The economy grew 6.4% in Q1

Good news !


The economy grew 6.4% in Q1 as stimulus checks, COVID shots, looser business constraints spurred more spending
https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/mar...constraints-spurred-more-spending/ar-BB1gbhHz
A U.S. economy that was supposed to be ailing this past winter instead got a couple of big shots in the arm, kicking off what’s likely to be a historically strong year.

Economic growth accelerated in early 2021 as federal stimulus checks and fast-growing COVID vaccinations left consumers flush with cash and ready to spend it just as more states lifted business constraints. The developments pushed up a recovery that wasn’t supposed to gather force until mid-year.

The surge in consumer spending was bolstered by another strong quarter of business investment as companies rushed to meet the customer demand with purchases of new equipment and factory machines and housing starts continued to soar. Those advances more than offset the negative effects of slowing exports and a drawdown in inventories amid lingering supply-chain snarls.

 

Wait, isn't that the "number" Trump was aiming at? See how great a job Trump was doing, it carried over in Biden's time.
Just you watch, it'll drop next quarter and it will be all Biden's fault for screwing up the awesome job Trump did.

 

Trump aimed high in his promises, but the actual numbers do not flatter him:
- An average of 1% GDP annual growth during his term in office
- 8 trillion increase in debt.
- 30% increase in unemployment

 

When you inject as much stimulus into the game as a percentage of GDP as we have, the numbers should have been stronger. Things are still off-kilter.

 

Trump was not, is not, a financial genius. He has some charisma, and some people idolize him for some, I think, odd reason.
He was handed hundreds of millions, and still managed to screw it up. I wouldn't criticize him so hard if he hadn't run his mouth so much.
Obama handled the economy much better, and actually did have to deal with a real financial crisis literally as he took office.
Trump tricked some into believing that there was a financial crisis when he took over, but all he did was take advantage of a very stable, moderately growing economy. Those who believe otherwise are going to have to prove it if I am to believe it, because there is plenty of evidence to the contrary.

 

Really? Trump injected more than twice as much and got negative growth.

 

So? The economy being off-kilter has nothing to do with who is President there, cheerleader.

 

To be fair, much of the financial hit of the whole COVID-19 thing was mostly out of Trump's control. He could have had a lot better of a response, but most of the deaths, hospitalizations and financial hits were going to happen regardless. BUT, (you had to know that was coming!), upon examination of the economy before covid reveals that Trump took advantage of an already healthy economy, and gave it a little "juice" with the tax cuts, and still didn't really produce. To me, anyone who thinks Trump did a great job with the economy isn't taking a real, accurate and unbiased assessment of it.

 

No, it is not about who is president, but what I said tends to negate your argument, - that the money injection is the only reason for 6+% growth and 1.5 million jobs created. If the argument was valid, then it would have worked last year too. The growth this year indicates we have turned the corner aka we are getting past the pandemic.

 

Since you clearly didn't even understand my post, let alone negate it, perhaps buying a new set of pom poms would be a better endeavor for you.

 

Its not me who is failing to understand, and the personal BS proves it (it is always invoked to conceal a weak position).

Why does it make you angry to see the nation do better?

 

Consumption does not create wealth. That wasn't growth, it was just consumption fueled by the destruction of wealth necessary to hand out all that cash.

And you wonder why there is no real wage growth, income inequality grows, and the plutocracy accumulates more wealth. The sheep class will blame capitalism for those things, of course.

 

The US (and really much of the developed world) is in a liquidity trap. When the S&P is trading at 30+ times historical earnings and over 20 times even their forecast earnings, we have crossed the Rubicon. The fed has to keep pumping insane amounts of cash into the system or risk major capital market disruptions. That money isn't going to produce big sustained growth. It is only going to push the inevitable "correction" down the road to the next guy.

 

Consumption is 70% of our GDP, so it pretty much revolves around consumption. Get people jobs, which puts money in their pockets, which allows them to spend, and the economy rolls again.

Is the US a consumer economy?
https://www.econ.iastate.edu/ask-an-economist/us-consumer-economy#:~:text=Answer:,at nearly 50% of GDP.
Ours is called a consumer economy because consumption is nearly 70% of our GDP. Countries like China, are more investment-driven with investment (often by the public sector) at nearly 50% of GDP.

 

Thanks for the explanation. My guess would be that they are trying to spread the bad effects over a longer period of time, to lessen the dramatic swings in the economy, which on it's own should help. But, you can sweep all the dirt you want under the rug, but it'll make it's way out sooner or later. And there isn't an unlimited amount of room under that rug.

 

The theory is that the economy will eventually grow to match the money supply but we have pushed so much cash into the system I am not sure that is realistic. We are seeing hyperinflation in the stock market and nowhere else. That is why the rich are getting richer--they have all their money there. It is going to be an ugly reckoning. That is why when I do buy stocks independent of my 401K, I stick with short term in and out trades. It is gonna wipe people out one day.

 

It would have been higher if we had not increased our imports so much, while allowing our exports to shrink.

 

Do you know what a Post Hoc fallacy is?

Apparently not.

And, that's a circular argument and appeal to authority. You're good at this.

 

Yes, Maybe you don't, because you try to insert it where it doesn't belong

It is not an argument, nor an appeal. When I say US is a consumption based economy, I am merely stating a fact.

 

Money supply expansion is working great for Goldman Sucks et al.

 

If that was the only reason for getting 1.5 million Americans a job in a matter of few months and getting the economy to expand by 64%, then you could argue that its worked great. Fortunately its mostly driven by other, more permanent factors.

 

This sort of economic soothsaying is largely BS. Economies are affected by many factors outside of a President's control - the big one being monetary policy.

It's better to talk about individual policies Presidents have.

 

I agree, I was being sarcastic, relative to Trump and his supporters. Probably a poor choice.

 

Is this good growth or the beginning of hyperinflation?