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

[otto105]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

How many months of positive job growth did President Barack Hussein Obama economic managing produce?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

How many months of positive job growth did President Barack Hussein Obama economic managing produce?

His very weak recovery lasted a long time.

 

[otto105]

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.

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.

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.

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.

How many months of positive job growth did President Barack Hussein Obama economic managing produce?

His very weak recovery lasted a long time.

So, you can't post 65 months?

Obama's economy tripled the stock market, has donny grifters?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

protectionist, post: 22671132, member: 45665"]

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]

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]

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22669163

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]

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]

Toddsterpatriot, post: 22669163

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

There you go, he didn't cut the payroll tax in 2009.
Glad you FINALLY realized your error.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

protectionist, post: 22674907

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]

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]

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]

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.

Ya need to use the Obama math.

 

[protectionist]

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]

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,

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]

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!

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]

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,

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

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]

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

 

[Harpy Eagle]

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

You are so stupid. That is not how the annual GDP growth is determined .

I am truly embarrassed for you

 

[Faun]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

But you claim trump's economy is so strong and he's pressuring the fed to drop the rate.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

But you claim trump's economy is so strong and he's pressuring the fed to drop the rate.

And if they ever drop it to Obama levels, then you can claim Trump's economy is as weak as Obama's.