If Hillary Had Won the Economy Would Be 7/24 News

[danielpalos]

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

who couldn't get those numbers with that much Government spending.

Ah, Barry?

He spent much more than Trump...had almost zero interest rates from the Fed...and he STILL couldn't get the economy to grow!

upward trends for almost ten years. nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics.

It was the slowest recovery from a recession since FDR and The Great Depression, Daniel! "Tepid" is the word that best describes the "Obama Economy"! Despite spending trillions and having an almost zero interest rate by the Fed for the longest time in history...Barry still couldn't come close to the numbers that Trump is now giving us!

What do you think would have happened to the economy under Obama if the Fed had given him five rate increases in two years instead of the one that he got from when he was elected until Trump was elected? I'll give you a hint...

He inherited a right wing mess. He turned our economy around. Every Chart, shows that. The right wing has nothing but debt as big as that hole.

You need to study history and not just blame everything that's bad on the right wing. Bush did not cause the Crash in the housing/stock market and Obama's recession "recovery" was the most anemic in modern history. Here is your assignment: study the roles of Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Ben Bernanke, Hank Paulson and Barney Frank in the crash. Then report back about how wrong you were.

Only the Right Wing, never gets it. How much Debt did the most anemic recovery in History, cost us?

How much is the right wing costing us, simply helping the Rich, get Richer.

 

[rightwinger]

Trump is derailing an economic message with a fearmongering "immigration" message. It has nothing to do with the media.

Trump needs his racist base to turn out

Obviously. I have my own gripes with the "caravan", "asylum", etc., but it's pretty clear what his intentions are in bringing that to the forefront of the debate. If he was trying to be inclusive he would say something like, "We need to enforce our border security" and leave it at that, then turn to positive economic messages. Instead he is trying to stoke up as much fear as possible and it's totally obvious that he's just trying to scare white people.

Bad move by Trump

Takes peoples attention away from the economy. His caravan hate rants turn on his base but turn off most Americans.

His fear mongering should be Democrats will destroy the economic surge

 

[rightwinger]

U.S. National Debt Clock : Real Time

who couldn't get those numbers with that much Government spending.

Ah, Barry?

He spent much more than Trump...had almost zero interest rates from the Fed...and he STILL couldn't get the economy to grow!

upward trends for almost ten years. nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics.

It was the slowest recovery from a recession since FDR and The Great Depression, Daniel! "Tepid" is the word that best describes the "Obama Economy"! Despite spending trillions and having an almost zero interest rate by the Fed for the longest time in history...Barry still couldn't come close to the numbers that Trump is now giving us!

What do you think would have happened to the economy under Obama if the Fed had given him five rate increases in two years instead of the one that he got from when he was elected until Trump was elected? I'll give you a hint...

He inherited a right wing mess. He turned our economy around. Every Chart, shows that. The right wing has nothing but debt as big as that hole.

You need to study history and not just blame everything that's bad on the right wing. Bush did not cause the Crash in the housing/stock market and Obama's recession "recovery" was the most anemic in modern history. Here is your assignment: study the roles of Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, Ben Bernanke, Hank Paulson and Barney Frank in the crash. Then report back about how wrong you were.

RW economic revisionism

We did not cause the crash and Obama did not stop a Depression

 

[John Shaw]

Trump is derailing an economic message with a fearmongering "immigration" message. It has nothing to do with the media.

Trump needs his racist base to turn out

Obviously. I have my own gripes with the "caravan", "asylum", etc., but it's pretty clear what his intentions are in bringing that to the forefront of the debate. If he was trying to be inclusive he would say something like, "We need to enforce our border security" and leave it at that, then turn to positive economic messages. Instead he is trying to stoke up as much fear as possible and it's totally obvious that he's just trying to scare white people.

Bad move by Trump

Takes peoples attention away from the economy. His caravan hate rants turn on his base but turn off most Americans.

His fear mongering should be Democrats will destroy the economic surge

Motivating scared white people has worked great for him in the past. TBH, I don't see why that would change. It is probably a more effective message overall. The economy is hard to understand; people make their careers on it. People who don't look like you or speak your language, trying to force their way into your country? Any 70-IQ neanderthal can understand that kind of message.

 

[Oldstyle]

Here's my main issue with what Barack Obama DID in response to the worst recession since The Great Depression, Anton! He went after health care reform that was going to make that same recession worse that it was. Who would do that?

The now popular healthcare reform that Republicans could not undo with full majorities?

Yea, that was a good move for Obama, and this move was among many expansionary moves you failed ot mention, including QE.

You'd have to be straigh bonkers or just ignorant to claim that Obama policies overall did not contribute to economic growth.

What Obama policy contributed to economic growth?

Seriously?

Ok, I will teach you the art of internet search:

CLICKY LINKY

In the first link (pro-Obama puff piece, but it does list the policies):

In February 2009, Congress approved Obama's $787 billion economic stimulus package. It cut taxes, extended unemployment benefits, and funded public works projects.

Obama bailed out the U.S. auto industry on March 30, 2009. The federal government took over General Motors and Chrysler, saving three million jobs. It forced the companies to become more fuel efficient and therefore more globally competitive.

In July 2010, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act improved regulation of eight areas that led to the financial crisis.The Consumer Financial Protection Agency reduced harmful practices of credit cards and mortgages. The Financial Stability Oversight Council regulated hedge funds and banks that became too big to fail. The "Volcker Rule" banned banks from risking losses with their depositors' money. Dodd-Frank clarified which agencies regulated which banks, stopping banks from cherry-picking their regulators.

2010 Tax Cuts - In December 2010, Obama and Congress agreed upon additional stimulus in the form of an $858 billion tax cut. It had three main components: a $350 billion extension of the Bush tax cuts, a $56 billion extension of unemployment benefits, and a $120 billion reduction in workers' payroll taxes. Businesses received $140 billion in tax cuts for capital improvements and $80 billion in research and development tax credits. The estate tax was exempted (up to $5 million), and there were additional credits for college tuition and children.

Maintained Continuation of Federal Reserve Policy - Obama appointed Federal Reserve Vice-Chair Janet Yellen to replace Ben Bernanke. She maintained an expansionary monetary policy that created the lowest interest rates in 200 years.

2012 Tax Cuts - Obama makes Bush tax-cuts permanent for all but top bracket.



What does that add up to?

2 economists imagined a financial crisis without stimulus or bailouts. It’s … ugly.

LOL...ah, yes...the liberal economists who think the financial crisis could have been erased if only we'd simply spent more money through the government and they base that hypothesis on the same type of models they used to assure us that if the Obama stimulus was passed it would created hundreds of thousands of jobs!

Nothing to do with “liberal economists” it has to do with comon sense that stabilizing markets, spending into economy and keeping interest rates low helps growth in a recessionary environment.

You asked which expansionary policies. I listed them and now you switch to bitch about liberal economists.

Do you really not grasp that spending put into the economy by Government has to come from somewhere? That every time the Fed resorted to QE to prop up an Obama economy it meant the money in your wallet was worth a little less? Stabilizing markets? Oh, you mean the way that W. did with TARP? Where the taxpayers actually got paid back what we loaned out...plus interest? Or the way Barry used TARP...to get a better deal for the UAW and give out cash to supporters of his in the "Green Energy" sector that then went belly up?

 

[ColonelAngus]

The good thing is the economy is the one thing politicians can’t BS the voters on. We all know our own situation and that of our neighbors.

Economy adds robust 250,000 jobs in October in last employment report before election.

“The unemployment rate was unchanged at a near 50-year low of 3.7 percent. Annual wage growth topped 3 percent for the first time in nine years.”

Good economy doesn’t fit the narrative.

All that left wing lunatics know is:

 

[danielpalos]

As we look further ahead, the question of sustainability becomes more difficult to come by. One school of thought holds that the economy’s performance in the most recent quarter is a “sugar high.” The 4.1 percent growth rate was due to deficit-fueled tax cuts and to purchases by the Chinese of goods that they knew would soon be the subject of tariffs. China’s orders are borrowed from future quarters, the tax cuts are already producing trillion-dollar deficits (twice those the Trump administration predicted) that will inevitably drive up interest rates and slow growth. It won’t be long before growth falls back to the 2 percent range—or the economy lapses into recession.--https://www.weeklystandard.com/irwin-m-stelzer/is-the-trump-economy-sustainable

 

[danielpalos]

U.S. stocks fell as investors faced the grim reality of a protracted trade war between the two powers.--https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-24/trump-imposes-next-batch-of-china-tariffs-as-trade-war-escalates

 

[AntonToo]

Actually you SHOULD forget it, because it's bullshit.

4.1% is an annualized number for just one quarter (2018 Q2). Trump has at this point ZERO 3%+ growth calendar years. In 2017 GDP growth was 2.3%.

In 2014 we posted 5.1% growth quarter - US economy grows at fastest pace in a decade

And Obama also posted several .5 and -1% "growth" quarters that cancelled those numbers out.

Obama's average annual GDP growth was 1.9%

Thats just more counterfactual bullshit.

How mentally inedequite do you have to be to not even know how to do basic internet search?

Here, let me show you how basic internet search is done:

CLICKY LINKY

Do it yourself, moron. I don't use discredited political organizations like google.

My numbers are completely accurate.

You refuted nothing of what you replied to. So your bullshit is completely bullshit.

Obama didn't post 3% growth but neither did Trump thus far. He may well just barely post one for 2018, but getting some extra 0.x% growth in good times by blowing up the debt by a trillion dollars is not exactly rocket science - it's just really bad Keynesianism.

Obama is the only President in history to never obtain a 3% annual GDP.
Even the ones who died in their first term.
So suck it up, buttercup.

Single cherry picked stat aside, Obama had much better economy than Bush Sr. and Jr.

What good is posting 3%+ growth if you are follwing it up with a recesision? Obama was one of very few presidents to post consistent growth throughout two terms and not hand of a recession.

 

[ColonelAngus]

And Obama also posted several .5 and -1% "growth" quarters that cancelled those numbers out.

Obama's average annual GDP growth was 1.9%

Thats just more counterfactual bullshit.

How mentally inedequite do you have to be to not even know how to do basic internet search?

Here, let me show you how basic internet search is done:

CLICKY LINKY

Do it yourself, moron. I don't use discredited political organizations like google.

My numbers are completely accurate.

You refuted nothing of what you replied to. So your bullshit is completely bullshit.

Obama didn't post 3% growth but neither did Trump thus far. He may well just barely post one for 2018, but getting some extra 0.x% growth in good times by blowing up the debt by a trillion dollars is not exactly rocket science - it's just really bad Keynesianism.

Obama is the only President in history to never obtain a 3% annual GDP.
Even the ones who died in their first term.
So suck it up, buttercup.

Single cherry picked stat aside, Obama had much better economy than Bush Sr. and Jr.

What good is posting 3%+ growth if you are follwing it up with a recesision? Obama was one of very few presidents to post consistent growth throughout two terms and not hand of a recession.

By increasing the debt by $30,000 per living soul in the USA.

Yea, he was an economic fucking genius.

 

[danielpalos]

Thats just more counterfactual bullshit.

How mentally inedequite do you have to be to not even know how to do basic internet search?

Here, let me show you how basic internet search is done:

CLICKY LINKY

Do it yourself, moron. I don't use discredited political organizations like google.

My numbers are completely accurate.

You refuted nothing of what you replied to. So your bullshit is completely bullshit.

Obama didn't post 3% growth but neither did Trump thus far. He may well just barely post one for 2018, but getting some extra 0.x% growth in good times by blowing up the debt by a trillion dollars is not exactly rocket science - it's just really bad Keynesianism.

Obama is the only President in history to never obtain a 3% annual GDP.
Even the ones who died in their first term.
So suck it up, buttercup.

Single cherry picked stat aside, Obama had much better economy than Bush Sr. and Jr.

What good is posting 3%+ growth if you are follwing it up with a recesision? Obama was one of very few presidents to post consistent growth throughout two terms and not hand of a recession.

By increasing the debt by $30,000 per living soul in the USA.

Yea, he was an economic fucking genius.

He turned our economy around after a recession; he did not simply help the rich get richer, and put it on the Peoples' tab.

 

[JWBooth]

The good thing is the economy is the one thing politicians can’t BS the voters on. We all know our own situation and that of our neighbors.

Economy adds robust 250,000 jobs in October in last employment report before election.

“The unemployment rate was unchanged at a near 50-year low of 3.7 percent. Annual wage growth topped 3 percent for the first time in nine years.”

Good economy doesn’t fit the narrative.

All that left wing lunatics know is:

So stealing the gif

 

[ColonelAngus]

The good thing is the economy is the one thing politicians can’t BS the voters on. We all know our own situation and that of our neighbors.

Economy adds robust 250,000 jobs in October in last employment report before election.

“The unemployment rate was unchanged at a near 50-year low of 3.7 percent. Annual wage growth topped 3 percent for the first time in nine years.”

Good economy doesn’t fit the narrative.

All that left wing lunatics know is:

So stealing the gif

Great, isn't it?

So fucking perfect.

 

[BS Filter]

Do it yourself, moron. I don't use discredited political organizations like google.

My numbers are completely accurate.

You refuted nothing of what you replied to. So your bullshit is completely bullshit.

Obama didn't post 3% growth but neither did Trump thus far. He may well just barely post one for 2018, but getting some extra 0.x% growth in good times by blowing up the debt by a trillion dollars is not exactly rocket science - it's just really bad Keynesianism.

Obama is the only President in history to never obtain a 3% annual GDP.
Even the ones who died in their first term.
So suck it up, buttercup.

Single cherry picked stat aside, Obama had much better economy than Bush Sr. and Jr.

What good is posting 3%+ growth if you are follwing it up with a recesision? Obama was one of very few presidents to post consistent growth throughout two terms and not hand of a recession.

By increasing the debt by $30,000 per living soul in the USA.

Yea, he was an economic fucking genius.

He turned our economy around after a recession; he did not simply help the rich get richer, and put it on the Peoples' tab.

What a crock. You really believe that crap, huh.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Do it yourself, moron. I don't use discredited political organizations like google.

My numbers are completely accurate.

You refuted nothing of what you replied to. So your bullshit is completely bullshit.

Obama didn't post 3% growth but neither did Trump thus far. He may well just barely post one for 2018, but getting some extra 0.x% growth in good times by blowing up the debt by a trillion dollars is not exactly rocket science - it's just really bad Keynesianism.

Obama is the only President in history to never obtain a 3% annual GDP.
Even the ones who died in their first term.
So suck it up, buttercup.

Single cherry picked stat aside, Obama had much better economy than Bush Sr. and Jr.

What good is posting 3%+ growth if you are follwing it up with a recesision? Obama was one of very few presidents to post consistent growth throughout two terms and not hand of a recession.

By increasing the debt by $30,000 per living soul in the USA.

Yea, he was an economic fucking genius.

He turned our economy around after a recession; he did not simply help the rich get richer, and put it on the Peoples' tab.

What exactly did Obama do?

 

[danielpalos]

You refuted nothing of what you replied to. So your bullshit is completely bullshit.

Obama didn't post 3% growth but neither did Trump thus far. He may well just barely post one for 2018, but getting some extra 0.x% growth in good times by blowing up the debt by a trillion dollars is not exactly rocket science - it's just really bad Keynesianism.

Obama is the only President in history to never obtain a 3% annual GDP.
Even the ones who died in their first term.
So suck it up, buttercup.

Single cherry picked stat aside, Obama had much better economy than Bush Sr. and Jr.

What good is posting 3%+ growth if you are follwing it up with a recesision? Obama was one of very few presidents to post consistent growth throughout two terms and not hand of a recession.

By increasing the debt by $30,000 per living soul in the USA.

Yea, he was an economic fucking genius.

He turned our economy around after a recession; he did not simply help the rich get richer, and put it on the Peoples' tab.

What a crock. You really believe that crap, huh.

every chart says it.

 

[danielpalos]

You refuted nothing of what you replied to. So your bullshit is completely bullshit.

Obama didn't post 3% growth but neither did Trump thus far. He may well just barely post one for 2018, but getting some extra 0.x% growth in good times by blowing up the debt by a trillion dollars is not exactly rocket science - it's just really bad Keynesianism.

Obama is the only President in history to never obtain a 3% annual GDP.
Even the ones who died in their first term.
So suck it up, buttercup.

Single cherry picked stat aside, Obama had much better economy than Bush Sr. and Jr.

What good is posting 3%+ growth if you are follwing it up with a recesision? Obama was one of very few presidents to post consistent growth throughout two terms and not hand of a recession.

By increasing the debt by $30,000 per living soul in the USA.

Yea, he was an economic fucking genius.

He turned our economy around after a recession; he did not simply help the rich get richer, and put it on the Peoples' tab.

What exactly did Obama do?

He had to spend a lot of money to get even a weak recovery going for the right wing to take credit for, ten years later.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Obama is the only President in history to never obtain a 3% annual GDP.
Even the ones who died in their first term.
So suck it up, buttercup.

Single cherry picked stat aside, Obama had much better economy than Bush Sr. and Jr.

What good is posting 3%+ growth if you are follwing it up with a recesision? Obama was one of very few presidents to post consistent growth throughout two terms and not hand of a recession.

By increasing the debt by $30,000 per living soul in the USA.

Yea, he was an economic fucking genius.

He turned our economy around after a recession; he did not simply help the rich get richer, and put it on the Peoples' tab.

What exactly did Obama do?

He had to spend a lot of money to get even a weak recovery going for the right wing to take credit for, ten years later.

Oh, so Obama’s claim to fame is adding trillions to the deficit. How come economists say now that Porkulus was a flop?

 

[danielpalos]

Single cherry picked stat aside, Obama had much better economy than Bush Sr. and Jr.

What good is posting 3%+ growth if you are follwing it up with a recesision? Obama was one of very few presidents to post consistent growth throughout two terms and not hand of a recession.

By increasing the debt by $30,000 per living soul in the USA.

Yea, he was an economic fucking genius.

He turned our economy around after a recession; he did not simply help the rich get richer, and put it on the Peoples' tab.

What exactly did Obama do?

He had to spend a lot of money to get even a weak recovery going for the right wing to take credit for, ten years later.

Oh, so Obama’s claim to fame is adding trillions to the deficit. How come economists say now that Porkulus was a flop?

turning our economy around. just read the charts.

are those same economists lauding Your guys' deficit spending?

 

[Weatherman2020]

By increasing the debt by $30,000 per living soul in the USA.

Yea, he was an economic fucking genius.

He turned our economy around after a recession; he did not simply help the rich get richer, and put it on the Peoples' tab.

What exactly did Obama do?

He had to spend a lot of money to get even a weak recovery going for the right wing to take credit for, ten years later.

Oh, so Obama’s claim to fame is adding trillions to the deficit. How come economists say now that Porkulus was a flop?

turning our economy around. just read the charts.

are those same economists lauding Your guys' deficit spending?

Slowest economic recovery in history. Reagan was getting a million jobs a month, Obama was lucky to see 50,000.