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

[Oldstyle]

Horseshit! You and every leading Democrat was predicting Trump would crash the economy and the stock market because of rampant uncertainty and his complete lack of experience. REMEMBER? Had that happened would you be saying "It's not Trump's fault for the crash, he inherited Obama's economy so it's Obama's fault."

I would bet my house you or any other Trump hater would NEVER say that.

How are the markets doing now?

Markets are fine, going through a correction phase after a fantastic run since Trump's election.

with tax cut economics? only in right wing fantasy do fundamentals not matter under capitalism.

Interesting...so when Kennedy called for tax cuts...did he not understand economic "fundamentals"?

apples and oranges. besides; tax cut economics are worthless if you are not going to cut spending.

Beyond these two great issues of the day, JFK created the Peace Corps, initiated the "space race" which put a man on the moon in 1969, advocated on mental health issues, and worked with Congress on affordable housing, equal pay for women, and a host of other agendas.--https://www.maryferrell.org/pages/Kennedy_Domestic_Policy.html

Your guys falls far short.

So Kennedy cut spending?

 

[Oldstyle]

Let us not forget, Trump has the GDP up at 4.1%. Obama couldn't even get at above 3%.

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

Your chart says I am right, moron.

The -1.1 in qtr 1 crushed the prospects of growth for the entire year of 2014(because when you LOSE 1.1 in a weak recovery the 4.3 or 5.1 growth doesn't amount to anything, and the 2 in qtr 4 sealed the deal for that year).

The chart says I'm right - there is no growth that happened under Turmp that we haven't seen under Obama

Let me ask you this, Anton...do you think Obama's economy would have seen the same growth as we've seen under Trump if Barry was also having to absorb 5 Fed rate increases in his first two years in office?

 

[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

Your chart says I am right, moron.

The -1.1 in qtr 1 crushed the prospects of growth for the entire year of 2014(because when you LOSE 1.1 in a weak recovery the 4.3 or 5.1 growth doesn't amount to anything, and the 2 in qtr 4 sealed the deal for that year).

The chart says I'm right - there is no growth that happened under Turmp that we haven't seen under Obama

Let me ask you this, Anton...do you think Obama's economy would have seen the same growth as we've seen under Trump if Barry was also having to absorb 5 Fed rate increases in his first two years in office?

Trump "having to obsorb"? You have to be kidding me. The guy inherited a stable, growing economy compared to Obama who inherited not just a recession, but the deepest one since GREAT DEPRESSION.

Take your "poor ol' Trump got a raw deal" tears somewhere else.

I personally do not think there ever was "Obama economy" and there never will be "Trump economy", their policy contrbution to economic picture is limited (Trump's much more so)

 

[Oldstyle]

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

Your chart says I am right, moron.

The -1.1 in qtr 1 crushed the prospects of growth for the entire year of 2014(because when you LOSE 1.1 in a weak recovery the 4.3 or 5.1 growth doesn't amount to anything, and the 2 in qtr 4 sealed the deal for that year).

The chart says I'm right - there is no growth that happened under Turmp that we haven't seen under Obama

Let me ask you this, Anton...do you think Obama's economy would have seen the same growth as we've seen under Trump if Barry was also having to absorb 5 Fed rate increases in his first two years in office?

Trump "having to obsorb"? You have to be kidding me. The guy inherited a stable, growing economy compared to Obama who inherited not just a recession, but the deepest one since GREAT DEPRESSION.

Take your "poor ol' Trump got a raw deal" tears somewhere else.

I personally do not think there ever was "Obama economy" and there never will be "Trump economy", their policy contrbution to economic picture is limited (Trump's much more so)

Nice job of totally ducking my question. Don't want to answer it...do you?

 

[AntonToo]

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

Your chart says I am right, moron.

The -1.1 in qtr 1 crushed the prospects of growth for the entire year of 2014(because when you LOSE 1.1 in a weak recovery the 4.3 or 5.1 growth doesn't amount to anything, and the 2 in qtr 4 sealed the deal for that year).

The chart says I'm right - there is no growth that happened under Turmp that we haven't seen under Obama

Let me ask you this, Anton...do you think Obama's economy would have seen the same growth as we've seen under Trump if Barry was also having to absorb 5 Fed rate increases in his first two years in office?

Trump "having to obsorb"? You have to be kidding me. The guy inherited a stable, growing economy compared to Obama who inherited not just a recession, but the deepest one since GREAT DEPRESSION.

Take your "poor ol' Trump got a raw deal" tears somewhere else.

I personally do not think there ever was "Obama economy" and there never will be "Trump economy", their policy contrbution to economic picture is limited (Trump's much more so)

Nice job of totally ducking my question. Don't want to answer it...do you?

I answered it.

But to add - there is no economy today that does not rest on economy of yestrday. There is not a baubbly that begins and ends with some guy entering or leaving the White House.

There is no way to know where we woudl be today if it wasn't for QE.

 

[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?

 

[Oldstyle]

Your chart says I am right, moron.

The -1.1 in qtr 1 crushed the prospects of growth for the entire year of 2014(because when you LOSE 1.1 in a weak recovery the 4.3 or 5.1 growth doesn't amount to anything, and the 2 in qtr 4 sealed the deal for that year).

The chart says I'm right - there is no growth that happened under Turmp that we haven't seen under Obama

Let me ask you this, Anton...do you think Obama's economy would have seen the same growth as we've seen under Trump if Barry was also having to absorb 5 Fed rate increases in his first two years in office?

Trump "having to obsorb"? You have to be kidding me. The guy inherited a stable, growing economy compared to Obama who inherited not just a recession, but the deepest one since GREAT DEPRESSION.

Take your "poor ol' Trump got a raw deal" tears somewhere else.

I personally do not think there ever was "Obama economy" and there never will be "Trump economy", their policy contrbution to economic picture is limited (Trump's much more so)

Nice job of totally ducking my question. Don't want to answer it...do you?

i answered it.

That was your answer? Come on...

 

[AntonToo]

The chart says I'm right - there is no growth that happened under Turmp that we haven't seen under Obama

Let me ask you this, Anton...do you think Obama's economy would have seen the same growth as we've seen under Trump if Barry was also having to absorb 5 Fed rate increases in his first two years in office?

Trump "having to obsorb"? You have to be kidding me. The guy inherited a stable, growing economy compared to Obama who inherited not just a recession, but the deepest one since GREAT DEPRESSION.

Take your "poor ol' Trump got a raw deal" tears somewhere else.

I personally do not think there ever was "Obama economy" and there never will be "Trump economy", their policy contrbution to economic picture is limited (Trump's much more so)

Nice job of totally ducking my question. Don't want to answer it...do you?

i answered it.

That was your answer? Come on...

But to add - there is no economy today that does not rest on economy of yesterday. There is not a bubble that begins and ends with some guy entering or leaving the White House.

There is no way to know where we would be today if it wasn't for QE.

 

[Oldstyle]

Your chart says I am right, moron.

The -1.1 in qtr 1 crushed the prospects of growth for the entire year of 2014(because when you LOSE 1.1 in a weak recovery the 4.3 or 5.1 growth doesn't amount to anything, and the 2 in qtr 4 sealed the deal for that year).

The chart says I'm right - there is no growth that happened under Turmp that we haven't seen under Obama

Let me ask you this, Anton...do you think Obama's economy would have seen the same growth as we've seen under Trump if Barry was also having to absorb 5 Fed rate increases in his first two years in office?

Trump "having to obsorb"? You have to be kidding me. The guy inherited a stable, growing economy compared to Obama who inherited not just a recession, but the deepest one since GREAT DEPRESSION.

Take your "poor ol' Trump got a raw deal" tears somewhere else.

I asked a very specific question that you either don't understand...or you're deliberately changing the subject on. Let's try again...

Do you think the economy during Barack Obama's two terms would have seen the same growth as what we've seen under Trump if the Fed had raised interest rates 5 times in two years like they have with Trump?

I personally do not think there ever was "Obama economy" and there never will be "Trump economy", their policy contrbution to economic picture is limited (Trump's much more so)

Nice job of totally ducking my question. Don't want to answer it...do you?

I answered it.

But to add - there is no economy today that does not rest on economy of yestrday. There is not a baubbly that begins and ends with some guy entering or leaving the White House.

There is no way to know where we woudl be today if it wasn't for QE.

 

[AntonToo]

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.

 

[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?

 

[Oldstyle]

I mean lets be honest here, Anton...despite massive amounts of QE...despite near zero interest rates by the Fed for most of his two terms...despite trillions of dollars that were spent on stimulus...economic growth during Barry's time in office would best be described as "tepid"! If it hadn't been for the energy boom caused by fracking (something that Obama was against!) the numbers for Obama would have been SPECTACULARLY bad!

 

[AntonToo]

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.

 

[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!

 

[ptbw forever]

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

Your chart says I am right, moron.

The -1.1 in qtr 1 crushed the prospects of growth for the entire year of 2014(because when you LOSE 1.1 in a weak recovery the 4.3 or 5.1 growth doesn't amount to anything, and the 2 in qtr 4 sealed the deal for that year).

The chart says I'm right - there is no growth that happened under Turmp that we haven't seen under Obama

Let me ask you this, Anton...do you think Obama's economy would have seen the same growth as we've seen under Trump if Barry was also having to absorb 5 Fed rate increases in his first two years in office?

Trump "having to obsorb"? You have to be kidding me. The guy inherited a stable, growing economy compared to Obama who inherited not just a recession, but the deepest one since GREAT DEPRESSION.

Take your "poor ol' Trump got a raw deal" tears somewhere else.

I personally do not think there ever was "Obama economy" and there never will be "Trump economy", their policy contrbution to economic picture is limited (Trump's much more so)

Obama had a ZERO percent interest rate, idiot.

 

[ptbw forever]

Let us not forget, Trump has the GDP up at 4.1%. Obama couldn't even get at above 3%.

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

Your chart says I am right, moron.

The -1.1 in qtr 1 crushed the prospects of growth for the entire year of 2014(because when you LOSE 1.1 in a weak recovery the 4.3 or 5.1 growth doesn't amount to anything, and the 2 in qtr 4 sealed the deal for that year).

The chart says I'm right - there is no growth that happened under Turmp that we haven't seen (even more of) under Obama.

The claim that Trump posted 4.1% growth, while Obama never posted 3%+ is bullshit.

You are REALLY bad at economics, aren't you? Trump had ONE qtr below 2 and that was partly from Obama.

The rest have been good to great. Look at Obama's pathetic spread. Even if you take out 09 and give Obama credit for all the Republican budgets and spending after 2011 his numbers are still terrible, and that is with a ZERO interest rate.

 

[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

Your chart says I am right, moron.

The -1.1 in qtr 1 crushed the prospects of growth for the entire year of 2014(because when you LOSE 1.1 in a weak recovery the 4.3 or 5.1 growth doesn't amount to anything, and the 2 in qtr 4 sealed the deal for that year).

The chart says I'm right - there is no growth that happened under Turmp that we haven't seen (even more of) under Obama.

The claim that Trump posted 4.1% growth, while Obama never posted 3%+ is bullshit.

You are REALLY bad at economics, aren't you? Trump had ONE qtr below 2 and that was partly from Obama.

The rest have been good to great. Look at Obama's pathetic spread. Even if you take out 09 and give Obama credit for all the Republican budgets and spending after 2011 his numbers are still terrible, and that is with a ZERO interest rate.

Terrible? You are fucking nuts. Two last Republican presidents would give their right nut (pun intended) to have Obama's record of recovery and growth.

Terrible is blowing a trillion dollar hole in the debt when we are already facing red ink as far as the eye can see, all to finance a cherry on top of sustianed expansion and full employemnt.

Deficit will hit 1 trillion dollars by next year - this in GOOD times. And if economy so much as hickups from here? WE ARE FUCKED.

 

[ptbw forever]

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

Your chart says I am right, moron.

The -1.1 in qtr 1 crushed the prospects of growth for the entire year of 2014(because when you LOSE 1.1 in a weak recovery the 4.3 or 5.1 growth doesn't amount to anything, and the 2 in qtr 4 sealed the deal for that year).

The chart says I'm right - there is no growth that happened under Turmp that we haven't seen (even more of) under Obama.

The claim that Trump posted 4.1% growth, while Obama never posted 3%+ is bullshit.

You are REALLY bad at economics, aren't you? Trump had ONE qtr below 2 and that was partly from Obama.

The rest have been good to great. Look at Obama's pathetic spread. Even if you take out 09 and give Obama credit for all the Republican budgets and spending after 2011 his numbers are still terrible, and that is with a ZERO interest rate.

Terrible? You are fucking nuts. Two last Republican presidents would give their right nut (pun intended) to have Obama's record of recovery and growth.

Terrible is blowing a trillion dollar hole in the debt when we are already facing red ink as far as the eye can see, all to finance a cherry on top of sustianed expansion and full employemnt.

Deficit will hit 1 trillion dollars by next year - this in GOOD times. And if economy so much as hickups from here? WE ARE FUCKED.

Obama's record on growth and recovery was terrible, especially when you have zero interest rates. 1.9% annual GDP is terrible.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Let us not forget, Trump has the GDP up at 4.1%. Obama couldn't even get at above 3%.

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.

 

[rightwinger]

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

Your chart says I am right, moron.

The -1.1 in qtr 1 crushed the prospects of growth for the entire year of 2014(because when you LOSE 1.1 in a weak recovery the 4.3 or 5.1 growth doesn't amount to anything, and the 2 in qtr 4 sealed the deal for that year).

The chart says I'm right - there is no growth that happened under Turmp that we haven't seen under Obama

Let me ask you this, Anton...do you think Obama's economy would have seen the same growth as we've seen under Trump if Barry was also having to absorb 5 Fed rate increases in his first two years in office?

The economy would be better under the Great Obama without a billionaire tax cut and foolish trade war