A Look at the Senate Democrats' JOBS & INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN FOR AMERICA’S WORKERS

[Dschrute3]

What the hell? We're only $21 Trillion in Debt. Why not spend more Tax Dollars?

 

[Flopper]

Maybe I didn't make myself clear. Without the repatriation clause, corporation will bring money back at the 21% rate. By adding the incentive of a rate as low 8%, corporations will not bring the money at 21% but 8% and that is tax revenue loss for those corporations that would have brought the money back at 21%.

Read the reparation clause from the law, "As a transition to the new regime, deemed repatriation of previously untaxed “old earnings.” A 15.5% rate applies to earnings attributable to liquid assets and an 8% rate applies to earnings attributable to illiquid assets" There is nothing in the law saying how these funds can be used. Although we hope they will find their way into business expansions that will lead to substantial job growth, it seems quite likely that a lot of those funds will end up in stock buy backs, dividends to stockholders, and investments in non-labor intensive business expansions.
https://home.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmg/us/pdf/2017/12/tnf-new-tax-law-dec22-2017.pdf

But without the repatriation clause, what's the incentive to bring the revenue back at all?

They could bring it back at 21% where previously it was 35%.

What's important is not really the top rates but rather what percent the tax is of a corporation's pre-tax income, the effective rate. The average effective rate under the old law for all corporations was about 20% and 12.9% for large corporation. Under the new law the average will be around 15% and 6 to 7% for large corporations. So how do those rates effect repatriation? Whether a country moves old profits to the US will be determined based on the anticipated return and effective tax rate in the two countries, and the reparation rate. There is no way to determine how effective the reparation will be in bringing profits by to America much lest jobs.

What's important is not really the top rates but rather what percent the tax is of a corporation's pre-tax income, the effective rate.

Can you explain why the effective rate is ever below the statutory rate?

The effective rate is always lower than the statutory rate because the business is allowed to deduct from gross revenues the costs of production such as the cost of goods sold, cost of labor, rents, interest, etc, all quite legitimate deductions. Then there are those that are questionable such deduction for reinvesting profits in the business, intangible drilling costs, etc. And then there are those tax credits and deductions for effective lobbying.

The effective rate is always lower than the statutory rate because the business is allowed to deduct from gross revenues the costs of production such as the cost of goods sold, cost of labor, rents, interest, etc, all quite legitimate deductions.

The statutory rate is only charged after those deductions. Saying that the effective rate is lower, because of those deductions is silly.

You did ask the question, Can you explain why the effective rate is ever below the statutory rate". I just told why it is.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

But without the repatriation clause, what's the incentive to bring the revenue back at all?

They could bring it back at 21% where previously it was 35%.

What's important is not really the top rates but rather what percent the tax is of a corporation's pre-tax income, the effective rate. The average effective rate under the old law for all corporations was about 20% and 12.9% for large corporation. Under the new law the average will be around 15% and 6 to 7% for large corporations. So how do those rates effect repatriation? Whether a country moves old profits to the US will be determined based on the anticipated return and effective tax rate in the two countries, and the reparation rate. There is no way to determine how effective the reparation will be in bringing profits by to America much lest jobs.

What's important is not really the top rates but rather what percent the tax is of a corporation's pre-tax income, the effective rate.

Can you explain why the effective rate is ever below the statutory rate?

The effective rate is always lower than the statutory rate because the business is allowed to deduct from gross revenues the costs of production such as the cost of goods sold, cost of labor, rents, interest, etc, all quite legitimate deductions. Then there are those that are questionable such deduction for reinvesting profits in the business, intangible drilling costs, etc. And then there are those tax credits and deductions for effective lobbying.

The effective rate is always lower than the statutory rate because the business is allowed to deduct from gross revenues the costs of production such as the cost of goods sold, cost of labor, rents, interest, etc, all quite legitimate deductions.

The statutory rate is only charged after those deductions. Saying that the effective rate is lower, because of those deductions is silly.

You did ask the question, Can you explain why the effective rate is ever below the statutory rate". I just told why it is.

Thank you for explaining why whining about "low effective rates" is silly.

 

[ThunderKiss1965]

A few days ago, Senator Chuck Schumer and other leading Senate Democrats held a press conference to present their infrastructure and tax reform plan. The full title of the bill is SENATE DEMOCRATS' JOBS & INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN FOR AMERICA’S WORKERS: RETURNING THE REPUBLICAN TAX GIVEAWAYS FOR THE WEALTHY TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

The Dem plan is actually pretty good. It is only a tax-hike measure compared to the new tax rates under the Trump tax cuts. Compared to the tax rates that existed until last year, it calls for huge tax cuts, even for corporations, in spite of the bill's unfortunately partisan subtitle. If Hillary had proposed this plan during the election, Bernie supporters and other Dems would have skewered her for wanting to "give away hundreds of billions of dollars to the rich." Consider:

* The Dem plan would set the corporate income tax rate at 25%. This is 4 percentage points higher than the Trump rate of 21%, but it's 10 percentage points lower than what the rate was last year and for decades before that. When Mitt Romney proposed cutting the corporate tax rate to 25% in 2012, Dems attacked the idea as a "tax cut for the rich."

* The Dem plan would leave intact all of the Trump tax cuts for personal income taxes, with the sole exception of the top marginal rate, which would go back to the previous rate of 39.6%, which would still be lower than it was for most of Reagan's presidency. Moreover, the Dem plan would maintain the Trump threshold of $600K for the top bracket.

* As mentioned, the Dem plan would keep *all* of the massive Trump tax cuts for the middle-income brackets. It would also maintain the Trump tax-cut provisions of capping SALT deductions at $10K and of capping mortgage-interest deductions.

* The Dem plan would return the death tax (the estate tax) to 2017 levels, which were an improvement over the rates for most of the previous four decades, and it would also return to the previous GOP-backed threshold of $5.49 million for exemption from the tax (vs. $11 million under the Trump tax cuts).

* The Dem plan would bring back the AMT, a very bad, baffling move. But, the AMT only affected people who made over 120K (single)/160K (married), and it did not really bite anyone until they started making over $300K, and even then the bite was not draconian.

* The Dem plan would leave intact Trump's special repatriation rate of 13.5% for American corporate money parked overseas that is brought back to the U.S.

* The Dem plan would close the carried-interest loophole, something that should have been done with the Trump tax cuts.

* The Dem plan would use the assumed savings vs. the Trump tax cuts to fund $1 trillion in infrastructure spending, and even most conservative think tanks agree that infrastructure spending usually largely pays for itself and sometimes gives us a large net gain. Trump has called for at least $1.6 trillion in infrastructure spending.

The Dem plan is not bad at all, but it is not as good as the Trump tax-cut bill and the Trump infrastructure-spending proposal. The Dem plan is a non-starter as long as the GOP controls the Senate, but it is really a pretty good plan.

Full text of the bill:
https://www.democrats.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Senate Democrats' Jobs and Infrastructure Plan.pdf

Executive summary of the bill:
https://www.democrats.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Senate Democrats' Jobs and Infrastructure Plan One Pager.pdf

Are these "shovel ready jobs"?

 

[Muhammed]

The only infrastructure plan the Democrats have is to dump illegal alien shit on the road while they are busing them to the polls.

For those of you who don't know, that "VOTOVOTAR" message emblazoned on the side of the DNC's bus caught on camera emptying raw sewage on the highway in Georgia translates to "I will vote" in Spanish.

 

[Oldstyle]

So why didn't they tackle tax reform or immigration reform? Obama promised to address both early in his Presidency. Instead he ignored them.

Priorities man, Incase you didn’t get the memo we were fresh of one of the worst recessions in our nations history. First few years went into righting the ship and healthcare.

Priorities? Interesting concept, Slade! If you were truly concerned with "righting the ship" from one of the worst recessions in the nation's history...then why would you spend the bulk of your time passing a healthcare bill that caused so much uncertainty that it hampered economic recovery? Especially a healthcare bill that you deliberately designed to fail?

Well healthcare wasn’t their immediate focus, you can go back at learn the history yourself but there was a series of actions taken to pull this country out of the recession and put us on a recovery pathway that has now lead to historical lows in unemployement and recording breaking stock market.

I'm a history major, Slade and I remember recent history rather well, thank you! Healthcare WAS an immediate focus for them...starting early in 2009.

Great then you tell me, was healthcare their only focus or did they work on other efforts? Which ones?

You tell me...did they work on immigration reform? Did they work on tax reform? If not...why not?

 

[Slade3200]

Priorities man, Incase you didn’t get the memo we were fresh of one of the worst recessions in our nations history. First few years went into righting the ship and healthcare.

Priorities? Interesting concept, Slade! If you were truly concerned with "righting the ship" from one of the worst recessions in the nation's history...then why would you spend the bulk of your time passing a healthcare bill that caused so much uncertainty that it hampered economic recovery? Especially a healthcare bill that you deliberately designed to fail?

Well healthcare wasn’t their immediate focus, you can go back at learn the history yourself but there was a series of actions taken to pull this country out of the recession and put us on a recovery pathway that has now lead to historical lows in unemployement and recording breaking stock market.

I'm a history major, Slade and I remember recent history rather well, thank you! Healthcare WAS an immediate focus for them...starting early in 2009.

Great then you tell me, was healthcare their only focus or did they work on other efforts? Which ones?

You tell me...did they work on immigration reform? Did they work on tax reform? If not...why not?

Asked and answered. They were pulling us out of a recession and trying to fix our financial institutions, corporations, save jobs, restore the housing market and do major healthcare reform... ya know little stuff like that. They tried for taxes and immigration afterward but by that time the obstructionists had taken power and those proposals became dead in the water

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Priorities? Interesting concept, Slade! If you were truly concerned with "righting the ship" from one of the worst recessions in the nation's history...then why would you spend the bulk of your time passing a healthcare bill that caused so much uncertainty that it hampered economic recovery? Especially a healthcare bill that you deliberately designed to fail?

Well healthcare wasn’t their immediate focus, you can go back at learn the history yourself but there was a series of actions taken to pull this country out of the recession and put us on a recovery pathway that has now lead to historical lows in unemployement and recording breaking stock market.

I'm a history major, Slade and I remember recent history rather well, thank you! Healthcare WAS an immediate focus for them...starting early in 2009.

Great then you tell me, was healthcare their only focus or did they work on other efforts? Which ones?

You tell me...did they work on immigration reform? Did they work on tax reform? If not...why not?

Asked and answered. They were pulling us out of a recession and trying to fix our financial institutions, corporations, save jobs, restore the housing market and do major healthcare reform... ya know little stuff like that. They tried for taxes and immigration afterward but by that time the obstructionists had taken power and those proposals became dead in the water

Asked and answered. They were pulling us out of a recession

They did such an awesome job, the recession ended by June 2009.

 

[Slade3200]

Well healthcare wasn’t their immediate focus, you can go back at learn the history yourself but there was a series of actions taken to pull this country out of the recession and put us on a recovery pathway that has now lead to historical lows in unemployement and recording breaking stock market.

I'm a history major, Slade and I remember recent history rather well, thank you! Healthcare WAS an immediate focus for them...starting early in 2009.

Great then you tell me, was healthcare their only focus or did they work on other efforts? Which ones?

You tell me...did they work on immigration reform? Did they work on tax reform? If not...why not?

Asked and answered. They were pulling us out of a recession and trying to fix our financial institutions, corporations, save jobs, restore the housing market and do major healthcare reform... ya know little stuff like that. They tried for taxes and immigration afterward but by that time the obstructionists had taken power and those proposals became dead in the water

Asked and answered. They were pulling us out of a recession

They did such an awesome job, the recession ended by June 2009.

What was the unemployement rate in 2009? where was the stock market? How was the housing market? How about in 2016? How’d they do?

 

[Oldstyle]

Priorities? Interesting concept, Slade! If you were truly concerned with "righting the ship" from one of the worst recessions in the nation's history...then why would you spend the bulk of your time passing a healthcare bill that caused so much uncertainty that it hampered economic recovery? Especially a healthcare bill that you deliberately designed to fail?

Well healthcare wasn’t their immediate focus, you can go back at learn the history yourself but there was a series of actions taken to pull this country out of the recession and put us on a recovery pathway that has now lead to historical lows in unemployement and recording breaking stock market.

I'm a history major, Slade and I remember recent history rather well, thank you! Healthcare WAS an immediate focus for them...starting early in 2009.

Great then you tell me, was healthcare their only focus or did they work on other efforts? Which ones?

You tell me...did they work on immigration reform? Did they work on tax reform? If not...why not?

Asked and answered. They were pulling us out of a recession and trying to fix our financial institutions, corporations, save jobs, restore the housing market and do major healthcare reform... ya know little stuff like that. They tried for taxes and immigration afterward but by that time the obstructionists had taken power and those proposals became dead in the water

So answer me this, Slade? If they were really concerned with pulling us out of a recession...why would they first concentrate on healthcare...something that added uncertainty and costs to doing business drastically slowing down the recovery? Let's be honest here...it was TARP that kept US financials afloat and that was a George W. Bush thing. Obama and your progressives passed the Obama Stimulus...something that spent a whole lot of money and didn't come close to doing what they promised it would! The results were so bad in fact that they had to start using a new economic term "jobs created or saved" because they created so few jobs! They used stimulus money to reward their base with deals for unions, public sector workers and big campaign contributors like the guys running Solyndra.

I'm amused by your contention that they were too "busy" to deal with immigration reform or tax reform. The truth is...they never tried because they were rushing to pass things like ObamaCare and pushing for things like Cap & Trade which would have REALLY screwed up the recovery! They got voted out in the 2010 midterms because it had become painfully obvious that they cared more about passing their liberal agenda then they did about the millions of people in the Private Sector who were out of work and burning up their life's savings trying to stay afloat!

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I'm a history major, Slade and I remember recent history rather well, thank you! Healthcare WAS an immediate focus for them...starting early in 2009.

Great then you tell me, was healthcare their only focus or did they work on other efforts? Which ones?

You tell me...did they work on immigration reform? Did they work on tax reform? If not...why not?

Asked and answered. They were pulling us out of a recession and trying to fix our financial institutions, corporations, save jobs, restore the housing market and do major healthcare reform... ya know little stuff like that. They tried for taxes and immigration afterward but by that time the obstructionists had taken power and those proposals became dead in the water

Asked and answered. They were pulling us out of a recession

They did such an awesome job, the recession ended by June 2009.

What was the unemployement rate in 2009? where was the stock market? How was the housing market? How about in 2016? How’d they do?

It's true, under Obama we had the slowest recovery since WWII.

 

[Slade3200]

Well healthcare wasn’t their immediate focus, you can go back at learn the history yourself but there was a series of actions taken to pull this country out of the recession and put us on a recovery pathway that has now lead to historical lows in unemployement and recording breaking stock market.

I'm a history major, Slade and I remember recent history rather well, thank you! Healthcare WAS an immediate focus for them...starting early in 2009.

Great then you tell me, was healthcare their only focus or did they work on other efforts? Which ones?

You tell me...did they work on immigration reform? Did they work on tax reform? If not...why not?

Asked and answered. They were pulling us out of a recession and trying to fix our financial institutions, corporations, save jobs, restore the housing market and do major healthcare reform... ya know little stuff like that. They tried for taxes and immigration afterward but by that time the obstructionists had taken power and those proposals became dead in the water

So answer me this, Slade? If they were really concerned with pulling us out of a recession...why would they first concentrate on healthcare...something that added uncertainty and costs to doing business drastically slowing down the recovery? Let's be honest here...it was TARP that kept US financials afloat and that was a George W. Bush thing. Obama and your progressives passed the Obama Stimulus...something that spent a whole lot of money and didn't come close to doing what they promised it would! The results were so bad in fact that they had to start using a new economic term "jobs created or saved" because they created so few jobs! They used stimulus money to reward their base with deals for unions, public sector workers and big campaign contributors like the guys running Solyndra.

I'm amused by your contention that they were too "busy" to deal with immigration reform or tax reform. The truth is...they never tried because they were rushing to pass things like ObamaCare and pushing for things like Cap & Trade which would have REALLY screwed up the recovery! They got voted out in the 2010 midterms because it had become painfully obvious that they cared more about passing their liberal agenda then they did about the millions of people in the Private Sector who were out of work and burning up their life's savings trying to stay afloat!

Is this your first bout with politics? If the Dems win in November can I use the same argument against Trump and criticize him for not doing the great infrastructure bill that he campaigned about?

I’m not a huge Obama fan when it comes to his policies. I liked him as a person but did think he could have done better executing many of his plans. But I’m being honest about how politics works. You don’t go after healthcare, immigration reform, and tax reform in the same year all while trying to pull the country out of a recession. You can criticize his policies all you want, you got plenty of ammo, but lose the critique about him not going after all the major reforms in his first two years. We both know that’s not realistic.

 

[Slade3200]

Great then you tell me, was healthcare their only focus or did they work on other efforts? Which ones?

You tell me...did they work on immigration reform? Did they work on tax reform? If not...why not?

Asked and answered. They were pulling us out of a recession and trying to fix our financial institutions, corporations, save jobs, restore the housing market and do major healthcare reform... ya know little stuff like that. They tried for taxes and immigration afterward but by that time the obstructionists had taken power and those proposals became dead in the water

Asked and answered. They were pulling us out of a recession

They did such an awesome job, the recession ended by June 2009.

What was the unemployement rate in 2009? where was the stock market? How was the housing market? How about in 2016? How’d they do?

It's true, under Obama we had the slowest recovery since WWII.

answer my questions. What was the unemployement rate in 2009? where was the stock market? How was the housing market? How about in 2016? How’d they do in those areas?

 

[Slade3200]

You tell me...did they work on immigration reform? Did they work on tax reform? If not...why not?

Asked and answered. They were pulling us out of a recession and trying to fix our financial institutions, corporations, save jobs, restore the housing market and do major healthcare reform... ya know little stuff like that. They tried for taxes and immigration afterward but by that time the obstructionists had taken power and those proposals became dead in the water

Asked and answered. They were pulling us out of a recession

They did such an awesome job, the recession ended by June 2009.

What was the unemployement rate in 2009? where was the stock market? How was the housing market? How about in 2016? How’d they do?

It's true, under Obama we had the slowest recovery since WWII.

answer my questions. What was the unemployement rate in 2009? where was the stock market? How was the housing market? How about in 2016? How’d they do in those areas?

That’s all you got? A “funny”? How about you answer some simple questions without the spin job

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Asked and answered. They were pulling us out of a recession and trying to fix our financial institutions, corporations, save jobs, restore the housing market and do major healthcare reform... ya know little stuff like that. They tried for taxes and immigration afterward but by that time the obstructionists had taken power and those proposals became dead in the water

Asked and answered. They were pulling us out of a recession

They did such an awesome job, the recession ended by June 2009.

What was the unemployement rate in 2009? where was the stock market? How was the housing market? How about in 2016? How’d they do?

It's true, under Obama we had the slowest recovery since WWII.

answer my questions. What was the unemployement rate in 2009? where was the stock market? How was the housing market? How about in 2016? How’d they do in those areas?

That’s all you got? A “funny”? How about you answer some simple questions without the spin job

He added $9.3 trillion to the debt.
You think that will add jobs? Boost the market?
FFS, 50% of GDP added to the debt, and he had the same GDP growth as Bush?

Wow! Great job. DERP!

 

[Slade3200]

Asked and answered. They were pulling us out of a recession

They did such an awesome job, the recession ended by June 2009.

What was the unemployement rate in 2009? where was the stock market? How was the housing market? How about in 2016? How’d they do?

It's true, under Obama we had the slowest recovery since WWII.

answer my questions. What was the unemployement rate in 2009? where was the stock market? How was the housing market? How about in 2016? How’d they do in those areas?

That’s all you got? A “funny”? How about you answer some simple questions without the spin job

He added $9.3 trillion to the debt.
You think that will add jobs? Boost the market?
FFS, 50% of GDP added to the debt, and he had the same GDP growth as Bush?

Wow! Great job. DERP!

I said with out the spin. You seem incapable of honest conversation. I also have problems with Obama’s spending. It wasn’t 9.3 trillion as the majority of that was mandatory spending that we were already committed to, but the discretionary spending could have been done more responsibly. He did reduce the deficit throughout his term following the stimulus which should be noted. Do you know by how much he reduced the deficit?

Now back to the original questions. This is the third time I’ve asked. Can you give direct answers to direct questions without the spin?

What was the unemployement rate in 2009? where was the stock market? How was the housing market? How about in 2016? How’d they do in those areas?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

What was the unemployement rate in 2009? where was the stock market? How was the housing market? How about in 2016? How’d they do?

It's true, under Obama we had the slowest recovery since WWII.

answer my questions. What was the unemployement rate in 2009? where was the stock market? How was the housing market? How about in 2016? How’d they do in those areas?

That’s all you got? A “funny”? How about you answer some simple questions without the spin job

He added $9.3 trillion to the debt.
You think that will add jobs? Boost the market?
FFS, 50% of GDP added to the debt, and he had the same GDP growth as Bush?

Wow! Great job. DERP!

I said with out the spin. You seem incapable of honest conversation. I also have problems with Obama’s spending. It wasn’t 9.3 trillion as the majority of that was mandatory spending that we were already committed to, but the discretionary spending could have been done more responsibly. He did reduce the deficit throughout his term following the stimulus which should be noted. Do you know by how much he reduced the deficit?

Now back to the original questions. This is the third time I’ve asked. Can you give direct answers to direct questions without the spin?

What was the unemployement rate in 2009? where was the stock market? How was the housing market? How about in 2016? How’d they do in those areas?

He did reduce the deficit throughout his term following the stimulus which should be noted.

Really?
What spending did he actively work to reduce?
Must be a big list........

What was the unemployement rate in 2009? where was the stock market?

Civilian Unemployment Rate

S&P 500

 

[Slade3200]

It's true, under Obama we had the slowest recovery since WWII.

answer my questions. What was the unemployement rate in 2009? where was the stock market? How was the housing market? How about in 2016? How’d they do in those areas?

That’s all you got? A “funny”? How about you answer some simple questions without the spin job

He added $9.3 trillion to the debt.
You think that will add jobs? Boost the market?
FFS, 50% of GDP added to the debt, and he had the same GDP growth as Bush?

Wow! Great job. DERP!

I said with out the spin. You seem incapable of honest conversation. I also have problems with Obama’s spending. It wasn’t 9.3 trillion as the majority of that was mandatory spending that we were already committed to, but the discretionary spending could have been done more responsibly. He did reduce the deficit throughout his term following the stimulus which should be noted. Do you know by how much he reduced the deficit?

Now back to the original questions. This is the third time I’ve asked. Can you give direct answers to direct questions without the spin?

What was the unemployement rate in 2009? where was the stock market? How was the housing market? How about in 2016? How’d they do in those areas?

He did reduce the deficit throughout his term following the stimulus which should be noted.

Really?
What spending did he actively work to reduce?
Must be a big list........

What was the unemployement rate in 2009? where was the stock market?

View attachment 182985

Civilian Unemployment Rate

View attachment 182986

S&P 500

Thank you for answering, those charts tell a pretty positive story so though you didn’t put it into words I think we both see a healthy trend towards the good.

As for the reduction in the deficit, of course that wasn’t all due to Obama. The growing economy, despite the “slow growth” argument, was largely responsible for the reduction in deficits. How about I answer your question and provide one of those charts for Obama’s descretionary spending so we can see exactly what he was responsible for... from the spike (2009) on, which way is his spending going? Up or down?

 

[Slade3200]

Really?
What spending did he actively work to reduce?
Must be a big list........

You also might find this interesting to look at which cuts Obama proposed in his last budget. Do you give these ideas a thumbs up or thumbs down? Note that these were included in the 2017 budget proposed by Obama that Trump is taking full credit for...

Visualising Obama's Budget Cuts

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

answer my questions. What was the unemployement rate in 2009? where was the stock market? How was the housing market? How about in 2016? How’d they do in those areas?

That’s all you got? A “funny”? How about you answer some simple questions without the spin job

He added $9.3 trillion to the debt.
You think that will add jobs? Boost the market?
FFS, 50% of GDP added to the debt, and he had the same GDP growth as Bush?

Wow! Great job. DERP!

I said with out the spin. You seem incapable of honest conversation. I also have problems with Obama’s spending. It wasn’t 9.3 trillion as the majority of that was mandatory spending that we were already committed to, but the discretionary spending could have been done more responsibly. He did reduce the deficit throughout his term following the stimulus which should be noted. Do you know by how much he reduced the deficit?

Now back to the original questions. This is the third time I’ve asked. Can you give direct answers to direct questions without the spin?

What was the unemployement rate in 2009? where was the stock market? How was the housing market? How about in 2016? How’d they do in those areas?

He did reduce the deficit throughout his term following the stimulus which should be noted.

Really?
What spending did he actively work to reduce?
Must be a big list........

What was the unemployement rate in 2009? where was the stock market?

View attachment 182985

Civilian Unemployment Rate

View attachment 182986

S&P 500

Thank you for answering, those charts tell a pretty positive story so though you didn’t put it into words I think we both see a healthy trend towards the good.

As for the reduction in the deficit, of course that wasn’t all due to Obama. The growing economy, despite the “slow growth” argument, was largely responsible for the reduction in deficits. How about I answer your question and provide one of those charts for Obama’s descretionary spending so we can see exactly what he was responsible for... from the spike (2009) on, which way is his spending going? Up or down?

As for the reduction in the deficit, of course that wasn’t all due to Obama.

Was any due to Obama?

The growing economy, despite the “slow growth” argument, was largely responsible for the reduction in deficits.

Imagine how much higher growth could have been without so many new regulations standing on the brakes for 8 years....