Due to president Obama's policies that does makes senseThe recession of 2008 was the biggest economic meltdown since the Great Depression. So it kind of makes sense that the (8 consecutive year) recovery was similarly "weak".
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.
Due to president Obama's policies that does makes senseThe recession of 2008 was the biggest economic meltdown since the Great Depression. So it kind of makes sense that the (8 consecutive year) recovery was similarly "weak".
Actually it would be the opposite. The deeper the recession, the lower the starting point of the recovery, the most room to grow back towards a normalized economic level.The recession of 2008 was the biggest economic meltdown since the Great Depression. So it kind of makes sense that the (8 consecutive year) recovery was similarly "weak".
I'll play this game, when Obama economy (really stupid to tie to a president) hit 4.9 and 5.1 in Q3/Q4 in '14 were those regulations in place?Alot yes and I'll tell you why.
The recovery began in June 2009, before president Obama's “stimulus” spendathon even started. It recovered because of the actions of the Federal Reserve and because it’s what market economies do. But presidents Obama policies led to the weakest recovery since before WWII.
cool story.So NJ Gov. is up to his keyster in a sexual abuse scandal! You hear about it?
The incident actually has a credible accusor, who did not wait 36 years but went right to hospital/police, reported it to her direct reports, contacted the Gov. direct and no justice! No investigation.
But in Jersey it is a quick sound bite on the local news, the local news that did seemingly hourly updates on an a scheduled appearance of Stormy Davis.
The is the problem when news media does not practice unbiased reporting, but is reflective of the owners and/or management of the station, paper, or whatever outlet is informing the public. We actually do get fake news. Fake news is very real.
Probably not based "exclusively" on anything in particular. Lots of things contributing to today's bustling economy, including the things you mentioned, which are certainly helping a lot, especially for small business growth.Let me guess this is based on exclusively the tax cuts and getting rid of regulations?
Are you suggesting that the "we believe victims" movement has some limitations?So NJ Gov. is up to his keyster in a sexual abuse scandal! You hear about it?
The incident actually has a credible accusor, who did not wait 36 years but went right to hospital/police, reported it to her direct reports, contacted the Gov. direct and no justice! No investigation.
But in Jersey it is a quick sound bite on the local news, the local news that did seemingly hourly updates on an a scheduled appearance of Stormy Davis.
The is the problem when news media does not practice unbiased reporting, but is reflective of the owners and/or management of the station, paper, or whatever outlet is informing the public. We actually do get fake news. Fake news is very real.
President Obama never hit annual growth near those numbers. Not even closeI'll play this game, when Obama economy (really stupid to tie to a president) hit 4.9 and 5.1 in Q3/Q4 in '14 were those regulations in place?
President Obama never hit annual growth near those numbers. Not even close
This is true but if the Obama administration was more fiscally sound, president Trump's hand would if been forcedFederal Deficit Jumps 17 Percent As Tax Cuts Eat Into Government Revenue
https://www.npr.org/2018/10/16/6577...rcent-as-tax-cuts-eat-into-government-revenue
Actually it would be the opposite. The deeper the recession, the lower the starting point of the recovery, the most room to grow back towards a normalized economic level.
Really?President Obama never hit annual growth near those numbers. Not even close
Federal tax revenue is actually UP around 4.2%, in spite of tax cuts. Expenses are growing at 4.9%, due almost solely to increasing treasury rates causing net interest expense paid by the government to rise substantially.Federal Deficit Jumps 17 Percent As Tax Cuts Eat Into Government Revenue
https://www.npr.org/2018/10/16/6577...rcent-as-tax-cuts-eat-into-government-revenue
Federal tax revenue is actually UP around 4.2%, in spite of tax cuts. Expenses are growing at 4.9%, due almost solely to increasing treasury rates causing net interest expense paid by the government to rise substantially.
Lots of ways to look at the same info.
That we are in agreement on.The most obvious way of looking at it is that while we are in a booming economy, out deficit is GROWING. That is TERRIBLE and should be a concern to EVERYONE.
If we can't balance our books while the economy is running at full capacity, then we are truly F-ed.
Really NO ANNUAL GDP GROWTH above 3% during president Obama's 8 yrs mostly due to his polices
Again I'll play your game.Really NO ANNUAL GDP GROWTH above 3% during president Obama's 8 yrs mostly due to his polices
http://fortune.com/2017/08/30/donald-trump-springfield-mo-3-gdp/
Some kind of special to pivot to annual when that's not what I asked. Again I'll play your game.
http://fortune.com/2017/08/30/donald-trump-springfield-mo-3-gdp/
“We just announced that we hit 3% in GDP, it just came out,” the president said.”On a yearly basis, as you know, the last administration, during an eight year period, never hit 3%. So we’re really on our way. If we achieve sustained 3% growth, that means 12 million new jobs and $10 trillion of new economic activity over the next decade. That’s some numbers.”
But the comparison that he made is somewhat misleading. President Trump compared annual GDP growth in the Obama era to quarterly GDP growth in a three month period. And quarterly GDP often isn’t a good indicator for how much an economy will produce over the year, with quarterly GDP growth often differing significantly from the year’s overall GDP growth.
Take the Obama era for example. Between 2009 and 2016, GDP growth reached at or above 3% on a quarterly basis about eight times.
President Trump lives in your headWhat's the orange dotard up to today? Embarrassing our country again? More lies?
And yet president Obama policies led to the weakest recovery since before WWII. The recovery began in 2009, before his stimulus spendathon because of the actions of the Federal Reserve and because market economies do thisAgain I'll play your game.
http://fortune.com/2017/08/30/donald-trump-springfield-mo-3-gdp/
“We just announced that we hit 3% in GDP, it just came out,” the president said.”On a yearly basis, as you know, the last administration, during an eight year period, never hit 3%. So we’re really on our way. If we achieve sustained 3% growth, that means 12 million new jobs and $10 trillion of new economic activity over the next decade. That’s some numbers.”
But the comparison that he made is somewhat misleading. President Trump compared annual GDP growth in the Obama era to quarterly GDP growth in a three month period. And quarterly GDP often isn’t a good indicator for how much an economy will produce over the year, with quarterly GDP growth often differing significantly from the year’s overall GDP growth.
Take the Obama era for example. Between 2009 and 2016, GDP growth reached at or above 3% on a quarterly basis about eight times.
Just winning!What's the orange dotard up to today? Embarrassing our country again? More lies?
And all on borrowed money .....more than every other President combined......pathetic really!And yet president Obama policies led to the weakest recovery since before WWII. The recovery began in 2009, before his stimulus spendathon because of the actions of the Federal Reserve and because market economies do this
Another Libitard has surfaced.....What's the orange dotard up to today? Embarrassing our country again? More lies?
This is true but if the Obama administration was more fiscally sound, president Trump's hand would if been forced
We will see this next go around what president Trump will do, but you president Bush and president Obama for this ridiculous deficit.
Good to see Ivan prudent debt wise--------funny we didn't see that during last administration when National Debt went from 7 to 18 trillion.
Then again.......
Agree regarding war. Raising the debt didn't work in the Great Depression and it didn't work during the last recession.Raising the national debt can be justified during times of war or financial calamity. We are going through neither now.
Agree regarding war. Raising the debt didn't work in the Great Depression and it didn't work during the last recession.
Besides, 2007 was not the 'financial calamity' DC elite portray it as. They conned the public into believing financial ruin was around to corner in order to justify handing my money to banks and then allowing banks to foreclose on peoples homes. Talk about the ultimate sting; I paid banks to compensate them for a home somebody defaulted on then the banks gets the home too... talk about double dipping.
But hey, at least the big donors to; Obama, Biden, Ryan, McConnell, etc came out on the good end.
The Democrats controlled both houses in 2008...is there any wonder there was a recession. Barney Franks fingerprints are all over that messRaising the debt through deficit spending on WW II is what ended the Great Depression.
And bailing out the banks (even though unpopular) had wide support from BOTH sides of the aisle in 2008. It what kept the recession from getting totally out of control.
The Democrats controlled both houses in 2008...is there any wonder there was a recession. Barney Franks fingerprints are all over that mess
What stopped the recession from getting out of hand was the federal reserve, and a market economy
I did and there is some truth to thatDeregulation of the banks (Reagan) was the other set of fingerprints on that mess.
You should read Too Big To Fail. It is frightening how close we came to a total melt down.
Hillary still does not believe her predator hubby should have resigned!!!!!!
How is that for double double standards! Ah Dems, no moral compass...so lost!
Quote of the Day from the Los Angeles Times:
"Frankly, I don't know what it is about California, but we seem to have a strange urge to elect really obnoxious women to high office. I'm not bragging, you understand, but no other state, including Maine, even comes close. When it comes to sending left-wing dingbats to Washington, we're Number One. There's no getting around the fact that the last time anyone saw the likes of Barbara Boxer, Dianne Feinstein, Maxine Waters, Kamala Harris, and Nancy Pelosi, they were stirring a cauldron when the curtain went up on ' Macbeth '. The five of them are like jackasses who happen to possess the gift of blab You don't know if you should condemn them for their stupidity or simply marvel at their ability to form words."
Columnist Burt Prelutsky,
Los Angeles Times