• 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!

After Hillary Destroys Benghazi Panel, Interviews Will be Private

Sorry Con....but the facts don't lie and you can deny and deny, but over and over you have been refuted, not just by me but by dozens of other posters. I know that you truly in your heart want to believe that GWB was a great President who led the US to economic utopia...however it just isn't the case. You are correct that many Americans are still suffering...absolutely and Obama shares part of the blame for that. He has been successful to a certain extent but not to the extent that any of us would like to see. However, you want to view the world through a vacuum and pretend that Obama started off on a clean slate. That simply isn't the case. You want to ignore the fact that Obama was handed a complete disaster when he took over. I'm sorry Con....but nobody except the most die-hard Bush Apologists are willing to simply ignore/overlook history and fail to put things in the proper perspective. But its cute that you still keep trying.

Dozens of other posters don't trump official govt. data and that disaster Obama inherited was created in part by the Democrat Congress of which he was part.
 
You may consider yourself a BLS expert but certainly have no understand of how to research BEA.gov numbers. Suggest you try again by going to GDP on the main menu
Well, it has been a while since I sat down with the people at BEA and went over the NIPAs. But the point remains that I am not coming up with the same figures as you are. What specific table are you looking at? Perhaps it is you who is wrong. Perhaps it's me. If you were more helpful in sourcing your data, that would be easier.

The 842 billion Obama spending bill that added to GDP. Take that out of the Obama GDP and tell me what you have? Direction of employment??
So you're saying the stimulus worked? The 2008 stimulus didn't appear to.

January 2009 142 million and January 2011 139 million. You tell me
January 2009: 142 million, February 2010 138.6 million, and consistant growth to the current 149 million.


We are over 7 years after the implementation of the stimulus so where should it be?
No idea where it "should be." That's not what were discussing, anyway.


[qutoe]Is it higher or lower than the average Bush discouraged?[/quote] Why do you think the average matters? Bush started with 301,000 discouraged and ended with 734,000. Obama started with 734,000, saw it continue to go up to 1.3 million, and it's now down to 665,000 Which do you think is better? Average doesn't matter.

You and others seem to have such low standards and expectations of liberal economic policies, why is that?
I don't comment on policy. Just on what the numbers are.
 
Seems pretty easy information to find,

GDP at the end of 2000 was 10.2 trillion and at the end of 2008 it was 14.7 or a 4.5 trillion increase

GDP when Obama took office 14.7 trillion and it is 17.5 trillion today or 2.8 trillion. Of that 2.8 trillion 842 billion was govt. spending.

BEA.gov
Table 1.1.5. Gross Domestic Product
[Billions of dollars]
Bureau of Economic Analysis
Last Revised on: October 29, 2015 - Next Release Date November 24, 2015

See, you were looking at nominal GDP. I was looking at Real GDP..Table 1.1.6 Real Gross Domestic Product, Chained Dollars.
Q1 2001 was $12,643.3B and Q1 2009 was $14,375B. Change of $1.7 trillion.
Q3 2015 was $16,394.2B, Change of $2 trillion.

Not sure why you would choose nominal GDP.
 
Dozens of other posters don't trump official govt. data and that disaster Obama inherited was created in part by the Democrat Congress of which he was part.

riiiiiiight. And in your world 9/11 occurred on Clinton's watch, GWB responded by going after those who attacked us, captured and killed Bin Laden and then took a humongous deficit that he inherited and led the United States to economic Utopia. Wow...it must be comfortable living in your world.
 
Dozens of other posters don't trump official govt. data and that disaster Obama inherited was created in part by the Democrat Congress of which he was part.

riiiiiiight. And in your world 9/11 occurred on Clinton's watch, GWB responded by going after those who attacked us, captured and killed Bin Laden and then took a humongous deficit that he inherited and led the United States to economic Utopia. Wow...it must be comfortable living in your world.
 
pinqy;1065264011]Well, it has been a while since I sat down with the people at BEA and went over the NIPAs. But the point remains that I am not coming up with the same figures as you are. What specific table are you looking at? Perhaps it is you who is wrong. Perhaps it's me. If you were more helpful in sourcing your data, that would be easier.

I posted the bea.gov chart which was GDP for the actual period of time, not inflation adjusted because you don't get revenue off inflation adjusted numbers


So you're saying the stimulus worked? The 2008 stimulus didn't appear to.

Define working? 142 million employed to 139 million, is that working? What was the purpose of the stimulus and isn't stimulus supposed to be short term?

January 2009: 142 million, February 2010 138.6 million, and consistant growth to the current 149 million.

We had 146 million employed in December 2007 so what you are saying is that a 3 million increase in employment in 8 years at a cost of 7.6 trillion added to the debt is a success?

No idea where it "should be." That's not what were discussing, anyway.

OK, but it gets back to definitions of success. How can going from 146 million employed to 149 million in 8 years be classified as a success? Why is this recovery being defined as the worst in History? When does Obama apologists accept responsibility for the very poor economic policies that led to this recovery?

Why do you think the average matters? Bush started with 301,000 discouraged and ended with 734,000. Obama started with 734,000, saw it continue to go up to 1.3 million, and it's now down to 665,000 Which do you think is better? Average doesn't matter.

Probably doesn't matter at all but 665,000 is still worse that anything Bush had prior to the end of 2008 and is a poor accomplishment thus an indication of policy failures

I don't comment on policy. Just on what the numbers are.

And the numbers show stagnant economic growth, high debt, and poor employment numbers based upon the money spent
 
See, you were looking at nominal GDP. I was looking at Real GDP..Table 1.1.6 Real Gross Domestic Product, Chained Dollars.
Q1 2001 was $12,643.3B and Q1 2009 was $14,375B. Change of $1.7 trillion.
Q3 2015 was $16,394.2B, Change of $2 trillion.

Not sure why you would choose nominal GDP.

I am judging performance at the time, you don't get revenue or pay expenses on inflation adjusted GDP
 
riiiiiiight. And in your world 9/11 occurred on Clinton's watch, GWB responded by going after those who attacked us, captured and killed Bin Laden and then took a humongous deficit that he inherited and led the United States to economic Utopia. Wow...it must be comfortable living in your world.

No 9/11 occurred on Bush's watch after the 1998 PDB that Clinton received
 
riiiiiiight. And in your world 9/11 occurred on Clinton's watch, GWB responded by going after those who attacked us, captured and killed Bin Laden and then took a humongous deficit that he inherited and led the United States to economic Utopia. Wow...it must be comfortable living in your world.

Congratulations Obama for losing the peace in Iraq and losing territory to ISIS
 
Congratulations Obama for losing the peace in Iraq and losing territory to ISIS

Sorry Con....but ISIS exists as a direct result of the failure of Bush/Cheney to understand the implications of going into a volatile region and throwing it into completely chaos. We wouldn't have ISIS today if Bush/Cheney/Rumsfield and the rest of the neo-cons had focused on those who attacked us on 911 rather than using 911 as an excuse to manipulate public fears and attack Iraq, a country that they had been trying to attack for decades (even approaching father Bush, who was too smart to fall for their schemes). You are aware, are you not Con, that GHB recently has come forward and talked about this.....right?
 
Sorry Con....but ISIS exists as a direct result of the failure of Bush/Cheney to understand the implications of going into a volatile region and throwing it into completely chaos. We wouldn't have ISIS today if Bush/Cheney/Rumsfield and the rest of the neo-cons had focused on those who attacked us on 911 rather than using 911 as an excuse to manipulate public fears and attack Iraq, a country that they had been trying to attack for decades (even approaching father Bush, who was too smart to fall for their schemes). You are aware, are you not Con, that GHB recently has come forward and talked about this.....right?

That is your opinion not supported by reality and history. If you don't believe we eventually would have had to go into Iraq you are very naïve and poorly informed as to what was going on in the region. Obviously your obsession with Bush is a problem and nothing I say or no matter what data I post it isn't going to make a difference in your world
 
Wow....I think this is the first time that you have actually been willing to admit this. Perhaps there is hope for you.

Right, I can actually read a calendar and know when the presidential terms begin and end. It really is a shame that you have no sense of history and obviously believe the world began in January 21, 2001 when Bush took office
 
That is your opinion not supported by reality and history. If you don't believe we eventually would have had to go into Iraq you are very naïve and poorly informed as to what was going on in the region. Obviously your obsession with Bush is a problem and nothing I say or no matter what data I post it isn't going to make a difference in your world

Daddy Bush disagrees with you as well. Sorry con.
 
Right, I can actually read a calendar and know when the presidential terms begin and end. It really is a shame that you have no sense of history and obviously believe the world began in January 21, 2001 when Bush took office

Well....I bring it up because I honestly believe that this is the first time that you have ever admitted that 911 occurred on GWB's watch. You've always skirted the issue and never addressed it directly. I give you Kudos for once having the integrity to admit that 911 occurred on your hero's watch and no one else's.
 
Well....I bring it up because I honestly believe that this is the first time that you have ever admitted that 911 occurred on GWB's watch. You've always skirted the issue and never addressed it directly. I give you Kudos for once having the integrity to admit that 911 occurred on your hero's watch and no one else's.

Please post where I ever said it didn't? Please explain to me what Clinton did with the December 1998 PDB he received?

Please explain to me how any of this has to do with the thread topic and why anyone would support Hillary?
 
Back
Top Bottom