• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Republicans block Obama jobs bill

Status
Not open for further replies.
Quote Originally Posted by Conservative View Post
Right, Reagan really screwed up, doubling GDP, creating 17 million jobs and increasing govt. revenue by 69% with the tax rate cuts
Click to expand...

Where do you get this idea that Reagan doubled GDP?

Growth by Year for all Reagan fiscal years
Year Real GDP % Growth
1981 5,021.0 NA
1982 4,919.3 -2.0
1983 5,132.3 4.3
1984 5,505.2 7.3
1985 5,717.1 3.85
1986 5,912.4 3.4
1987 6,113.3 3.4
1988 6,368.4 4.2
1989 6,591.8 3.5

The Reagan Information Page:GDP

You can get the PDF @

BEA : Search the BEA Website
 
Conservative said:
Bush and Reagan aren't on the ballot, your problem is Obama and his record

Obama economic results in 2011,
.4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011(bea.gov)
25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011(bls.gov)
2.6 million fewer jobs(bls.gov)
4.2 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years(U.S. Treasury Site)
Downgrade of the U.S. credit rating(S&P)
Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.97 (The United States Misery Index By Year)
38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings(Gallup)
Click to expand...

Good thing they aren't because by the numbers you cite they sucked pretty bad.
 
Conservative said:
Christina Romer did and she was speaking for the Administration
Click to expand...

Did you read the quote at all:

The administration never characterized it that way and included plenty of disclaimers saying the predictions had "significant margins of error" and a higher degree of uncertainty due to a recession that is "unusual both in its fundamental causes and its severity."
Click to expand...
 
whysoserious said:
No he didn't and if you actually read the news you'd know that.

PolitiFact | Cantor and other Republicans say Obama promised stimulus would keep unemployment rates below 8 percent


--------------------------------------------

Also, question, what is it about the economists that I quoted that you disagree with?
Click to expand...

Try reading what I wrote instead of distorting it. I never said that the Obama administration promised us unemployment under 8%, I said his economists did. Obama's stimulus plan was based off of Romer's projections which were clearly wrong. However, team Obama used Romer's analysis to validate their atrocious stimulus spending that amounted to jack.

Mankiw points this out nicely.
Greg Mankiw's Blog: Team Obama on the Unit Root Hypothesis

Obviously, you only listen to economist who agree with your viewpoint.
 
Last edited:
Antiderivative said:
Try reading what I wrote instead of distorting it. I never said that the Obama administration promised us unemployment under 8%, I said his economists did. Obama's stimulus plan was based off of Romer's projections which were clearly wrong. However, team Obama used Romer's analysis to validate their atrocious stimulus spending that amounted to jack.

Mankiw points this out nicely.
Greg Mankiw's Blog: Team Obama on the Unit Root Hypothesis
Click to expand...

And you read mine, you'd see that they didn't. They projected 8% with a wide margin of error.
 
whysoserious said:
And you read mine, you'd see that they didn't. They projected 8% with a wide margin of error.
Click to expand...

You can twist it anyway you want, but the fact still remains. Obama's CEA were strong proponents of the stimulus plan, advocating that it would reduce unemployment to under 8%.

How'd that prediction work out?
 
winston53660 said:
Where do you get this idea that Reagan doubled GDP?

Growth by Year for all Reagan fiscal years
Year Real GDP % Growth
1981 5,021.0 NA
1982 4,919.3 -2.0
1983 5,132.3 4.3
1984 5,505.2 7.3
1985 5,717.1 3.85
1986 5,912.4 3.4
1987 6,113.3 3.4
1988 6,368.4 4.2
1989 6,591.8 3.5

The Reagan Information Page:GDP

You can get the PDF @

BEA : Search the BEA Website
Click to expand...

You won't have a chance to vote for or against Reagan or Bush in 2012 but you will be voting on the Obama record.

Obama economic results in 2011,
.4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011(bea.gov)
25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011(bls.gov)
2.6 million fewer jobs(bls.gov)
4.2 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years(U.S. Treasury Site)
Downgrade of the U.S. credit rating(S&P)
Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.97 (The United States Misery Index By Year)
38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings(Gallup)
 
Conservative said:
You won't have a chance to vote for or against Reagan or Bush in 2012 but you will be voting on the Obama record.

Obama economic results in 2011,
.4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011(bea.gov)
25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011(bls.gov)
2.6 million fewer jobs(bls.gov)
4.2 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years(U.S. Treasury Site)
Downgrade of the U.S. credit rating(S&P)
Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.97 (The United States Misery Index By Year)
38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings(Gallup)
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with your claim that Reagan doubled GDP?
 
winston53660 said:
What does that have to do with your claim that Reagan doubled GDP?
Click to expand...

1980 2,788.10
1981 3,126.80
1982 3253.20
1983 3534.60
1984 3930.90
1985 4217.50
1986 4460.10
1987 4736.40
1988 5100.40
1989 5482.10

Looks pretty close to double to me
 
Conservative said:
You won't have a chance to vote for or against Reagan or Bush in 2012 but you will be voting on the Obama record.

Obama economic results in 2011,
.4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011(bea.gov)
25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011(bls.gov)
2.6 million fewer jobs(bls.gov)
4.2 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years(U.S. Treasury Site)
Downgrade of the U.S. credit rating(S&P)
Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.97 (The United States Misery Index By Year)
38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings(Gallup)
Click to expand...

Holy ****, that is running away when caught out in a lie in such a blatant way it is hilarious. Sometimes you look better to admit you got it wrong.
 
Antiderivative said:
You can twist it anyway you want, but the fact still remains. Obama's CEA were strong proponents of the stimulus plan, advocating that it would reduce unemployment to under 8%.

How'd that prediction work out?
Click to expand...

It did clearly curb employment losses and kept it from ever getting past 10.1%. And by the way, you are the one twisting facts by saying that a project was a promise. They projected that unemployment would peak at 8%. They were clearly wrong. There is a difference between being wrong and lying, and I hope that you can see the difference.
 
Redress said:
Holy ****, that is running away when caught out in a lie in such a blatant way it is hilarious. Sometimes you look better to admit you got it wrong.
Click to expand...

Have you seen this thread? He has literally spammed that for at least 20 pages, and we have debunked every "fact" on his list.
 
Conservative said:
1980 2,788.10
1981 3,126.80
1982 3253.20
1983 3534.60
1984 3930.90
1985 4217.50
1986 4460.10
1987 4736.40
1988 5100.40
1989 5482.10

Looks pretty close to double to me
Click to expand...

Hmmm that doesn't match up with the BEA numbers nor the link I provided.
 
Conservative said:
1980 2,788.10
1981 3,126.80
1982 3253.20
1983 3534.60
1984 3930.90
1985 4217.50
1986 4460.10
1987 4736.40
1988 5100.40
1989 5482.10

Looks pretty close to double to me
Click to expand...

He wasn't in office at in 1980. So you need to remove the first number - at which point is clearly not doubled. But, it doesn't matter because you once again forgot to adjust for inflation. He increased real GDP (that's an important term - look it up) by 24.07731749%.

winston53660 said:
Hmmm that doesn't match up with the BEA numbers nor the link I provided.
Click to expand...

He used the wrong numbers again. Your numbers are probably adjusted for inflation, and he started a year before Reagan was in office.
 
Last edited:
whysoserious said:
He wasn't in office at in 1980. So you need to remove the first number - at which point is clearly not doubled. But, it doesn't matter because you once again forgot to adjust for inflation. He increased real GDP (that's an important term - look it up) by 24.07731749%.



He used the wrong numbers again. Your numbers are probably adjusted for inflation, and he started a year before Reagan was in office.
Click to expand...

I did use real numbers. Odd isn't it that con didn't provide a link to his numbers.........NOT!:lamo
 
whysoserious said:
He increased real GDP (that's an important term - look it up) by 24.07731749%.
Click to expand...

So Conservative was only off by a factor of 4? What's a few hundred billion among friends?
 
whysoserious said:
He wasn't in office at in 1980. So you need to remove the first number - at which point is clearly not doubled. But, it doesn't matter because you once again forgot to adjust for inflation. He increased real GDP (that's an important term - look it up) by 24.07731749%.



He used the wrong numbers again. Your numbers are probably adjusted for inflation, and he started a year before Reagan was in office.
Click to expand...

1980 was the base year and what he inherited so why would you remove it. This is really too easy.
 
winston53660 said:
I did use real numbers. Odd isn't it that con didn't provide a link to his numbers.........NOT!:lamo
Click to expand...

If you provide links, then people can look at the data...that would be bad.
 
winston53660 said:
I did use real numbers. Odd isn't it that con didn't provide a link to his numbers.........NOT!:lamo
Click to expand...

Odd that you are concerned about what Reagan did on an Obama thread. Keep diverting from the Obama record.

Obama economic results in 2011,
.4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011(bea.gov)
25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011(bls.gov)
2.6 million fewer jobs(bls.gov)
4.2 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years(U.S. Treasury Site)
Downgrade of the U.S. credit rating(S&P)
Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.97 (The United States Misery Index By Year)
38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings(Gallup)
 
Conservative said:
Odd that you are concerned about what Reagan did on an Obama thread. Keep diverting from the Obama record.

Obama economic results in 2011,
.4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011(bea.gov)
25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011(bls.gov)
2.6 million fewer jobs(bls.gov)
4.2 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years(U.S. Treasury Site)
Downgrade of the U.S. credit rating(S&P)
Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.97 (The United States Misery Index By Year)
38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings(Gallup)
Click to expand...

This has nothing to do with your claim.
 
Conservative said:
Odd that you are concerned about what Reagan did on an Obama thread. Keep diverting from the Obama record.

Obama economic results in 2011,
.4% GDP and 1.3% GDP growth in 2011(bea.gov)
25+ million unemployed or under employed Americans in 2011(bls.gov)
2.6 million fewer jobs(bls.gov)
4.2 trillion added to the debt in less than 3 years(U.S. Treasury Site)
Downgrade of the U.S. credit rating(S&P)
Rising Misery index 7.83 to 12.97 (The United States Misery Index By Year)
38-41% JAR and well over 50-55% disapproval ratings(Gallup)
Click to expand...

And when busted lying, he goes back and spams entirely unrelated stuff. I am not sure if it is more sad than amusing, or the other way around.
 
GDP By Year/Quarter

By the way, in his first 2.5 years in office, Obama has increased GDP by 4.75067436% in real GDP dollars.

In Reagan's first 2.5 years in office he increased the GDP by 1.97121402% in real GDP dollars.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom