms of GDP what they were intended to do and they are not paying for themselves. 

Because the GDP under TrumpO is in an exact tie at 2.9 with Obama, and because TrumpO is failing in reducing the debt during good economic conditions, I find it very hard to go beyond concluding that TrumpO and Obma get equal grades in the economy. Both at B-.

Even up. 

If The Fed needs to lower rates and we still fall into a recession in 2020 I think I will righfully lower TrumpO to an F.


----------



## Faun (Jul 6, 2019)

Thinker101 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101 said:
> ...


Of course I do. Exactly how fucked in the head are you?


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 6, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> WTH_Progs?, post: 22662192
> 
> 
> 
> ...



When progs aren't telling stories and declaring the victim role they're projecting. Not Fooled By Truth is a prime example.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 6, 2019)

Thinker101, post: 22666233





Thinker101 said:


> see, so you want to just focus on the percentages, nothing that affects those percentages.



How else do we measure a president’s performance on the overall economy? And In using the bar that Trump set himself not some arbitrary measurement I pulled out of thin air. 

All you need to say is that IN terms of single year GDP TrumpO is no better than Obama and visa versa.

What is so difficult with stating or acknowledging a straightforward irrefutable fact?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 6, 2019)

Thinker101, post: 22666240,





Thinker101 said:


> Great, then you would admit this is Trumps economy?



This is TrumpO’s economy. In 2018 it produced a high in GDP at 2.9.

In 2015 it was Obama’s economy. It also produced a high in GDP at 2.9.

Your fellow TrumpOroids are posting that 2015 was not Obama’s economy. Obama’s only economy was 2016.

Do you agree with them?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 6, 2019)

mikegriffith1 said:


> He has significantly improved on Obama's numbers--in wages, in manufacturing jobs, in persons employed part-time for economic reasons, in jobless claims, in GDP growth, in the U-6 rate, etc.




TrumpO has not changed the trajectory (steady rate of improvement) trending pattern, 
 over any of those with the exception perhaps of manufacturing jobs. 

He has not improved GDP growth one iota.


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 6, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Thinker101, post: 22666233
> 
> 
> 
> ...



How is it NOTFOOLEDBYTRUTH keeps saying Obama's GDP is equal Trump's when he KNOWS that's not true?  (Obama average GDP growth was 1.59%, Trump's average GDP growth is 2.73%).  And WTF do other progs agree with him?

How is it NOTFOOLEDBYTRUTH is unable comprehend basic math, logic and economics to understand Trump's unemployment rate cannot be less than zero?

How is it NOTFOOLEDBYTRUTH is unable to respond when asked if he knows how the unemployment rate is calculated?

How is it NOTFOOLEDBYTRUTH is unable to comprehend there's greater room for rapid growth following a recession (aka economic recovery)?

How is it NOTFOOLEDBYTRUTH is unable to respond when asked what Obama did to improve the economy?

How is it NOTFOOLEDBYTRUTH is unable to respond to the fact interest rates were historically low on Obama's watch, which is the primary contributor to an improved economy?  Rates that have risen on Trump's watch.

How is it NOTFOOLEDBYTRUTH states Trump's unemployment could only be historically low?

How is it NOTFOOLEDBYTRUTH is unable to acknowledge the Democrats controlled congress when the "Bush Recession" occurred?


----------



## bripat9643 (Jul 6, 2019)

Faun said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


You think it's just as easy to go from 4.8% to zero as it is to go from 10% to 4.8%?  What an idiot.   Just admit you turds will use any excuse to attack Trump.  If he walked on water, you would claim it was because he's afraid to get wet.


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 6, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...



Exactly.  

When the ball bounces it increases velocity as it rises.  I know this cuz I'm a prog-head, and everyday is opposite day.


----------



## Faun (Jul 6, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


Fucking moron, I never said that was easy .... or even possible. Your brain is so fucking deformed, you actually read what I wrote and you  _think_ that's what I said. 

What I said was .... the job market was already growing at an unprecedented rate (83 consecutive months in the private sector). That kept growing at the same rate under trump. Meanwhile, you rightards praise trump while bashing Obama because you really are as fucked in the head as you appear.

If I took away the grid lines and the dates, you wouldn't even be able to tell me at what point Obama left office and trump entered...




... what trump gets credit for is not fucking up the economy he was handed by Obama.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 6, 2019)

Faun said:


> Thinker101 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



*So you really are stupid enough to think the deficits from Bush's final budget and from Bush's Great Recession are Obama's fault.*

That depends.....how many of those spending bills were signed by Obama instead of Bush?


----------



## Thinker101 (Jul 6, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Thinker101, post: 22666233
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Can't say that's the stupidest thing I've seen on USMB, but it's sure damn close.


----------



## Faun (Jul 6, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101 said:
> ...


I didn't count. But the budget handed Obama, along with its deficits, were approved by Bush. And here you are, trying to pin that on Obama. Along with the massive deficits caused by the Great Recession Bush also handed to Obama.


----------



## Faun (Jul 6, 2019)

Thinker101 said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101, post: 22666233
> ...


You don't read what you write, huh?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 6, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



*I didn't count.*

Why not? Why would Bush get blamed for spending signed by Obama?

*And here you are, trying to pin that on Obama. *

If Bush signed the spending, pin it on Bush.
If Obama signed the spending, pin it on Obama.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 6, 2019)

Thinker101 said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101, post: 22666233
> ...



No. Stupid is not being able to answer the question.

How else do we measure a president’s performance on the overall economy?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 6, 2019)

Thinker101, post: 22164620, 





Thinker101 said:


> And liberals/democrats have done everything they could to hamper any growth.



Like what?


----------



## bripat9643 (Jul 6, 2019)

Faun said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


"Not that difficult."  In other words, it was easy.

I love the way you always contradict yourself.  

Economic growth after a recession is a given.  The deeper the recession, the more pronounced the rebound.  All Obama did is be in the right place at the right time.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jul 6, 2019)

WTH_Progs? said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


What's a "prog-head?"


----------



## caddo kid (Jul 6, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...




so, you really believe Obama wanted to take credit for the fuck up of G. W GOP Bush?

LOFL U so fucking stu .............. pid ...........


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 6, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22166253





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Weakest recovery since WWII, but Obama had no responsibility?



Did the payroll tax cuts in the Feb 2009 Recovery Act that TrumpO praised ‘weaken’ the recovery or strengthen it. 


"First of all, I thought he did a great job tonight," said Trump. "I thought he was strong and smart, and it looks like we have somebody that knows what he is doing finally in office, and he did inherit a tremendous problem. He really stepped into a mess, Greta.”   https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bu...d-trump-praised-the-stimulus-package-on-fox-n


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 6, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22166253
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*Did the payroll tax cuts in the Feb 2009 Recovery Act that TrumpO praised ‘weaken’ the recovery or strengthen it. *

What 2009 payroll tax cut?

Caddo, help him out......LOL!


----------



## Thinker101 (Jul 6, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Thinker101, post: 22164620,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



For Christ sake, didn't realize you were one of those that modify posts you respond to....yea your a fricken clown.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jul 6, 2019)

caddo kid said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


He took credit for being in the right place at the right time.  His actions did nothing to speed the recovery.  In fact, they hindered it.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jul 6, 2019)

Thinker101 said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101, post: 22164620,
> ...


That's against the rules.    Report him.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 6, 2019)

Thinker101, post: 22166803 





Thinker101 said:


> You do realize Obama had a ZERO percent interest rate, right? Dumbass.



Yes because of the recession and of course because of the high unemployment crisis.

I also realize TrumpO should have known in October 2016 about the previous Fed rates and why it should no longer be low because unemployment was below five percent by then, when he said:


Obama is the first president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth," Trump said during an Oct. 28 campaign rally in Manchester, N.H.
If he didnt know that he had no business running for President.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jul 6, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Thinker101, post: 22166803
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Wrong.  It was because the Federal Reserve was printing money like it was only paper.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 6, 2019)

Thinker101, post: 22669193 





Thinker101 said:


> For Christ sake, didn't realize you were one of those that modify posts you respond to....yea your a fricken clown.



Modified what?


----------



## Thinker101 (Jul 6, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Thinker101, post: 22669193
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Ok, I'll go slow...there's my post, and there's your post.  When I see your response to some of my posts, my post has been modified.  Slow enough for you?


----------



## Old Yeller (Jul 6, 2019)

Faun said:


> Thinker101 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...






Faun said:


> _think_ the deficits from Bush's final budget and from Bush's Great Recession are Obama's faul



No. Chancy took Congress in 2007. They make the budget.  They setup the big debt bomb.  Continued Resolution or some trick carried over to 2016.   Dem == Rino == disaster.


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 6, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> WTH_Progs? said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...



Some reference them as progressives.  In good conscious I can't call them anything that implies progress.  Ironically, progress in progressive is an euphemism as well (opposite day).


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 6, 2019)

protectionist, post: 22179144 





protectionist said:


> Of course, I concur that Obama was not president for only one year. But only one year (2016) is attributable to his work. The preceding years were natural recoil after a serious recession, whereby steady improvement typically occurs, on its own, regardless of any presidency.



Back in February 2009 Why didn’t TrumpO know about this amazing “_natural recoil after a serious recession, whereby steady improvement typically occurs, on its own” _that you seem to be the only human being alive that knows about it.

"First of all, I thought he did a great job tonight," said Trump. "I thought he was strong and smart, and it looks like we have somebody that knows what he is doing finally in office, and he did inherit a tremendous problem. He really stepped into a mess, Greta.” https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bu...d-trump-praised-the-stimulus-package-on-fox-n
You want more of your beloved leader praising Obama’s stimulus plan.

Van Susteren tried again, questioning whether Trump thought that "the breakdown between spending projects and taxes" in the president's plan was the right one. And again, Trump offered praise for Obama's proposal. 

"Well, I have analyzed the bill as closely as it can be analyzed in this quick a period of time, but he's really got a combination of both," Trump replied. "He is doing the taxes, he is doing rebates, and he is also doing lots of public works


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 6, 2019)

Thinker101, post: 22669233,





Thinker101 said:


> Ok, I'll go slow...there's my post, and there's your post. When I see your response to some of my posts, my post has been modified. Slow enough for you?



No idiot. Click on the Little Arrow to the right of “thinker said” and it will take you directly back to your post. You will see your post has not been modified. 

Your exact words have been cited. 

I am always very careful about that,


----------



## Thinker101 (Jul 6, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Thinker101, post: 22669233,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yea, now is not the best time to play stupid.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 6, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22669163, 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> What 2009 payroll tax cut?



When do you quit being a dumbass? 

The $288 bn one that TrumpO said he analyzed and  praised on the Greta Van Sustern Show on Fox News. That one. 

In February 2009, Congress approved Obama’s economic stimulus package. It restored confidence and ended the Great Recession in July 2009. It cut $288 billion in taxes. It reduced that year's income taxes for individuals by $400 each and $800 for families. Instead of stimulus checks, workers received a lower withholding in their paychecks. It wasn't publicized very well, so many people didn't even notice the increase.  Why Did Obama Extend the Bush Tax Cuts in 2010?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 6, 2019)

Thinker101, post: 22669365 





Thinker101 said:


> Yea, now is not the best time to play stupid.



I’ll ask again - what do you think was modified?  It’s in writing. If it exists why not just post it.

Quit lying in other words.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 7, 2019)

protectionist, post: 22179044 





protectionist said:


> In Obama's last 4 quarters in office, GDP growth SANK from 2.3% to 1.8%.  Thankfully, he left, and Trump raised it significantly.



If Q2 comes in at its current forecast at 1.3% then it can be said, TrumpO's last 4 quarters in office, GDP growth SANK from 4.2% to 1.3%.
 We should be thankful if he wouid leave, right.

My what a terrible economy TrumpO will be handing off to himself.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 7, 2019)

I wrote; *We know from current TrumpO economic GDP data that he, so far and most likely will remain THE SECOND PRESIDENT In US HISTORY to FAIL to ACHIEVE a FULL YEAR of GDP GROWTH ABOVE 3%.*


Toddsterpatriot, post: 22187894 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Even if that is the case, it doesn't change the fact that Obama had the weakest recovery since WWII.



It means there is a new normal at play in global economics. It means failure to get GDP in the USA above 3.0 is no longer considered weak. 

2.2 to 2.6 over many successive years is now considered a healthy economy. 

TrumpOroids are deliberately out of touch with that new reality because of the desperate need to hate Obama.


----------



## Faun (Jul 7, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


No one said Bush should get blamed for Obsma's spending. Even though rightards are trying to blame Obama for Bush's budget deficits and recession deficits.


----------



## Faun (Jul 7, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


Fucking moron, when I denied "it was easy," I was talking about your idiocy of taking the unemployment rate from 4.8% to 0%. When I said "it's not that difficult," I was talking about keeping a strong job market growing.

See that? There was no I consistency on my part -- only the typical ignorance on yours.


----------



## Faun (Jul 7, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101, post: 22166803
> ...


LOLOL 

Fucking moron, the Fed dropped interest rates to 0.25% while Bush was president and in response to his Great Recession.


----------



## Faun (Jul 7, 2019)

Thinker101 said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101, post: 22669193
> ...


Your posts were not modified. Exactly how deranged are you?


----------



## Faun (Jul 7, 2019)

Old Yeller said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Thinker101 said:
> ...


I have no idea who "Chancy" is, but regardless, the president approves the budget, whether it's a new budget or a continuing resolution. That's on Bush, not Obama, for what he handed him.


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 7, 2019)

Faun said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



Ah here we go again, it was "Bush's recession".  We're supposed to ignore the Dems. had the majority in congress.  Prog-news doesn't report that fact, because they don't believe in facts.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 7, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Back in February 2009 Why didn’t TrumpO know about this amazing “_natural recoil after a serious recession, whereby steady improvement typically occurs, on its own” _that you seem to be the only human being alive that knows about it.
> 
> "First of all, I thought he did a great job tonight," said Trump. "I thought he was strong and smart, and it looks like we have somebody that knows what he is doing finally in office, and he did inherit a tremendous problem. He really stepped into a mess, Greta.” https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bu...d-trump-praised-the-stimulus-package-on-fox-n
> You want more of your beloved leader praising Obama’s stimulus plan.
> ...


You seem to be the only person on earth that does NOT know about it. All the kids in City University of New York (who were paying attention) learned it. What deficient junk college did YOU go to ?

There are plenty of criticisms of Obama that Trump has made.  No need to point them out.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 7, 2019)

Faun said:


> No one said Bush should get blamed for Obsma's spending. Even though rightards are trying to blame Obama for Bush's budget deficits and recession deficits.


No need to blame Obama for Bush years.  Obama flunked out gloriously in his last chance to prove himself > 2016. He proved himself allright. A total economic failure, and a traitorous Muslim jihadist colluder with ISIS, willing to accept the ISIS trojan horse.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 7, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> It means there is a new normal at play in global economics. It means failure to get GDP in the USA above 3.0 is no longer considered weak.
> 
> 2.2 to 2.6 over many successive years is now considered a healthy economy.
> 
> TrumpOroids are deliberately out of touch with that new reality because of the desperate need to hate Obama.


GDP is Obama's black mark. It is Trump's shiny medal.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 7, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> If Q2 comes in at its current forecast at 1.3% then it can be said, TrumpO's last 4 quarters in office, GDP growth SANK from 4.2% to 1.3%.
> We should be thankful if he wouid leave, right.
> 
> My what a terrible economy TrumpO will be handing off to himself.


Democrat pathetic, poor souls.  They are reduced to_ forecast_s (from Trump bashers), and words like _"will"_....._"If"_...…


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 7, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22669163,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hey, moron, I saw the link, now where is the 2009 payroll tax cut?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 7, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



*No one said Bush should get blamed for Obsma's spending. *

Great. So what was Bush's deficit from his final budget?


----------



## protectionist (Jul 7, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Back in February 2009 Why didn’t TrumpO know about this amazing “_natural recoil after a serious recession, whereby steady improvement typically occurs, on its own” _that you seem to be the only human being alive that knows about it.
> 
> "First of all, I thought he did a great job tonight," said Trump. "I thought he was strong and smart, and it looks like we have somebody that knows what he is doing finally in office, and he did inherit a tremendous problem. He really stepped into a mess, Greta.” https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bu...d-trump-praised-the-stimulus-package-on-fox-n
> You want more of your beloved leader praising Obama’s stimulus plan.
> ...


Trump praising OBAMA ?  HA HA .  Here's Trump rating Obama >>

_"I think he's the worst president maybe in the history of our country.  I think he's been a disaster.   He's been weak. He's been ineffective.  You look at this so-called recovery, it's setting record lows.  I guess not since 1949 has there been anything like it.  You look at home ownership._

_Look at what happened, as an example, he talks about Ukraine.  I believe I know far more about foreign policy than he knows.  Look at Ukraine. He talks about Ukraine, well you know how tough he is, well you know how tough he is with Russia right ?  In the meantime they took over Crimea."_

There's more to this interview, but this scathing attack on Obama is quite enough.

Wanna see the interview ? Trump's words begin at 0:53 on the time bar.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jul 7, 2019)

Faun said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


Now you're just quibbling.

No one is fooled.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jul 7, 2019)

Faun said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...


So?  You mean they did it right before he left office?   All that shows is that the Fed started printing money even before Obama ascended the throne, and it continued to do so all through his administration.  You failed to contradict what I posted.


----------



## Faun (Jul 7, 2019)

WTH_Progs? said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


_"*Thanks to our policies*, homeownership in America is at an all time high!" ~ George Bush,  2004 *RNC* acceptance speech_


----------



## Faun (Jul 7, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > No one said Bush should get blamed for Obsma's spending. Even though rightards are trying to blame Obama for Bush's budget deficits and recession deficits.
> ...


*And still, trump can't beat Obama's 5.1% real GDP growth, achieved in Q2-2014.*


----------



## Faun (Jul 7, 2019)

protectionist said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > It means there is a new normal at play in global economics. It means failure to get GDP in the USA above 3.0 is no longer considered weak.
> ...


*LOL 

To the brain-dead cultists, 2.3% growth since the end of Bush's Great Recession is a "black mark," while 2.8% growth is a "shiny medal."

*


----------



## Faun (Jul 7, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


A portion of the deficit until his budget expired.


----------



## Faun (Jul 7, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


LOLOL 

Yeah, pointing out reality to you fucking morons is always such a hoot.


----------



## Faun (Jul 7, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


No, fucking moron, it shows they dropped the federal fund rate as low as they could when the economy cratered below Bush's feet. It had nothing to do with Obama.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jul 7, 2019)

Faun said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


Who arranged it isn't the issue.  The fact is that the government was printing vast quantities of money all through Obama's reign of error.


----------



## Faun (Jul 7, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


Fucking moron, I explained *when* they arranged it and *why* and it had nothing to do with Obama. It's no one else's fault but your own that you're too big of a fucking moron to understand.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jul 7, 2019)

Faun said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


Of course it had to do with Obama.  It went on during his entire administration.  No one gives a fuck who did it or why they did it.  The fact that Obama didn't do it means he deserves no credit for it.


----------



## Faun (Jul 7, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


It was lowered before Obama became president and due to horrid economic disasters occurring under the previous president. That has nothing to do with Obama.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 7, 2019)

bripat9643, post: 22673254


bripat9643 said:


> Who arranged it isn't the issue. The fact is that the government was printing vast quantities of money all through Obama's reign of error.



And TrumpO needs and is demanding rates cut because his greatest economy has fizzled out as we speak. 

The GDPNow model estimate for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the second quarter of 2019 is *1.3 percent* on July 3, down from 1.5 percent on July 1. 
So what is your point?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 7, 2019)

Faun said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...




And yes that is comparing seven Obama years to two TrumpO years without TrumpO’s slow diwn in the calculation. 

If Q2 2019 holds at 1.3 the avg GDP for 2919 through two quarters will be 2.2.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jul 7, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> bripat9643, post: 22673254
> 
> 
> bripat9643 said:
> ...


What does that have to do with what occurred during the Obama administration?


----------



## Faun (Jul 7, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643, post: 22673254
> ...


Fucking moron, this thread is about whether or not trump can do any better than Obama's best calendar year of 2.9% real GDP growth.

Do you even know what planet you're on??


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 7, 2019)

Faun said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



*It was lowered before Obama became president and due to horrid economic disasters occurring under the previous president. *

And it stayed there for the first 7 years of Obama's tenure. 

Because Obama's recovery was so good.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jul 7, 2019)

Faun said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...


That isn't what you have been blubbering about for the last several posts.


----------



## Remodeling Maidiac (Jul 7, 2019)

I was banned and missed all the shit talking when the jobs numbers were released.

So here goes.....

NANANANABOOBOO stick your head back in the sand dunes


----------



## otto105 (Jul 7, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...



How many months of positive job growth did President Barack Hussein Obama economic managing produce?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 7, 2019)

otto105 said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



His very weak recovery lasted a long time.


----------



## otto105 (Jul 7, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> otto105 said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...




So, you can't post 65 months?

Obama's economy tripled the stock market, has donny grifters?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 7, 2019)

protectionist, post: 22671132, member: 45665"]





protectionist said:


> You seem to be the only person on earth that does NOT know about it. All the kids in City University of New York (who were paying attention) learned it.



So there must be some reference material we can all take a look at or you are lying.

I accept the latter until you produce the reference material.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 7, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> So there must be some reference material we can all take a look at or you are lying.
> 
> I accept the latter until you produce the reference material.


I taught lot of stuff - some in the textbooks; some not.  Whether something is in a textbook or not, doesn't mean squat.  There a lot of stuff that's never been in textbooks, which are undeniably accurate. 

Textbooks are products of private industry, and much of them have say over what is or isn't said.  Especially regarding business economics.  All the eco teachers taught extra-textbook stuff, to the dismay of our cowardly administrators.  You get a well-rounded education that way. And you're getting some of that right now.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 7, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22669163 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> *Did the payroll tax cuts in the Feb 2009 Recovery Act that TrumpO praised ‘weaken’ the recovery or strengthen it. *
> 
> What 2009 payroll tax cut?




*Tax incentives for individuals *Total: $237 billion  $116 billion: New payroll tax credit of $400 per worker and $800 per couple in 2009 and 2010. Phaseout begins at $75,000 for individuals and $150,000 for joint filers.[29] American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 - Wikipedia


----------



## protectionist (Jul 7, 2019)

2.9% ?  No,  Only thing Obama had was ONE.9%.  His 2016 year . 2.9......1.9....1.8.....1.8 divided by 4. = 1.9.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 7, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22669163
> 
> 
> 
> ...



There you go, he didn't cut the payroll tax in 2009. 
Glad you FINALLY realized your error.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 7, 2019)

protectionist, post: 22674907 





protectionist said:


> I taught lot of stuff - some in the textbooks; some not. Whether something is in a textbook or not, doesn't mean squat. There a lot of stuff that's never been in textbooks, which are undeniably accurate.
> 
> Textbooks are products of private industry, and much of them have say over what is or isn't said. Especially regarding business economics. All the eco teachers taught extra-textbook stuff, to the dismay of our cowardly administrators. You get a well-rounded education that way. And you're getting some of that right now.



I don’t want a text book idiot .  Since you claim you taught this ‘recession rebound self- stimulus dynamic’ you most certainly must have cited an economist or two that discovered this dynamic and when in some kind of historical context it occurred. 

Something rattling around inside your skull does not count.


----------



## pinqy (Jul 7, 2019)

protectionist said:


> 2.9% ?  No,  Only thing Obama had was ONE.9%.  His 2016 year . 2.9......1.9....1.8.....1.8 divided by 4. = 1.9.


You can’t use the arithmetic mean for growth rates, you have to use the geometric mean. 
So your math should be (1.029*1.019*1.018*1.018)^.25 = 1.0208
2.1% growth (and you even did your own equation wrong)

But then i’m Not sure what numbers you are citing. They don’t match up with quarterly or annual growt under Obama.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 7, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> I don’t want a text book idiot .  Since you claim you taught this ‘recession rebound self- stimulus dynamic’ you most certainly must have cited an economist or two that discovered this dynamic and when in some kind of historical context it occurred.
> 
> Something rattling around inside your skull does not count.


No need to do that either. You don't know much about education. You seem to think that something is only validify somebody said it before.  For your edification, the only reason why college administrators often require past reference, is so they can  have something to hid behind, to cover their cowardly asses.

What "counts' is what cannot be disproved.  ANYTHING, in or out of textbooks or quotations.  Like the bellshaped curve of prices vs business income. I saw it in 1 textbook 44 years ago.  Never saw it again. Big busine$$ doesn't like it.  They want to be able to lay their price and layoff scare talk on you.  And you sound like a prime patsy.  I can see they've got YOU programmed.


----------



## Thinker101 (Jul 7, 2019)

pinqy said:


> protectionist said:
> 
> 
> > 2.9% ?  No,  Only thing Obama had was ONE.9%.  His 2016 year . 2.9......1.9....1.8.....1.8 divided by 4. = 1.9.
> ...



Ya need to use the Obama math.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 7, 2019)

pinqy said:


> But then i’m Not sure what numbers you are citing. They don’t match up with quarterly or annual growt under Obama.


I TOLD you what I was using, just now, and I've BEEN telling you all through this Lonnnnng thread.  Obama's 2016 GDPs.  Duh!


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 7, 2019)

Unlike the 2008 individual stimulus payments, taxpayers will not receive a lump-sum check from the government. Instead, the credit will be received *through a reduction in payroll taxes over the course of 2009 *and then again in 2010.


Toddsterpatriot, post: 22675192,


Toddsterpatriot said:


> There you go, he didn't cut the payroll tax in 2009.



Idiot.

Making Work Pay Credit
The largest of the tax provisions is the Making Work Pay Credit (MWPC). In 2009 and 2010, individual workers will receive an income tax credit equal to 6.2% of their earned income, with a maximum credit of $400 for individuals and $800 for married couples filing jointly.10
The amount for each individual represents the employee’s share of the Social Security payroll tax.11 For self-employed taxpayers, the credit may still be taken from the income of their business.12 The credit phases out at a rate of 2% of income over $75,000 for individuals ($150,000 for couples). Therefore, individuals with incomes exceeding $95,000 ($190,000 for couples) will not receive the credit.13 Unlike the 2008 individual stimulus payments, taxpayers will not receive a lump-sum check from the government. Instead, the credit will be received through a reduction in payroll taxes over the course of 2009 and then again in 2010. The reduction in withholdings from the paycheck will result in workers having about fifteen additional dollars in their paychecks in 2009 once the credit is implemented    https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f169/cada96b12b88c1d393aa36e45a50f5f2140b.pdf


----------



## pinqy (Jul 7, 2019)

protectionist said:


> pinqy said:
> 
> 
> > But then i’m Not sure what numbers you are citing. They don’t match up with quarterly or annual growt under Obama.
> ...


Which was 1.5, 2.4, 1.9, 1.8
So no, you weren’t using 2016 GDP
https://www.bea.gov/system/files/2019-06/gdp1q19_3rd.xlsx Includes 2016 data in table 1


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 7, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Unlike the 2008 individual stimulus payments, taxpayers will not receive a lump-sum check from the government. Instead, the credit will be received *through a reduction in payroll taxes over the course of 2009 *and then again in 2010.
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22675192,
> ...



*Unlike the 2008 individual stimulus payments, taxpayers will not receive a lump-sum check from the government.*

That was awesome!! An extra $7.69 a week. Was that what ended the recession by June 2009?

*individual workers will receive an income tax credit equal to 6.2% of their earned income, *

Tax credits are cool! Not a payroll tax cut though...…..idiot.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 7, 2019)

pinqy said:


> Which was 1.5, 2.4, 1.9, 1.8
> So no, you weren’t using 2016 GDP
> https://www.bea.gov/system/files/2019-06/gdp1q19_3rd.xlsx Includes 2016 data in table 1


They were ....1.5....2.3.....1.9.....1.8 = 7.5,   Divided by 4 = 1.875







I was rounding off the 1.87 to 1.9.  gave you the benefit. Now you don't get that anymore.  I'll call it what it is >>1.8


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 7, 2019)

protectionist said:


> pinqy said:
> 
> 
> > Which was 1.5, 2.4, 1.9, 1.8
> ...



You are so stupid.  That is not how the annual GDP growth is determined .

I am truly embarrassed for you


----------



## Faun (Jul 7, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643 said:
> ...


But you claim trump's economy is so strong and he's pressuring the fed to drop the rate.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 7, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



And if they ever drop it to Obama levels, then you can claim Trump's economy is as weak as Obama's.


----------



## Faun (Jul 7, 2019)

otto105 said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > otto105 said:
> ...


83 months in the private sector.


----------



## Faun (Jul 7, 2019)

protectionist said:


> 2.9% ?  No,  Only thing Obama had was ONE.9%.  His 2016 year . 2.9......1.9....1.8.....1.8 divided by 4. = 1.9.


*LOLOL 

A dumbfuck who "claims" to have taught economics proves he was full of shit as he averages out quarterly growth to show annual growth when anybody with any knowledge of economics would calculate annualized growth.

Not to mention, your math sucks. The average of 2.9, 1.9, 1.8 and 1.8 is 2.1, not 1.9.

*


----------



## Faun (Jul 7, 2019)

protectionist said:


> pinqy said:
> 
> 
> > But then i’m Not sure what numbers you are citing. They don’t match up with quarterly or annual growt under Obama.
> ...


*and the numbers you posted were wrong.*


----------



## Faun (Jul 7, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Not necessary since unlike Obama, trump wasn't handed the worst economy since the Great Depression. And still, trump is fighting to lower the already low rate.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 8, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> You are so stupid. That is not how the annual GDP growth is determined .
> 
> I am truly embarrassed for you


Ha ha. One problem liberals have, is that they can't seem to come to grips with the realization that the whole world does not dance to their catchwords, catchphrases, and ideas that they set up, and then expect everyone to go along with.  If they didn't stick so tightly to liberal media, university professors, and think tanks, they wouldn't be living in their own lopsided bubbles.
You can call it any way you want.  The FACT is these 4 quarters are Obama's last 4 quarters, and they average out to 1.875.

When I was a guitarist in a rock band, and played in clubs, there was an old saying.  You can be mediocre all through your set, but if your LAST 3 SONGS are really good, the audience will love you, as you walk offstage.

The American people didn't and shouldn't love Obama's last 3 or 4 quarters. They stunk and they sunk.  They can be viewed or "determined" or spun, any way you like, but at ht eend of the term Obama walked offstage a flunk.

Lesson learned from the last 10 years.  Elect successful businessmen to be POTUS, not community organizers.  I've given you an education here, but you don't seem to be too good a student.  Not my problem.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 8, 2019)

Faun said:


> *and the numbers you posted were wrong.*


And what half ass college did YOU attend.  Too bad some of you couoldn't be in our CUNY classes of the 1970s.  Looks like university economics has gone astray a bit since the libbies have taken over.  We learned and taught the real thing, not some lefty spin jobs.

PS - the numbers I posted are from US Bureau of Economic Analysis, US Dept of Commerce.  Don't like the numbers. Go fight with them.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 8, 2019)

Faun said:


> Not necessary since unlike Obama, trump wasn't handed the worst economy since the Great Depression. And still, trump is fighting to lower the already low rate.


But in 2016, Obama wasn't being handed " the worst economy since the Great Depression"  He had an improving economy, AND HE MUFFED IT.  That will be his economic legacy for all time.  2.3.....1.9......1.8.   As George H. Bush would say >>_ " BAD!  BAD!"_


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 8, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22675790. 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> And if they ever drop it to Obama levels, then you can claim Trump's economy is as weak as Obama's.



But then to be fair you’d have to adjust poor little DonnyJ ‘s GDP based on starting out with a much smaller workforce  than the one he was fortunate to start with. In other words as is done with inflation being based upon constant 2009 dollars you will have to adjust TrumpO’s GDP based upon the number of Americans employed near the end of January 2009.

So if you need to cry and pout about lil DonnyJ’s hardship from the Fed you’ll have to  weigh in with the myriad other beneficial factors that have an impact on GDP as well.

I’m for expecting each President to be man enough to play the hand they were dealt.

And lil DonnyJ’s 2.9 GDP does not beat  Obama’s 2.9.

TrumpO said he could take the hand he was dealt to 4.0 and as high as 6.0 but no amount of excuses from him and all his TrumpOroids will erase the failure to achieve that which came out of lil DonnyJ’s big lyin’ mouth.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 8, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > You are so stupid. That is not how the annual GDP growth is determined .
> ...



Yes, Obama sucked...on that part we agree.

Yet Trump has only been marginally better...yet you worship the very ground he walks on.

You put the party before the country and are loyal to a man and not your country. 


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Faun (Jul 8, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > *and the numbers you posted were wrong.*
> ...


*Dumbfuck, the numbers you posted for 2016 were 2.9, 1.9, 1.8, 1.8. While the actual numbers are 1.5, 2.3, 1.9, 1.8.

You prove to be too senile to even know what younpost.*


----------



## Faun (Jul 8, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Not necessary since unlike Obama, trump wasn't handed the worst economy since the Great Depression. And still, trump is fighting to lower the already low rate.
> ...


*His legacy is the same as trump's.... being the only 2 presidents to not have a year of 3% growth or higher.*


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 8, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



*Not necessary since unlike Obama, trump wasn't handed the worst economy since the Great Depression.*

And according to the Fed, it sucked for 7 years.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 8, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22675790.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*I’m for expecting each President to be man enough to play the hand they were dealt.*

If that were true, you'd whine less about Obama's weakest recovery since WWII.


----------



## Faun (Jul 8, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Nope, that's not what that meant. Thanks for trying though.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 8, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22675790.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*And lil DonnyJ’s 2.9 GDP does not beat Obama’s 2.9.*

If Obama's 2.9% happened with Fed Funds at 1.50% and rising instead of at 0.25%, I'd agree.
If Obama's 2.9% happened with QE getting reversed instead of expanding the Fed balance sheet 59%, I'd agree.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 8, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Fed Funds at 0-0.25% for 7 years meant the economy was rocking? 
Thanks for adding your wisdom. DURR.


----------



## Faun (Jul 8, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


No, it meant the fed was nervous about raising the rate since the last time they had, it contributed to the collapse of our economy.  It's the same reason they're keeping it low now and not raising it more.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 8, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



An economy so fragile that it needs rates at 0-0.25% isn't a strong economy.


----------



## Faun (Jul 8, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Your continued lying doesn't help you. Again, it was a nervous Fed that didn't want to wreck the economy again. The same Fed that is keeping the rate low now. According to you, that means the economy sucks now too.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 8, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



No lie, the effective Fed Funds rate was below 0.25% from December 2008 until December 2015.





Effective Federal Funds Rate | FRED | St. Louis Fed

*The same Fed that is keeping the rate low now. According to you, that means the economy sucks now too.*





Effective Federal Funds Rate | FRED | St. Louis Fed

2.4% is a far cry from sub 0.25%.


----------



## Faun (Jul 8, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Your lie was why they kept it so low for as long as they did. But again, according to your lies, the economy sucks right now since the rate is still low.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 8, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



*Your lie was why they kept it so low for as long as they did.*

LOL!

*Again, it was a nervous Fed that didn't want to wreck the economy again. *

If the Fed thinks raising rates above 0.25% will wreck the economy, that isn't a strong economy. No lie.

*according to your lies, the economy sucks right now since the rate is still low.*

If the rate was 0.25%, I'd agree the economy sucks.


----------



## basquebromance (Jul 8, 2019)

"I helped create the GOP *tax* myth. *Trump* is wrong: *Tax* cuts don’t equal growth." - Bruce *Bartlett*


----------



## Faun (Jul 8, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


2.5% is still low. According to you, that means the economy sucks.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 8, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Low and yet 10 times what it was for Obama's first 7 years.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 8, 2019)

basquebromance said:


> "I helped create the GOP *tax* myth. *Trump* is wrong: *Tax* cuts don’t equal growth." - Bruce *Bartlett*



It's a shame, Bruce's madcow disease is getting worse.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 8, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22676732 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> If that were true, you'd whine less about Obama's weakest recovery since WWII.



I’m not whining about your stupid commentary because your determination is not derived from anything comparable to a recovery from the Great Bush Recession. You have no baseline from which to place the ‘weakest’ on the 2009 recovery years label on the Obama recovery.

Some call it weak because it did not produce GDP above 3.0. That means little now that the Great White MAGA Hope’s post-recovery economy cannot produce a GDP above 3.0 with massive tax cuts and full employment. 

It’s the new normal.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 8, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22676732
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*You have no baseline from which to place the ‘weakest’ on the 2009 recovery years label on the Obama recovery.*

The baseline is........every recovery since WWII.

*It’s the new normal.*

We'll have to see if future recoveries are better or worse than Obama's.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 8, 2019)

Faun said:


> *Dumbfuck, the numbers you posted for 2016 were 2.9, 1.9, 1.8, 1.8. While the actual numbers are 1.5, 2.3, 1.9, 1.8.
> 
> You prove to be too senile to even know what younpost.*



You're too late.  My clerical error (big deal) was already corrected in posts 917, 925, and 927, before you blabbered about it in your post 930.  Only thing you accomplished was to look stupid.

Here's what I posted >>


----------



## Faun (Jul 8, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > *Dumbfuck, the numbers you posted for 2016 were 2.9, 1.9, 1.8, 1.8. While the actual numbers are 1.5, 2.3, 1.9, 1.8.
> ...


*LOLOLOL 

You post bogus numbers and you call others stupid for laughing at you. 

*


----------



## protectionist (Jul 8, 2019)

Faun said:


> *You post bogus numbers and you call others stupid for laughing at you.
> *


You make a habit of getting things wrong.  Everyone here knows I called you stupid because you posted a correction that had already been corrected by me 3 TIMES, stupid.


----------



## Faun (Jul 8, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > *You post bogus numbers and you call others stupid for laughing at you.
> ...


*LOL 

Dumbfuck, I responded to your moronic figures before I got to any of your corrections. You prove that even common sense avoids you.*


----------



## protectionist (Jul 8, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Yes, Obama sucked...on that part we agree.
> 
> Yet Trump has only been marginally better...yet you worship the very ground he walks on.
> 
> ...


To say Trump is only marginally better shows that you have the same defect that most leftists have - a severe information deprivation, typically caused by watching liberal OMISSION media.

Obama might be the worst president we've ever had, and to say he could be convicted of treason is not a stretch. He colluded with al Baghdadi, pulled US troops out of Iraq in 2011 opening the vacuum for ISIS to move in, and then gave US airmen stand down orders, allowing ISIS convoys to travel on open, desert roads, sitting ducks for airstrikes, that only occurred as ex-Generals described as "pinpricks".

Obama even supplied ISIS with material.   He also filled his White House with seditious Muslim Brotherhood operatives, and gave ill treatment to Israel, while supporting the Palestinians(Hamas), and giving acceptance to the Muslim Brotherhood govt in Egypt, while dissing Mubarek, a friend of the US for 30 years.

He also allowed thousands of Muslims to immigrate into the US (an act of insanity), including many Syrian "refugees" who could not be vetted, and still may show up as the ISIS trojan horse that Trump referred to.  Obama is a Muslim jihadist.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 8, 2019)

Faun said:


> *
> Dumbfuck, I responded to your moronic figures before I got to any of your corrections. You prove that even common sense avoids you.*


Well, that's your mistake, The corrections were there (3), before you posted.  Now you compound the error by trying to defend it.   

Maybe this just isn't your day.


----------



## Faun (Jul 8, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > *
> ...


*Nope, I made no mistake. You did though, hysterically posting 2.9, 1.9, 1.8 and 1.8 as 2016's GDP figures. And then idiotically saying if you divide those numbers by 4, you get 1.9.

*


----------



## protectionist (Jul 8, 2019)

Faun said:


> *His legacy is the same as trump's.... being the only 2 presidents to not have a year of 3% growth or higher.*


Obama left office with a sinking economy. His reign is over.  Trump's is only 1/4 through, and already his quarters look like tall buildings alongside Obama's 2016 stumps.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 8, 2019)

Faun said:


> *Nope, I made no mistake. You did though, hysterically posting 2.9, 1.9, 1.8 and 1.8 as 2016's GDP figures. And then idiotically saying if you divide those numbers by 4, you get 1.9.
> *


Now you've compounded your error TWICE.  The whole you've dug for yourself is getting deeper. Hope it's not too hot down there.


----------



## Faun (Jul 8, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > *His legacy is the same as trump's.... being the only 2 presidents to not have a year of 3% growth or higher.*
> ...


*And is still the second president to not have a year of 3% or higher.*


----------



## Faun (Jul 8, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > *Nope, I made no mistake. You did though, hysterically posting 2.9, 1.9, 1.8 and 1.8 as 2016's GDP figures. And then idiotically saying if you divide those numbers by 4, you get 1.9.
> ...


*LOL 

Nope, I still made no mistake. Pointing out you're an idiot who posted the wrong figures and said 8.4 ÷ 4 = 1.9, when it actually equals 2.1, does not transfer your idiocy onto me.

*


----------



## protectionist (Jul 8, 2019)

Faun said:


> *Nope, I still made no mistake. Pointing out you're an idiot who posted the wrong figures and said 8.4 ÷ 4 = 1.9, when it actually equals 2.1, does not transfer your idiocy onto me.
> *


Everyone makes clerical errors occasionally.  That's no big deal, especially when the error is corrected.

What is a big deal is some blockhead coming along and yammering about it after it was already corrected, and then compounding the error 3 TIMES, because of not being man enough to stand up straight and tall, and admit YOU SCREWED UP.

Boy, that hole you're in is really deep now.  Let us know if you strike oil.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 8, 2019)

Faun said:


> *And is still the second president to not have a year of 3% or higher.*



Already addressed, as everyone here knows (except you)


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 8, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > *And is still the second president to not have a year of 3% or higher.*
> ...



Thanks for verifying that Trump has not had a year over 3%.


----------



## protectionist (Jul 8, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> Thanks for verifying that Trump has not had a year over 3%.


Thanks for posting my bar graph again (in your quote) showing Trump's skyscrapers, and Obama's stumps.


----------



## Faun (Jul 8, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > *Nope, I still made no mistake. Pointing out you're an idiot who posted the wrong figures and said 8.4 ÷ 4 = 1.9, when it actually equals 2.1, does not transfer your idiocy onto me.
> ...


*Repeating your idiocy doesn't help you since I did nothing wrong in pointing out your ignorance.*


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 8, 2019)

*I wrote: You have no baseline from which to place the ‘weakest’ label on the recovery years *

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22678485 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> The baseline is........every recovery since WWII.



Do you have all those baselines in some sort of order of weakness? Can you tell us specifically which one is second weakest so we can analyze the baseline you have determined has the same conditions as the Obama recovery.

Or did you just pull ‘the weakest” out of your ass like most of your crazy ideas.


----------



## Frankeneinstein (Jul 8, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> Trump promised four or five


The important thing here is that he is president


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 8, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> *I wrote: You have no baseline from which to place the ‘weakest’ label on the recovery years *
> 
> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22678485
> 
> ...



https://lmgtfy.com/?q=weakest+economic+ recovery


----------



## Faun (Jul 8, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks for verifying that Trump has not had a year over 3%.
> ...


 *Had you posted more, you'd see trump's skyscrapers were in the shadows of Obama's Q2/Q3-2014....*


----------



## Old Yeller (Jul 9, 2019)

Easy to see the Oblamo policies held the avg GDP ~1.9%  whereas the red DJT years are already ~0.6% higher average.   That is close to 30% better already and with zero help by DemRinoMSM.  Oblamo was loaded withe help. See the massive debt (since Dems took congress 2007) and 8 years of Fed money dumping.

What are you going to do when the recent red bars keep climbing up?  This will raise the avg of the red bars?  You will have nothing left?  Battery going......


----------



## Faun (Jul 9, 2019)

Old Yeller said:


> Easy to see the Oblamo policies held the avg GDP ~1.9%  whereas the red DJT years are already ~0.6% higher average.   That is close to 30% better already and with zero help by DemRinoMSM.  Oblamo was loaded withe help. See the massive debt (since Dems took congress 2007) and 8 years of Fed money dumping.
> 
> What are you going to do when the recent red bars keep climbing up?  This will raise the avg of the red bars?  You will have nothing left?  Battery going......


Yes, the difference between starting with -8.4% GDP and +1.8% GDP is obvious.

Meanwhile, annualized real GDP growth during the more than 18 years since Clinton left office has been *2.3%*. Annualized  real GDP growth during the Obama years following the Great Recession was *2.3%*.

https://www.bea.gov/system/files/2019-06/gdplev_0.xlsx


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 9, 2019)

Old Yeller, post: 22681804. 





Old Yeller said:


> This will raise the avg of the red bars?



This thread is not about average, pay attention.

You are averaging eight years of Obama starting at and including a negative 2.9 that had nothing to do with Obama or Democratic Party policies. You are averaging two years of TrumpO which started well above zero and catches TrumpO’s highest GDP at 4.2 in 2018. But TrumpO has recorded lower GDP since that peak soon to include this :

*Latest forecast: 1.3 percent — July 3, 2019. *The GDPNow model estimate for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the second quarter of 2019 is *1.3 percent* on July 3, down from 1.5 percent on July 1.
We will know more tomorrow and in the coming month where Q2 2019 ends up, but right now TrumpO is looking at a death spiral for his Greatest Economy in US history from a peak quarterly GDP at 4.2 diwn to 1.3 in the most recent full quarter. 

No matter what - TrumpO will be the second president in US history never to get a single year GDP above 3.0. He is tied with Obama at 2.9.

Do you have anything to say about the subject of this thread or do you want to compare batting averages of one still playing the gsme and who’s hot streak is over to a retired player who had a better hit streak and started against the toughest pitcher since the Great Depression?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 9, 2019)

*"We are experiencing the longest string of consecutive monthly jobs gains in economic history," see link below. *

That’s Obama’s magnificent record at seven years. TrumpO is at two and s half. 


Toddsterpatriot, post: 22681658


Toddsterpatriot said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > *I wrote: You have no baseline from which to place the ‘weakest’ label on the recovery years *
> ...




From one of your links dumbass:


Since World War II, the American economy has typically grown for about five years and then had a contraction. *This expansion is already over seven years old. *

Furthermore, the average pace of job growth in this recovery *has already topped what happened during the 2001 to 2007 expansion u*nder President George W. Bush (the Bush recovery was the slowest in terms of jobs growth, Achuthan says). 

Over 14 million jobs have been added since the low point from the financial crisis. Job growth is as important -- if not more important -- than overall growth, many economists argue.

*"We are experiencing the longest string of consecutive monthly jobs gains in economic history,"* says Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics.  https://money.cnn.com/2016/10/05/news/economy/us-recovery-slowest-since-wwii/


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 9, 2019)

Frankeneinstein said:


> rightwinger said:
> 
> 
> > Trump promised four or five
> ...



Yes a president’s who fails to keep his campaign promises. The second president who failed to get a single year GDP above Obana’s single year at 2.9 after cutting taxes mostly for the rich promising yearly growth above 4.0. That’s a very IMPORTANT major fail don’t you agree.


----------



## Frankeneinstein (Jul 9, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Frankeneinstein said:
> 
> 
> > rightwinger said:
> ...


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 9, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Old Yeller, post: 22681804.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*You are averaging eight years of Obama starting at and including a negative 2.9 that had nothing to do with Obama or Democratic Party policies. *

Yeah, the Dems have always fought against government policies to expand homeownership. DURR!


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 9, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> *"We are experiencing the longest string of consecutive monthly jobs gains in economic history," see link below. *
> 
> That’s Obama’s magnificent record at seven years. TrumpO is at two and s half.
> 
> ...



_Since World War II, the American economy has typically grown for about five years and then had a contraction. *This expansion is already over seven years old. *_

Yes, the very weak recovery has gone on a long time.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 9, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22682945





Toddsterpatriot said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > *"We are exactly periencing the longest string of consecutive monthly jobs gains in economic history," see link below. *
> ...



According to your link Obama’s recovery was not weakest in terms of jobs growth and of course duration. And we know TrumpO can’t get GDP past Obama’s numbers. 

You are a liar when you say Obama’s recovery was the weakest since WWII. His lasted longer and produced more jobs than all those postwar recoveries.


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 9, 2019)

How is it NOTFOOLEDBYTRUTH insists Obama's GDP is equal Trump's when Obama's average GDP growth was 1.59%, while Trump's average GDP growth is 2.73%? 

How is it NOTFOOLEDBYTRUTH states Trump's GDP was established by Obama, when it was  an unremarable 1.6% for Obama's last year, and Trump's seen 2.2% followed by 2.9%?

How is it NOTFOOLEDBYTRUTH is unable comprehend basic math, logic and economics to understand Trump's unemployment rate cannot be less than zero?

How is it NOTFOOLEDBYTRUTH is unable to respond when asked if he knows how the unemployment rate is calculated?

How is it NOTFOOLEDBYTRUTH is unable to comprehend there's greater room for rapid growth following a recession (aka economic recovery)?

How is it NOTFOOLEDBYTRUTH is unable to respond when asked what Obama did to improve the economy?

How is it NOTFOOLEDBYTRUTH is unable to respond to the fact interest rates were historically low on Obama's watch, which is the primary contributor to an improved economy? Rates that have risen on Trump's watch.

How is it NOTFOOLEDBYTRUTH states Trump's unemployment could only be historically low?

How is it NOTFOOLEDBYTRUTH is unable to acknowledge the Democrats controlled congress when the "Bush Recession" occurred?


----------



## AntonToo (Jul 9, 2019)

WTH_Progs? said:


> How is it NOTFOOLEDBYTRUTH insists Obama's GDP is equal Trump's when Obama's average GDP growth was 1.59%, while Trump's average GDP growth is 2.73%?



The (factual) insistance is that Trump did not yet post better year than Obama. Top number is 2.9% for both. Of course Republicans called one 2.9% "Stagnation!" and the other 2.9% "Boom!"

According to Trump himself in 2016,  great economy is when you have 4-6% growth, so by his own standard he has so far come up quite short.

As far as AVERAGE? Well last I checked Trump inherited a healthy economy while Obama was handed something called the Great Recession. So tell you what, go ahead and count averages right after you can find a way to adjust for that stark difference.


----------



## Remodeling Maidiac (Jul 9, 2019)

Funny thread that in hindsight deserves.....


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 9, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22682945
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*According to your link Obama’s recovery was not weakest in terms of jobs growth and of course duration. And we know TrumpO can’t get GDP past Obama’s numbers. *

If was pretty damn weak, even looking at jobs growth.
If was pretty damn weak, even looking at household income.
It was weak all around.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 9, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22682945
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*You are a liar when you say Obama’s recovery was the weakest since WWII. His lasted longer and produced more jobs than all those postwar recoveries. *

If you get a chance, post your links that show his recovery "produced more jobs than all those postwar recoveries"

Thanks!


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 10, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 2268846





Toddsterpatriot said:


> If was pretty damn weak, even looking at jobs growth.



It was not the weakest recivery from the worst recession since the Great Depression when looking at jobs growth during a recivery since WWII, so you lied about that.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 10, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> If you get a chance, post your links that show his recovery "produced more jobs than all those postwar recoveries"




The trend in job growth is easier to see by focusing on the year-over-year growth at any point, rather than the more volatile monthly figures. Looked at this way, hiring accelerated early in the recovery, peaking in early 2015 at a pace of more than three million jobs per year.   The Jobs Recovery: A Longer View
Show me the post WWII recovery from much milder recessions that produced ttat many jobs per year and lasted as long as it has with consecutive positive yearly jobs growth, 

I meant Obama’s recovery produced more jobs than all those individual post war recoveries..I didnt say combined if you are confused about that.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 10, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 2268846
> 
> 
> 
> ...



How many months did it take to recover all the job losses?
If you have one that took longer, post it.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 10, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > If you get a chance, post your links that show his recovery "produced more jobs than all those postwar recoveries"
> ...



*I meant Obama’s recovery produced more jobs than all those individual post war recoveries.*

I meant post your links that show his recovery "produced more jobs than all those individual post war recoveries."


----------



## Faun (Jul 10, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot, post: 2268846
> ...


Bush's Great Recession lost 8 million jobs to E3, 12 million to E6. If you can find a recession that lost more, post it.


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 10, 2019)

Are you guys arguing that losing more jobs in a recession results in more jobs captured during recovery?  That's crazy talk.

Are you guys arguing that a greater population may result in more jobs lost during recession and more jobs captured during recovery?  That's crazy talk. 

ILMAO at comparing population and economics of today with that of the past. 


Once again, the Democrats had the majority in congress when "Bush's recession" occurred.  The primary reason for recovery was historically low interest rates.  It's not magic.


----------



## Faun (Jul 10, 2019)

WTH_Progs? said:


> Are you guys arguing that losing more jobs in a recession results in more jobs captured during recovery?  That's crazy talk.
> 
> Are you guys arguing that a greater population may result in more jobs lost during recession and more jobs captured during recovery?  That's crazy talk.
> 
> ...


What difference does it make which party was in control when the dam burst?


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 10, 2019)

Faun said:


> WTH_Progs? said:
> 
> 
> > Are you guys arguing that losing more jobs in a recession results in more jobs captured during recovery?  That's crazy talk.
> ...



Gosh I don't know.  I keep hearing this was Bush's recession.  As if congress, who takes a great share of responsibility are unaccountable.  Let's be honest, people are short-sighted morons, especially progs.


----------



## Faun (Jul 10, 2019)

WTH_Progs? said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > WTH_Progs? said:
> ...


_*"Gosh I don't know."*_

Then why make a point of it?


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 10, 2019)

Faun said:


> WTH_Progs? said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Oh shit Faun, nice comeback.  You really showed me.


----------



## Faun (Jul 10, 2019)

WTH_Progs? said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > WTH_Progs? said:
> ...


No answer? Figures.


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 10, 2019)

Faun said:


> WTH_Progs? said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



You're a coward and intellectually dishonest.  You only addressed sarcasm and ran away from the point.


----------



## Faun (Jul 10, 2019)

WTH_Progs? said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > WTH_Progs? said:
> ...


LOLOL 

So that was sarcasm??


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 10, 2019)

Meister, post: 22664115, member: 17949





Meister said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > protectionist said:
> ...



Are you going to post lil DonnyJ's 1.4 Q2 just in: 


*Latest forecast: 1.4 percent — July 10, 2019 *The GDPNow model estimate for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the second quarter of 2019 is *1.4 percent* on July 10, up from 1.3 percent on July 3. The nowcast of second-quarter real GDP growth increased 0.1 percentage points on July 5 after the release of the employment report by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 10, 2019)

bripat9643, post: 22663604





bripat9643 said:


> In reality, having good economic numbers is not an advantage for a president because making further improvements is that much more difficult the better they are.



So that is TrumpO’s brilliant strategy to tank the economy right now so he can take credit for the huge improvements he’s going to make right before the election next year. 


*Latest forecast: 1.4 percent — July 10, 2019.   *The GDPNow model estimate for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the second quarter of 2019 is *1.4 percent* on July 10, up from 1.3 percent on July 3. The nowcast of second-quarter real GDP growth increased 0.1 percentage points on July 5 after the release of the employment report by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 10, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> bripat9643, post: 22663604
> 
> 
> 
> ...



He was referencing common sense, math, logic and economics.  I'm sure he didn't intend on confusing you, and I doubt he expected your nonsense.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jul 10, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> bripat9643, post: 22663604
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I meant it's not and advantage to have good economic numbers at the beginning of his term, shit for brains.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 10, 2019)

WTH_Progs?, post: 22695240, member 





WTH_Progs? said:


> He was referencing common sense, math, logic and economics..



Does that mean you agree with the common sense, math, logic and economics reality that TrumpO inherited good economic conditions from President Obama?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 11, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> meant it's not and advantage to have good economic numbers at the beginning of his term, shit for brains.



The beginning of TrumpO’s term had Obama’s good economic numbers. The first major economic legislation was not signed by TrumpO until December 2017. Then in TrumpO’s first full year the GDP was 2.9% and that’s been it. 

 2019 is looking to come in at 2 to 2.5.

I just don’t accept TrumpO’s braggadocio that he created the greatest economy in US history as I watch all the real shits for brains believe the asswipe President they worship. .


----------



## Socratica (Jul 11, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > meant it's not and advantage to have good economic numbers at the beginning of his term, shit for brains.
> ...



Whoever is in office gets the credit for the economy.


----------



## gtopa1 (Jul 11, 2019)

Q2, Q2 What for art thou Q2???????

Greg


----------



## Socratica (Jul 11, 2019)

gtopa1 said:


> Q2, Q2 What for art thou Q2???????
> 
> Greg



What about Q2? GDP is calculated quarterly at an annualized rate...


----------



## gtopa1 (Jul 11, 2019)

Socratica said:


> gtopa1 said:
> 
> 
> > Q2, Q2 What for art thou Q2???????
> ...



What NOT about it?

Greg


----------



## Socratica (Jul 11, 2019)

gtopa1 said:


> Socratica said:
> 
> 
> > gtopa1 said:
> ...



You asked a question about Q2? I'm asking you what about Q2 is so important. I also mentioned  (for your reference) how quarterly GDP was calculated, justed to avoid confusion.


----------



## gtopa1 (Jul 11, 2019)

Socratica said:


> gtopa1 said:
> 
> 
> > Socratica said:
> ...



Why would I be confused? And why do you think it would be important?

Greg

Greg


----------



## Socratica (Jul 11, 2019)

gtopa1 said:


> Socratica said:
> 
> 
> > gtopa1 said:
> ...



I don't know. I'm asking you.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 11, 2019)

gtopa1 said:


> Q2, Q2 What for art thou Q2???????
> 
> Greg



It is not published till 26 July (if I am not mistaken).


----------



## Ropey (Jul 11, 2019)




----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 11, 2019)

Socratica, post: 22695739.  





Socratica said:


> Whoever is in office gets the credit for the economy.



True, but those who look upon the world realistically fully understand that there is a generous period time, not fixed or set in stone, right after an inauguration that the economic conditions carry over from the preceding president to the next.

If you believe that the economy responds and changes momentum from good to bad or from bad to good based on Inauguration Day Activities then you are quite the fool.

If you believe that the economy responds in varying degrees to legislative policy when enacted then you wouid get what I am sayingZ

I don’t believe in the cult of personality ideas that Trump winning the election in 2016 is what turned a horrid seven years of economy into the greatest economy in US history mainly because the economic data defies all insane  notions that ttat couid be true.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 11, 2019)

“The Atlanta Fed GDPNow model also mimics the methods used by the BEA to estimate real GDP growth. The GDPNow forecast is constructed by aggregating statistical model forecasts of 13 subcomponents that comprise GDP. L”





Golfing Gator said:


> gtopa1 said:
> 
> 
> > Q2, Q2 What for art thou Q2???????
> ...



Do you truly believe the BEA waits until the 25th of July before crunching the past 100 days of data that goes into making that chart?

Or


The growth rate of real gross domestic product (GDP) measured by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) is a key metric of the pace of economic activity. It is one of the four variables included in the economic projections of Federal Reserve Board members and Bank presidents for every other Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting. As with many economic statistics, GDP estimates are released with a lag whose timing can be important for policymakers. For example, of the four scheduled 2014 release dates of an “advance” (or first) estimate of GDP growth, two are on the second day of a scheduled FOMC meeting with the other two on the day after the meeting. In preparation for FOMC meetings, policymakers have the Fed Board staff projection of this “advance” estimate at their disposal. These projections—available through 2008 at the Philadelphia Fed’s Real Time Data Center—have generally been more accurate than forecasts from simple statistical models. As stated by economists Jon Faust and Jonathan H. Wright in a 2009 paper, “by mirroring key elements of the data construction machinery of the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the Fed staff forms a relatively precise estimate of what BEA will announce for the previous quarter’s GDP even before it is announced.”

The Atlanta Fed GDPNow model also mimics the methods used by the BEA to estimate real GDP growth. The GDPNow forecast is constructed by aggregating statistical model forecasts of 13 subcomponents that comprise GDP. Other private forecasters use similar approaches to “nowcast” GDP growth. However, these forecasts are not updated more than once a month or quarter, are not publicly available, or do not have forecasts of the subcomponents of GDP that add “color” to the top-line number. The Atlanta Fed GDPNow model fills these three voids.

The BEA’s advance estimates of the subcomponents of GDP use publicly released data from the U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, and other sources. Much of this data is displayed in the BEA’s Key Source Data and Assumptions table that accompanies the “advance” GDP estimate. GDPNow relates these source data to their corresponding GDP subcomponents using a “bridge equation” approach similar to the one described in a Minneapolis Fed study by Preston J. Miller and Daniel M. Chin. Whenever the monthly source data is not available, the missing values are forecasted using econometric techniques similar to those described in papers by James H. Stock and Mark W. Watson and Domenico Giannone, Lucrezia Reichlin, and David Small. A detailed description of the data sources and methods used in the GDPNow model is provided in an accompanying Atlanta Fed working paper.

As more monthly source data becomes available, the GDPNow forecast for a particular quarter evolves and generally becomes more accurate. That said, the forecasting error can still be substantial just prior to the “advance” GDP estimate release. It is important to emphasize that the Atlanta Fed GDPNow forecast is a model projection not subject to judgmental adjustments. It is not an official forecast of the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta, its president, the Federal Reserve System, or the FOMC.

©2017 Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. All rights reserved. Permission is granted to reproduce for personal and educational use only.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 11, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> “The Atlanta Fed GDPNow model also mimics the methods used by the BEA to estimate real GDP growth. The GDPNow forecast is constructed by aggregating statistical model forecasts of 13 subcomponents that comprise GDP. L”
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I believe that the data comes from multiple disparate sources and that the BEA gathers them and provides the report in a timely enough manner.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com


----------



## Faun (Jul 11, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> “The Atlanta Fed GDPNow model also mimics the methods used by the BEA to estimate real GDP growth. The GDPNow forecast is constructed by aggregating statistical model forecasts of 13 subcomponents that comprise GDP. L”
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Forecasts are typically wildly off.


----------



## Socratica (Jul 11, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Socratica, post: 22695739.
> 
> True, but those who look upon the world realistically fully understand that there is a generous period time, not fixed or set in stone, right after an inauguration that the economic conditions carry over from the preceding president to the next.
> 
> If you believe that the economy responds and changes momentum from good to bad or from bad to good based on Inauguration Day Activities then you are quite the fool.



Economic policy operates with outside and inside lag times, so whether this premise is true or not is irrelevant. If the economy is performing better in relative terms compared to last year, the people in charge will get the credit.



> If you believe that the economy responds in varying degrees to legislative policy when enacted then you wouid get what I am sayingZ
> 
> I don’t believe in the cult of personality ideas that Trump winning the election in 2016 is what turned a horrid seven years of economy into the greatest economy in US history mainly because the economic data defies all insane  notions that ttat couid be true.



Economic activity, relative to previous years, appears to be performing noticeably better. That's not debatable


----------



## bripat9643 (Jul 11, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > meant it's not and advantage to have good economic numbers at the beginning of his term, shit for brains.
> ...


Repealing government regulations has a big effect on the economy, and he started doing that the day after his inauguration.

Nobody cares what you accept.


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 11, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> WTH_Progs?, post: 22695240, member
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Why wouldn't I?  Someone said it best using the analogy of a baseball team.  Obama took over a losing baseball team high on talent.  He brought them to nearly a playoff team, Trump took over and they won the championship.

I also know enough about common sense, math, logic and economics to say "good economics from Obama" is a misnomer. Obama did little to improve the economy.  In fact the bottom occurred on his watch.  He didn't bring confidence, which is one reason recovery was slow. 

Don't look now, but I suspect some recession soon.  We need one on occasion, so long as the reasons for aren't critical, such as 9-11 and the housing CRASH!


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 11, 2019)

WTH_Progs? said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > WTH_Progs?, post: 22695240, member
> ...



*Obama did little to improve the economy. *

Correct. Many of his actions were damaging to the economy.


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 11, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> WTH_Progs? said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



More than that his POTUS was damaging to our society.  Identity politics was built on his watch.  He and progs built the snowflake.  They taught us to question everything from country, to patriotism to gender.  They taught people how to defend themselves by flashing race and gender cards. They taught us justice and ethics vary based on party affiliation, and so far not a one was held accountable.


----------



## Faun (Jul 11, 2019)

WTH_Progs? said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > WTH_Progs?, post: 22695240, member
> ...


*"Obama took over a losing baseball team high on talent. He brought them to nearly a playoff team, Trump took over and they won the championship."*

Which is why about half of those polled, don't credit trump with the economy. You can't make the championship game unless you make the playoffs.


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 11, 2019)

Faun said:


> WTH_Progs? said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



ILMAO @ "half those polled".


----------



## Faun (Jul 11, 2019)

WTH_Progs? said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > WTH_Progs? said:
> ...


What a pity you have no actual rebuttal.


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 11, 2019)

Faun said:


> WTH_Progs? said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Ha ha, fucking progs, I just don't get it.  Polls aint worth a fuck to begin with.  Combine that with approx. half those polled are conservatives or Demonicrats, go figure 50% of the dumb-shits polled thank O'bummer for Trump's achievements.

That and consider progs are most vocal, as they project and entertain a victim role.  They're also bent over by media.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 12, 2019)

Golfing Gator, post: 22696041 





Golfing Gator said:


> I believe that the data comes from multiple disparate sources and that the BEA gathers them and provides the report in a timely enough manner.



Of course it does. And the NOWCAST  I posted does exactly the same to produce timely and early forecasts.

The forecast at rhe end of Q2 is now at 1.4. I have not declared it to be the official final number nor do they.

But because it is at 1.4 and will become official thereabouts, I can say with great confidence that TrumpO will be the second president in US history never to have a single year GDP hugher than 3.0. He is tied with Obama’s highest single year at 2.9.

All things considered on the economy when comparing TrumoO’s two years to Obama's final seven years there is no significant difference between the two president’s policy  effect on the economy.

If the current NOWCAST was sitting at 4.0 or hugher for Q2 2019 I couid not be confident saying TrumpO will not finish his first term with a single year GDP above 3.0 and thus keeping his word and doing better than Obama.
 .
On top of that, I am absolutely positive that TrumpO will never see a single year at 4.O or higher. So if you are scoring presidents for hype and bullshit claims of fake greatness TrumpO is the winner of that.

You criticize forecasts based on science and real economic data but say nothing about the idiot goon in the White House making crazy forecasts about his greatness to be. Not even close to being greater than Obama on the economy and therefore nothing else. 

Obama never disgraced the Presidency with such shameful,  irresponsible self glory and hyie. 

So on the style and character score we must rate Obama on that aspect for the economy much higher than TrumpO although the growth numbers are virtually the same so far.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 12, 2019)

Progs?, post: 22698930 





WTH_Progs? said:


> Obama took over a losing baseball team high on talent. He brought them to nearly a playoff team, Trump took over and they won the championship.



Because a single year GDP higher than 3.0 is the championship level according to the game rules that TrumpO himself set we know for a FACT that TRUMPO has not made the playoffs (tied with Obama at 2.9) and never will.

We know from the latest Q2 forecast at 1.4 it means the TrumpO team is not playing well at all right now. 

If you think TrumpO has won a championship already that’s proof enough for me that you are an idiot.

If you think TrumpO is on his way to a championship you are a fool.


*Latest forecast: 1.4 percent — July 10, 2019. *The GDPNow model estimate for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the second quarter of 2019 is *1.4 percent* on July 10, up from 1.3 percent on July 3.
And now the FED will need to bail out TrumpO’s 1.4 GDP economy to keep it from getting worse.

And you think this is championship material,

What a dumbass.


----------



## MarathonMike (Jul 12, 2019)

Not sure where 'fooled' is getting his numbers. Seems gloomier than any source I check. Here is a recent estimate of GDP growth for the last few years that seems to be more in line with consensus.
Gross Domestic Product, First Quarter 2019 (Third Estimate); Corporate Profits, First Quarter 2019 (Revised Estimate) | U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 12, 2019)

MarathonMike, post: 22701865





MarathonMike said:


> Not sure where 'fooled' is getting his numbers. Seems gloomier than any source I check. Here is a recent estimate of GDP growth for the last few years that seems to be more in line with consensus.
> Gross Domestic Product, First Quarter 2019 (Third Estimate); Corporate Profits, First Quarter 2019 (Revised Estimate) | U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)



Yes it  has come in officially at 3.1 for quarter one. That’s right.

The GDPNow model was off by 0.7 for Q1 seventeen days after the end of Q1. They were at 2.4% and I believe moved up to 2.7%. Final score was 3.1 for Q1.


Fed: GDPNow estimate for Q1-2019 rises to 2.4% - FXStreet "The GDPNow model estimate for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted ... Atlanta Fed: GDPNow estimate for Q1-2019 rises to 2.4 %. NEWS | Apr 17, 15:28 GMT | By Eren ...
TrumpO’s GDP is currently well below 2.0% for Q2 therefore making it virtually impossible for the goon to see 2019 finish up with a GDP above 3.0. Remember the goon was promising 4.0 growth due to his tax cuts not that long ago. That’ll never happen in TrumpO’s watch.


----------



## Faun (Jul 12, 2019)

WTH_Progs? said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > WTH_Progs? said:
> ...


LOLOL

Wut?? You don't believe in polls? Yet here you are, boasting about one...



WTH_Progs? said:


> *POLL UPDATE:*
> 
> Trump is winning with 76% of the total polled.  That's the thing with Trump, he always seems to be a step ahead in the game, and at times he doesn't even have to try.
> 
> Next closest is Gabbard, with 16% of the total polled.



Thanks for giving up so easy by demonstrating your only answer to polls you don't like is to feign apathy about them.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 12, 2019)

bripat9643, post: 22696982 





bripat9643 said:


> Repealing government regulations has a big effect on the economy, and he started doing that the day after his inauguration.



Name a big one that would have had an immediate effect on the economy.


----------



## TRFjr (Jul 12, 2019)

funny how Obamas less then 2% is a great economy but Trumps 2% plus isnt
Obama had next to 0% feds interest Trump has had interest rate increases every quarter 
explain that liberals


----------



## TRFjr (Jul 12, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Here’s the record thru 2018:
> View attachment 254781
> 
> U.S. - GDP growth by year 1990-2017 | Statista
> ...



*what utter bull crap you have to take Obama best year out of 8 and compare it to two years of Trump 
and will remind you Obama had next to 0% fed interest rates 0.25% to be exact  and only could get to 2.9%
 Trump got to 2.9 with 2.5% interest ten times higher then Obama *


----------



## TRFjr (Jul 12, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Golfing Gator, post: 22696041
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Trump was able to reach 2.9% with a 2.5 interest rate ten times higher then  when Obama reached his 2.9%


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 12, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> bripat9643, post: 22696982
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Don't ask questions you don't want answered.  Two Huge Effects Of Trump's Economic Policies: Jobs Surge In Both Manufacturing And Low Tax States


Faun said:


> WTH_Progs? said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...




Prog-projection using wrong terms. You might look up "boasting".   And you lack critical application. That quote comes from a poll I prepared.  I rubbed in the results with an "update".  Some might call it trolling.  Nice try though, you just came up short is all.  Compare and contrast that poll to "controlled" polling influenced by agenda driven questions and targeted areas.  That and your point would fail to prove I take stock in polling.

*http://www.usmessageboard.com/threads/who-is-winning-the-debates-so-far.763834/page-7#post-22617849*


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 12, 2019)

WTH_Progs? said:


> Don't ask questions you don't want answered. Two Huge Effects Of Trump's Economic Policies: Jobs Surge In Both Manufacturing And Low Tax States



Why not? You didn’t answer the question. You were supposed to tell me about a major deregulation that wouid have provided an immediate effect on the economy. 
Instead you cite someone spreading the bullshit propaganda about the cult of TrumpO's personality having the immediate effect.

Further, the boom in manufacturing job growth *started immediately after Trump was elected, *showing the effect that the anticipation of regulatory relief had on hiring and investment decisions. 
It started in November 2016 per your link. 

You are a gullible fool when you swallow right wing propaganda such as that perfect example. 

Try again.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 12, 2019)

TRFjr said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator, post: 22696041
> ...


In a true booming economy a tiny rate of 2.5 should not make a bit of difference.  Even 2.5 is historically low


----------



## bripat9643 (Jul 12, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> bripat9643, post: 22696982
> 
> 
> 
> ...


New Cafe standards.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 12, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643, post: 22696982
> ...



Exactly. If you didn't already know Obama was a twat....54.5 MPG CAFE standards was your proof.


----------



## TRFjr (Jul 12, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> TRFjr said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...


so why couldn't Obama have a booming economy with 0.25 rate
all you doing with your bashing of Trumps economy is you bashing Obama worse


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 12, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> WTH_Progs? said:
> 
> 
> > Don't ask questions you don't want answered. Two Huge Effects Of Trump's Economic Policies: Jobs Surge In Both Manufacturing And Low Tax States
> ...



Yeah try again, the link doesn't show 2016.  You lying dude?

Here's another link for you.  Trump deregulations quickly boost confidence and hiring in manufacturing sector


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 13, 2019)

bripat9643, post: 22706555 





bripat9643 said:


> New Cafe standards



Did TrumpO pass that immediately after inauguration?


----------



## Mac1958 (Jul 13, 2019)

WTH_Progs? said:


> Ha ha, fucking progs, I just don't get it.  Polls aint worth a fuck to begin with.  Combine that with approx. half those polled are conservatives or Demonicrats, go figure 50% of the dumb-shits polled thank O'bummer for Trump's achievements.
> That and consider progs are most vocal, as they project and entertain a victim role.  They're also bent over by media.


Polls aren't perfect, but they're fairly accurate.  For example, they predicted a slim winning margin for Hillary in 2016, and that's what happened.

Talk radio isn't honest. It presents a distorted, terribly biased view of reality, creating its own little world of people who swallow what it's selling.
.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 13, 2019)

WTH_Progs?, post: 22707978 





WTH_Progs? said:


> Yeah try again, the link doesn't show 2016. You lying dude?



Why are you lying? TrumpO was elected in 2016 and that is when your propagandIst admits the surge in manufacturing jobs started.

You can’t be so stupid to not get that referring  to an event that took place in.2016 means the numbers 2 0 1 6 need not be typed in as well.

That is too stupid even for you. So guilty of lying you are today.

When I say you are lying today -  your brain automatically associates the word “today” with the current year. I don’t have to type in the numbers for normal readers’ brains to comprehend the year something happened..


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 13, 2019)

TRFjr, post: 22706103 





TRFjr said:


> what utter bull crap you have to take Obama best year out of 8 and compare it to two years of Trump



You are a complete moron. Comparing best year to best year is based on TrumpO insisting we compare best single year to best single year.

"Obama is the first president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth," Trump said during an Oct. 28 campaign rally in Manchester, N.H.  Trump's claim about Obama's weak economic growth is limited[/QUOTE]
So I did. 

But you are a complete and utter moron beyond that. Obama set the pace for us to be living through the longest economic recovery and expansion in US history m

But every expansion has its share of downs. 

So since TrumpO cut taxes in December 2017  to stimulate a high employment economy he got his GDP surge to hit in 2018 and came in at 2.9. 

So you need to try to understand that comparing the single best of all seven recovery years under Obama to only TrumpO’s highly ‘stimulated year in 2018 is an advantage for TrumpO because his economic downturn has begun. 


*Latest forecast: 1.4 percent — July 10, 2019 *The GDPNow model estimate for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the second quarter of 2019 is *1.4 percent* on July 10, up from 1.3 percent on July 3. 

And one outlook for the rest of the year is not pointing to TrumpO’s promises of 4.0% GDP and higher becoming reality any time soon. 


After achieving 2.9 percent growth in 2018 — tied with 2015 for the strongest year of growth of the current business cycle — the U.S. economy expanded at a healthy 3.1% pace in the first quarter, exceeding expectations. However, trade frictions are undoubtedly contributing to the softness in the U.S. manufacturing sector, which continued to struggle in Q2 and does not appear to be on the verge of a rebound.            Though domestic oil production has been a key bright spot for the U.S. economy and the increasingly dovish Federal Reserve has helped buoy financial markets, there are several risk factors that merit close attention for the rest of the year. Risks include the efficacy of China’s efforts to stimulate its economy, the divergence between small- and big-business optimism, and the potential for a protracted slowdown in consumer spending later this year.  2019 U.S. Economic Outlook Q3 Update Forecasts 3.9% Expansion in Equipment and Software Investment and 2.5% GDP Growth

Have I cleared that up for you.


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 13, 2019)

TRFjr said:


> so why couldn't Obama have a booming economy with 0.25 rate
> all you doing with your bashing of Trumps economy is you bashing Obama worse



Because Obama was terrible, second worst POTUS ever, in my opinion.   You are just one more mindless Trump minion that assumes because I do not worship Trump that I must love Obama.   This will likely be a shock to your system, but there are those of us who do not like either one.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 13, 2019)

easyt65, post: 22164622, 





easyt65 said:


> Trump has accomplished economic and employment successes not seen in decades and accomplished more in 2 years than Obama did in 8...



There are two parts to your opinion.

#1 economic successes

#2 employment successes

Single year GDP growth is in my opinion the very best measure of (#1 economic success) and it was the measurement TrumpO himself used to define Obama’s economy as weak.

"Obama is the first president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth," Trump said during an Oct. 28 campaign rally in Manchester, N.H. Trump's claim about Obama's weak economic growth is limited
So when you say Trump has accomplished economic successes not seen in decades, just exactly what in the hell are you blabbing about - calling people snowflakes and shit. 

TumpO’s 2.9% single year high (TrumpO’s measure not mine) in 2018 is tied with Obama’s in 2015. 

After achieving 2.9 percent growth in 2018 — tied with 2015 for the strongest year of growth of the current business cycle.2019 U.S. Economic Outlook Q3 Update Forecasts 3.9% Expansion in Equipment and Software Investment and 2.5% GDP Growth
So your opinion regarding (#1 economic success) that TrumpO “accomplished more in 2 years than Obama did in 8” is not tied to objective facts or reality. It is your weak and feeble minded subjugation to TtumpO’s ceaseless style of self glorifying propaganda. 

Obama slaughters TrumpO on (#2 employment successes) by reducing unemployment from 10 to under 5 giving TrumpO a much larger workforce to deal with at the start of his first term. That’s not even a contest just so you know. TrumpO continued well but that’s it. Your hype is unfounded.


----------



## TRFjr (Jul 13, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> TRFjr, post: 22706103
> 
> 
> 
> ...


So I did.

But you are a complete and utter moron beyond that. Obama set the pace for us to be living through the longest economic recovery and expansion in US history m

But every expansion has its share of downs.

So since TrumpO cut taxes in December 2017  to stimulate a high employment economy he got his GDP surge to hit in 2018 and came in at 2.9.

So you need to try to understand that comparing the single best of all seven recovery years under Obama to only TrumpO’s highly ‘stimulated year in 2018 is an advantage for TrumpO because his economic downturn has begun.


*Latest forecast: 1.4 percent — July 10, 2019 *The GDPNow model estimate for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the second quarter of 2019 is *1.4 percent* on July 10, up from 1.3 percent on July 3.

And one outlook for the rest of the year is not pointing to TrumpO’s promises of 4.0% GDP and higher becoming reality any time soon.


After achieving 2.9 percent growth in 2018 — tied with 2015 for the strongest year of growth of the current business cycle — the U.S. economy expanded at a healthy 3.1% pace in the first quarter, exceeding expectations. However, trade frictions are undoubtedly contributing to the softness in the U.S. manufacturing sector, which continued to struggle in Q2 and does not appear to be on the verge of a rebound.            Though domestic oil production has been a key bright spot for the U.S. economy and the increasingly dovish Federal Reserve has helped buoy financial markets, there are several risk factors that merit close attention for the rest of the year. Risks include the efficacy of China’s efforts to stimulate its economy, the divergence between small- and big-business optimism, and the potential for a protracted slowdown in consumer spending later this year.  2019 U.S. Economic Outlook Q3 Update Forecasts 3.9% Expansion in Equipment and Software Investment and 2.5% GDP Growth

Have I cleared that up for you.[/QUOTE]
*Obama had next to 0 fed interest rate highest it was under Obama was 0.5 never reached a full number and the best he could do with that unprecedented low interest rates was 2.9 GDP 
Trump was able to tie that after two years with an interest rate increased ten times higher then Obama had *





*Obamas economic growth was the worst by any president in 70 years *

*Yes, this is the slowest U.S. recovery since WWII *





Yes, this is the slowest U.S. recovery since WWII

*Even CNN had to admit that fact *


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 13, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> TRFjr said:
> 
> 
> > so why couldn't Obama have a booming economy with 0.25 rate
> ...




Then on the other hand there’s me being of the opinion that both TrumpO and Obama are equals on an economy which is the longest expansion, since the start in JULY 2009, in US HIstory. 

I commend both President’s on the economy and hope this 2.5% GDP growth spree goes on and on and on, 

I hope the TrumpOroids will begin to see the truth based on hard economic data instead of emotional tribal hysteria and give up this wholly bogus fake reality that TrumpO is the greatest and Obama was the weakest. That’s bullshit and nothing else.,


----------



## TRFjr (Jul 13, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > TRFjr said:
> ...


*what you refuse to do is put any of that in context *

*Obama highest GDP was 2.9 after 8 years with an interest rate less then 1 the whole time *

*Trump best after two years was 2.9 yes tied with Obama but he did so in two years with an interest rate of 2.5 ten times higher *

*what your doing is the equivalent of comparing best  marathon times which one runner (Obama) ran down hill for 8 races and took his best time and compared it to a runner (Trump) that was forced to run up hill for two races compared the two then make the false dishonest claim they are equal runners *

*you can try to cherry pick Obama numbers all the hell you want but it will never change the bottom line that Obama had the worst economic growth by any president in over 70 years and third from the bottom in history *


----------



## Golfing Gator (Jul 13, 2019)

TRFjr said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator said:
> ...



And Trump has been only marginally better, and this year will be worse than last...yet the only thing you can do is compare him to Obama...what does that say about your god in the White House?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 13, 2019)

TRFjr said:


> 2.9 GDP
> Trump was able to tie that after two years with an interest rate increased ten times higher then Obama had



Keep going on about the rate. But TrumpO was seven years removed from the Great Bush Recession and a couple years removed from severe unemployment when taking office.

More Americans getting paychecks contributes to high GDP.

And TrumpO had to know where the rate was going and needs to go in good economic times when his administration set this goal.


"To get the economy back on track, President Trump has outlined a bold plan to create 25 million new American jobs in the next decade and return to 4 percent annual economic growth," reads the White House site.                       The 4% GDP promise is one that Trump has made before, but now it is the official promise of the White House and the president.       Trump is officially making an economic promise that will be nearly impossible to keep

His bold plan including the deficit increasing tax cuts are not working and the TrumpO cultists are now blaming the Fed.

You are whining about Obama having a good rate without relating it to the size of the workforce and under consideration of other growth inhibiting factors such as Europe stuck in recession during much of Obama’s term,

So whine about the Fed all you want.  The fact TRUMPO says 2.9 is weak and that’s all he could do with the very decent hand he drew is the reality you need to acknowledge or rensin duped.


----------



## TRFjr (Jul 13, 2019)

Golfing Gator said:


> TRFjr said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...


better with an interest rate of 2.5% compared to Obama 0.25 Trump had ten times the interest rate as Obama 
thats equivalent as comparing runners times which one runner ran down hill and the other had to run up hill its just dishonest bull crap but I wouldnt expect anything different from an Obama worshiping Trump deranged liberal


----------



## TRFjr (Jul 13, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> TRFjr said:
> 
> 
> > 2.9 GDP
> ...


*and I will say again you can cherry pick Obamas numbers all the hell you want but it will never change the fact that Obama had the worst economic growth by any president in over 70 years and third from the bottom in all of our history those are the facts *

*and I will continue to repeat those facts and rub your nose in it *


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 13, 2019)

TRFjr said:


> and I will say again you can cherry pick Obamas numbers



You owe me an explanation as to what numbers you think are cherry picked.  

2.9% GDP 2015 is the exactly rather same as 2. M9% GDP in 2018. 

Why do you think one is higher than the other.


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 13, 2019)

ILMAO @ picking Obama's best years to compare with Trump.  Especially when Obama had more room for growth under lower interest rates.


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 13, 2019)

Mac1958 said:


> WTH_Progs? said:
> 
> 
> > Ha ha, fucking progs, I just don't get it.  Polls aint worth a fuck to begin with.  Combine that with approx. half those polled are conservatives or Demonicrats, go figure 50% of the dumb-shits polled thank O'bummer for Trump's achievements.
> ...



Congratulations on Hillary Clinton's win.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 13, 2019)

TRFjr said:


> better with an interest rate of 2.5% compared to Obama 0.25 Trump had ten times the interest rate as Obama



If you must select a variable to make excuses for TrumpO’s inability to do better than Obama on single year GDP and the failure of his tax cuts to produce GDP above 2.9 then you have to look at all of the including the ones that suppressed GDP when Obama. You have to look at all of them. 

Why don’t you. 

TrumpO had a much larger workforce for example, more Americans with the ability to purchase stuff.


----------



## Mac1958 (Jul 13, 2019)

WTH_Progs? said:


> Mac1958 said:
> 
> 
> > WTH_Progs? said:
> ...


Just pointing out facts.  Not fake news.
.


----------



## Faun (Jul 13, 2019)

TRFjr said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Here’s the record thru 2018:
> ...


The same is true about you. You want to lower Obama's numbers by saddling him with the negative GDP he was handed by his predecessor. And 2.5% interest is still very low.


----------



## Faun (Jul 13, 2019)

TRFjr said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Golfing Gator, post: 22696041
> ...


That's not true. The rate wasn't raised to 2.5% until December 19th, 2018, with less than 2 weeks left in the year. 2018 opened with the federal fund rate at 1.5%. So it's false to claim Trump reached 2.9% with a rate 10 times higher than Obama did. Who knows from where you get that crazy information? 

Oh, and trump cut taxes and could do no better than Obama did in 2015 with higher taxes.


----------



## Faun (Jul 13, 2019)

WTH_Progs? said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > bripat9643, post: 22696982
> ...


LOL 

Actually, your poll, with a MoE of about 99, is far less accurate than the poll you were bashing. Still, you prove you only like polls when they produce the numbers you like.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 13, 2019)

TRFjr, post: 22708786, member: 45733"] 





TRFjr said:


> Obamas economic growth was the worst by any president in 70 years



Sure when you put one year of Bush’s mess on On Obama’s scorecard. 

And why in the hell are you comparing Obama to those that preceded him? 

We are talking about the FACT that TrumpO is the second president in US history not to have a single year of GDP growth above 3.0 %.

TrumpO says that failure is a weak economy.

I disagree with that but if a 2.9 high point is weak then TrumpO’s 2.9 is weak too.

Why not admit the two president based upon economic growth are essentially identical and that both have been presiding over a very decent economy for an entire decade?

Why can’t you suppress your hatred for Obama and admit that 2.9 equals 2.9?

Because 2.9 equals 2.9. It really does.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 13, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> TRFjr, post: 22708786, member: 45733"]
> 
> 
> 
> ...


*And why in the hell are you comparing Obama to those that preceded him? *

Because he did worse than those that preceded him.

*Why not admit the two president based upon economic growth are essentially identical*

Because Obama's sub 2.0% performance is not identical to Trump's performance.


----------



## Faun (Jul 13, 2019)

TRFjr said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > TRFjr said:
> ...


*"Obamas economic growth was the worst by any president in 70 years"*

Real GDP growth since Clinton left office has been 2.3%. Real GDP growth from when Bush's Great Recession ended until Obama left office is right in line with that at 2.3%


----------



## TRFjr (Jul 13, 2019)

Faun said:


> TRFjr said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...


*Obama Wins The Gold For Worst Economic Recovery Ever*

If mismanaging an economic recovery were an Olympic event, President Obama would be standing on the middle platform right now, accepting the gold medal.

Deep recessions are supposed to be followed by strong recoveries, but, under Obama, the worst recession since the 1930s has been followed by the slowest economic recovery in the history of the republic.  In a very real sense, there has been no recovery at all—things are still getting worse.


*Report: Worst economic recovery since 1930s, salaries fall $17,000 short*

The sputtering economic recovering under President Obama, the last to follow a major recession, has fallen way short of the average recovery and ranks as the worst since the 1930s Great Depression, according to a new report.


Had the recovery under Obama been the average of the 11 since the Depression, according to the report, family incomes would be $17,000 higher, six million fewer Americans would be in poverty, and there would be six million more jobs.

*you keep spewing your crap I will keep correcting you and rubbing your nose in it *


----------



## Faun (Jul 13, 2019)

TRFjr said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > TRFjr said:
> ...


*"Deep recessions are supposed to be followed by strong recoveries"*

That's utter nonsense. All recessions are different and the causes of recessions are often different. Bush's Great Recession was one of the worst ever.

And again, real GDP growth was the same (2.3%) between the end of the recession to the end of Obama's presidency as it has been from Q4-2000 through now.


----------



## bripat9643 (Jul 13, 2019)

Faun said:


> TRFjr said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


----------



## Faun (Jul 13, 2019)

bripat9643 said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > TRFjr said:
> ...


Cute chart, ya fucking moron, but looking at actual BLS figures reveals the rate of job growth during the 80's is about the same as job growth during the 90's and is about the same as the 10's...





And while Reagan's recession lost _only_ 3 million jobs (3.3%), Bush's recession lost almost 9 million (6.3%) plus another 4 million.based on U-6 statistics


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 13, 2019)

TRFjr said:


> you keep spewing your crap I will keep correcting you and rubbing your nose in it



You have corrected nothing. I am comparing TrumpO’s 2.9 to Obama’s 2.9 and citing TrumpO’s exact words that Obama was the first president never to have a single year GDP above 3.0.   

What have you corrected me on?

You need to quit lying like that

My point has absolutely nothing to do with the GDP history prior to Obama.

Yet you go on and on about that.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 13, 2019)

I asked:


Toddsterpatriot, post: 22711442 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Because he did worse than those that preceded him.



That


TRFjr said:


> *and I will say again you can cherry pick Obamas numbers all the hell you want but it will never change the fact that Obama had the worst economic growth by any president in over 70 years and third from the bottom in all of our history those are the facts *
> 
> *and I will continue to repeat those facts and rub your nose in it*



You freakin lying idiot. I accept as fact that Obama had the lowest economic growth by any president since WWII.

I also accept the fact that TrumpO has matching economic growth to Obama’s.

So quit lying that you are in possession of the facts.
*
*


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 13, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> I asked:
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22711442
> ...



*I accept as fact that Obama had the lowest economic growth by any president since WWII.*

Excellent! So you'll stop whining like a little bitch when I say Obama had the weakest recovery since WWII?

*I also accept the fact that TrumpO has matching economic growth to Obama’s.*

You were doing so well, then you lied again.....so sad.

Obozo's GDP......weak.....Trumps GDP.....stronger than Obozo's.


----------



## TRFjr (Jul 14, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> I asked:
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22711442
> ...


*Your wrong because you wont make an honest comparison what your doing is just dishonest bull shit 
the honest comparison is average GDP growth of one compared to the average GDP growth of the other*

*Trumps so far average GDP growth is 2.7% so far  compared to Obamas average GDP growth of 1.8% during his 8 years *

*there is the honest comparison 
but what do you know about honesty *


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 14, 2019)

TRFjr said:


> Your wrong because you wont make an honest comparison what your doing is just dishonest bull shit
> the honest comparison is average GDP growth of one compared to the average GDP growth of the other




I’m not wrong you deplorable Trump duped moron. I have clearly cited TrumpO and his single year method of determining a ‘weak’ economy.

"Obama is the first president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth," Trump said during an Oct. 28 campaign rally in Manchester, N.H.

Trump's claim about Obama's weak economic growth is limited

So your so called ‘honest’ comparison is the outright lie. 

And comparing two years to eight years is a fake comparison because TrumpO’s downturn is ongoing and we will never know TrumpO’s average performance over eight years to make a proper comparison. 

So stick with your cult master’s edicts 

"not to have a single year of 3 percent growth," 

And wait for TrumpO’s average to be determined.

And quit lying about the honest hard facts I have presented to you.

Facts are annoying to TrumpOroids I know but try harder and they will take you out of that fake hate world you live in.


----------



## TRFjr (Jul 14, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> TRFjr said:
> 
> 
> > Your wrong because you wont make an honest comparison what your doing is just dishonest bull shit
> ...


*Is Trump term/terms over yet ? no they aren't so wait till the fat lady sings before you open you dam mouth*

*you stink of desperation *

*nothing you can say or do will ever change the fact that Obama was one of the worst president we ever had when it comes to the issue most American care about and thats the economy and he will be remembered for that just like Carter once was *

*Obama was a failure and so are you *


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 14, 2019)

TRFjr, post: 22714452, 





TRFjr said:


> *Is Trump term/terms over yet ? no they aren't so wait till the fat lady sings before you open you dam mouth*
> 
> *you stink of desperation *
> 
> ...




I said TrumpO’s term is not over you idiot.

And if TrumpO should serve a full eight years then you can cite TrumpO’s average GDP over eight years. And if longest economic expansion  in US history continues without a recession for four to five more years then TrumpO’s average
GDP may be a little higher than Obama’s.

But there is a huge asterisk next to Obama’s average GDP regarding 2009 being so deep in recession. Normal people accept the fairness of not calculating the negative GDP of that year into Obama’s average.

I realize facts will never change your hate based opinion ttat Obama was one of the worst presidents ever but it’s great to get you deplorables on record exposing your contempt for facts.

Facts such as 2.9 equals 2.9

And TrumpO factually said this:

"Obama is the first president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth," Trump said during an Oct. 28 campaign rally in Manchester, N.H.

Trump's claim about Obama's weak economic growth is limited


So the fact remains that according to TrumpO’s mathematics and understanding of the English language TrumpO’s economy thus far has been equally and mathematically verifiably as being just as weak or just as strong or just as normal as Obama’s. 

When you can cite and contest that statement by proving that 2.9 does not equal 2.9 then we are obligated to pay attention to you and respect your opinion.

But knowing you cant means you must be the stark raving partisan deplorable that your posts continually depict.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 14, 2019)

TRFjr, post: 22714452, 





TRFjr said:


> Is Trump term/terms over yet ? no they aren't so wait till the fat lady sings before you open you dam mouth



You idiot. I’m telling you to wait till the fat lady sings before comparing the average GDP between Obama and TrumpO.

Until then let’s compare the way TrumpO does. Single year high for GDP growth. 

So far it’s 2.9 to 2.9. TrumpO is no greater or worse based upon that key statistic.

Do you agree?


----------



## Faun (Jul 14, 2019)

TRFjr said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > I asked:
> ...


If you were honest, you'd factor in a big part of that difference was Obama starting with the worst recession in our lifetime compared to trump starting off with a healthy economy.


----------



## Faun (Jul 14, 2019)

TRFjr said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > TRFjr said:
> ...


_*"Is Trump term/terms over yet ?"*_

It doesn't matter. Obama's terms were not up yet when some had already started pointing out he was the only president to never reach 3% GDP (which is actually a slam against Bush).

And now, Onama is not the only one. Trump has joined him.

_*"Obama was a failure and so are you"*_

And yet, Obama was re-elected and left office with a 60% approval rating.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 15, 2019)

TRFjr, post: 22706103, 





TRFjr said:


> Trump got to 2.9 with 2.5% interest ten times higher then Obama



Yes TrumpO and a much larger workforce is tied with Obama.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 15, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> TRFjr, post: 22706103,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Why does a much larger workforce matter when you're discussing growth of GDP?


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Jul 15, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> TRFjr said:
> 
> 
> > better with an interest rate of 2.5% compared to Obama 0.25 Trump had ten times the interest rate as Obama
> ...



Were you dropped on your head?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 15, 2019)

WTH_Progs? said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > TRFjr said:
> ...



Repeatedly, from altitude.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 15, 2019)

WTH_Progs?, post: 22721764 





WTH_Progs? said:


> Were you dropped on your head?



No. You cited my post. Do you dispute my comment that TrumpO had more Americans employed when he took office than Obama did?

Do you dispute that a higher number of Americans being employed with more money to spend contributes to economic growth? 

If not what’s with your stupid response. Are you really that stupid?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 15, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> WTH_Progs?, post: 22721764
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*Do you dispute that a higher number of Americans being employed with more money to spend contributes to economic growth? *

Confused about the difference between "higher GDP" and "higher GDP growth"? LOL!


----------



## ph3iron (Jul 15, 2019)

Thinker101 said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Here’s the record thru 2018:
> ...



So you don't care about the cons promises?
He's created fewer jobs than Obama did Obamas last  2 years v's the cons first 2
Man you ARE indoctrinated
Why don't you contribute like our Muslims here who have better education and pay more taxes than white rubes like me?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 15, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Confused about the difference between "higher GDP" and "higher GDP growth"? LOL!




No. You are an idiot. Here’s proof:

*Measuring Economic Growth*. Economists use many different methods to *measure* how fast the *economy* is growing. The most common way to *measure* the *economy* is real gross domestic product, or real GDP. GDP is the total value of everything - goods and services - produced in our *economy*.




*Measuring Economic Growth - Bank of Canada*


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 15, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Confused about the difference between "higher GDP" and "higher GDP growth"? LOL!
> ...



_The most common way to *measure* the *economy* is real gross domestic product, or real GDP. GDP is the total value of everything - goods and services - produced in our *economy*._

That is awesome!

*Do you dispute that a higher number of Americans being employed with more money to spend contributes to economic growth?*

Do you feel that Obozo had a harder time reaching 2.9% real GDP growth in 2015 than Trump did in 
2018 because there were more Americans employed in 2018 than in 2015?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 16, 2019)

I asked: *Do you dispute that a higher number of Americans being employed with more money to spend contributes to economic growth?*

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22724240, 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Do you feel that Obozo had a harder time reaching 2.9% real GDP growth in 2015 than Trump did in 2018 because there were more Americans employed in 2018 than in 2015?



No. Idiot. Obama worked with the hand he was dealt which included lower interest rates than TrumpO. High unemployment is one legitimate reason the Fed lowered the rates when they saw the unemployment/job loss disaster that Bush 43 created.

The point being that pitiful crying TrumpO and the TrumpOroids piked up on his ass only bring up the Fed rates as if Obama had nothing but advantages to get to a highest single year GDP of 2.9%.

Of course smaller numbers of Americans receiving a decent sized paycheck every week stymied GDP growth somewhat. But that is what Obama corrected to about a percent from record low unemployment by the time TrumpO took over.

So TrumpO had higher rates but also had advantages in his favor so he could get to 2.9 to tie Obama’s GDP single year growth.

So you TrumoOroids are lying - telling only part of story when you bring up the lower Fed rate under Obama as the most common excuse for TrumpO being the second president in US history never to have a GDP 3.0 or higher.

And TrumpO had his tax cut stimulus which managed a high GDP of 2.9 before burning out. He did ttat with far more paychecks being cashed each week than Obama had to work with.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 16, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> I asked: *Do you dispute that a higher number of Americans being employed with more money to spend contributes to economic growth?*
> 
> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22724240,
> 
> ...


*Obama worked with the hand he was dealt which included lower interest rates than TrumpO. *

And even with near zero interest rates and the Fed pumping new money into the system like crazy, 
all Obozo could get was 2.9%. Weak, weak, weak.

Can you name 5 things he did that actually helped the economy?

*only bring up the Fed rates as if Obama had nothing but advantages to get to a highest single year GDP of 2.9%. *​
Lots of monetary help. He was handicapped by his economic idiocy and hate for business.​


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 16, 2019)

*only bring up the Fed rates as if Obama had nothing but advantages to get to a highest single*

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22726225, 


Toddsterpatriot said:


> Lots  of monetary help. He was handicapped by his economic idiocy and hate for business.​



The two goofy assed emotional factors you attribute to Obama certainly in your goofy mind were certainly not present when Bush 43 and his love for business was at work on the economy. Then we got 2.9 GDP in the negative  direction and of course the worst recession since the Great Depression and the fastest rate of job losses ever. 

Obama dealt with and fixed that just fine and you want sympathy and a excuses for TrumpO having lower than normal Fed rate with very close to full employment when he started his term. 

You pathetic pitiful anti-thinking loser. TrumpO will be the second US president never to see a single year above 2.9 GDP in US history. And he had so many advantages but still could not beat Obama.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 16, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> *only bring up the Fed rates as if Obama had nothing but advantages to get to a highest single*
> 
> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22726225,
> 
> ...



*Obama dealt with and fixed that just fine*

He dealt with giving us the weakest recovery since WWII.
Imagine how much weaker his economy would have been if the Dems hadn't lost 63 seats in the House (63, Holy Shit!), when the people saw what a clown Obama was. We could have had Cap and Trade and laws prohibiting fracking and who knows what additional economic idiocy.

He might have averaged 1.4% or lower.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 16, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> *only bring up the Fed rates as if Obama had nothing but advantages to get to a highest single*
> 
> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22726225,
> 
> ...



When you get a chance, list those 5 things Obama did to help the economy.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 16, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22726225 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> all Obozo could get was 2.9%. Weak, weak, weak.



Then, all TrumpO could get was 2.9%. Weak, weak, weak.

*Latest forecast: 1.6 percent — July 16, 2019. *The GDPNow model estimate for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the second quarter of 2019 is *1.6 percent* on July 16, up from 1.4 percent on July 10. 
You can celebrate TrumpO's Q2 GDP going up a bit, but it’s sill a long way from 3.0.


----------



## ph3iron (Jul 16, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Obozo?
Not enough balls to call him what you really think?
An uppity ne?
You don't know Obama created more jobs in his last 2 years than don did in his first 2
Gotta be a zero college white boy?
Forgot we were losing 750000 jobs a month when the Kenyan came in?


----------



## ph3iron (Jul 16, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> *only bring up the Fed rates as if Obama had nothing but advantages to get to a highest single*
> 
> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22726225,
> 
> ...



Wonder how my daughter started a $150MM business under Obama?
A few more brains than our don cult white boy?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 16, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22727044,





Toddsterpatriot said:


> When you get a chance, list those 5 things Obama did to help the economy.



Already have,  but go ahead and list the five things that TrumpO did not do to get the economy above 2.9 and up to 4.0 as he promised his tax cuts would.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 16, 2019)

ph3iron said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



*Not enough balls to call him what you really think?*

He was an economic bubble-head.

*You don't know Obama created more jobs in his last 2 years than don did in his first 2*

Well, shit. He had 0% interest rates for 7 years and trillions in QE sloshing around.....
and his idiocy still resulted in weak economic growth. What a putz.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 16, 2019)

ph3iron said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > *only bring up the Fed rates as if Obama had nothing but advantages to get to a highest single*
> ...



What kind of business?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 16, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22727044,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Why are you afraid to post the list again? LOL!


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 16, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Why are you afraid to post the list again? LOL!



You have not posted what I asked for. 

List the five things TrumpO did NOT do to get the economy above the 2.9 level which TrumoO says is what separates the weak economy from the greatest economy in US history. 

TrumpO still has a weak economy by his own standard in case you forgot. 

Why is that? What is TrumpO not doing?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 16, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22729461 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Well, shit. He had 0% interest rates for 7 years and trillions in QE sloshing around.....
> and his idiocy still resulted in weak economic growth. What a putz.



You are digging a hole because by TrumpO’s standard his idiocy has resulted in a weak economy as well.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 16, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22729461
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's true, Trump's average is higher than Obozo's.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 16, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22729896 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> It's true, Trump's average is higher than Obozo's.



Average is not the standard TrumpO set for himself.  He set single year GDP higher than 3.0 as the requirement not to have a ‘weak’ economy like Obama’s. 

So TrumpO has a weak economy. You cannot deny or change that. No matter the excuses you, in such apparent desperation toss out there, TrumpO has not led to a single year GDP above 3.0. And he never will. 

And now this:

U.S. manufacturing 'is in recession,' Fed's data show - MarketWatch 8 hours ago · The numbers: The U.S. factory sector declined in the three months ended in June, the second straight quarterly decline, the Federal Reserve said Tuesday. For the second quarter, production was down 1.2% after a 1.9% decline in the first three months of the year.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 16, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22729896
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*Average is not the standard TrumpO set for himself.*

So what? 
Weakest recovery since WWII probably wasn't the standard Obozo set for himself, but that's what he got.
Imagine how much weaker it'd have been with cap & trade or a fracking ban.

*He set single year GDP higher than 3.0 as the requirement not to have a ‘weak’ economy like Obama’s. *

You bet. So Trump's weak economy is still better than Obozo's weak economy.

*TrumpO has not led to a single year GDP above 3.0. And he never will. *

We'll see. I think the upcoming recession will be short and shallow. Probably clear 3.0 after that.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 16, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22730930,





Toddsterpatriot said:


> So Trump's weak economy is still better than Obozo's weak economy.



Look how long it took for you to admit the truth. 

Now the next step in getting you deprogrammed from the TrumpO cult of personality will be your acceptance that a comparison of averages between a two year stretch and seven or eight year stretch is quite ridiculous. 

TrumpO is no shoe-in to make it a full eight years and he’s burned through his chances to come strong out of the gate and it’s not looking like he has much endurance for the long run.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 16, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22730930,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*Look how long it took for you to admit the truth. *

I've never denied the truth. 

Obozo had the weakest recovery since WWII. Truly.

*a comparison of averages between a two year stretch and seven or eight year stretch is quite ridiculous.*

You can only compare the years they've served. 

*TrumpO is no shoe-in to make it a full eight years*

No one ever is.....so what?

* he’s burned through his chances to come strong out of the gate*

Stronger than Obozo….I know, that's a really, REALLY low bar.


----------



## Faun (Jul 16, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot, post: 22730930,
> ...


*"Obozo had the weakest recovery since WWII. Truly."*

So after hearing this repeated claim, I decided to check it out myself, and .....

No, not truly. With the recovery being the period between the end of the recession to when GDP is back to where it was before the recession started, we find ....

*Bush/Obama* (12/07 - 6/09)
Q3-2007 - 15,666.7 (the last quarter before the recession began)
Q2-2009 - 15,134.1 (the quarter when the recession ended)
Q3-2010 - 15,672.0 (the quarter when we fully recovered from the recession

*GHW Bush* (7/90 - 3/91)
Q2-1990 - 9,392.3 (the last quarter before the recession began)
Q1-1991 - 9,269.4 (the quarter when the recession ended)
Q4-1991 - 9,421.6 (the quarter when we fully recovered from the recession

*Bush/Obama ... 2.8% real annualized GDP growth
GHW Bush ....... 2.2% real annualized GDP growth*

gdplev.xlsx  | U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 16, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...


'
Thanks for the link. Are you sure it's the correct one?
I didn't see any of the 6 GDP numbers you're posting in that spreadsheet.


----------



## Faun (Jul 17, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Wow, that's really weird that the BLS would link to outdated numbers like that. Regardless, here are the latest figures...

https://www.bea.gov/system/files/2019-06/gdplev_0.xlsx


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 17, 2019)

I wrote: *Look how long it took for you to admit the truth
*
Toddsterpatriot, post: 22732532


Toddsterpatriot said:


> I've never denied the truth.



I didn’t say you have ever “denied” the truth. It’s very difficult to deny that 2.9 does not equal 2.9. What I said was “Look how long it took for you to *admit* the truth“ in reference to when you call Obama's 2.9 economy weak you must also call TrumpO’s 2.9 weak.

You, for the first time ever,  just admitted that TrumpO’s 2.9 economy, up to right now, is “weak” (regardless of average) in your one time openly honest still-born-brained head.

You admitted that my formula A+B+C=D is true.

NotfooledbyW, post: 22186616 





NotfooledbyW said:


> A+B+C=D
> 
> My point is: (a) because Trumpo has established that the entire Obama economy below 3.0% annual GDP growth was weak and anemic.
> 
> ...



To be clear you finally admitted A+B+C=D is true either way you read it.

If Trumpo’s economy is good or strong at max peak 2.9 GDP, then it must now also be true that Obama's 7 year recovery and share of the expansion was good or strong.

If Obama's 7 year recovery and share of the expansion was *weak* at max peak 2.9 GDP, then it must now also be true that Trumpo’s economy is *weak. *

Either way! But you in writing admitted the latter. Good for you. Admitting the truth. I suggest you build on it.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 17, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> I wrote: *Look how long it took for you to admit the truth
> *
> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22732532
> 
> ...



Yes, Trump's over 2.5% GDP growth is weak, not as weak as Obozo's sub 2% GDP growth.
Glad we can agree.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 17, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



So you're looking at 2 or 3 quarters of GDP to show that Obama's recovery wasn't weaker than GHW Bush's?
Why not 2 or 3 years?


----------



## Faun (Jul 17, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Because you were talking about the recovery.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 17, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



I know. Which is usually more than a couple of quarters.


----------



## Faun (Jul 17, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


It all depends on how deep the recession is.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 17, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Deeper recession should have a longer recovery?


----------



## Faun (Jul 17, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Of course they should. The deeper the hole, the longer to climb out of it. But all recessions are different and all recoveries are different.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 17, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Obama's was different and weaker.


----------



## Faun (Jul 17, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Than what?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 17, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Than every other post WWII recovery.


----------



## Faun (Jul 17, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Stop lying. I already showed you GHW Bush's was weaker.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 17, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...









Real Gross Domestic Product | FRED | St. Louis Fed





Real Gross Domestic Product

Nah.


----------



## Faun (Jul 17, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


LOL

Yeah, Obama's 2.8% real annualized GDP growth was better than Bush's 2.2%.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 17, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Bush's 3.5% was better than Obama's 2.6%.


----------



## Faun (Jul 17, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


GHW Bush's recovery was only 2.2%. Who knows where you imagine it was 3.5%?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 17, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Bush's 3.5% and 2.8% were both better than Obama's 2.6% and 1.6%.

Bush's 3.5% and 2.8% and 4.0% were all better than Obama's 2.6% and 1.6% and 2.2%.

Wow, the longer you go, the weaker Obama's "recovery" looks.


----------



## Faun (Jul 17, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


LOLOL

You're talking about something other than the recovery and conflating it with the recovery.

Bush41's recession had recovered by Q4-1991, at which point, real annualized GDP growth was *2.2%*.

Bush43's recession had recovered by Q3-2010, at which point, real annualized GDP growth was *2.8%*.

Any other quarters you're looking at are beyond the recovery.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 17, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Who said recovery is what you claim?
Which is what, precisely? From the trough to the first new peak....annualized?


----------



## Faun (Jul 17, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Recovery is growing back to the level prior to the recession. Do you not know what the word, "recover," means?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 17, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



When did Obama and Bush recover the previous employment peak?


----------



## Faun (Jul 17, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


LOLOL 

You were talking about GDP, remember?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 17, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



I remember. LOL!


----------



## ph3iron (Jul 17, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> ph3iron said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...


Electrical


----------



## ph3iron (Jul 17, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22729461
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Record deficits and debts though.
And fewer jobs than Obama 
Just blab MAGA to the cult , that's all you need


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 17, 2019)

ph3iron said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > ph3iron said:
> ...



Getting some of those awesome "green energy" tax credits?
Or does her business actually generate useful amounts of reliable energy?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 17, 2019)

ph3iron said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot, post: 22729461
> ...



*Record deficits and debts though.*

Obama had higher deficits.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 17, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22736460 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Obama had higher deficits



TrumpO is not a recovery President. Why do you feel the need to compare TrumpO’s failings in a good economy to Obama’s achievements in the wake of the worst economy since the Great Depression.?


----------



## Faun (Jul 17, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> ph3iron said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...


Obama was handed the worst economy in our lifetime.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 17, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22736460
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*TrumpO is not a recovery President.*

Who said he was? Link?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 17, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > ph3iron said:
> ...



Poor Obama......smartest President in history, not responsible for anything.

How did he do on "slowing the rise of the oceans"?


----------



## Faun (Jul 17, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


LOL

He's certainly not responsible for the economy in the failed condition it was in when he started.

Your next whine is ... ?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 17, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



But he was responsible for the next seven years of weakness.
Imagine the damage he could have done if the American people hadn't voted 
out 63 Dems in the House (63, Holy Shit!) in 2010.


----------



## Faun (Jul 17, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Of course he was. And when all was said and done, 60% approved of the job he did.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 17, 2019)

*I said: TrumpO is not a recovery President.*

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22738457 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> . Who said he was? Link?



Get a clue moron. I am not saying you said it. I’m saying you have your pathetic need to compare your god’s gift to the economy who was given a good economy to a recovery president who was handed the worst recession since the Great Depression by a Republican President.

Obama takes a horrible economy from a Republican and hands it off in very good shape     on its way to being the longest economic expansion in US history and hands that off to a Republican. And all you can do is feed your hatred by cherry picking the economic data so you can shove Obama underneath TrumpO and Bush. As if TrumpO is nothing unless you can have him pictured with his shiny big black shoe  on Obama’s neck. You are obsessed.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 17, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 2273867 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> But he was responsible for the next seven years of weakness.
> Imagine the damage he could have done if the American people hadn't voted
> out 63 Dems in the House (63, Holy Shit!) in 2010.



You dork. TrumpO should get down on his knees every day and thank the Lord for the term limit provision that prevented Obama from running for a third term.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 17, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22738679 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> But he was responsible for the next seven years of weakness.



Don’t you mean nine years?





As you can see the “weakness” continued for two more years into the TrumpO era. No sense blaming TrumpO for that. Obama was responsible for that too since TrumpO couldn’t pick up the pace one bit.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 17, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> *I said: TrumpO is not a recovery President.*
> 
> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22738457
> 
> ...



* I am not saying you said it.*

Looks like no one else said it either. Thanks for the strawman.

*Obama takes a horrible economy from a Republican and hands it off in very good shape *

All it took was 7 years of 0% interest rates, $2.4 trillion of QE and $9.3 trillion in new debt.
In return for the weakest recovery since WWII.

*And all you can do is feed your hatred by cherry picking the economic data *

All I want to do is take Obozo's entire performance and compare it to Trump's entire performance.
I leave the cherry picking to you.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 17, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 2273867
> 
> 
> 
> ...



We're all thankful that stuttering whiner couldn't run for a third term.
And personally, I'm thankful he didn't return to Chicago.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 18, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22739935 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Looks like no one else said it either. Thanks for the strawman.



The point included *you didn’t say it.* So Thanks for proving how stupid you are
If not a liar.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 18, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 2273993 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> All it took was 7 years of 0% interest rates, $2.4 trillion of QE and $9.3 trillion in new debt.
> In return for the weakest recovery since WWII.



You’ve admitted TrumpO’s post-recovery economy is weak as well. No one should pay attention to your unfounded use of the word weak - and your failure to define what you think was the second weakest recovery since WWII,


----------



## Faun (Jul 18, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > *I said: TrumpO is not a recovery President.*
> ...


*"In return for the weakest recovery since WWII"*

That's a lie. As you've been shown, Bush41's recovery was weaker. That you repeat your lie makes you a liar.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 18, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22739935. 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> All I want to do is take Obozo's entire performance and compare it to Trump's entire performance.



All you want and can actually do is phonily compare Obama to all preceding presidents without naming one which is to change the subject since you were forced to admit that if you call Obama’s 2.9 peak economy weak you have to admit that TrumpO’s 2.9 economy is weak as well. And you did that.

You likely will never get to compare overall economies so we take your admission that TrumpO’s economy is weak if you call Obama’s weak as quite sufficient for now.

And Faun has shown your stupid “weakest since WWII” talking point to be the lie that it is so you virtually have no reason to be here except to prove how dumb and hateful you truly are.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 18, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 2273993
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's true, if Trump had 7 years of 0% interest rates, $2.4 trillion of QE and $9.3 trillion in new debt, even clowns like you wouldn't be able to deny Trump's GDP growth was clearly better than Obozo's.

*and your failure to define what you think was the second weakest recovery since WWII,*

It's not a matter of my defining, it's a matter of GDP.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 18, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



Yeah, Obama's first 3 quarters were awesome, it was the last 27 that sucked.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 18, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22739935.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*All you want and can actually do is phonily compare Obama to all preceding presidents without naming one *

Why do I need to name one? If you know one with a weaker recovery than Obozo, post it.


----------



## Faun (Jul 18, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


LOL 

It did, huh? Well 4 of those 27 quarters produced 2.9% real annualized GDP growth, matching the best Trump has done. So if Trump's best "sucks," that doesn't bode well for the rest of his time in office.


----------



## Faun (Jul 18, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot, post: 22739935.
> ...


You've already been shown. GHWBush... 2.2% GDP

You just can't stop lying, can ya?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 18, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



2.9% is easier with $1.4 trillion of fresh QE in the system, eh?
And it was the rest of Obama's quarters that sucked. That's why he was sub 2% for his GDP.


----------



## Faun (Jul 18, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


LOL

It matters not how it was achieved in terms of you saying it sucked. You already admitted trump's best, "sucked."

Oh, and QE had already ended prior to Obama's 2.9% year.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 18, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



*Oh, and QE had already ended prior to Obama's 2.9% year. *

Exactly how long do you think it takes before QE hits GDP numbers?


----------



## Faun (Jul 18, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Money pumped into the economy affects GDP immediately.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 18, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



That's funny!
Who told you that QE immediately hits GDP?


----------



## Faun (Jul 18, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Maybe you should learn what comprises GDP?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 18, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



*Maybe you should learn what comprises GDP?*

I've looked at several definitions. None include QE.
Link to one that does...….

QE was about 6% of GDP in 2013.

What was GDP growth that year?


----------



## Faun (Jul 18, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


LOL 

You're literally agreeing with me that QE affects GDP immediately  while you're trying your hardest to prove me wrong.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 18, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



*You're literally agreeing with me that QE affects GDP immediately  *

If it did, 2013 should have been 6% higher than without QE.
Do you feel 2013 GDP would have been -4.2% without QE?


----------



## ph3iron (Jul 18, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


Of course he was responsible.
Every pres is responsible for his term
Very unlike our fat don the con who takes zero responsibility for anything
And again why has the con created  fewer jobs than our weak Obama?
Notice you didn't mention the 2016 house?


----------



## ph3iron (Jul 18, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > *I said: TrumpO is not a recovery President.*
> ...


Obozo?
Small trump u made up mind?
How about job creation O's last 2 years v's the cons first 2?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 18, 2019)

ph3iron said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



*How about job creation O's last 2 years v's the cons first 2? *

How about it?


----------



## Ernie S. (Jul 18, 2019)

obama' average was 2.02 and Trumps is 2.65 at this point.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 18, 2019)

“It is also important to put the economic performance in global context. During President Obama's presidency, the United States' GDP growth beat the GDP growth of the other original NATO member countries by the widest margin of any president since World War II.”  See link below.

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22730930. 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Weakest recovery since WWII probably wasn't the standard Obozo set for himself, but that's what he got.



I realize that CONTEXT means little to a hater, but here goes anyway:


*Economic Record: President Obama*

Name: *Barack Obama*
Number: *44*
Party: *Democratic*
Vice President: *Joe Biden*
Entered Office: *January 20, 2009*
Left Office: *January 20, 2017*

The most significant economic event during President Obama's presidency was, without a doubt, been the Great Recession. When he took office, the country was losing hundreds of thousands of jobs a month, the stock market was in freefall and the GDP was shrinking. Several of the measures below show the country pulling out of this recession during the first 6 to 18 months of his presidency and then performing well above average performance after that point. In many cases, his overall average performance is impacted significantly by the first initial months.

Given that caveat, during President Obama's presidency, the economy performed worse than average for GDP growth, job creation, median income and debt. However, the performance of the stock market was spectacular. It is also important to put the economic performance in global context. During President Obama's presidency, the United States' GDP growth beat the GDP growth of the other original NATO member countries by the widest margin of any president since World War II.

Economic Record: President Obama


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 18, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> “It is also important to put the economic performance in global context. During President Obama's presidency, the United States' GDP growth beat the GDP growth of the other original NATO member countries by the widest margin of any president since World War II.”  See link below.
> 
> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22730930.
> 
> ...



* Several of the measures below show the country pulling out of this recession during the first 6 to 18 months of his presidency and then performing well above average performance after that point.*

Performing well above average performance? 

Above the performance of what? When?

*During President Obama's presidency, the United States' GDP growth beat the GDP growth of the other original NATO member countries *

They needed to do something like TARP, to rebuild their bank capital. They never did.
But nothing Obama did during his 8 years deserves credit for our overperformance.
The Euros fucked up and the recovery was baked in before Obama took office.

Even you can't post the top 5 things Obama did to help our economy.

*Given that caveat, during President Obama's presidency, the economy performed worse than average for GDP growth, job creation, median income and debt.  *

Yup.


----------



## Faun (Jul 18, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Oh? How do you figure -4.2%?


----------



## Faun (Jul 18, 2019)

Ernie S. said:


> obama' average was 2.02 and Trumps is 2.65 at this point.


So?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 18, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



GDP was +1.8%.
If QE added +6%, absent QE.....GDP is -4.2%


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 18, 2019)

I posted: “*During President Obama's presidency, the United States' GDP growth beat the GDP growth of the other original NATO member countries.”*

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22745082 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> But nothing Obama did during his 8 years deserves credit for our overperformance.
> The Euros fucked up and the recovery was baked in before Obama took office.



So Bush is getting credit from you for ‘baking in’ the ‘*overperforming*’ recovery of his own worst recession since the Great Depression.

Then I guess we must also thank Bush for ‘baking in’ the stock market’s remarkable performance during ty Obama years.

This graph compares the performance of the S&P500 under President Obama with the average.




The stock market performed remarkably during Obama's presidency and more than tripled in value. ........  President Obama has the best record of any president in modern history. Economic Record: President Obama
It’s amazing how every economic good news that occurred between January 2010 and November 2016 was “baked in” with the recession of 2008.

Were the payroll tax cuts in February 2009, that no Republican voted for, baked in too?

Was the ACA that Republicans could not kill,  ‘baked in’ too?

It’s a good thing Bush baked in the payroll tax cuts and the ACA so that while Obama was president the United States' GDP growth wouid  handily beat the GDP growth of the other original NATO member countries.

Why can’t you see what an idiot you are?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 18, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> I posted: “*During President Obama's presidency, the United States' GDP growth beat the GDP growth of the other original NATO member countries.”*
> 
> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22745082
> 
> ...



*So Bush is getting credit from you for ‘baking in’ the ‘overperforming’ recovery *

Overperforming? Hardly.

*It’s amazing how every economic good news that occurred between January 2010 and November 2016 was “baked in”*

That's not what I said. The recession was going to end, no matter what Obama did in his first 5 months.
Nothing he did was responsible for the recession ending in June 2009. 

I love the idiotic claim that he prevented a new Great Depression.

*Were the payroll tax cuts in February 2009, that no Republican voted for, baked in too?*​
There were no payroll tax cuts in 2009.​


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 18, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22746213 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > I posted: “*During President Obama's presidency, the United States' GDP growth beat the GDP growth of the other original NATO member countries.”*
> ...




What do you mean that’s not what you said?

The topic was:

*“During President Obama's presidency, the United States' GDP growth beat the GDP growth of the other original NATO member countries@*


You said:

“But nothing Obama did during his 8 years deserves credit for *our overperformance*.”  The Euros fucked up and the *recovery was baked in *before Obama took office

Then you wrote:

overperforming? Hardly.


Toddsterpatriot, post: 22745082 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> *During President Obama's presidency, the United States' GDP growth beat the GDP growth of the other original NATO member countries *
> 
> They needed to do something like TARP, to rebuild their bank capital. They never did.
> But nothing Obama did during his 8 years deserves credit for our overperformance.
> The Euros fucked up and the recovery was baked in before Obama took office.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 18, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22746213
> 
> 
> 
> ...



_“But nothing Obama did during his 8 years deserves credit for *our overperformance*.” _

The Europeans fucked up and didn't recapitalize their banks. To this day, Deutsche Bank is criminally undercapitalized. The biggest bank in Germany.
Are you giving Obama credit for recapitalizing our banks? LOL!

_The Euros fucked up and the *recovery was baked in *before Obama took office_

Yes, the recession was going to end, no matter what he did or didn't do before June 2009.
The weakness once the recession ended, I'd never take that away from your hero.
There was no overperforming in his weakest recovery since WWII.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 19, 2019)

Classic Toddster:

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22746356 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> _But nothing Obama did during his 8 years deserves credit for *our overperformance*.” _



Same post!!

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22746356 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> _
> 
> There was no overperforming in his weakest recovery since WWII._


_

Let’s pretend for once you were trying to express an opinion based on the facts. 

That means you would have to decide whether the facts show that there was overperfomance or not.

As it stands neither one of your expressed opinions are based on facts. 

Which must be why you can so easily contradict yourself in the same post.

Facts don’t matter to you._


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 19, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 2274621 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> There were no payroll tax cuts in 2009.




Facts get stronger with age:

NotfooledbyW, post: 22675091 





NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22669163
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Those payroll tax cuts, moron.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 19, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Classic Toddster:
> 
> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22746356
> 
> ...



Our recovery sucked. 
The fact that some Euro economies had weaker recoveries isn't a credit to Obama.

Did you ever come up with the 5 things Obama did to help our economy?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 19, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 2274621
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Tax credits aren't payroll tax cuts, idiot.


----------



## Faun (Jul 19, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


LOLOL

Dayum, are you ever stupid.  This sure does go a long way in explaining your posts though.

No, dumbfuck, 1.8% minus 6% is NOT -4.2%. 

Using your conservative fuzzy math "skills," if we were to subtract the other 94% from GDP instead of the 6% you say was due to QE, then that would have meant GDP for that year was *-92.2%*. You subtracted points, not a percent.  Do you see now why you're an idiot??

6% of 1.8% is 0.108%. GDP that year minus 6% is *1.7%*, not *-4.2%*.


----------



## Faun (Jul 19, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > I posted: “*During President Obama's presidency, the United States' GDP growth beat the GDP growth of the other original NATO member countries.”*
> ...


*"The recession was going to end, no matter what Obama did in his first 5 months."*

There is absolutely no evidence of that. It's possible, but it's also possible had Obama done nothing, the economy could have slid into a depression. We'll never know what would have happened had he not pushed ARRA through to becoming law but what we do know is that he did, and the Great Recession ended 4 months later.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 19, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Your idiocy is exhausting.
2013 GDP was $16.785 trillion.
The Fed added $1.114 trillion to their spreadsheet in 2013.

According to your moronic "QE instantly adds to GDP" theory, 
QE added about 6.6% to 2013 GDP growth.





Real Gross Domestic Product | FRED | St. Louis Fed​
2013 real GDP grew 1.8%.
Was 2013 GDP going to shrink 4.8% if QE had been $0 instead of $1.114 trillion?


----------



## Faun (Jul 19, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


*"Your idiocy is exhausting."*

Spits the moron who actually said 1.8% minus 6% is -4.2%


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 19, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



*There is absolutely no evidence of that*

Feel free to post the evidence that Obama's actions from January 20th until June 2009 
was the difference between the end of the recession and the recession continuing.

*We'll never know what would have happened had he not pushed ARRA through to becoming law but what we do know is that he did, and the Great Recession ended 4 months later.*

ARRA was signed on February 17, 2009. How much spending happened from that moment until June?
Less than $100 billion? Less than $50 billion? What percentage of GDP was that? 

The US economy isn't like a speedboat, it's like an oil tanker.
There is a lag between stimulus and GDP impact. 
Even if you're magic enough to slow the rise of the oceans.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 19, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



$16.785 trillion - $1.114 trillion = $15.671 trillion.
15.671/16.875 = 93.4%

Yup, that's about 6% less, not  0.108% less.

Exhausting.​


----------



## Faun (Jul 19, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


The money from ARRA does not directly go towards GDP. It also stimulated spending by showing the country the government was going to do what was necessary to save the economy from slipping deeper into recession. Then there were tax savings. Credit markets began relaxing. And there were other factors. QE was helping. People began investing again. And again, as already mentioned, we'll never know how ARRA contributed, but it's absurd to claim the recession would have ended anyway since there's nothing to back that statement up.


----------



## Faun (Jul 19, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


LOLOL

Dumbfuck.... 6% of 1.8% is 0.108%. Try this on for size.... 50% of 1.8% is 0.9%.

Is any of this getting through to you?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 19, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



*The money from ARRA does not directly go towards GDP.*

Government spending doesn't go directly towards GDP but QE does?

Wow, you need a better definition of GDP......

*Then there were tax savings.*

Yes, Obama's $8 per week tax credit made me run out and stimulate the economy.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 19, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Moron, 6% (actually 6.6%) of GDP is 6% of GDP.
If you subtract 6% from GDP and then add 1.8% of GDP, you're looking at a drop in GDP.....not a 1.7% increase. DURR

Tell me more about your QE instantly adds to GDP theory.
That one will never get old.


----------



## Faun (Jul 19, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


QE was the lowering interest rates to 0.25%. That made borrowing money more attractive which is the money from QE that went into the economy which boosted GDP.

Is any of this getting through to you?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 19, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



*QE was the lowering interest rates to 0.25%*

That's hilarious!!!






FRB: Central Banking Before, During and After the Crisis Conference - QE 1 vs. 2 vs. 3... A Framework for Analyzing Large Scale Asset Purchases as a Monetary Policy Tool

*Is any of this getting through to you?*

Your ignorance got through to me a long time ago.


----------



## Faun (Jul 19, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Holyfuckingshit 

Your ignorance is growing.

GDP was 1.8%. You said 1.8% minus 6% is -4.2%.

Let's check the math .... 

1.8% = 0.018
6% = 0.06

0.018 x 0.06 = 0.00108 (or 0.108%)

0.018 - 0.00108 = 0.01692 (or 1.692% ... rounded to 1.7%)

Is any of this getting through to you??


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 19, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



*GDP was 1.8%. You said 1.8% minus 6% is -4.2%.*

Yup. If you subtract 6% of GDP, Obama's got a serious recession in 2013......


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 19, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22747060 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Tax credits aren't payroll tax cuts, idiot.



The ARRA *reduced* 2009 income taxes for individuals by $400 and $800 for families.

Now you may be too stupid to comprehend that *reduce* and *cut* when referring to payroll taxes means that all people earning income and paying payroll taxes during the recovery from the Great Bush Recession *paid about $400 less in taxes *than they would have but for  the ARRA. 

Overall the ARRA *cut $288 billion in taxes *with payroll tax credits being effective immediately in 2009.

In February 2009, Congress approved Obama’s economic stimulus package. It restored confidence and ended the Great Recession in July 2009.* It cut $288 billion in taxes. *It reduced that year's income taxes for individuals by $400 each and $800 for families. Instead of stimulus checks, workers received a lower withholding in their paychecks.

ARRA also reduced income taxes by the amount equal to the sales tax on a new car purchase. It provided $17 billion in tax cuts for households who invested in renewable energy. It included $54 billion in small business tax cuts.

The Congressional Budget Office estimated ARRA would save between 900,000 and 2.3 million jobs. In addition to tax cuts, it spent $224 billion in extended unemployment benefits, education and health care. It also spent $275 billion for job creation using federal contracts, grants, and loans.  Why Did Obama Extend the Bush Tax Cuts in 2010?
So Obama acted immediately to reduce, cut, lower, taxes and it had a significant beneficial impact on the recovery. 

Now you can’t admit it because of the obvious obsessive hatred you have for Obama. It really disturbed you that Obama was President for seven years of positive economic growth.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 19, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22747060
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*paid about $400 less in taxes than they would have but for the ARRA. *

Yes, a $400 tax credit, not a cut in payroll taxes.

*In February 2009, Congress approved Obama’s economic stimulus package. It restored confidence and ended the Great Recession in July 2009. It cut $288 billion in taxes. *

Yes, $8 a week in reduced withholding is just the thing to "restore confidence".
March, April and May.....that'd be about $112. Wow!
That should have given us 4% GDP growth, at least.....DURR

*So Obama acted immediately to reduce, cut, lower, taxes and it had a significant beneficial impact on the recovery. *

Tax cuts help the economy? Weird.

* It really disturbed you that Obama was President for seven years of positive economic growth.*

I've already made my feelings known about his weak economic performance.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 19, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22752207 


Toddsterpatriot said:


> Yes, a $400 tax credit, not a cut in payroll taxes.



Did the deathbed Bush economy know or care how the billions of dollars in Obama’s tax cuts were delivered into the economy to revive it.

Tax credits received through reduced payroll taxes are tax cuts.

You said Obama did nothing to stimulate the recovery and at least we know you are  lying because you know about the tax credits.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 20, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22752207
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



*You said Obama did nothing to stimulate the recovery *

You think $8 a week caused the recession to end?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 20, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22752462 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> You think $8 a week caused the recession to end?



Of course not. The payroll tax cut was a small part of the total stimulus tax cut and spending package. It certainly helped. The point here was simply to show what a liar you are when you post utter bullshit such as Tax Credits are not Tax Cuts. (You just admitted they were) and Obama did nothing that deserves credit for ending the recession and the USA outperforming the GDP of all the original NATO countries. 

Just can’t allow lies to go unchallenged here.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 20, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Yes, Obama's $8 per week tax credit made me run out and stimulate the economy.



It didn’t have to make you do a goddam thing. If you lived paycheck to paycheck you spent it probably without knowing you had extra jingle in your pocket. If you were well off at the time you may have sat on it. But multiply that times over 120.000.000 and there was about an extra billion a week circulating around in the economy.

And you lied that Obama did nothing. Don’t forget about your lies


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 20, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22752462
> 
> 
> 
> ...



* The payroll tax cut was a small part of the total stimulus tax cut and spending package. *

As far as stimulating the economy, temporary tax credits like this are practically useless.
They were useless when Bush did them in 2001.
They were useless when Bush did them in 2008.
They were useless when Obama did them in 2009.
And if you think the economy would have stayed in recession absent the $8 per week lower withholding
you're even dumber than I first suspected.

*and Obama did nothing that deserves credit for ending the recession*

Nothing he did can be shown to have impacted the economy enough by June 2009 to be credited with 
ending the recession. Does a useless rebate check, like Bush mailed out in 2001 and 2008, add to GDP? 
Yes, a tiny bit.
Does a useless temporary $8 a week reduction in tax withholding add to GDP? 
Yes, a tiny bit.
Are either of them the difference between the recovery starting in June 2009 or the recovery being delayed?
Nope. Not at all. 

The new car sales tax deduction was more useful at stimulating the economy, because it was use it or lose it.
It actually pulled new car purchases into 2009. 

The first time homebuyers tax credit can also be said to be slightly stimulative, but again, not enough by June 2009 to say Obama ended the recession. Sorry, I know this makes you sad.

* Obama did nothing that deserves credit for ending the recession and the USA outperforming the GDP of all the original NATO countries. *​
Did you ever come up with the list of top 5 things Obama did to help the economy?

I know you must be thinking up some doozies!!!​


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 20, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, Obama's $8 per week tax credit made me run out and stimulate the economy.
> ...



*But multiply that times over 120.000.000 and there was about an extra billion a week circulating around in the economy.*​
A billion a week, in a $14.4 trillion economy, wow!
I'm surprised we didn't see 8% GDP growth with that boost.
​*And you lied that Obama did nothing.*​
Obama did nothing by June 2009 to end the recession. Don't forget.​


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 20, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Obama did nothing by June 2009 to end the recession. Don't forget.



You are a liar. The ARRA WAS passed in February 2009 with no Republican votes. 

The Republicans did nothing. You are a liar.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 20, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22752207
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



​*Tax credits received through reduced payroll taxes are tax cuts.*​





The Making Work Pay Credit: Who Will Benefit? | Tax Foundation


Like I said before, payroll taxes were not reduced.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 20, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Obama did nothing by June 2009 to end the recession. Don't forget.
> ...



*The ARRA WAS passed in February 2009 with no Republican votes. *

Yes. And only a moron would credit ARRA with being the difference between an ongoing depression 
and the recession ending in June 2009.

Oh, there you are!


----------



## Camp (Jul 20, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Obama did nothing by June 2009 to end the recession. Don't forget.
> ...


In the era of Trump, it's perfectly OK for Republicans and Trumpicans to lie.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 20, 2019)

Camp said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



Did you stimulate the economy with your $8 a week reduced withholding?


----------



## Camp (Jul 20, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...


By myself, barely made a dent. Multiply that by 10 or 20 thousand people in my community every week, ya, the local economy was stimulated.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 20, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22754279 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Yes. And only a moron would credit ARRA with being the difference between an ongoing depression
> and the recession ending in June 2009.



Liar. I did not credit the ARRA with being the difference between an ongoing depression
and the recession ending in June 2009. I have exposed your lie that Obama did nothing before June 2009 and that there were no tax cuts or stimulus before then. You are a liar. That’s what I’m saying. And you should cease and desist more lies in response.

The ARRA had a positive immediate impact:





Measuring the Effects of ARRA


That’s the impact vs a baseline had the ARRA not been passed.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 20, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22754279
> 
> 
> 
> ...



* I have exposed your lie that Obama did nothing before June 2009*

I never said he did nothing. He did lots of things. A couple of them probably even helped more than they hurt.
What I said was, nothing he did after he took office can be credited with ending the recession by June 2009.

*The ARRA had a positive immediate impact:*

Baloney. There was no huge surge of spending between February and June. 
No rush to spend the additional $8 per week. Sorry.

Still working on that list of 5 things he did to help the economy?

You must have hundreds of choices from his 8 years, eh?
I wonder why you're too shy to post them?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 20, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22756473


Toddsterpatriot said:


> What I said was, nothing he did after he took office can be credited with ending the recession by June 2009.



You may have said that but that is wrong too,

What I have been referring to would be when you wrote “nothing Obama did during his 8 years deserves credit”

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22746356 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> “But nothing Obama did during his 8 years deserves credit for *our overperformance*.”



The reality is Obama did plenty to make the economy respond in a way that some economists are calling a “new normal” (single year high growth below 3.0 GDP with GDP running long term between 2.0 and 2.5.

The most positive aspect of the Obama recovery and economy is it’s record duration. Obama started what is now the longest economic expansion in US.

That is an overperformance of record economic stability.

And all you can say about that record decade of economic stability is that nothing Obama did during his 8 years deserves credit for what he handed off to TrumpO.

And you can’t see how hatred clouds your mind. You can’t think straight.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 20, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22756473
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



_“But nothing Obama did during his 8 years deserves credit for *our overperformance*.”_

Sounds right. I loved that claim you posted, "we overperformed the economies of the original NATO members"
Never heard that stat before.

*The reality is Obama did plenty to make the economy respond in a way that some economists are calling a “new normal”*

When you get a chance, post the top 5 things Obama did that made our GDP growth higher than Belgium's.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 21, 2019)

I wrote: *The reality is Obama did plenty to make the economy respond in a way that some economists are calling a “new normal”*

Toddsterpatriot, post: 2275781


Toddsterpatriot said:


> When you get a chance, post the top 5 things Obama did that made our GDP growth higher than Belgium's.



Why would I bother with that? The ARRA HAD A multitude of ‘things’ that improved the US recovery much higher and sooner than the recovery around the globe. 

You are of the opinion that the ARRA was doing nothing and thus Obama did nothing for eight years. 

Why should I list out all the things Obama did when you have made up your ignorance based mind that nothing Obama did deserves credit for producing what has turned out to be the longest economic expansion in US history and is still going.,

You can’t respond to my  statement you copied about the ‘new normal’. 

You are already on record that you believe Obama did nothing to boost the economy. You are an idiot. No one bothers to respond to an idiot when they ask for something idiotic.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 21, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> I wrote: *The reality is Obama did plenty to make the economy respond in a way that some economists are calling a “new normal”*
> 
> Toddsterpatriot, post: 2275781
> 
> ...


*Why would I bother with that?* 

You're right, why post the goods things you give him credit for?

*You are of the opinion that the ARRA was doing nothing *

It didn't do nothing. But it didn't pull us out of the recession either.

*and thus Obama did nothing for eight years*

He did lots of things. Most that did more harm than good.

*Why should I list out all the things Obama did *

You can't come up with a list. It makes you sad that I'm right.

*Obama did deserves credit for producing what has turned out to be the longest economic expansion in US history and is still going.,*​
If you slow down the economy enough, you could probably get a 20 or 30 year expansion. 
The economy at the end of that period would be much smaller than it could have been, but at least it was long.​​*You are already on record that you believe Obama did nothing to boost the economy. *​
Prove me wrong, list 5 good things. ​


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 21, 2019)

I wrote: *Why would I bother with that?*

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22761221 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> You're right, why post the goods things you give him credit for?



I know I’m right. You don’t give a damn about a list of all the good things he did for the recovery and economy that non-hatefilled intelligent people give him credit for.

Your request for a list is a ruse you employ to avoid dealing with facts or responding to a specific point that even a liar like you can’t dream up some lame comment. 

You are a fraud.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 21, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> I wrote: *Why would I bother with that?*
> 
> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22761221
> 
> ...



*You don’t give a damn about a list of all the good things he did for the recovery and economy *

You mean all the good things you can't list? LOL!


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 21, 2019)

I wrote*: The reality is Obama did plenty to make the economy respond in a way that some economists are calling a “new normal” *

And Toddster does not want to think about the “new normal” because TrumpO is presiding over the “new Normal” and confirming it’s existence.

This was his reply:

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22757819 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> When you get a chance, post the top 5 things Obama did that made our GDP growth higher than Belgium's.



You see Toddster cannot accept the “new normal” because it means Obama’s record on the economy is normal / not weak. And TrumoO is presiding over “new normal” GDP growth same as Obama’s. 


The Trump Administration argues that its policies will return the economy to growth rates of 3 percent or more like those achieved in the second half of the last century. CBO’s more sober assessment reflects the importance of demographic factors like the retirement of the baby boom generation that, without greater immigration, will slow population and potential labor force growth substantially. CBO also projects that, while potential productivity growth will improve somewhat relative to its recent past, it will not match the 1.7 percent average rate achieved over the entire 1950-2017 period — which included 2.4 percent average annual productivity growth in 1950-73. CBO is not infallible, but its projections are more like those of other mainstream analyses than the Trump Administration’s are. Chart Book: Tracking the Post-Great Recession Economy
Watch Toddster run again from reality and ask for some stupid list.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 21, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> I wrote*: The reality is Obama did plenty to make the economy respond in a way that some economists are calling a “new normal” *
> 
> And Toddster does not want to think about the “new normal” because TrumpO is presiding over the “new Normal” and confirming it’s existence.
> 
> ...



I wrote*: The reality is Obama did plenty to make the economy respond in a way that some economists are calling a “new normal” *

Yes, economists who wanted to excuse Obama's crappy economic performance decided that the economy will never grow strongly again. That would mean Obama wasn't bad, just typical. 

*Watch Toddster run again from reality and ask for some stupid list.*

Your inability to post the things Obama did to make us overperform Belgium is hilarious!
If he'd gotten Cap and Trade enacted, would we have done 1% better per year? 2% better?
If he'd have wasted...err...invested another $1 trillion in solar, would that have added another 1%? 2%?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 22, 2019)

I wrote*: The reality is Obama did plenty to make the economy respond in a way that some economists are calling a “new normal”*

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22763208 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Yes, economists who wanted to excuse Obama's crappy economic performance decided that the economy will never grow strongly again. That would mean Obama wasn't bad, just typical.



Regardless and so far, unfortunately for those mired deeply in the TrumpO cult, even under the greatest economic genius president TrumpO with two years of GOP control of Congress and massive tax cuts for the rich and corporations,  those economists are right. It means TrumpO isnt bad, just typical.

But according to you TrumpO is weak.

Are you going to revise your opinion of  TrumpO to “normal” as in “new normal”.

Obama best single year 2.9 GDP.

TrumpO best single year 2.9 GDP

Very very normal in the record setting expansion that Obama started.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 22, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> I wrote*: The reality is Obama did plenty to make the economy respond in a way that some economists are calling a “new normal”*
> 
> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22763208
> 
> ...



No, I'm not convinced that Obozo's crappy performance is the best we can do going forward.

Thanks for not posting a list of the things that he did to help the economy.

When his biggest sycophants won't say what he did.....that's very telling.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 22, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22765208 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> No, I'm not convinced that Obozo's crappy performance is the best we can do going forward.



That’s ok. You’ve already expressed your opinion that TrumpO’s expansion is weak. I take that to mean it’s a crappy performance as well.

Perhaps there will be a return to steady single year GDP above 3.0 but it’s not in the foreseeable future with TrumpO at the helm.

So when TrumpO O tells you he has produced the greatest economy ever you call him on that bullshit, right?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 22, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22765208
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Trump's weak expansion is still stronger than Obozo's weaker expansion.

Still working on the list of all the good things Obozo did for the economy? LOL!

I'll help you start.


1) Left office
2) …….
3) ……. 
4) …….
5) …….


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 22, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22766222 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Trump's weak expansion is still stronger than Obozo's weaker expansion.



TrumpO had a roughly 4.0 GDP head start and many more advantages than Obama had. But he still can’t put together two consecutive years that are better than Obama’s best two years. That after promising his tax cuts would boost GDP well over 3.0 for years to come and that he would eliminate the Federal deficit by the end of his second term. 

So nothing stronger out out of TrumpO yet and his final year is headed towards being closer to  1.0 GDP than 4.0 GDP. 

Not seeing how TrumpO's 2.9 GDP high mark amidst the increased flood of increased debt during record low employment should be considered strong in any sense of that word.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 22, 2019)

If you give Trump 7 years of 0% rates and dump $1.4 trillion of fresh QE into the system, then you can whine about the number that results, it'd be higher than 2.9%, that's for sure.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 22, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22768470 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> If you give Trump 7 years of 0% rates and dump $1.4 trillion of fresh QE into the system, then you can whine about the number that results, it'd be higher than 2.9%, that's for sure.



But then you’d have to give him nine million suddenly unemployed, banks/financials and automakers on the brink of bankruptcy and a global recession that hangs around for a while, and 200,000 US troops needing to be extricated from Bush’s two unfinished wars.

You are a liar if you think TrumpO couid have handled that situation as well as Obama did.

Dream on idiot.

TrumpO can’t handle much of the good situation he was handed. He has to cry for the Fed to crazily lower rates during unemployment being about as low as it possibly can go.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 22, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22768470
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Obama did almost everything wrong.
Even a moron like you could have done better.

Funny that even a diehard Obama fluffer like you can't come up with a list of 5 things he did to help the economy.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 22, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22768470
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*But then you’d have to give him nine million suddenly unemployed, banks/financials and automakers on the brink of bankruptcy and a global recession that hangs around for a while, and 200,000 US troops needing to be extricated from Bush’s two unfinished wars. *

What the hell are you babbling about? 
Obozo had 0% rates until December 2015. There weren't nine million suddenly unemployed then.
QE3 ended in October 2014. There weren't nine million suddenly unemployed then. 
But it wasn't until after that fresh injection of $1.4 trillion of QE that he finally hit 2.9%.

And still no list from you. Hilarious!!!


----------



## Faun (Jul 22, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> If you give Trump 7 years of 0% rates and dump $1.4 trillion of fresh QE into the system, then you can whine about the number that results, it'd be higher than 2.9%, that's for sure.


Thanks for admitting tax cuts don't work.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 22, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > If you give Trump 7 years of 0% rates and dump $1.4 trillion of fresh QE into the system, then you can whine about the number that results, it'd be higher than 2.9%, that's for sure.
> ...



Trump had higher growth with tax cuts than Obama had with tax hikes.


----------



## Faun (Jul 22, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


And yet, they both had their best years hit 2.9% GDP growth. So no, not really.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 22, 2019)

Faun said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



$1.4 trillion in QE is awesome.

You know what QE is now, right? LOL!


----------



## Faun (Jul 22, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...


Apparently, better than tax cuts plus $1.5 trillion in deficits.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 22, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22768470 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> If you give Trump 7 years of 0% rates and dump $1.4 trillion of fresh QE into the system,



Toddster wrote:* If you give Trump 7 years of 0% rates and dump $1.4 trillion of fresh QE into the system,*


I wrote: *But then you’d have to give him nine million suddenly unemployed, banks/financials and automakers on the brink of bankruptcy and a global recession that hangs around for a while, and 200,000 US troops needing to be extricated from Bush’s two unfinished wars.*

Here is your response to to what I wrote:

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22768595. 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> What the hell are you babbling about? Obozo had 0% rates until December 2015. There weren't nine million suddenly unemployed then.



First off, you said TrumpO must get 7 years of 0% rates to produce a better economy than Obama. That’s actually a put down for your orange clown. So don’t blame me that you are an idiot.

Secondly if you want to create a scenario for a comparison as to where TrumpO couid move the economy having the the same rates as Obama then TrumpO must have exactly the same conditions that Obama had on day one.

In your ridiculousy stupid supposition “If you give Trump 7 years of 0%”  you’d have to give TrumpO the exact same conditions from the start and then say go.

What happens after the start wouid be the theoretical result you are looking for. Of course there should not be “nine million suddenly unemployed” four years after TrumpO’s fictional start.

But there should be ”nine million suddenly unemployed” at TrumpO’s start if the orange clown were to be given seven years of zero rates.

You are indeed a moron.

You want TrumpO to have seven years of zero rates and start with unemployment at 4.7 %

You don’t have much faith in your idiot orange clown, do you?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 23, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22768470
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*First off, you said TrumpO must get 7 years of 0% rates to produce a better economy than Obama. *

Nah. Obozo had 7 years of 0% rates and $1.4 trillion of fresh QE and all he hit was 2.9%?
That's how weak he was.

Still no list of his economic awesomeness? DURR


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 23, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22769467 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Nah. Obozo had 7 years of 0% rates and $1.4 trillion of fresh QE and all he hit was 2.9%?



Obama had 0% rates for a reason.

All the reasons I gave you.

You continue to ignore the context and reality of the situation Obama faced. The reality that Obama fixed for TrumpO.

You cannot ignore the deep dark recession that  Obama confronted and just cry and complain that poor lil DonnyJ had to deal with damn near full employment and reasonable Fed rates for an economy that TrumpO was fortunate to be handed.

TrumpO promised 4.0% when he suckered you in. He did not qualify that by saying he needed 0% rates in order to do it. He got his debt infested tax cuts and still cannot beat Obama’s 2.9.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 23, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22769467
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*Obama had 0% rates for a reason.*

I agree. Almost everything he did was bad for the economy.
The adults had to try something.

*You cannot ignore the deep dark recession that  Obama confronted *

It was awful. And it ended in June 2009.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 23, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22768648 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Trump had higher growth with tax cuts than Obama had with tax hikes.



TrumpO does not have higher growth than Obama, liar. He is tied with Obama for single year GDP at 2.9%. You know that.

For that tie, we must ask ourselves, which policy has actually produced the better result in terms of the overall economic health of our country?

According to Emily Cochrane, Alan Rappeport and Jim Tankersley on July 22, 2019 in The NY Times, “The federal *budget deficit has increased by an average of 15 percent* for each fiscal year he *[TrumpO]* has been in office.

Or

In *[Obama’s] *second term, *deficits fell by an average of 11 percent *per fiscal year.


As president, Mr. Trump has overseen both a binge in discretionary spending, the part of the federal budget governed by annual spending bills, and a plunge in expected tax revenues as a result of the tax cuts that stand as his signature legislative achievement. The federal budget deficit has increased by an average of 15 percent for each fiscal year he has been in office.

Mr. Obama ran large deficits in his first term in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis. But in his second term, deficits fell by an average of 11 percent per fiscal year.     Federal Budget Would Raise Spending by $320 Billion

Although Obama's 2.9 high growth is tied with TrumpO’s 2.9 high growth, TrumpO increased government spending and reduced government revenue to get his.

With  TrumpO's trillion dollar deficits piling up on our future, will it be worth it for TrumpO to claim his “tie” at 2.9% GDP in 2018 growth was the greatest economy in US history?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 24, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Can you name 5 things he did that actually helped the economy?



Do you count cutting spending and reducing the size of the deficit as ‘helping’ it ‘hindering’ economic growth?

Who knows what you think Toddster.

Welcome to Greece on Steroids.  thank you TrumpO.

“When you hit $24 trillion, and we’re going to be there very soon, because it’s building up very quickly . . . when we hit that $24 trillion number, we become Greece on steroids,” he said in August 2015. “I mean, we have a lot of problems in this country.”

In his second term Obama reduced the debt every year by reducing government spending.

That’s not good for higher GDP but good for debt reduction

TrumpO has boosted government spending and cut revenue to get one  year of GDP at 2.8.

Obama’s 2.9 cane with decreased spending and lower debt.

TrumpO’s 2.9 comes with increased spending and higher debt.

You tell us which is better and ‘helps’  the economy.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 24, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22768648
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*TrumpO does not have higher growth than Obama, liar. He is tied with Obama for single year GDP at 2.9%. *

If each had only served one year with that growth rate, you'd be right, but that's not the case.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 24, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Can you name 5 things he did that actually helped the economy?
> ...



*Do you count cutting spending and reducing the size of the deficit as ‘helping’ it ‘hindering’ economic growth?*

Obama cut spending? When? Link?

*Obama’s 2.9 cane with decreased spending and lower debt.*

0% rates and $1.4 trillion in QE is cool. Obama never lowered the debt.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 24, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Obama never lowered the debt.



Yes he did, idiot. 3 years removed from the Great Bush Recession he lowered the annual deficit

In his second term Obama reduced the debt every year by reducing government spending.


NotfooledbyW, post: 22775734, 





NotfooledbyW said:


> In *[Obama’s] *second term, *deficits fell by an average of 11 percent *per fiscal year.



Trump is increasing the debt by 15% per fiscal year. 

Why is that? And do you think TrumpO is making America great by running up the debt after Obama’s had the deficits going down four for years.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 24, 2019)

i wrote: *TrumpO does not have higher growth than Obama, liar. He is tied with Obama for single year GDP at 2.9%*

Toddsterpatriot, post: 2277761 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> *. *
> 
> If each had only served one year with that growth rate, you'd be right, but that's not the case.



Idiot. TrumpO said "Obama is the first president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth," Trump said during an Oct. 28 campaign rally in Manchester, N.H.

Obama had served 7.75 years when TrumpO disparaged Obama’s record based on a single year never getting above 3.0% growth. 

TrumoO has served 2.5 years and has not had a single year above 3.% growth. 

TrumpO does not have higher growth than Obama. And it’s not likely that he never will. 

TrumpO’s stimulus has fizzled out. No boom from that tax cut fiasco.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 24, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Obama never lowered the debt.
> ...



Obama never lowered the debt.

*Yes he did, idiot. *

No he didn't, moron.

*3 years removed from the Great Bush Recession he lowered the annual deficit*

Now that you've admitted you don't understand the difference between national debt and annual deficit......


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 24, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22779332 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Now that you've admitted you don't understand the difference between national debt and annual deficit.....



I know the difference and I know that you are an idiot for not knowing that lower deficits means lower debt.

Obama’s first term added debt as needed to recover from the Great Bush Recession.

Obama’s second term brought lower deficits and that lowered the total debt of the nation.

TrumpO on the other hand has been increasing the deficit year after year.


In FY 2016 the federal deficit was *$585 billion.*

In FY 2017 the federal deficit was *$665 billion.*

In FY 2018 the federal deficit was *$779 billion.*

In FY 2019, the federal government projects  the deficit will be *$1,092 billion. 

*


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 24, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22779332
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*lower deficits means lower debt.*

FFS, no it doesn't.

*Obama’s second term brought lower deficits and that lowered the total debt of the nation.*​
Nope. Every single deficit made the debt higher, none made it lower.
​


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 24, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22781325 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Nope. Every single deficit made the debt higher, none made it lower



It made the debt lower than it wiuid have been with a higher deficit. You moron. 

If you think Obama’s 586 billion deficit adds as much to the debt as TrumpO’s 1000 billion deficit does you are indeed a moron.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 24, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22781325
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You have to be an idiot to claim a $586 billion deficit reduced the debt.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 25, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22781492,  





Toddsterpatriot said:


> You have to be an idiot to claim a $586 billion deficit reduced the debt.



You incompetent illiterate moron. The 586 billion deficit happened in 2016 right. The national debt is an accumulated total right.

So TrumpO has increased spending and eliminated revenue to the tune of a projected 1,000 billion deficit for 2019.

So you tell me had Obama produced a 1000 billion deficit in 2016 that it wouid not have added 414 billion to the nation’s debt in 2017.


It was 586 billion. The opposite of ‘added’ is ‘reduced’. I am correct. You are the idiot as usual.

The National debt was lower than it wouid have been in 2017 had Obama spent more and cut revenue as terribly as TrumpO has since taking office.

Your have to admit that once out of the shadow of the Great Bush Recession Obama’s Presidency was close to being twice fiscally responsible as the TrumpO sham as measured by deficits in roughly the same GDP economic conditions.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 25, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22781492,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*The 586 billion deficit happened in 2016 right. The national debt is an accumulated total right.*

So you'll stop lying and claiming Obama reduced the debt? Awesome!

* The opposite of ‘added’ is ‘reduced’. *

The debt in 2016 was larger than the debt in 2015.
Because Obama added to the debt and didn't reduce the debt.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 25, 2019)

I wrote: *The opposite of ‘added’ is ‘reduced’.*


Toddsterpatriot, post: 22783261 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> The debt in 2016 was larger than the debt in 2015.
> Because Obama added to the debt and didn't reduce the debt.



I didn’t say that Obama didn’t add to the debt.

I see you didn’t reply to my full statement:

NotfooledbyW, post: 22782252 





NotfooledbyW said:


> So you tell me had Obama produced a 1000 billion deficit in 2016 that it wouid not have added 414 billion to the nation’s debt in 2017.



So if you can’t tell me that if Obama had produced a $1000 billion deficit in 2016 that it wouid not have added $414 billion to the nation’s debt in 2017 don’t bother to reply.

Lower deficits produce lower debt than higher deficits. That is a fact,

This might explain TrumpO’s $1000 billion deficits or worse this year.

His tax cuts have turned out to be a massive fail.

The GDPNow model estimate for real GDP growth (seasonally adjusted annual rate) in the second quarter of 2019 is *1.3 percent* on July 25, down from 1.6 percent on July 17.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 25, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> I wrote: *The opposite of ‘added’ is ‘reduced’.*
> 
> 
> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22783261
> ...



*I didn’t say that Obama didn’t add to the debt.*

You're lying.






Q1 2019 watch - if under 3.0% - where is Trump’s economic miracle - can Trump beat O’s 2.9% ever?

Is that clear enough?
Maybe I should zoom in?





Clear yet?





How about now?

That's twice in post #1240. Obama "reduced the debt every year" or Obama "...….lower debt"

Were you lying? Or just mistaken?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 25, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22784810 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> That's twice in post #1240. Obama "reduced the debt every year" or Obama "...….lower debt"



You leave out that I was referring to Obama’s second term. Obama reduced debt by reducing deficits on average 11% compared to his first term with much higher deficits. 

I was contrasting that with TrumpO going the opposite direction by increasing debt by 15% because of higher deficits. 

Now if you can convince me mathematically that lower deficits do not lower debt and that higher deficits do not increase debt then you can call me a liar, 

Until you do you are still a moron. 

Looks like you are stuck being a moron / no way out.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 25, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22784810
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*You leave out that I was referring to Obama’s second term. *

The debt was higher every year under Obama.

*Now if you can convince me mathematically that lower deficits do not lower debt *

Every deficit increases the national debt.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 25, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22786691 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Every deficit increases the national debt.



I didn’t say it doesn’t.

What would you prefer happen this year? Obama’s 2016 deficit st $586bn or TrumpO’s $1000bn? 

So tell me why you prefer the $586 billion even though Obama did it. 

Would the nation’s debt be lower, less, reduced  if TrumpO could reduce his 2019 deficit to Obama’s 2016 level?

Thank you in advance for admitting you are a moron.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 25, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22786691
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Every deficit increases the national debt.

*I didn’t say it doesn’t.*

Ummm…..

*Now if you can convince me mathematically that lower deficits do not lower debt *

Now you realize lower deficits don't lower debt? Excellent!

It'd be okay to admit you misspoke.....





Just say you meant to say...

*In his second term Obama reduced the deficit every year by reducing government spending.
*
Running around pretending you didn't make a mistake just makes you look like an even bigger moron.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 25, 2019)

I wrote: *Obama’s second term brought lower deficits and that lowered the total debt of the nation.*

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22781325 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Nope. Every single deficit made the debt higher, none made it lower.​



Is every single deficit exactly the same amount?

Do you agree that (A) and (B) are true? 

(A) “The *debt* is the total amount of money the U.S. government owes. It represents the accumulation of past *deficits*, minus surpluses. ...”

(B) “A *deficit* year increases the *debt*, while a surplus year decreases the *debt* as more money is received than spent”

So why are you arguing there is no relationship between the total amount of a deficit year and the accumulated total of all the past deficit years minus surpluses?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 25, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> I wrote: *Obama’s second term brought lower deficits and that lowered the total debt of the nation.*
> 
> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22781325
> 
> ...



Obama didn't reduce the debt. Obama didn't lower the debt. Not even once. Not even a little.
You misspoke. Stop digging.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 25, 2019)

*I wrote: Now if you can convince me mathematically that lower deficits do not lower debt. *

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22787222 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Now you realize lower deficits don't lower debt? Excellent!



You are a complete moron to say that.

You are saying there is no relationship between the total amount of each deficit year and the total amount of the national debt.

You guys

They don’t make very many TrumpO goons much dumber than you.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 25, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> *I wrote: Now if you can convince me mathematically that lower deficits do not lower debt. *
> 
> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22787222
> 
> ...



You fucked up, just admit it.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 25, 2019)

How can any deficit lower debt. More Leftist logic.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 25, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 2278722 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Just say you meant to say...
> 
> *In his second term Obama reduced the deficit every year by reducing government spending.
> *
> Running around pretending you didn't make a mistake just makes you look like an even bigger moron.



I’m ok with saying it that way as well because it means exactly the same thing.

You do not dispute that the “debt” is the result of adding up all the “deficits” minus the surpluses. And since you cannot dispute that fact, it has to mean that you agree that reducing ‘deficits’ actually and truly reduce the ‘debt’. The nation owes less money for every single dollar that the deficit goes down.

Yes, Obama reduced the deficits in his second term. And that reality you concede is true also simultaneously reduced the debt. Just like I said. 

I didn’t make a mistake. It exposes clearly what an idiot you are.

Your obsession with semantics prevents you from admitting that Obama’s last year in office produced nearly half the $1 trillion deficit that TrumpO is producing this year and for many years to come.

Your defense of TrumpO’s deficit calamity is that higher deficits and lower deficits have no impact on the national debt.

So I’m glad I wrote it the way I did because you’ve gone on record writing some very stupid things that we may have not seen if you were not obsessed with trivial semantics.

Tfanks again.

Exposing the stupidity of TrumpOroids is most of the fun of being here.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 26, 2019)

“Reduce our *$18 trillion in debt*, because, believe me, we’re in a bubble.“  Here's Donald Trump's Presidential Announcement Speech

Donald Trump: “We’ve got to get rid of the $19 trillion in *debt*.”

Bob Woodward: “How long would that take?”

Trump: “I think I could do it fairly quickly, because of the fact the numbers…”

Woodward: “What’s fairly quickly?”

Trump: “Well, I would say over a period of *eight years. *And I’ll tell you why.”

Here's Donald Trump's Presidential Announcement Speech

AzogtheDefiler, post: 22787569, 





AzogtheDefiler said:


> How can any deficit lower debt. More Leftist logic.



Easy. You increase revenue and reduce spending in the current year. Then you compare it to the previous year(s). Now if the current year is lower than the previous year(s) you have lowered the debt. You have begun to reduce the amount of money the Federal Governnent owes.

I compared Obama’s second term to his first and it is quite clear that Obama effectively reduced the amount of money that the Federal givernment owes. He did that by reducing the deficits in his second term as opposed to his first term. He ended with s $586 billion deficit in 2016.

Then in 2016 we got TrumpO and by the end of his third year he has pissed away the downward momentum that Obama handed off. we are getting deficits over a $trillion for years to come.

When is the last time the White House has brought up his campaign pledge to eliminate the entire *debt*  in eight years?

You idiots believe in your potus idiot. Why? I’ll never know.

TrumpO reality sets in this fiscal year:


The federal deficitshot up by about 38% in the first seven months of the fiscal year, in part because of lower receipts following the $1.5 trillion tax-cut package that took effect last year. That was despite a strong economy, which typically prompts lawmakers to take steps to lower it.    Trump vowed to pay off the national debt in 8 years. But he’s touting a budget deal that would raise spending by more than $300 billion. | Markets Insider
TrumpO is increasing the deficit and debt every single day,

And you want to quibble over using the words deficit and debt in some pure and proper way.

You should be asking “How can TrumoO the idiot POTUS eliminate debt by increasing the deficit x 38% this year. 

He should ask Obama how to do it.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 26, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22787563 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> You fucked up, just admit it.



I told you why. You can’t dispute my explanation I see.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 26, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> “Reduce our *$18 trillion in debt*, because, believe me, we’re in a bubble.“  Here's Donald Trump's Presidential Announcement Speech
> 
> Donald Trump: “We’ve got to get rid of the $19 trillion in *debt*.”
> 
> ...



You need a SURPLUS to lower debt. It is not a even a political comment. It is basic mathematics. You dumb Leftist. Your TDS has eroded your already mediocre math skills.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 26, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 2278722
> 
> 
> 
> ...



​*I’m ok with saying it that way as well because it means exactly the same thing.*​
No, saying he reduced the debt every year in his second term is not exactly the same thing as saying he reduced the deficit every year in his second term.​​* And that reality you concede is true also simultaneously reduced the debt. *​
If you can show a year over year reduction in the debt under Obama, I'll stop pointing out your idiocy.​


​


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 26, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > “Reduce our *$18 trillion in debt*, because, believe me, we’re in a bubble.“  Here's Donald Trump's Presidential Announcement Speech
> ...



He stuck his foot in his mouth, now he's working on swallowing his entire leg.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 27, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler, post: 22788338 





AzogtheDefiler said:


> You need a SURPLUS to lower debt.



Donald Trump: “We’ve got to get rid of the $19 trillion in _*DEBT*_.”

Bob Woodward: “How long would that take?”

Trump: “I think I could do it fairly quickly, because of the fact the numbers…”

Woodward: “What’s fairly quickly?”

Trump: “Well, I would say over a period of *eight years. *And I’ll tell you why.”  Here's Donald Trump's Presidential Announcement Speech

TrumpO said that when the deficit was $586 billion and he was a lying candidate and Obama was President.  It then went up to $666 billion in 2017 after he became a lying president.

In other words TrumpO began making America Great Again by increasing *DEBT *his first year by 80 billion dollars 

But you and your idiot pal there are saying that it is wrong to say that TrumpO has ncreased the *DEBT *by $80 bn over Obama in his first year. You want a semantics argument that I made a horrible mistake because it’s as if I didn’t refer to the increase (or reduction) being apllied to the *DEFICIT*. 

You two TrumpOroids are therefore both making the argument that TrumpO and increased the _*DEFICIT*_ by $80 bn but the _*DEBT *_did not go up because if that at all.

You are fools, two fools congratulating themselves for being idiots on a public forum. 

Do you want to tell us how exactly the *DEBT *did not go up an extra $80 bn or so during the first year that TrumpO was President when the *DEFICIT *went up by that amount, 

So instead of  ‘reducing’ or  ‘getting rid of _*DEBT *_as TrumpO promised you two fools argue that he began his presidency by increasing *DEFICIT but not the DEBT* . 

 Put your heads together and explain how that is supposed to work.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 27, 2019)

Oh oh! What’s your this?



Seems pretty notable that the president can no longer claim even one year of 3+% growth, with last year’s GDP numbers revised down to 2.5%,” she said. “After all the tax cuts and deregulation, growth is still plugging along about where it was under Obama.”

The myth of the ‘Trump economy’ is going down in flames



I believe TrumoO is no longer tied with Obama at 2.8%


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 27, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> AzogtheDefiler, post: 22788338
> 
> 
> 
> ...



My argument has zero to do with Trump. My argument is that you cannot begin to reduce debt until you have a surplus.


----------



## Faun (Jul 27, 2019)

protectionist said:


> Golfing Gator said:
> 
> 
> > Thanks for verifying that Trump has not had a year over 3%.
> ...


*Thanks for showing how trump is the only president to not have a quarter where GDP was higher than 3.5%.*


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 27, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler, post: 22795177 





AzogtheDefiler said:


> My argument has zero to do with Trump. My argument is that you cannot begin to reduce debt until you have a surplus.



That (your)  argument has nothing to do with the point I made. You are talking about reducing the _*national*_ debt. I was talking about reducing debt  lin the general sense of the word. And you attacked

And you say ‘nothing to do with TrumpO. What the hell does TDS mean?

AzogtheDefiler, post: 22788338 





AzogtheDefiler said:


> You dumb Leftist. Your TDS has eroded your already mediocre math skills.



My math skills are fine. Your honesty and comprehension skills suck

I have posted my explanation as to why my reference to debt, that you questioned, is proper.

Now you run from that explanation.

This explanation:

NotfooledbyW, post: 22794789 





NotfooledbyW said:


> Do you want to tell us how exactly the *DEBT *did not go up an extra $80 bn or so during the first year that TrumpO was President when the *DEFICIT *went up by that amount,




See the post for the full explanation. Or run.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 28, 2019)

Still waiting for the explanation as to why or how it is that money added to or reduced from the annual deficit does not add to or reduce from the national debt.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 28, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> AzogtheDefiler, post: 22795177
> 
> 
> 
> ...



What the hell is “TrumpO”? You’re a dumb Leftist. You stepped into it. So let me gauge a baseline. So you in general, forget Trump, believe that debt may be reduced if say a corporation is operating at a deficit?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 28, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler 





AzogtheDefiler said:


> So let me gauge a baseline. So you in general, forget Trump, believe that debt may be reduced if say a corporation is operating at a deficit?




Yes you braindead moron. If a corporation operates yearly deficits for four consecutive years that are LOWER on average than it was the previous consecutive four years it’s debt is being reduced. The debt has not been eliminated but it is truly being reduced .


Because the total debt is the accumulated total of surpluses and deficits.

It really is you clueless twerp.

That is what I wrote about Obama’s first and second term.

And you jumped on it just like any ordinary TrumpO duped fool wouid.

Now apologize for being so stupid.

Likewise TrumpO is not eliminating any debt or reducing it. He is increasing it every year he’s been in office.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 28, 2019)

Still waiting to see a year-over-year reduction in the national debt under Obama.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 28, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> AzogtheDefiler
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Here is a chart of Obama reducing the debt his last in his last four years. Do you see it?




Federal Debt: Total Public Debt | FRED | St. Louis Fed


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 28, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler
> ...



I can see it you freakin idiot. The rate of increase of debt slows down after 2012. Its enough to be visible on the chart. You fool.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 28, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> AzogtheDefiler
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Hold on. So if a corporation has $10mil in debt and pays a 5% interest rate and has a deficit in earnings of $500k in year one and losses of $250k in year two, how is the $10mil in debt reduced? Please explain.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 28, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler
> ...



The dude is obviously insane or cannot do basic math. All set with him.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 28, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



*The rate of increase of debt slows down after 2012.*

Yes, your claim he reduced the debt was a lie.


----------



## Faun (Jul 28, 2019)

Trump is the only president to never have a quarter of real GDP growth above 3.5%.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 28, 2019)

Faun said:


> Trump is the only president to never have a quarter of real GDP growth above 3.5%.



Give it time, Fawn


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 28, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Yes, your claim he reduced the debt was a lie.



How so? Deficits are debt.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 28, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Still waiting for the explanation as to why or how it is that money added to or reduced from the annual deficit does not add to or reduce from the national debt.



Still waiting?


----------



## Faun (Jul 28, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Trump is the only president to never have a quarter of real GDP growth above 3.5%.
> ...


LOLOL

I recall rightards saying the same thing when Bush couldn't find the stockpiles of WMD over which he invaded Iraq. _just you wait, he'll find them! Just you wait._





Spoiler



... still waiting


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 28, 2019)

Faun said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



I said The same thing about Bush. You’re a waste of space Leftist.


----------



## Faun (Jul 28, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...


You said what about Bush? _"give him time?"_


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 28, 2019)

Faun said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



I said The WMDs was a hoax you dummy. I didnt vote for Bush. But I am not beholden to any party. You worship the Blue brand like a sycophant


----------



## Old Yeller (Jul 28, 2019)

*Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 2000 - 2018*

*Date * *Dollar Amount*
09/30/2018 21,516,058,183,180.23
09/30/2017 20,244,900,016,053.51
09/30/2016 19,573,444,713,936.79
09/30/2015 18,150,617,666,484.33
09/30/2014 17,824,071,380,733.82 
09/30/2013 16,738,183,526,697.32
09/30/2012 16,066,241,407,385.89  ****chancy loses control  $7T later
09/30/2011 14,790,340,328,557.15
09/30/2010 13,561,623,030,891.79  ***ouch again $1.6T jump
09/30/2009 11,909,829,003,511.75 ***ouch $1.9T jump
09/30/2008 10,024,724,896,912.49
09/30/2007 9,007,653,372,262.48  ***chancy wins control
09/30/2006 8,506,973,899,215.23
09/30/2005 7,932,709,661,723.50
09/30/2004 7,379,052,696,330.32
09/30/2003 6,783,231,062,743.62
09/30/2002 6,228,235,965,597.16
09/30/2001 5,807,463,412,200.06
09/30/2000 5,674,178,209,886.86


----------



## Faun (Jul 28, 2019)

Old Yeller said:


> *Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 2000 - 2018*
> 
> *Date * *Dollar Amount*
> 09/30/2018 21,516,058,183,180.23
> ...


Who's "Chancy?"


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 28, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Yes, your claim he reduced the debt was a lie.
> ...



Yes, your claim he reduced the debt was a lie.


*How so? Deficits are debt.*

Durr…..





























Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)


----------



## Old Yeller (Jul 28, 2019)

Faun said:


> Old Yeller said:
> 
> 
> > *Historical Debt Outstanding - Annual 2000 - 2018*
> ...




Dont play dumb.  You know it is short for dishonest dirty Nancy Chuck Harry and all the loon.


----------



## Faun (Jul 28, 2019)

Old Yeller said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Old Yeller said:
> ...


LOLOL 

How could I know the silly nicknames you invent?

Regardless.... they took control again in January of this year and the debt is lower now than it was since February 12th.

You credit them with that too, am I right?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 28, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



You made an argument regarding corporate debt to which I replied. Why are you running from my reply?


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 28, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



Show me the reply,


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 28, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> AzogtheDefiler
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Your fucking idiot. If the Company is not making enough money to even cover the interest expense how is it reducing debt? You inept moron.


----------



## Old Yeller (Jul 28, 2019)

Faun said:


> Old Yeller said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...






Faun said:


> Regardless.... they took control again in January of this year and the debt is lower now than it was since February 12th.



Huh?  Debt is lower?  Debt is going down? Great if true? Doubtful since Spending is increased? Is income increasing faster than outgo?   Trump policies are working.  Wait till China agrees to more a fair arrangement.


----------



## Faun (Jul 28, 2019)

Old Yeller said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Old Yeller said:
> ...


2.12.19: 22,035,768,149,460
7.25.19: 22,022,943,775,070

So that's thanks to "Chancy," right? If you blame them for increasing the debt, I'm sure you credit them for stabilizing it. Right?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 28, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler, post: 22805335





AzogtheDefiler said:


> Your fucking idiot. If the Company is not making enough money to even cover the interest expense how is it reducing debt? You inept moron.



Since you cannot read, apparently you cannot get that the reduction in debt I was referring to was when comparing Obama’s second term of lower deficits to his first term of higher deficits. 

If that is too complicated try to find an adult that can work with you on understanding that national debt and debt are two distinct concepts. 

Deficits are debt. The national debt is debt. 

I was comparing the additional amount of debt being added from one period of time to the additional amount of debt being added to a second period of time. The second period of time less debt was being added. That is a reduction in the amount of debt being owed.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 28, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> AzogtheDefiler, post: 22805335
> 
> 
> 
> ...



No. I asked You to step outside the political realm and provide a baseline. You, like a fucking dumbass stated debt may be reduced if the corporation is not making any money. That is retard 101. Aka you. Do not hide behind politics, you fat coward.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 28, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler, post: 22802420 





AzogtheDefiler said:


> So let me gauge a baseline.



What was that supposed to mean?

My original point refers to a baseline that was Obama’s first term. During Obama’s second term less debt was added than the baseline. 

You are saying that is not possible. You are indeed stupid.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 28, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22804567, 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Durr



Where are you making a case that deficits are not debt?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 28, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler, post: 22806517 





AzogtheDefiler said:


> You, like a fucking dumbass stated debt may be reduced if the corporation is not making any money.



No I didn’t say that, liar.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 28, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22783261 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> Because Obama added to the debt and didn't reduce the debt.



I was not comparing 2016 to 2015 liar.,


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 28, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22804567,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Have you found that year in Obama's last term, where the debt was lower at the end than at the beginning?


----------



## Old Yeller (Jul 28, 2019)

Faun said:


> Old Yeller said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...




Yahoo.  Yes I give them credit for not spending all the increased revnue coming in!  I had no idea.  You got one foot off the list.

If you stop posting "obstruction" nonsense.....you can come off.  Congratulations.  You may be the first decent Left backing loon!


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 28, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22783261
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You lie didn't specify which year Obama lowered our debt.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 28, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler, post: 22806517





AzogtheDefiler said:


> You, like a fucking dumbass stated debt may be reduced if the corporation is not making any money.



I dibdnt say the corporation was not making any money..

That is a lie. Here is what I wrote: 

NotfooledbyW, post: 22803086



NotfooledbyW said:


> Yes you braindead moron. If a corporation operates yearly deficits for four consecutive years that are LOWER on average than it was the previous consecutive four years it’s debt is being reduced. The debt has not been eliminated but it is truly being reduced .



Why did you lie like that?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 28, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22806718 





Toddsterpatriot said:


> You lie didn't specify which year Obama lowered our debt.



I said first term compared to second term.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 28, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> ave you found that year in Obama's last term, where the debt was lower at the end than at the beginning?



I was not comparing the end of one year to its beginning.

It was comparing the second term to the first.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 28, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> AzogtheDefiler, post: 22806517
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yes you did. You are a fucking moron.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 28, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> AzogtheDefiler, post: 22806517
> 
> 
> 
> ...



How the fuck is their debt reduced when they cannot even pay the interest on it? You brain dead Leftist zombie.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 28, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22806718
> 
> 
> 
> ...



In his first term, the debt increased every year.
In his second term, the debt increased every year.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 28, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler, post: 22806517
> ...



You need to do the math.
If the deficit is $100 million in year one, $80 million in year two, $70 million in year three and $50 million in year four, the debt isn't really $300 million higher than at the start, "but it is truly being reduced".
Liberal math.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 28, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> In his first term, the debt increased every year.
> In his second term, the debt increased every year.



So what was the second term compared to the first term? Was the amount of increase the same or more or less. You tell me.


----------



## Faun (Jul 29, 2019)

Old Yeller said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > Old Yeller said:
> ...


Oh? Show that increased revenue.......


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 29, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > In his first term, the debt increased every year.
> ...



IDC if it increases by a penny, it still increases.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 30, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler, post: 22807430,





AzogtheDefiler said:


> IDC if it increases by a penny, it still increases.



Still can’t answer a simple question about making a comparison

NotfooledbyW 





NotfooledbyW said:


> So what was the second term compared to the first term? Was the amount of increase the same or more or less. You tell me.



If the first term increased by two pennies and the second term increased by one penny then the second term is actually a 50 percent reduction in the amount of deb to be dealt with and an improvement. 

Obama improved America’s debt situation when comparing his first term to his second.

TrumpO is making it worse so you must waste time arguing about semantics.

Why deny Obama’s good record and ignore TrumpO’s horrible record in debt just to get a like from an idiot message board poster who is in love with TrumpO.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 30, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> AzogtheDefiler, post: 22807430,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



What warped logic. So if my kid gets a 50 on their first test and a 55 on the their next text, both are still Fs but I should be happy because the 55 is not as bad as the 50? What the F is “TrumpO”? Are you in a mental institution?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 30, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> AzogtheDefiler, post: 22807430,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*If the first term increased by two pennies and the second term increased by one penny then the second term is actually a 50 percent reduction in the amount of deb to be dealt with and an improvement. *











$16.4 trillion at the end of his first term. $19.9 trillion at the end of his second term.

*Obama improved America’s debt situation when comparing his first term to his second.*

Is $19.9 trillion really an improvement over $16.4 trillion?


----------



## sealybobo (Jul 30, 2019)

rightwinger said:


> Trump promised four or five



U.S. trade negotiators open a new round of talks in China this week. But there appears to be little pressure for a settlement, even as the year-old conflict begins to weigh on the global economy.

"I don't know if they're going to make a deal," President Trump told reporters last week. "Maybe they will. Maybe they won't. I don't care, because we're taking in tens of billions of dollars' worth of tariffs."

The trade war began last summer when the Trump administration slapped tariffs on $50 billion worth of Chinese imports.


The U.S. now adds a 25% tax to some $250 billion in Chinese imports. Although Trump paints his tariffs as a windfall for the U.S. Treasury, economists say the bulk of the cost is paid by American businesses and consumers buying Chinese goods.


The battle has depressed trade between the countries. U.S. exports to China fell more than 30% in June compared to a year ago, while imports from China shrank by nearly 8%.


Leaders of the Federal Reserve have pointed to growing trade tensions as one factor behind a slowdown in worldwide economic growth.

"Uncertainties around global growth and trade continue to weigh on the outlook," Fed Chairman Jerome Powell told members of the House Financial Services Committee earlier this month.

The Fed is widely expected to cut interest rates this week, in an effort to prop up sagging growth in the U.S. Growth slowed from an annual rate of 3.1% in the first three months of the year to just 2.1% between April and June.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 30, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> What warped logic. So if my kid gets a 50 on their first test and a 55 on the their next text, both are still Fs but I should be happy because the 55 is not as bad as the 50? What the F is “TrumpO”? Are you in a mental institution?


m

You should be happy your kid got a 50 having such an ignorant parent. 

That’s a stupid analogy. Of course we should be happy if the debt owed by the US government is lower as time goes by. 

You should be unhappy that TrumpO has caused the debt to go up faster with loss of revenue and higher spending.


And then blame the Fed.





✔
Q2 GDP Up 2.1% Not bad considering we have the very heavy weight of the Federal Reserve anchor wrapped around our neck. Almost no inflation. USA is set to Zoom!
10:40 AM - Jul 26, 2019



Uhhh isn’t the greatest economy ever already zooming.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 30, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > What warped logic. So if my kid gets a 50 on their first test and a 55 on the their next text, both are still Fs but I should be happy because the 55 is not as bad as the 50? What the F is “TrumpO”? Are you in a mental institution?
> ...



So you admit you’re stupid as a 50 and a 55 are both Fs. You’re such a fucking moron.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 30, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Is $19.9 trillion really an improvement over $16.4 trillion?




Add the additional debt from the first term and compare it to the additional debt from the second term and that then subtract one from the other.   Idiot. Can you do that?


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 30, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Is $19.9 trillion really an improvement over $16.4 trillion?
> ...



LMAO. My middle schooler is better at math than you. What a stupid person you are.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 30, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Is $19.9 trillion really an improvement over $16.4 trillion?
> ...



Yup, $9.3 trillion, Obama added tons of debt.
It was actually more than that, because of TARP, but I don't want you to whine more than you already have.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 30, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> LMAO. My middle schooler is better at math than you. What a stupid person you are.




Can your middle schooler do what I asked? 



Add the additional debt from the first term and compare it to the additional debt from the second term and that then subtract one from the other.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 30, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > LMAO. My middle schooler is better at math than you. What a stupid person you are.
> ...



Even if you’re adding less debt, you’re still adding debt. Do you agree or disagree?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 30, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler, post: 22818080 





AzogtheDefiler said:


> Even if you’re adding less debt, you’re still adding debt. Do you agree or disagree?



Agree. That’s what I’m saying. Obama reduced the amount of debt being added to the “national” debt when comparing his second term to his first term. And that is good even though the “national” debt continued to grow through his first term.

If you bothered to read my posts I did not say the the “national” debt was being reduced.

My point was that Obama had the economy on a trajectory toward reducing debt, and along comes TrumpO claiming his tax cuts and trade deals would make it possible to eliminate the debt in eight years. Zero debt in eight years. That was TrumpO's campaign pledge.

Almost three of his four years are gone. He got his tax cuts and has been working his trade deal magic and TrumpO is giving us $trillion dollar deficits.

TrumpO is ADDING more debt. He has turned the good economy he inherited upside down. .

And all I’m hearing from rightwing goofballs and lunatics is that TrumpO has brought us the greatest economy ever and that Obama sucked having the slowest recovery since WWII.

I beg to differ.

Where do you stand on that? Are you done quibbling over semantics which is all the Toddster can do?


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 30, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> AzogtheDefiler, post: 22818080
> 
> 
> 
> ...



But debt was still being added and rates were super low. Neither he nor Trump seem to care about the deficit.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 30, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler, post: 22818905 





AzogtheDefiler said:


> Neither he nor Trump seem to care about the deficit.



Getting away from the recession Obama ‘cared’ enough about debt to slow the rate of growth of debt. 

TrumpO on the other hand was further from the worst recession since the Great Depression and with good employment numbers and low Fed rate to begin with, and then he enacts tax cuts which are failing to do what was forecast sending the economy to producing $trillion dollar deficits. 

And you lump TrumpO and Obama together as if I pointed out nothing about the huge difference in their economic record. 

You are not intellectually honest at all are you?


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 30, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> AzogtheDefiler, post: 22818905
> 
> 
> 
> ...



To me neither cared. You ignored the fact that he lowered rates to the floor. Trump has dealt with higher rates and that equates to higher interest expense.  Neither was willing to make the hard choice of cutting entitlements


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 30, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler, post: 22819247 





AzogtheDefiler said:


> You ignored the fact that he lowered rates to the floor.



Obama didn’t lower rates. You are back to being an idiot so quickly,


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 30, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> AzogtheDefiler, post: 22819247
> 
> 
> 
> ...



He didn’t directly but he certainly pressured the Fed to do so by printing money and stating that we need to lower interest rates.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 30, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> AzogtheDefiler, post: 22818905
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*Getting away from the recession Obama ‘cared’ enough about debt to slow the rate of growth of debt. *

Yeah, Obozo was a real budget hawk....always pushing to cut spending...…….DURR.


----------



## Faun (Jul 30, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler, post: 22819247
> ...


LOL

You just fucking said he did. Dayum, you rightards are truly insane.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 30, 2019)

Faun said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



How literal, Fawn. I restated what I meant.


----------



## Faun (Jul 30, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...


Yeah, after you were shown what an idiot you were for making such a ridiculous comment.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 30, 2019)

Faun said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



So you believe the President has zero impact on the Fed? Now who is the idiot?


----------



## Faun (Jul 30, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...


No, I said no such thing. You said, _"he lowered rates to the floor,"_ which is not possible since the "floor" was 0.25% and it was already lowered to that before he became president.

At least admit you're an idiot.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 30, 2019)

Faun said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



I restated what I meant. Mistakes happen. Look at you and your birth.


----------



## Faun (Jul 30, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...


Hey, if I wasn't born, who would point out what an idiot you are for blaming Obama for rates that were set before he became president?


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 30, 2019)

Faun said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



So he did or did not operate under low rates? That is what I meant.


----------



## Faun (Jul 30, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...


LOLOLOLOL

Are you too stupid to convey what you mean?

You said, _"he lowered rates to the floor"_

Either he did or you're an imbecile. Which is it?

And how about Trump? His best quarter is 3.5% GDP growth ... the only president to never do better than that.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 30, 2019)

Faun said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



It’s been how many years? If you dislike Trump then why did you vote for him? I already told you that I meant he operated at rates lowered to the floor. Mistakes happen.


----------



## Faun (Jul 30, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...


This is a forum of written words. I can only go by what you say. And what you said was that Obama lowered the rates. Which is beyond stupid since the rate was already at it's valley when he became president. And you only changed your idiotic position when you were called on it.

So what about trump being the only president who has not had GDP rise above 3.5%? That's a pretty shitty record, isn't it?


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 30, 2019)

Faun said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


So the fact that I said it was a mistake means nothing? LOL

OK Mr. Perfect.


----------



## Faun (Jul 30, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...


Not perfect, just better than you.

Regardless of your G-d given limitations.... 2½ years into trump's term ... 1½ years after his tax cuts ... the debt is up $2 trillion and GDP is has not been above 3.5% ... the only president to achieve that ...


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 30, 2019)

Faun said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



I agree. It is very disappointing.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 30, 2019)

“We are running out of the traditional ammunition that’s used in a recession, which is to lower interest rates,” Mr. Obama said at a news conference Tuesday. “It is critical that the other branches of government step up, and that’s why the economic recovery plan is so essential.” December 2008. See LINK below.
AzogtheDefiler, post: 2281927 





AzogtheDefiler said:


> He didn’t directly but he certainly pressured the Fed to do so by printing money and stating that we need to lower interest rates.



i don’t find any sources where Obama stated  that the Fed needed to lower interest rates. Why would he? The rate was virtually at zero before he was inaugurated.

I must assume you are lying because I found Obana saying this in December 2008

““We are running out of the traditional ammunition that’s used in a recession, which is to lower interest rates,” Obama, December 2008.​


> *​​Fed Cuts Key Rate to a Record Lows​*By​EDMUND L. ANDREW​ and​JACKIE CALMES​ *DEC. 16, 2008​*
> The move came as President-elect Barack Obama summoned his economic team to a four-hour meeting in Chicago to map out plans for an enormous economic stimulus measure that could cost anywhere from $600 billion to $1 trillion over the next two years.
> 
> The two huge economic stimulus programs, one from the Fed and one from the White House and Congress, set the stage for a powerful but potentially risky partnership between Mr. Obama and the Fed’s Republican chairman, Ben S. Bernanke.
> ...



Fed Cuts Key Rate to a Record Low


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 30, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> “We are running out of the traditional ammunition that’s used in a recession, which is to lower interest rates,” Mr. Obama said at a news conference Tuesday. “It is critical that the other branches of government step up, and that’s why the economic recovery plan is so essential.” December 2008. See LINK below.
> AzogtheDefiler, post: 2281927
> 
> 
> ...



Mistakes are not lies. What I meant was that he operated with cheaper monies than the current administration. Do you agree or disagree? I typed Erroneously, that doesn’t make it a lie. Why are you such an asshole?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Jul 30, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler, post: 22819883 





AzogtheDefiler said:


> What I meant was that he operated with cheaper monies than the current administration.



Sure, mistakes happen, but your ‘correction’ contains the lie I’m talking about.

You said Obama was ‘pressuring and “stating that we need to lower interest rates”

It’s the “stating” I’m calling you out on a lie.

That’s one helluva typo when you go around typing that Obama’s “stated” something when you don’t have a source for that claim.

AzogtheDefiler, post: 2281927 





AzogtheDefiler said:


> He didn’t directly but he certainly pressured the Fed to do so by printing money and stating that we need to lower interest rates.



Obama didn’t “state” what you said he stated. That is a lie. You got caught. Sorry.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Jul 30, 2019)

Faun said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...




*This is a forum of written words. I can only go by what you say. *

Like when you said "QE was the lowering interest rates to 0.25%"? That was funny.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 31, 2019)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...



He did not realize it was printing of money? Hmmm


----------



## Faun (Jul 31, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Toddsterpatriot said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...


Yes, I was wrong. Happens.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 31, 2019)

Faun said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Toddsterpatriot said:
> ...



You're also a hypocrite. It happens.


----------



## Faun (Jul 31, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 31, 2019)

Faun said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



Deny it all you want. You will 4ever be known as Faun the Hypocrite on this board.


----------



## Faun (Jul 31, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Jul 31, 2019)

Faun said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > Faun said:
> ...



It bothers you. Next time don't be a HYPOCRITE!


----------



## Faun (Jul 31, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler said:
> ...


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Aug 1, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler, post: 22818905 





AzogtheDefiler said:


> But debt was still being added and rates were super low. Neither he nor Trump seem to care about the deficit.



Trump’s Budget Deficits Could Almost Double Obama’s

Obama:

Fiscal 2013: $680 billion
Fiscal 2014: $485 billion
Fiscal 2015: $438 billion
Fiscal 2016: $587 billion

TrumpO;

Fiscal 2017: $665 billion
Fiscal 2018: $779 billion
Fiscal 2019: $896 billion
Fiscal 2020: $990 billion

But who cared more and who cares less when you go by the numbers?

And TrumpO is almost doubling Obama’s yesrly debt growth with unemployment at record lows. And the Fed just now cutting its rate to a historic low during record unemployment.

Obama was certainly doing better than TrumpO when comparing four years to four years in the most similar of economic growth and conditions. Overall with added debt in the mix TrumpO is presiding over a much weaker economy than Obama handed to him. 

Don’t you agree?

Or are you going to be a hypocrite and no longer consider added debt as a problem for the economy?


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Aug 1, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> AzogtheDefiler, post: 22818905
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It is very disappointing. I have stated this 10x now. I hope these are short term pains for long term gains. Obama was terrible for the country. Trump has been better but not in terms of debt management. 

Your comment about the economy being much weaker is false


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Aug 1, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler, post: 22828156, 





AzogtheDefiler said:


> Your comment about the economy being much weaker is false




Why? It is just about even on GDP and unemployment is low but TrumpO is near doubling the debt growth compared to Obama’s second term. 




AzogtheDefiler said:


> Obama was terrible for the country. Trump has been better but not in terms of debt management.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Aug 1, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> AzogtheDefiler, post: 22828156,
> 
> 
> 
> ...



How does our debt impact the economy? Please explain.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Aug 1, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler, post: 22830888 





AzogtheDefiler said:


> How does our debt impact the economy? Please explain.



Sorry I mistook you for a fiscal conservative.

Where do I start?


How about the ultra right Washington Examiner?

But the president is screwing over my generation. We’re the ones who will suffer through a recession when the debt bubble inevitably bursts and who will have to pay $1 trillion in taxes every year just to cover the _interest payments _on debt past generations accrued. Think about it: Our grandparents have maxed out their credit cards on a spending spree, and they're leaving the bill, and the interest, for us and our parents to pay off. It’s a disgrace.  President Trump must not sign the death warrant on my generation’s financial future

Apparently you prefer living off the credit card pretending times are good and that card will last forever. 

The strength and weakness I’m talking about is having an economy that is very good but at the same time is strong enough to pare down the growing debt. 

Trumpo’s Economy was marginally better than Obama’s last four years. Not a lot of strength there if you think about it. But in the debt side TrumpO is horrendous. 

He pledged to eliminate the entire debt in eight years but in reality he has nearly doubled Obama’s second term numbers wiry no end in sight with GDP running no higher than 2.5.?

TrumpO’s economy is weak weak weak. Even the Fed had to lower the rate to save it.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Aug 1, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> AzogtheDefiler, post: 22830888
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I get it but how does that impact our economy now? Only way IMO to pay down the debt is to attack entitlements and neither party is willing to do so. I have Zero allegiance to any party.

Notice how in the debates that asshole Don Lemon did not question the debt one time. Amazing.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Aug 2, 2019)

AzogtheDefiler, post: 22833146 





AzogtheDefiler said:


> I get it but how does that impact our economy now?



Here!s an impact,


Yet Donald Trump is on track to be an even bigger spender than Obama. Federal spending has increased by 7.5 percent, or almost $300 billion, over President Trump’s first couple of years in office. Budget Deficits Are Only Getting Bigger Under Trump

More Government spending contributes to a higher GDP making it look to the casual observer that TrumpO has produced a better economic conditions than Obama.

On GDP both Presidents are tied with their highest year being 2.9 percent. But TrumoO needed 7.5% more government stimulus to get to his 2.9 than Obama.

Why does your so-called zero party allegiance translate into TrumpO is much better than Obama on the economy.

That is an absurd conclusion.


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Aug 2, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> AzogtheDefiler, post: 22833146
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You keep cutting and pasting. That debt is there and we are paying interest. It doesn’t impact you or me in our daily lives


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Aug 20, 2019)

*I wrote: You said Obama did nothing to stimulate the recovery*

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22752462,


Toddsterpatriot said:


> *. *You think $8 a week caused the recession to end?




Why is TrumpO considering giving workers $8 a week in payroll tax cuts to stimulate the greatest economy ever?





TrumpO’s failure to be the first president since the Great Bush Recession to have a full year of GDP at 3% or higher has forced him to think  about doing what Obama did in 2009 to save the dying Bush economy.

Will payroll tax cuts help TrumpO get re-elected. I’m curious to know what you think.

And are you going to straighten out Fox News that payroll tax cuts are not tax cuts?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Aug 20, 2019)

NotfooledbyW said:


> *I wrote: You said Obama did nothing to stimulate the recovery*
> 
> Toddsterpatriot, post: 22752462,
> 
> ...



*Why is TrumpO considering giving workers $8 a week in payroll tax cuts to stimulate the greatest economy ever?*

Trump probably saw you giving $8 a week credit for ending a depression...…...

*Will payroll tax cuts help TrumpO get re-elected. *

Maybe. Are the Dem candidates all going to promise to hike taxes?

*I’m curious to know what you think.*

Temporary tax credits are pointless.

*And are you going to straighten out Fox News that payroll tax cuts are not tax cuts?*

If they call a "making work pay tax credit" a tax cut, I will definitely tell them that.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Feb 16, 2020)

​
TrumpO’s economy way below 2017 Tax Cut  Projections. A will never beat beat Obama economy when based on GDP growth:


The U.S. economy grew 2.1% in the fourth quarter, matching estimates.​
The 2.3% growth in U.S. gross domestic product for the full year was below the 2.9% increase from 2018 and the 2.4% gain in 2017.
It also was well below the White House's projections following the 2017 tax revamp.
Continued gains in consumer spending helped propel the economy in the year's final three months
Fourth-quarter GDP rose only 2.1% and full-year 2019 posts slowest growth in three years at 2.3%
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2020/01/30/us-gdp-q4-2019-first-reading.html
 WASHINGTON — The U.S. economy grew 2.1% in the fourth quarter, closing out a year in which gross domestic product decelerated to its slowest pace in three years amid a continuing drag in business investment.
​So m what’s with the TRUMPO drag on business investments?


----------



## Dragonlady (Feb 16, 2020)

AzogtheDefiler said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > AzogtheDefiler, post: 22833146
> ...



That debt is NOT there.  It's growing every single day, because Trump cut taxes, and put it on your credit card.  The bill is coming due, and you can't pay it.  

You should be balancing the economy in a good economy, and cutting spending, because when the recession comes, and you need the stimulous, you'll have no cash and no credit, and you can't cut spending or you'll make things worse.


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Feb 16, 2020)

The OP is a troll. I get to devour his "point".

1. Trump matched Obama's 2.9%.
2. Obama's average was 1.59%.  
3. Trump's average is 2.53%
4. Obama's last year was 1.6%.

There was more room for growth under Obama, due to economic recovery from the recession. I don't expect PROGS to admit to or understand the logic.  Regardless, Trump clearly trumps O'bummer.


----------



## Faun (Feb 16, 2020)

NotfooledbyW said:


> ​
> TrumpO’s economy way below 2017 Tax Cut  Projections. A will never beat beat Obama economy when based on GDP growth:
> 
> 
> ...


Real GDP under Trump ... 2.6%

Under Obama since the end of Bush's Great Recession ... 2.4%


----------



## AzogtheDefiler (Feb 16, 2020)

Dragonlady said:


> AzogtheDefiler said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



Are you or are you not going to admit that you lied what I said about judges? Yes or no?


----------



## ph3iron (Feb 23, 2020)

WTH_Progs? said:


> The OP is a troll. I get to devour his "point".
> 
> 1. Trump matched Obama's 2.9%.
> 2. Obama's average was 1.59%.
> ...


Obummer
Say no more.
Zero college trumpanzee?

Where’s the 5%?
I see,o created the depression so he could create more room?
I remember o created more jobs in his last 3years than the con did in his first three
2, let me check
I assume you are sucking off your socialist benefits?


----------



## ph3iron (Feb 23, 2020)

Faun said:


> NotfooledbyW said:
> 
> 
> > ​
> ...


Here’s more data
2010-16.          2.2


2000- 09.        1.8

1990- 99.          3.6.        2.4 average

1980-89.          2.7

1970-80.          2.1


----------



## ph3iron (Feb 23, 2020)

WTH_Progs? said:


> The OP is a troll. I get to devour his "point".
> 
> 1. Trump matched Obama's 2.9%.
> 2. Obama's average was 1.59%.
> ...





ph3iron said:


> Faun said:
> 
> 
> > NotfooledbyW said:
> ...



I presume the old white trump fart thinks mueller exonerated him.
Like 90% of republicans, never read the report


----------



## ph3iron (Feb 23, 2020)

ph3iron said:


> WTH_Progs? said:
> 
> 
> > The OP is a troll. I get to devour his "point".
> ...


Where do you get your 1.6from?knees news?


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Feb 23, 2020)

WTH_Progs? said:


> 1. Trump matched Obama's 2.9%.



Exactly. TrumpO said staying under 3.0 was a failed economic Presidency since Obama was the first President to do that.

Its true, so TrumpO and you to be honest must now admit that TrumpO is having a failed economic Presidency by his own standard.

The failure to achieve a full years growth about 3.0.

And TrumpO said his tax cuts wouid push GDP
above 3.0 to 4.0 and each 6.0. So he lied.


----------



## WTH_Progs? (Feb 23, 2020)

ph3iron said:


> WTH_Progs? said:
> 
> 
> > The OP is a troll. I get to devour his "point".
> ...



I know you think mueller made an accusation, never mind one that would stick.
Like 90% of Democrats who never read or could comprehend the report[/QUOTE]


----------



## Brain357 (Feb 27, 2020)

NotfooledbyW said:


> WTH_Progs? said:
> 
> 
> > 1. Trump matched Obama's 2.9%.
> ...


Trump won’t be honest....


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Mar 20, 2020)

TrumpO will never have a full year GDP above 3% as promised. 

TRUMPo will end the record eleven years of continuous economic growth that Obama started. 

This recession is all his. T TrumpO could have averted recession with Pandemic preparedness. 

*Goldman Sachs now says US GDP will shrink 24% next quarter amid the coronavirus pandemic - which would be 2.5 times bigger than any decline in history*
Carmen Reinicke
 Mar. 20, 2020, 01:21 PM​


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 20, 2020)

NotfooledbyW said:


> TrumpO will never have a full year GDP above 3% as promised.
> 
> TRUMPo will end the record eleven years of continuous economic growth that Obama started.
> 
> ...


This is the fake news recession, dumbass


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Mar 20, 2020)

bripat9643 said:


> This is the fake news recession, dumbass



 Like the fake Pandemic that TrumpO called a hoax and failed to prepare the Federal Government and keep Wall Street from panic,


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Mar 20, 2020)

bripat9643 said:


> This is the fake news recession, dumbass



It’s not the news media Predicting it . It Is the banks and investment firms. TRUMPO’s swamp pals,​
“Next week, roughly 3 million Americans will file first-time claims for unemployment assistance, more than four times the record high set in the depths of the 1982 recession, according to Bank of America Merrill Lynch. That is just the start of a surge that could send the jobless rate spiking to 20 percent from today’s 3.5 percent, a JPMorgan Chase economist told clients on a conference call Friday,” the newspaper reported.​
“Estimates of the pandemic’s overall cost are staggering. Bridgewater Associates, a hedge fund manager, says the economy will shrink over the next three months at an annual rate of 30 percent. Goldman Sachs pegs the drop at 24 percent,” _The Post_ reported. “JPMorgan Chase says 14 percent.”​
America’s ‘economic meltdown’ is ‘without historic parallel’ — and deteriorating rapidly: report​


----------



## bripat9643 (Mar 20, 2020)

NotfooledbyW said:


> bripat9643 said:
> 
> 
> > This is the fake news recession, dumbass
> ...


How does that prove that fake news generated hysteria didn't cause it?

Here's a clue for you:  it doesn't.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Mar 20, 2020)

bripat9643 said:


> How does that prove that fake news generated hysteria didn't cause it?



Can you tell us how the news media generated what hysteria. I have seen no hysteria unless you mean the panic on Wall Street that TrumpO’s incompetence set off.


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Mar 20, 2020)

WTH_Progs? said:


> 4. Obama's last year was 1.6%.




New wager board:

TrumpO’s last full year GDP will be;

 -(13)%GDP


----------



## NotfooledbyW (Oct 25, 2022)

PapaG120618-#529   “Obama and his health care lunacy has been far worse



Westender said:


> I was impressed by a Trump economy on steroids and everybody with half a brain knew that the economy would go to crap once Biden came in.





NotfooledbyW said:


> Do you think Trump will be the second president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth,"



Trump is the second president in modern history not to have a single year of 3 percent growth.



Source: US Bureau of Economic Analysis
*In Biden's case, through the second quarter of 2022





Yes, this is adjusted for inflation


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Oct 25, 2022)

NotfooledbyW said:


> PapaG120618-#529   “Obama and his health care lunacy has been far worse
> 
> 
> 
> ...



How many seats in the House and Senate are the Dems gonna lose 
with Biden's awesome economic performance?


----------



## AntonToo (Oct 25, 2022)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> How many seats in the House and Senate are the Dems gonna lose
> with Biden's awesome economic performance?



How many seats Repubs lost in 2018 with Trump's best-economy-ever! performance?


----------



## Golfing Gator (Oct 25, 2022)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> How many seats in the House and Senate are the Dems gonna lose
> with Biden's awesome economic performance?



30 or so in the House, will gain one or two in the Senate.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Oct 25, 2022)

AntonToo said:


> How many seats Repubs lost in 2018 with Trump's best-economy-ever! performance?



Trump's inflation numbers weren't at Biden's awesome +8%


----------



## Faun (Oct 25, 2022)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> How many seats in the House and Senate are the Dems gonna lose
> with Biden's awesome economic performance?



Given the president's opposition party almost always gains seats in their first midterm regardless of the economy, probably some.


----------



## Faun (Oct 25, 2022)

AntonToo said:


> How many seats Repubs lost in 2018 with Trump's best-economy-ever! performance?



That's the fault of the media, don'tcha know.


----------



## AntonToo (Oct 25, 2022)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Trump's inflation numbers weren't at Biden's awesome +8%


And he still had historic loss. What does that tell you?


----------



## AntonToo (Oct 25, 2022)

Faun said:


> Given the president's opposition party almost always gains seats in their first midterm regardless of the economy, probably some.


Oh man, now he knows the secret.


----------



## Faun (Oct 25, 2022)

AntonToo said:


> Oh man, now he knows the secret.



Yeah, but he'll still pretend he doesn't get it.


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Oct 25, 2022)

AntonToo said:


> And he still had historic loss. What does that tell you?



Historic? Link?


----------



## Faun (Oct 25, 2022)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Historic? Link?



74 million votes and lost. Not historic?


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Oct 25, 2022)

Faun said:


> 74 million votes and lost. Not historic?



We were talking about 2018.


----------



## Faun (Oct 25, 2022)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> We were talking about 2018.



Sorry, my mistake. 2018 was historic in that the president's party lost some 400 seats at the state & federal level even though the economy was strong.


----------



## AntonToo (Oct 25, 2022)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Historic? Link?











						Democrats won House midterms by largest margin since Watergate scandal, report says
					

This year's midterms flipped nearly 40 seats, allowing Democrats to take control of the House and set the stage for confronting President Trump.



					www.usatoday.com


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Oct 25, 2022)

AntonToo said:


> Democrats won House midterms by largest margin since Watergate scandal, report says
> 
> 
> This year's midterms flipped nearly 40 seats, allowing Democrats to take control of the House and set the stage for confronting President Trump.
> ...



Thanks for the link. What a silly headline.
Nearly 40 seats. Not even close to the largest number of midterm losses.
1994 and 2010 were much larger.


----------



## jc456 (Oct 25, 2022)

Faun said:


> That's the fault of the media, don'tcha know.


nope, mid term loses seats almost every time.


----------



## Faun (Oct 25, 2022)

jc456 said:


> nope, mid term loses seats almost every time.



I was being sarcastic, dope.


----------



## AntonToo (Oct 25, 2022)

Toddsterpatriot said:


> Thanks for the link. What a silly headline.
> Nearly 40 seats. Not even close to the largest number of midterm losses.


Imagine that, not the LARGEST seat loss during best-economy-ever!

Whatever was I thinking to bring it up


----------



## Toddsterpatriot (Oct 25, 2022)

AntonToo said:


> Imagine that, not the LARGEST seat loss during best-economy-ever!
> 
> Whatever was I thinking to bring it up



I know!
Clinton's and Obama's were much bigger.


----------



## Markle (Oct 25, 2022)

Faun said:


> I was being sarcastic, dope.


----------



## Faun (Oct 25, 2022)

Markle said:


>



AntonToo got it. Seems you're just too stupid.


----------

