Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
And yet, job growth was steady for the last 7 years under Obama and annual GDP is negligibly higher now than under Obama. That’s not sounding like 3-13.A 1-15 team can go 0-16 the following year. I omitted the first year because Bush handed Obama a quarterly GDP of -8.4% and a recession. So of course that had a huge impact on GDP in 2009 which had nothing to do with Obama’s policies. But from that year forward, it averaged 2.1. Trump’s average so far is 2.2.You mean after we hit the lowest of low points we started doing better? So when a football team goes 1-15 and the next year goes 3-13 you smile and say the team tripled the win total? Or do you say, "3-13 still sucks"?
Bush was bad but Obama spent a lot in free agency to go 3-13. Problem with him was that he was never seen as a business friendly president.
You're moving the rhetoric. Job growth was steady because Bush destroyed the economy and unemployment was near 9%. Obama also benefitted from retiring baby boomers, explosion of the App marketplace and innovation in general. I don't think BHO was a terrible president btw I just stated that he was not viewed as business friendly and his banking regulations made it very expensive for banks to compete with the shadow banking market, which exploded and now with rates rising the High Yield market could blow up. Trump is seen as business friendly but he is also dealing with much more expensive $$ as the Fed has raised rates, despite that and the whole division of Progressive Left vs. Right (I am neither) the country is doing pretty well in terms of the economy. The debt is the real issue and unless DJT addresses entitlements or implements a federal spending tax we will continue to accrue a massive debt load.
You were doing pretty well until you posted this
The debt is the real issue and unless DJT addresses entitlements or implements a federal spending tax we will continue to accrue a massive debt load.
So you want to take the Trump tax cuts out of the hide of the middle class
Oh...
I’m not moving anything. We’re discussing the economy. Employment is a big factor in that. And making it sound like it had nowhere to go but up is a red herring. It’s simply not true. The economy could have gotten worse. GDP could have continued shrinking. Employment could have continued falling. The recession could have become a depression.And yet, job growth was steady for the last 7 years under Obama and annual GDP is negligibly higher now than under Obama. That’s not sounding like 3-13.A 1-15 team can go 0-16 the following year. I omitted the first year because Bush handed Obama a quarterly GDP of -8.4% and a recession. So of course that had a huge impact on GDP in 2009 which had nothing to do with Obama’s policies. But from that year forward, it averaged 2.1. Trump’s average so far is 2.2.Real annual GDP was 2.1 starting the year aftere the recession. It’s 2.2 under Trump, though his second year will be reported on soon.
You mean after we hit the lowest of low points we started doing better? So when a football team goes 1-15 and the next year goes 3-13 you smile and say the team tripled the win total? Or do you say, "3-13 still sucks"?
Bush was bad but Obama spent a lot in free agency to go 3-13. Problem with him was that he was never seen as a business friendly president.
You're moving the rhetoric. Job growth was steady because Bush destroyed the economy and unemployment was near 9%. Obama also benefitted from retiring baby boomers, explosion of the App marketplace and innovation in general. I don't think BHO was a terrible president btw I just stated that he was not viewed as business friendly and his banking regulations made it very expensive for banks to compete with the shadow banking market, which exploded and now with rates rising the High Yield market could blow up. Trump is seen as business friendly but he is also dealing with much more expensive $$ as the Fed has raised rates, despite that and the whole division of Progressive Left vs. Right (I am neither) the country is doing pretty well in terms of the economy. The debt is the real issue and unless DJT addresses entitlements or implements a federal spending tax we will continue to accrue a massive debt load.
So weird that a Black President would be the first in history to spend more on welfare than on military.
You can of course back that claim up...right?
Ya know...with a link to actual stats?
I’m not moving anything. We’re discussing the economy. Employment is a big factor in that. And making it sound like it had nowhere to go but up is a red herring. It’s simply not true. The economy could have gotten worse. GDP could have continued shrinking. Employment could have continued falling. The recession could have become a depression.And yet, job growth was steady for the last 7 years under Obama and annual GDP is negligibly higher now than under Obama. That’s not sounding like 3-13.A 1-15 team can go 0-16 the following year. I omitted the first year because Bush handed Obama a quarterly GDP of -8.4% and a recession. So of course that had a huge impact on GDP in 2009 which had nothing to do with Obama’s policies. But from that year forward, it averaged 2.1. Trump’s average so far is 2.2.You mean after we hit the lowest of low points we started doing better? So when a football team goes 1-15 and the next year goes 3-13 you smile and say the team tripled the win total? Or do you say, "3-13 still sucks"?
Bush was bad but Obama spent a lot in free agency to go 3-13. Problem with him was that he was never seen as a business friendly president.
You're moving the rhetoric. Job growth was steady because Bush destroyed the economy and unemployment was near 9%. Obama also benefitted from retiring baby boomers, explosion of the App marketplace and innovation in general. I don't think BHO was a terrible president btw I just stated that he was not viewed as business friendly and his banking regulations made it very expensive for banks to compete with the shadow banking market, which exploded and now with rates rising the High Yield market could blow up. Trump is seen as business friendly but he is also dealing with much more expensive $$ as the Fed has raised rates, despite that and the whole division of Progressive Left vs. Right (I am neither) the country is doing pretty well in terms of the economy. The debt is the real issue and unless DJT addresses entitlements or implements a federal spending tax we will continue to accrue a massive debt load.
But it didn’t. GDP turned positive and averaged slightly less than Trump’s first year. Employment grew steadily and began a historic climb what is now in its 99th month of consecutive month. 76 months under Obama and 23 months (so far) under Trump.
The Tax cuts are a pittance. $2trn over 10 yrs? We need something substantial and long lasting. They definitely helped businesses and hence they are hiring more and you're seeing lower unemployment. And it is subjective and 100% your opinion on how "well" I am doing. I am debating logically with facts.
So weird that a Black President would be the first in history to spend more on welfare than on military.
You can of course back that claim up...right?
Ya know...with a link to actual stats?
The Tax cuts are a pittance. $2trn over 10 yrs? We need something substantial and long lasting. They definitely helped businesses and hence they are hiring more and you're seeing lower unemployment. And it is subjective and 100% your opinion on how "well" I am doing. I am debating logically with facts.
Yea...a trillion here and a trillion there and pretty soon you're talking about real money huh?
What a crock of shit
And why? (As in what did he do?)
This question is directed mostly to self-professed Conservatives, Republicans and other assorted rightwingers.
So weird that a Black President would be the first in history to spend more on welfare than on military.
You can of course back that claim up...right?
Ya know...with a link to actual stats?
www.google.com
Obama Was First President to Spend More on Welfare Than Defense
That's only accurate if you count Social Security as welfare.So weird that a Black President would be the first in history to spend more on welfare than on military.
You can of course back that claim up...right?
Ya know...with a link to actual stats?
www.google.com
Obama Was First President to Spend More on Welfare Than Defense
You need to read some financial history. Tax cuts don't even pay for themselves let alone reduce the budgetThe Tax cuts are a pittance. $2trn over 10 yrs? We need something substantial and long lasting. They definitely helped businesses and hence they are hiring more and you're seeing lower unemployment. And it is subjective and 100% your opinion on how "well" I am doing. I am debating logically with facts.
Yea...a trillion here and a trillion there and pretty soon you're talking about real money huh?
What a crock of shit
You have to give it time. The gamble is the cuts create more innovation, spending and hiring and hence more tax revenue. The $2trn is the WORST CASE SCENARIO.
You need to take a class in budgeting and forecasting.
You need to read some financial history. Tax cuts don't even pay for themselves let alone reduce the budgetThe Tax cuts are a pittance. $2trn over 10 yrs? We need something substantial and long lasting. They definitely helped businesses and hence they are hiring more and you're seeing lower unemployment. And it is subjective and 100% your opinion on how "well" I am doing. I am debating logically with facts.
Yea...a trillion here and a trillion there and pretty soon you're talking about real money huh?
What a crock of shit
You have to give it time. The gamble is the cuts create more innovation, spending and hiring and hence more tax revenue. The $2trn is the WORST CASE SCENARIO.
You need to take a class in budgeting and forecasting.
Allegedly. We will find out once they have been around for 2-3 yrs.
So weird that a Black President would be the first in history to spend more on welfare than on military.
You can of course back that claim up...right?
Ya know...with a link to actual stats?
www.google.com
Obama Was First President to Spend More on Welfare Than DefenseThat's only accurate if you count Social Security as welfare.So weird that a Black President would be the first in history to spend more on welfare than on military.
You can of course back that claim up...right?
Ya know...with a link to actual stats?
www.google.com
Obama Was First President to Spend More on Welfare Than Defense
So you're saying that all those Republican retirees are welfare recipients?
Allegedly. We will find out once they have been around for 2-3 yrs.
Did you miss the word "history"?
Tax cuts never have paid for themselves.
Why would THESE be different?
Which is still no more or less than what Congress offers them.The president can only spend what the Congress allows them to spend.You mean after we hit the lowest of low points we started doing better? So when a football team entgoes 1-15 and the next year goes 3-13 you smile and say the team tripled the win total? Or do you say, "3-13 still sucks"?
That's actually a really good point. However, I think Obama's policy, and maybe even some of his rhetoric held the economy back. It should have come back roaring over his eight years (that's a long time in economic cycling) instead of a whimper.
He was never seen as a business friendly president. What he did was keep rates very low for a very long period of time but companies did not spend or invest like he thought they would. With DJT he was seen as business friendly because well he is a businessman so it spurned confidence in both businesses and consumers alike. If it were Mark Cuban and not DJT the result would have been the same.
So weird that a Black President would be the first in history to spend more on welfare than on military...hmmm, nobody saw that coming.
POTUS is the final signature he has a lot of pull.
”Obama lowered rates to the floor”I’m not moving anything. We’re discussing the economy. Employment is a big factor in that. And making it sound like it had nowhere to go but up is a red herring. It’s simply not true. The economy could have gotten worse. GDP could have continued shrinking. Employment could have continued falling. The recession could have become a depression.And yet, job growth was steady for the last 7 years under Obama and annual GDP is negligibly higher now than under Obama. That’s not sounding like 3-13.A 1-15 team can go 0-16 the following year. I omitted the first year because Bush handed Obama a quarterly GDP of -8.4% and a recession. So of course that had a huge impact on GDP in 2009 which had nothing to do with Obama’s policies. But from that year forward, it averaged 2.1. Trump’s average so far is 2.2.
Bush was bad but Obama spent a lot in free agency to go 3-13. Problem with him was that he was never seen as a business friendly president.
You're moving the rhetoric. Job growth was steady because Bush destroyed the economy and unemployment was near 9%. Obama also benefitted from retiring baby boomers, explosion of the App marketplace and innovation in general. I don't think BHO was a terrible president btw I just stated that he was not viewed as business friendly and his banking regulations made it very expensive for banks to compete with the shadow banking market, which exploded and now with rates rising the High Yield market could blow up. Trump is seen as business friendly but he is also dealing with much more expensive $$ as the Fed has raised rates, despite that and the whole division of Progressive Left vs. Right (I am neither) the country is doing pretty well in terms of the economy. The debt is the real issue and unless DJT addresses entitlements or implements a federal spending tax we will continue to accrue a massive debt load.
But it didn’t. GDP turned positive and averaged slightly less than Trump’s first year. Employment grew steadily and began a historic climb what is now in its 99th month of consecutive month. 76 months under Obama and 23 months (so far) under Trump.
Not true.
When the I-Banks failed many commercial banks squeezed lending practices and it caused business to resort to layoffs or cease hiring or both. Then came TARP but that did not unfreeze credit the way the Gov't thought it would. Shareholder cries did. The Banks realized they needed to generate assets and loans are assets for banks. So banks waited a quarter or two and started lending again. My wife works for a big bank and lived through it. Now banks started lending again and businesses proceeded with caution. Obama lowered rates to the floor to inspire cheap lending and it helped. What he also did was impose tough regulations. Dealing with cheap money, businesses had more cash and began to rehire people. Same with banks, etc. Not sure how we could have done any worse. The Country is still rich and huge (too big to fail). The TARP monies have been repaid and in BHO's 8 years he spent $10Trn? But on what? The Military suffered, business confidence remained low, corruption everywhere in our welfare system? He did keep rates low but other than that I am not sure what specifically he did that was so great for the economy.
Why wait? We already know the tax cuts hurt the budget in FY2018. Prior to the tax cuts, the federal deficit was on target to add less than a trillion dollars in new debt. By the end of the fiscal year, we ended up with a $1.3 trillion deficit. So they greatly increased the debt.You need to read some financial history. Tax cuts don't even pay for themselves let alone reduce the budgetThe Tax cuts are a pittance. $2trn over 10 yrs? We need something substantial and long lasting. They definitely helped businesses and hence they are hiring more and you're seeing lower unemployment. And it is subjective and 100% your opinion on how "well" I am doing. I am debating logically with facts.
Yea...a trillion here and a trillion there and pretty soon you're talking about real money huh?
What a crock of shit
You have to give it time. The gamble is the cuts create more innovation, spending and hiring and hence more tax revenue. The $2trn is the WORST CASE SCENARIO.
You need to take a class in budgeting and forecasting.
Allegedly. We will find out once they have been around for 2-3 yrs.
So weird that a Black President would be the first in history to spend more on welfare than on military.
You can of course back that claim up...right?
Ya know...with a link to actual stats?
www.google.com
Obama Was First President to Spend More on Welfare Than DefenseThat's only accurate if you count Social Security as welfare.So weird that a Black President would be the first in history to spend more on welfare than on military.
You can of course back that claim up...right?
Ya know...with a link to actual stats?
www.google.com
Obama Was First President to Spend More on Welfare Than Defense
So you're saying that all those Republican retirees are welfare recipients?
Are you thinking that prior administrations didn’t have social security paid out on their watch?
You might be trying way too hard on this one.
Innovation. The way tech is moving, 5G, etc. Cuts inspire investment and innovation so now they may actually work...in theory anyway. We have never seen tech move this quickly EVER. Moore's Law used to be 18 mos. Now it is six months. I am speaking about the corporate cuts not the personal ones and on the personal ones a lot of the deductions have been reduced/eliminated so TBD how favorable they will be.
