• 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!

Seven Years Later, Recovery Remains the Weakest of the Post-World War II Era

Obama got handed a s**t sandwich, courtesy of the previous Chimp, conservatives have amnesia 2000-2008.
 
PeteEU said:
Yea sucks that he saved the US economy from failed GOP policies... what does the GOP do.. start a faux outrage campaign saying that it is not good enough and comparing growth rates in a mature economy with growth during a time of a changing economy..... yea it is easy to compare apples and cats.
Click to expand...

Obama put up the worst average GDP growth in American history.
 
No matter what the OP stats say about the nation as a whole .. it's viscerally more painful for individual Americans who lack a strong dollar buying power for baseline Maslow's Hierarchy of Need survival purchases.

When we look at the plight of individual Americans, scores of millions are stilling feeling the Great Recession as if it's considerably still with us: The Problem.
 
Fletch said:
I acknowledged already that Iraq--despite congressional approval--was his baby.

That's nice. But none of those caused the economic collapse. As for deficit spending, do you have the same criticism for the $10 trillion in debt Obama has rung up? Or is it ok because he did it and bad when Bush did it?

The president isn't the steward of the American economy. This isn't the Soviet Union or communist China. We have a largely free market which means it is stewarded by no one.
Click to expand...

A steward is not a dictator.

By the way nice deflection to Obama. Didn't work.
 
year2late said:
A steward is not a dictator.

By the way nice deflection to Obama. Didn't work.
Click to expand...

I didn't deflect to Obama. I asked a question you aren't prepared to answer. If deficits bother you like you claim, how do you feel about Obamas deficits, which are actually greater than Bush's. You wont answer and I understand why.
 
apdst said:
Obama put up the worst average GDP growth in American history.
Click to expand...

Last I looked he was the same as Bush 2 and that was last year. Lets talk about this when his term is over, because only then can you actually compare.
 
PeteEU said:
Last I looked he was the same as Bush 2 and that was last year. Lets talk about this when his term is over, because only then can you actually compare.
Click to expand...

You need to look again. Obama is the only president in American history to average less than 3% quarterly GDP growth. Obama's quarterly average was 1.3%; worst in history.
 
apdst said:
You need to look again. Obama is the only president in American history to average less than 3% quarterly GDP growth. Obama's quarterly average was 1.3%; worst in history.
Click to expand...

Well you should look again too. Bush 1 and 2, Ford and Eisenhower all had under 3% average quarterly GDP growth.
 
PeteEU said:
Yea sucks that he saved the US economy from failed GOP policies... what does the GOP do.. start a faux outrage campaign saying that it is not good enough and comparing growth rates in a mature economy with growth during a time of a changing economy..... yea it is easy to compare apples and cats.
Click to expand...
ROTFLOL...
He's taken national debt from 8 to 20 TRILLION... And what do we have? Zippo.

"Saved the US Economy from failed GOP policies" ROTFLOL.

Obama's legacy will be:

1. First black president.

2. Worse than Carter.

3. Increased racial tensions. No Uniter this guy.

4. Open borders.

5. 90+ million unemployed.

6. One of the least transparent. (Didn't he say he'd be the most transparent?)

7. Lost every, or virtually every case that went in front of SCOTUS.

8. Took our debt from 8 Trillion to 20 Trillion with nothing to show for it.

Our anti-American national nightmare will soon be over.
 
apdst said:
Simply the Worst=> Obama is FIRST PRESIDENT EVER to Not See Single Year of 3% GDP Growth
Click to expand...

OH moving the goal posts again I see..

You said

Obama is the only president in American history to average less than 3% quarterly GDP growth.
Click to expand...

and that is not what the article you link says.. that is about annual growth rate of 3% or more. Big ass difference.

Plus there have been several quarters where real GDP growth was over 3%.. yes you forced me to actually look the numbers up.

Q3 and 4 in 2013, Q2 and 3 in 2014. So at least 4 quarters with 3+% growth. Yes lately it has not been as good, but the US economy is not the same as it was under Reagan and Reagans economy was not the same as under Kennedy and so on.
 
PeteEU said:
OH moving the goal posts again I see..

You said



and that is not what the article you link says.. that is about annual growth rate of 3% or more. Big ass difference.

Plus there have been several quarters where real GDP growth was over 3%.. yes you forced me to actually look the numbers up.

Q3 and 4 in 2013, Q2 and 3 in 2014. So at least 4 quarters with 3+% growth. Yes lately it has not been as good, but the US economy is not the same as it was under Reagan and Reagans economy was not the same as under Kennedy and so on.
Click to expand...

But getting back to the fact that not even one year under Obama had even 3% growth - that's absolutely abysmal. His economic performance has been terrible. People are justified in asking whether or not they're better off today than they were 8 years ago.
 
PeteEU said:
OH moving the goal posts again I see..

You said



and that is not what the article you link says.. that is about annual growth rate of 3% or more. Big ass difference.

Plus there have been several quarters where real GDP growth was over 3%.. yes you forced me to actually look the numbers up.

Q3 and 4 in 2013, Q2 and 3 in 2014. So at least 4 quarters with 3+% growth. Yes lately it has not been as good, but the US economy is not the same as it was under Reagan and Reagans economy was not the same as under Kennedy and so on.
Click to expand...

Play semantics all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that Obama produced the worst GDP growth in American history.
 
year2late said:
Not just the crash, but getting us into a needless war that will have economic repercussions for decades to come.
Click to expand...

Yup

What idiot wages war but cuts taxes? They had no plan for the post invasion and no plan to pay for it, boggles the mind.
 
OpportunityCost said:
Don't get a paper cut on that race card you are fumbling about with.
Click to expand...

That is all they have is the race card. It is sad when you are that prejudice that you have to bring race into every debate.
 
apdst said:
Play semantics all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that Obama produced the worst GDP growth in American history.
Click to expand...

First off his term is not done yet. The latest data I have seen, shows that Obama and Bush 2 are even. If Obama can get growth the next two quarters then he will pass Bush 2. So again you are wrong.

Secondly, I am not playing semantics. You are the one all over the place and all I and others are trying to understand, is what the hell you are talking about.
 
sanman said:
But getting back to the fact that not even one year under Obama had even 3% growth - that's absolutely abysmal. His economic performance has been terrible. People are justified in asking whether or not they're better off today than they were 8 years ago.
Click to expand...

Yes it is not good compared to Reagan. But again the world is a far different place now than it was during Reagan.. hell it is a different place than it was under Clinton, and add in the changes in the US.... and you have a lot of the reasons.

For one.. Reagan never had the SS problem.. why? The baby boomers were still active. Under Obama the baby boomers have started to retire en mass. Just one of many differences that you right wingers seem to totally ignore. Are you one of those right wingers that believes a dollar today should have the same value as a dollar when you were a kid?
 
apdst said:
Play semantics all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that Obama produced the worst GDP growth in American history.
Click to expand...

Which is amazing considering when he took over the economy was at an all time low. The economy had just reset they way it has done in the past many times. The main difference is in the past a reset and all time low was followed by record growth. Some how Obama managed to not let that happen.
 
PeteEU said:
First off his term is not done yet. The latest data I have seen, shows that Obama and Bush 2 are even. If Obama can get growth the next two quarters then he will pass Bush 2. So again you are wrong.

Secondly, I am not playing semantics. You are the one all over the place and all I and others are trying to understand, is what the hell you are talking about.
Click to expand...

There's nothing he's going to do between now and January that's going to change the fact that Obama's GDP is the worst in American history.
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
Which is amazing considering when he took over the economy was at an all time low. The economy had just reset they way it has done in the past many times. The main difference is in the past a reset and all time low was followed by record growth. Some how Obama managed to not let that happen.
Click to expand...

Obama never wanted the economy to improve. He couldn't turn America into a third world country if the economy was strong.
 
The US economy is leading the crashed economies back to recovery. Bush and his banksters almost broke capitalism, it's bound to be a slow crawl back.
 
Hillary on Fox News Sunday just said Obama didn't spend enough and she will spend more on infrestructure project to get people back to work.

Where will that money come from?

Do we want more government jobs or more private sector jobs?
 
dimensionallava said:
the race card implies im trying to win an argument of some kind, I'm not
Click to expand...

No you just make an implied racial smear and then deny responsibility for it. You're right you aren't trying to win an argument you are trying to discredit those that oppose your argument rather than posting in a good faith manner. Here I have something for your race card. :shoot :fueltofir
 
apdst said:
There's nothing he's going to do between now and January that's going to change the fact that Obama's GDP is the worst in American history.
Click to expand...

Obama did not have year of at least 3% growth, but he also did not preside over an economic collapse in the last year of his presidency like his predecessor. Bush had inherited a much better situation from Clinton, than he turned over to Obama.

Much of the blame goes to the titans of industry, the CEO's who have been busy shipping jobs offshore for decades. Everyone is for capitalism while it benefits them, but when it goes against them, they want someone to regulate it.

1. U.S. multinationals shifted millions of jobs overseas in the 2000s. Data from the U.S. Department of Commerce showed that “U.S. multinational corporations, the big brand-name companies that employ a fifth of all American workers… cut their work forces in the U.S. by 2.9 million during the 2000s while increasing employment overseas by 2.4 million.”

2. As overseas outsourcing has expanded, U.S. manufacturing has suffered the brunt of the blow. According to a report on outsourcing by Working America, “Manufacturing employment collapsed from a high of 19.5 million workers in June 1979 to 11.5 workers in December 2009, a drop of 8 million workers over 30 years. These stable, middle-class jobs have been the driving force of the U.S. economy for decades and theses losses have done considerable damage to communities across the country.

4. Private equity firms have increased the pressure to cut costs by any means necessary, leading to more overseas outsourcing.
A wave of corporate takeovers, many of them unwanted and uninvited. Corporate executives came to fear that if they did not run their businesses with the aim of maximizing short-term profits and share prices, their companies would become takeover targets and they would be out of a job. Overnight, outsourcing became a manhood test for corporate executives.
For the private equity firms that took over companies, “the standard strategy has been to load up company executives with so much stock and stock options that they don’t hesitate to make difficult decisions such as shedding divisions, closing plants or outsourcing work overseas.”
Click to expand...
https://www.americanprogress.org/is.../09/11898/5-facts-about-overseas-outsourcing/

This is what Pres. Bush said about his tax cuts to the wealthy in selling his plan, which was a lie, based on the results noted above:

High marginal tax rates inhibit entrepreneurial activity because they act as a success tax, claiming a larger share of income from flourishing enterprises. For most entrepreneurs, income taxes reduce their companies' cash flow — the money businesses need to expand, buy more equipment, and hire more workers.

To ensure continued innovation, President Bush believes the tax system should be revised to restore incentives for success. In this period of revolutionary technological change, the government should leave as many resources as possible with the entrepreneurs and companies that are generating new ideas, better jobs, and greater wealth. The President's tax relief plan will cut the top marginal rate, which many small businesses pay, from nearly 40 percent to 33 percent. Reducing the top rate will spur entrepreneurial activity and investment, helping to attract the best workers from around the globe to America.
Click to expand...
https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/reports/taxplan.html

That is not what happened, more jobs were shipped offshore than ever, during the Bush administration.

At the end of the day, the CEO's, the capitalists, were doing what capitalists do, cutting cost, driving revenue, and optimizing profit. This model used to work to America's advantage, because shipping was slow and unreliable, language barriers, and slow communication made doing business in foreign countries too difficult for most. Technology has changed all that.

This is not primarily on the presidents, it is on the industrialists. Everyone likes capitalism, and when jobs move from high tax California to low tax TX, Texans are OK with that. But when jobs move from low tax TX to lower wage China, then folks get upset with capitalism, and they want someone to regulate it. Americans can be hypocrites.

Of course technology plays a big role in eliminating jobs, with robots doing many repetitive jobs that used to pay good middle class wages. Again, it is the CEO's decision to deploy the robots, under pressure from private equity to drive down labor costs.

So, why do you say it is the presidents responsibility? And given the change in the use of technology and offshoring, how can you compare the performance of one of today's presidents to even Reagan 30 years ago, much less a Kennedy some 50 years ago?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom