U.S. economy slows sharply to 2% annualized rate in third quarter

Explain the 119 Trillion dollar economic plan you claim came from Biden? I remind you, schools are a net expense and not a gain for the economy. Producing students who can't show you Brazil on a map is not progress. I know of no new tax that came from Biden. Show us what you are discussing.

 

Above post says 119 Trillion dollars but the correct figure he alleges is 1.9 Trillion dollars. (see post 151)

 

You need to look at the curves for 2016 - that was the economy Obama turned over; which was even poorer than the previous years "recovery" Obama delivered - the worst recovery since WW II. You can play with the axes of the various graft to make it look like economic miracles but compared to other recession recoveries it was a POS.

 

You forget Bush had already dealt with banks with TARP. Ypu forget the Dems took back the Congress January of 2007 with a strong economy. They were in charge of passing measures first to help mitigate the slowdown, then limit the depth and length of the recession and then get us into a full recovery.

Bush had a great economy when he had a Republican Congress and that was handed to the Democrats. Obama got his stimulus passed which was a total failure and then did nothing creating the worst recovery in modern day history. Trump took a strong economy, thank you Republican Congress, and his turned around the LFPR, saw incomes rising and historical low unemployment so what exactly is your complaint about it?

 

It's all 1 economic plan.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/10/stimulus-bill-to-give-nearly-40-billion-to-higher-education.html

Wednesday afternoon the House passed a $1.9 trillion stimulus bill, now expected to be signed by President Joe Biden by the weekend. The so-called American Rescue Plan increases the child tax credit, provides $30 billion for emergency rental assistance, funds a third stimulus payment and extends boosted unemployment benefits. The bill also includes nearly $40 billion for higher education — $39,584,570,000 to be exact.


Thinking schools are not a gain for the economy, is a total joke. Companies want people with skills.
Nobody is going to hire a lawyer with just a preschool diploma.
This is so obvious for me, that I'm not up for a debate about it.

 

You're rather childishly not taking into account that thanks to Obama and his economic recovery plans, that the US economy did not totally went bankrupt. The banks were able to pull through only thanks to communistic aid on an utterly unprecedented massive scale. That minus 2.5% in 2009 would have been far and FAR worse if Obama did not do that. In fact, the crisis has been compared to how bad it was in the 1930's... where the GDP hit a minus 12.9%. So it's not so much that Obama did not cause a massive recovery. He managed to not get the economy being totally destroyed at the expense of a massive recovery.

While it remains so that Donald totally mismanaged the economy. His plans to borrow massively and invest it all in Wall Street did not do any kind of magic to the economy. While in fact, at the earliest glance of an economic set back, the entire balloon Donald inflated with hot air just totally inflated. It's all Donald was good for. While the previous GOP president caused the mortgage crisis with his let the market deal with shade mortgage deals.

 

Strong economy? The GDP was negative in Bush's last year (2007), leaving Obama to deal with a country whose banks were about to go all bankrupt in 2008. Obama was still dealing with the mess in 2009 with the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Recovery_and_Reinvestment_Act_of_2009

The crash, caused by GWB policies, was on par with the great recession of the 1930's (since all the banks were about to go bankrupt), where the GDP went minus 12.9%. So it's not so much that Obama did not cause a massive recovery. He managed to not get the economy being totally destroyed at the expense of a massive recovery.


While it remains so that Donald totally mismanaged the economy. His plans to borrow massively and invest it all in Wall Street did not do any kind of magic to the economy. While in fact, at the earliest glance of an economic set back, the entire balloon Donald inflated with hot air just totally inflated. It's all Donald was good for. He never produced better numbers then Obama who had a +3.1%

 

Obama's "recovery plan"? Don't make me laugh. His "recovery" was the worst post-rececession recovery since WW II.

Were you out of the country during the Trump term? You could possibly have been in country and vomited up this effluvia. Was a hell of a balloon, wasn't it? Got burst by a world wide pandemic and immediate roared back - Trump got unemployment rates back to leveivels it took your hero Obama and his flunky Biden over five years to manage. And he gave the economy such powerful momentum it's manage to survive, so far, the incompetency of Blithering Biden.

 

I said

"Bush had a great economy when he had a Republican Congress and that was handed to the Democrats."

The Democrats took back the Congress a YEAR before the recession. The economy was GREAT and that last Bush/Republican budget had a $161B deficit. Where did the Dems including Senator then President Obama have it in 2009.

And Obama's massive stimulus which increased the deficit almost nine fold was a total disaster. He sold it on it would hold unemployment to just 8%, instead it soared to 10% and stay over 9% for the next three years the WORST recovery in modern history as the Labor Force Participation rate plummeled and we are STILL paying for that it took the Trump tax rate cuts regulations rolebacks that started to bring it back up while at the same time we hit historically low unemployment for ALL demographics. Biden has it even LOWER now the latest jobs report it's falling again under Biden.



We had the recession/dot.com bust/9-11 as Bush came into office in 2001 but he and the Rep's passed to correct measures to help mitigate i's length and depth and got us back into a full recover, LFPR increased, incomes increased, the deficit fell like a rock. Then the Dem's took back the Congress failed to do what the Reps had done and with President Obama passed the failed stimulus plan and then did nothing. Remember Obama and the "well those shovel ready infrastructure jobs just weren't so ready" and "well I can't wave a magic wand we just have to live with the fact those good jobs won't be coming back". Shoveled out money to people and the deficits soared and unemployment soared and the LFPR fell.

And Biden wants to go with those same policies again.

No it wasn't it was caused by housing policies that started years before to force banks to give out high risk mortgages with FANNIE and FREDDIE guarantying them igniting the market into speculation. I had a mortgage the entire time, it didn't bother me a bit except that because of all the money being doled out housing prices went up which made my insurance and taxes go up. When prices fell back down to reasonable levels it was great for me.

It was never there to remain and his borrowing was less than Obama and the Democrats. And if YOU don't invest in Wall Street that is YOUR problem. Trump never invested taxpayer dollars in the market, that was Obama and it cost the taxpayer hundreds of billions in another failed scheme of his.

And I posted the GDP numbers



And as I said, when coming out of a recession is when you post the 5 and 6 numbers, not after the economy is already running at full steam and has no more room for high growth because there is any more capital to invest or workers to hire, it is all in use. Obama NEVER hit the numbers they should have hit considering how deep they let the recession get.

 

Your previous claim that the recession was over in 5 months after Obama took over, might be true on paper... but the crisis caused by the GOP / GWB was thundering through for years after Obama took over. You're simply down talking the insane collapse of the economy by eyeballing a minus 2.5 economic "growth".... where the economic problems were on par with the great recession in the 1930's where economic growth was minus double digits. And my point remains that Obama managed to not get that double digit minus, but just one minus 2.5, and with that he sacrificed a fast recovery. In the end, I do agree only having one minus 2.5 and an average economic growth after that is a heck of a lot better then having a massive economic crash for the sake of having a very good rebound.

Everybody is able to see that the rate of how fast the unemployment went down when Trump took over, did not change at all until the pandemic it. So his economic plan to balloon Wall Street had zero impact. That is Trump's only economic legacy... make a weak US economy that's just a balloon full of hot air ready to burst at the first set back... which happened when he still was in office.

 

This is getting just dumb. The banks were going bankrupt due to GOP policies under GWB.
And here you complain that the DEMS under Obama borrowed money to keep the banks afloat.
Do you understand that if Obama did not borrow that money, that the entire country would have gone bust without banks?
I really think you do not.

You're eyeballing GDP figures and so think the recovery was happening just 5 months into Obama's term.
And that's where you're wrong. The crisis is on par with the great recession in the 1930's and lasted many years.
And I posted the unemployment figures. They were going down steady.

That dot.com recession is absolutely nowhere comparable with the mortgage crisis. The chaos the GOP caused is immensely bigger.
And this shows you really do not get it at all.

Them banks gave high risk mortgages, but nobody made them sell them in massive bundles with good mortgages hiding the risk to other banks. They only showed that the new product where they could make a good profit, and put it on sale. The sale of that product was a success, so they became worth more.... until the other banks figured out what the product actually contained high risk loans and weren't worth a lot at all. That's where the banks lost a heck of a lot of money, besides that the mortgages were going bust. The GOP let it all happen under their watch with Fannie and Freddie being the big culprits, 2 government sponsored enterprises. And that's why GWB is to blame and not the dem controlled congress.

So to say that the entire problem that Fannie and Freddie were made to give high risk morgages, hardly is touching the truth of the matter. GWB failed to step in when they were selling high risk morgages to other banks, hiding it being a high risk product, all for high profits and management getting big bonusses, with the GOP idea that the market will figure it all out and the government shouldn't intervene.

Trump utterly slashed the taxes for big companies, so the US government lost a lot of income.
Trump borrowed a heck of a lot of money to compensate that lack of income.
So he did indeed borrow money to give it to big companies.

The idea was that with less taxes = more profits = companies investing the more profits part in to the economy.
But in the end... the companies gave the more profits to the shareholders who bought stocks -raising prices of wall street- and not into the economy.
That's why stock prices went up, and companies with no fat on the bone went bust at the first glance of a set back.

As I noted, there were still recovery programs installed years after that minus GDP growth.
You're only eyeballing GDP growth, as if that's how you can see a crisis is over.... which is not true in this case.
The mortgage crisis was utterly massive and far larger than just 2 years of a mild economic decline that you're eyeballing.

 

TARP was by Bush and it was all paid back WITH INTEREST and EARLY. Obama borrowed money for his stimulus plan which by his own measure was a total failure.

If you want to complain about how bad was the recession then complain about the Democrat Congress which took over a year before it began and failed to pass the necessary measures to first mitigate the slowdown which turned into the recession and then get us into a full recovery. Bush was lame ducked in 2006 going into 2007. Unemployment was 4.4% the month before the Dems took back control.

YES because the Republicans with their policies got us through and into a full recovery. And the dot.com was far more a economic hit, there is not a huge GDP component to residential housing while the dot.com's were HEAVY into capital investment. And BTW thank you President Clinton and his justice department which helped to cause that bust by first going after Microsoft threatening to break it up and then the other high tech they though were getting "to big to fail".

Yes the government was forcing them to take them and of course they bundled them with other mortgages else no one would have bought them. Banks don't just sit on mortgages they sell them to investment firms. What else were they supposed to do with them?

They weren't hidden, investment firms are very good at analyzing what is they are buying. The problem was FANNIE and FREDDIE kept telling them not to worry we GURANTY them!!!

Prove corporate tax revenues fell under the Trump tax policy.

Congress borrows money to pay for it's budgets not the President. Now granted there weren't as many fiscal conservative Republicans as before and more RINO's to go along with the fiscal irresponsible Democrats. But Trump pressed for across the board budgets cuts every year and STILL had lower deficits than the Dems 2008-2015 where they had majority control.

The idea is that more capital in the markets equals more investment into the economy and that grows the economy and it works. Stocks have gone up because that is the best investment out there. Companies invest their profits to grow and expand. When the government takes that capital out of the market for it's wasteful inefficient spending it COST the economy and it COST the taxpayers.

I'm looking at everything it is you with the blinders on. The mortgage "crisis" was dealt with by Bush. You're just making bogus excuses for the failures of the Democrat economic policies which Biden is trying to institute once again and will result in the same.

 

Got anything other than tired, worn out excuses for Dear Leader's mediocre economic perform.

 

This is a step in the right direction. We need the economy to stop growing. Shrinking would be ideal. Continued economic growth is unsustainable. Infinite growth on a planet with finite resources is a recipe for disaster.

 

STAGFLATION

Jimmy Carter 2.0... but this time the President is senile and a kiddie sniffer.

 

You mean the Dem controlled congress with Pelosi did TARP, and then Obama went on with correcting the wrongs of the GWB administration.
GWB only signed TARP, when his government failed to prevent the mess. No big whoop there.

You're deflecting away from how bad the recession actually was, and how well the democratic controlled congress with Obama managed that crisis only to have 2 years of rather smal negative GDP growth.

Uh no. the GOP mismanaged FANNIE and FREDDIE, 2 governmental entities... when the GOP held that office.
While the Dems countered the total mess in congress by getting TARP and later financial plans.
The crisis was on par with the great depression in the 1930's where the GDP went massive negative GDP growth for 3 years.
The Dems countered that in congress resulting in just 2 years of mild negative GDP growth.

It simply was a policy that GWB just let happen... as explained in my next lines.

You say that... while The U.S. Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission reported its findings in January 2011 that where there government failed is: Key policy makers ill prepared for the crisis, lacking a full understanding of the financial system they oversaw; and systemic breaches in accountability and ethics at all levels.

That's GWB and his team of policy makers to counter what went on.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 was Trumps plan, pushed through the GOP held congress.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_Cuts_and_Jobs_Act_of_2017

It's all in the hands of the GOP. They did it with Trump at the helm.

This is just getting dumb. Companies were making more money because somebody lowered their taxes. That money was given to the shareholders. So since shareholders were getting more money, meant they were able to buy more shares that was giving them a good return on their money. That's why the shares went up. To just say them companies were investing in things.... like where? The unemployment curve did not make a big dip at all that suddenly a lot more people were working... so that did not happen.

It's not a bogus excuse to say that the policies for FANNIE and FREDDIE were in the hands of the GOP controlled government. A GOP controlled government who failed to understand what was going on. While a Dem controlled congress passed the counter measurements. Counter measurements that pushed the GDP hardly in any deep red numbers, while the crisis was just as big as the one in the 1930's.

 

I meant what I said, TARP was a Bush program, more specifically Treasury Secretary Paulson, which was merely a series of bridge loans which were paid back in full and with interest and Obama had nothing to do with or "saving the mortgage industry" it was already done before he move over to the WH. All he had to do was come up with a program for home owners who went underwater and he failed at anything substantial there with the Dem congress.


The Legacy of TARP
In December 2013, the Treasury wrapped up TARP and the government concluded that its investments had earned more than $11 billion for taxpayers. To be more specific, TARP recovered funds totaling $441.7 billion from $426.4 billion invested. The government also claimed that TARP prevented the American auto industry from failing and saved more than one million jobs, helped stabilize banks, and restored credit availability for individuals and businesses.
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/t/troubled-asset-relief-program-tarp.asp

Hardly I pointing out exactly how bad the slowdown leading to it was badly managed by the Democrat congress which failed to institute policies to help mitigate it and then get us into a recovery as Bush and the Reps did in 2001. It got as bad as it did BECAUSE of the Dems and lasted as long as it did BECAUSE of the Dems.

Ahhh no Barney Franks who was the grand protector of both and the Congessional goto expert mismanaged FANNIE AND FREDDIE going back for years. But that was taken care of under Bush, it was the getting us through the slowdown and the recession and into a recovery where the Dems/Obama/Biden were abject failures and they are trying to use those same policies now.

Again government rules and regulations long predated Bush required the mortgage companies issued sub-prime mortgages, what were they supposed to do with that added risk they were required to take on?

That's Congress and Presidents going back decades and it took Bush and Paulson to get out from under, not that I necessary agreed with their programs but the worked and then were ended and the taxpayers made money off of them.

So prove that produced less government tax revenue.

First amount is individual tax revenues second corporate tax revenues



Looks to me like we ended up with more than DOUBLE corporate income tax revenues. And with the increase in personal income tax revenues and their restrained budgets Bush and the Reps were able to take their peak deficit during the recession of $400B down to a paltry $161B heading for surplus again. Then the Dems took back first the Congress and then the WH and two years later the deficit hit $1,400B and stayed over $1,000B for the next three years until the Republicans started taking back the Congress and instituted the Austerity and Sequester programs which cut those deficits in half.

They were making more money because they could invest and expand and increase their productivity. Why do you find it unusual that stockholders get money? If they don't then where is the capital necessary to have an economy going to come from a government money tree? Companies were investing all over I was industrial sales all my life that period saw huge growth in manufacturing and services. The unemployment rate fell, the LFPR improved, incomes rose across the board.

You do know FANNIE and FREDDIE are quasi-government agencies they are independent agencies not run by the WH or the Treasury. They are overseen by the Congress but only limited. And that problem was SOLVED under Bush, not Obama. The best thing Obama could have done when he moved to the WH was announce that the Bush tax rates would be made permanent. That he would instituted a regulatory moratorium, that any plans to take over the nations healthcare system in is healthcare scheme would be put on hold until we were in a full recovery and then there would be extensive hearings IN PUBLIC to decide what if anything they should do. And then GET OUT OF THE WAY. Instead his stimulus was a hugely expensive total failure.

 

It remains so...
Who controlled congress during the last years of GWB? It were the Dems. Who voted in Tarp? The Dems!
And indeed Fannie and Freddie are quasi-Government. Who controls that? It was GWB and his gang and not congress.

So whose fault is it that Fanie and Freddie went out of control: GWB and his gang.
To who goes the credit of fixing it? Congress,... controlled by the Dems.


And no, GWB couldn't do TRAP, since he didn't control congress.

 

BIDENFLATIONHARMING MILITARY READINESS. This Administration lurches from one screw up to the next, solving nothing, just spins and blame fixes their destruction:

Rising Inflation Is Beginning to Worry Pentagon Leaders.

“Their warnings arrive as Congress is more than a month late in passing the Pentagon’s annual budget, meaning spending is frozen at the prior year’s level.”

They are taking back the wage gains the American Worker enjoyed under Trump. Time to change it back!