It should be ten years after the time they passed that they sunset but had the Democrat supported them they could have been made permanent. Want to keep them in place then vote for Republicans.
Which is two sides of the coin. Yet it is illegal and screws over Americans who build houses. Do you also buy stolen goods because they are cheaper? Same principle, right? Haha
What part of the US? The helper should make 20 bucks and the skilled mason twice that. A skilled carpenter gets 15 to 16 here in my area. An insult to the trade. In the 60s and 70s these men lived in new homes now most live in old mobile homes. That is housing for the working poor. I guess they should learn to code ? The great growth in income disparity gives the accurate view imo.
They build houses if you had paid attention. What a entitled snide remark. Working people are beneath you?
Republicans owned both houses of congress and passed the tax bill without democrat support. They chose not to make the middle class cuts permanent. Thst is entirely on republicans.
It is pointless to try and have a discussion with you as you will merely claim you have already refuted anything posted, as you demonstrated above, and refuse to answer direct questions to you. Your history of obfuscation well documented. And of course your claims of white flags, no white flag offered.
It is pointless to try and have a discussion with you as you will merely claim you have already refuted anything posted, as you demonstrated above, and refuse to answer direct questions to you. Your history of obfuscation well documented. And of course your claims of white flags, no white flag offered.
Well there was that last turd that jacked us up eight trillion and never really had anything "REAL" to show for it. And he was he was a friggin hero..
You're right, it's only my opinion. Why don't you find a single respected economist who believes protectionist trade policy is good for an economy? Oh BS Did we have a bull market throughout all of W's administration? I don't think so. Didn't we have a bull market for all of Clintons tenure? The reality is that presidents don't have as big an impact on the economy as most people think. What trump is doing IS bad for our economy. Who knows what records we might be breaking if the orange moron would let the FREE market work. If you'd think for your damn self you'd almost certainly come to the same conclusion.
It would be beneficial to the economy if Donald Trump, Melania, Ivanka, Jared Kushner, Donald Jr., and Eric emptied their pockets before leaving the White House on each visit.
When Obama moved to the White House, after the two years of the Democrat controlled Congress of which he was a what did they do starting January of 2007 when he and his fellow Democrats took the Congress and majority control of the government? Things don't just hinge on who is President you know.
In 2016 it was $57,600. So, yeah, Heritage got their numbers from elsewhere. Were they wrong about the increase?
Just because jobs were improving before the stimulus started doesn't mean the stimulus wasn't very helpful. From 2006-2008, the democrats had a strong majority in the house, but only held the senate by a razor thin margin, and the president was Republican. Both parties are equally responsible here. The unemployment rate was already 8.3% in Feb 2009 when the stimulus was passed and long before the bulk of the stimulus was spent. That projection in 2008 didn't take into account how broken the economy really was. Much of this spending was dealing with a collapsing economy. And an equal part of the deficit was due to revenue loss because we were in a big recession. What domestic programs? "We're not a rich country. We're a debtor nation... We've got to get rid of the $19 trillion in debt, I think I could do it fairly quickly...I would say over a period of eight years" At least democrats running are suggesting paying for their spending. Trump and Bush? No.
No, but bigots would be Funny how on one hand you guys want free markets, and on the other dont want to compete for your jobs like everyone else
Most of the trends I've seen continued regardless of who controlled what house of Congress. The recovery started when Dems were in control (again, not saying it was because of them) and continued when Reps took control. Pretty sure the global economy showed a similar trend, so I think there's a good case for not crediting either party. Now, smaller impacts, sure. Just like Trump's tax cut probably did things to help in the short term and his tariffs have done things to hurt in the short term.
"Competition is good for the economy!" "Um, you may have to compete for your job." "I have changed my mind!"
Hardly theyvshifted quite remarkably as in spending increasing 10% then 20% and the deficit leaping from $161B to $1,400B. The recession didn't begin until a year after they took control. Unemployment continued to climb and stayed over 8% for four years and the more Republicans took back control the better things got.
The unemployment rate was already 8.3% in Feb 2009 when the stimulus was passed and long before the bulk of the stimulus was spent. That projection in 2008 didn't take into account how broken the economy really was.[/quote] It was 4.5% when the Democrats took back the Congress and majority power. Everyone knew how bad the economy was the job loss rate was hitting bottom. And that unemployment rate continued to soar to 10% and stayed over 9% for the next 4 years even after the failed stimulus. And the Democrats were in charge, held the Congress a year before the recession even began had complete control starting 2009 and it was their policies. Compare that to the Republican response to the Dot.com bust, slowdown/recession and then 911 2000/2004. Their policies actually worked to help mitigate the depth and lenght of that recession and get is into a full recovery. The Democrats failed with their policies after doubling the debt and expanding government spending to the levels we are still having to deal with. You are doubting domestic spending was increased? And? There's no way they are going to pay for it all even though you will be paying hugely more in taxes. Elect more fiscal conservatives which are only found in the right. Growth in the economy and spending restraint produced the surpluses of the late 1990's and brought the peak deficit of $400B during the 2001 recession and recovery down to that paltry $161B Bush43/Republican. The Democrats didn't even come cloase to the WORST Republican years.