When Did This Become Trump's Economy?

[BrokeLoser]

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 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 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.

Unless you're claiming that Social Security is welfare...your claim is horse shit

Haha..sidestepped the fuck out of my question huh? Let’s try again.
“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.”

 

[Lesh]

Haha..sidestepped the fuck out of my question huh? Let’s try again.
“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.”

AGAIN stupid...unless you are claiming that Social Security (which you include) is welfare...your claim about welfare spending being higher than defense spending is bullshit on its face

 

[gipper]

And why? (As in what did he do?)

This question is directed mostly to self-professed Conservatives, Republicans and other assorted rightwingers.

When Obama says so, of course.

 

[jc456]

According to the left, it’s Trump’s economy every time there’s bad news and it’s 0bama’s economy every time there’s good news.

According to the right, it's trump's economy when theres good news and somebody else if there is any bad news.

that's pure fantasy mr. fk. It's his bad or good. He's president. I know, you don't accept that, but that is a fact that can't be denied. so go for it.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

”Obama lowered rates to the floor”

Utter nonsense. He did no such thing. The federal fund rate had already been lowered to a quarter percent before he became president. And that was in response to the financial collapse under Bush.

My bad not lowered....KEPT.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

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

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 budget

Allegedly. We will find out once they have been around for 2-3 yrs.

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.

Not to mention, a $1.3 trillion deficit during a strong economy is unconscionable.

You recall DJT didn't want to sign it but did because of the Military expenditures. He thought it was too fat with other expenses.

 

[Fang]

January 21, 2017. not sure what you're after.

So what made the economy BOOM! just one day after Trump took Office Spruce?

Trump's election in November of 2016. The mere thought of an America first President who understands the business world opened up the market to record gains. As the article points out the up tick started int 2010 which is when the Republicans won back the House. (From the article - Analysts expect pressure on stocks if Democrats gain control of the House of Representatives and a sharper downward reaction if they sweep the House and Senate.) Clearly there's a direct correlation between the Republicans controlling the House and/or Presidency.

Democrats and the MSM said the market would crash under Trump. Yet it hit record highs. Now Liberals like MarcATL start threads like this trying to convince us it's still Obama's economy 2 years into Trump's presidency. If MarcATL truly believes that then vote Trump/Pence in 2020 and you'll get 4 more years of "Obama's economy".

The S&P 500 has risen 28 percent since Trump’s election in November 2016 to the eve of congressional midterm elections on Tuesday. This surpasses the market’s performance over the same time frame under any other president in the past 64 years.

Two years in, Trump holds stock market bragging rights | Reuters

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

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.

The president can only spend what the Congress allows them to spend.

POTUS is the final signature he has a lot of pull.

Which is still no more or less than what Congress offers them.

BTW - I pick the torch of a party that does not celebrate this flag at their convention.

 

[Faun]

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 budget

Allegedly. We will find out once they have been around for 2-3 yrs.

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.

Not to mention, a $1.3 trillion deficit during a strong economy is unconscionable.

You recall DJT didn't want to sign it but did because of the Military expenditures. He thought it was too fat with other expenses.

Military expenses are factored into the FY2018 budget we’re reflective during the months October through December. The deficit during those months were on pace to add less than a trillion dollars in debt. That pace dramatically increased only after the tax cuts went into effect, ultimately hitting $1.3 trillion.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

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.

Again...tax cuts have historically never even paid for themselves...and with each new round...Republicans tell us "this time...will be different"

I explained my rationale. You could be right but you could also be wrong. The Democrats had the WH for eight years and our debt grew to $20Trn.

 

[Lesh]

You recall DJT didn't want to sign it but did because of the Military expenditures. He thought it was too fat with other expenses.

But sign it he did.

oh...

 

[BrokeLoser]

Haha..sidestepped the fuck out of my question huh? Let’s try again.
“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.”

AGAIN stupid...unless you are claiming that Social Security (which you include) is welfare...your claim about welfare spending being higher than defense spending is bullshit on its face

Haha...that’s a cool spin, let’s try again.
“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.”

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

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 budget

Allegedly. We will find out once they have been around for 2-3 yrs.

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.

Not to mention, a $1.3 trillion deficit during a strong economy is unconscionable.

You recall DJT didn't want to sign it but did because of the Military expenditures. He thought it was too fat with other expenses.

Military expenses are factored into the FY2018 budget we’re reflective during the months October through December. The deficit during those months were on pace to add less than a trillion dollars in debt. That pace dramatically increased only after the tax cuts went into effect, ultimately hitting $1.3 trillion.

Of course because mathematically you're taking $$ out of revenue. The plan is short term pain for long term gain. We will see if it works out. You did notice a lot of bonuses given to people by companies due to the cuts. You cannot judge the plan based on one year. Its like a team trading a star player for future prospects. Yes, at first you are worse but then hopefully down the road you're better.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

You recall DJT didn't want to sign it but did because of the Military expenditures. He thought it was too fat with other expenses.

But sign it he did.

oh...

yes and he explained that in his POV the military was in desperate need of upgrades and such that he swallowed the budget.

 

[justoffal]

THAT'S EASY.....ANYTHING GOOD THAT HAPPENS BETWEEN 2016 AND 2020 BELONGS TO OBAMA
ANYTHING BAD THAT HAPPENS IN THE SAME PERIOD BELONGS TO TRUMP

JO

 

[justoffal]

You need to read some financial history. Tax cuts don't even pay for themselves let alone reduce the budget

Allegedly. We will find out once they have been around for 2-3 yrs.

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.

Not to mention, a $1.3 trillion deficit during a strong economy is unconscionable.

You recall DJT didn't want to sign it but did because of the Military expenditures. He thought it was too fat with other expenses.

Military expenses are factored into the FY2018 budget we’re reflective during the months October through December. The deficit during those months were on pace to add less than a trillion dollars in debt. That pace dramatically increased only after the tax cuts went into effect, ultimately hitting $1.3 trillion.

Of course because mathematically you're taking $$ out of revenue. The plan is short term pain for long term gain. We will see if it works out. You did notice a lot of bonuses given to people by companies due to the cuts. You cannot judge the plan based on one year. Its like a team trading a star player for future prospects. Yes, at first you are worse but then hopefully down the road you're better.

THE ECONOMY IS RED HOT....I HAVE NEVER SEEN SO MANY HIRING BONUSES BEING OFFERED AS i AM NOW.

JO

 

[jc456]

best thing that happened to our economy is obammy left.

 

[Theowl32]

And why? (As in what did he do?)

This question is directed mostly to self-professed Conservatives, Republicans and other assorted rightwingers.

Why are you people so ignorant? The entire world would really like to know.

 

[Pilot1]

Obama did scare companies with his rhetoric, Obamacare, and other policies that weren't friendly to businesses, nor the cost structure of doing business in the U.S.

 

[Lesh]

THAT'S EASY.....ANYTHING GOOD THAT HAPPENS BETWEEN 2016 AND 2020 BELONGS TO OBAMA
ANYTHING BAD THAT HAPPENS IN THE SAME PERIOD BELONGS TO TRUMP

JO

Dude...no more coffee for you...

Ok JO?