• 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!

U.S. Economy Up 3.5% in 3rd Quarter, Capping Best 6 Months in Over a Decade[W:75]

cpwill said:
SlyFox is the one who thought it was - you would have to ask him.
Click to expand...

His statement was clear, concise, and to the point. The same cannot be said of your response.

I'm glad we are now partly recovering, and wish our recovery were better.
Click to expand...

As do i. But attempting to compare a once in a generation crisis with "other recoveries" is disingenuous. Do you understand why?
 
Kushinator said:
His statement was clear, concise, and to the point. The same cannot be said of your response.
Click to expand...

His point was that we were in a more technologically advanced and globalized era than previous post-war depressions, and implicitly that that was the cause of our exceedingly slow, low-growth recovery. I asked him to describe how he thought that impacted. Are you seriously suggesting that describing how the conditions that he is referencing would produce the effects he is suggesting is irrelevant?

As do i. But attempting to compare a once in a generation crisis with "other recoveries" is disingenuous. Do you understand why?
Click to expand...

"Not sure how that is relevant or necessary". :)
 
cpwill said:
His point was that we were in a more technologically advanced and globalized era than previous post-war depressions, and implicitly that that was the cause of our exceedingly slow, low-growth recovery. I asked him to describe how he thought that impacted. Are you seriously suggesting that describing how the conditions that he is referencing would produce the effects he is suggesting is irrelevant?
Click to expand...

In an era of information, most of the world missed the boat by about three years.

"Not sure how that is relevant or necessary".
Click to expand...

That explains quite a bit.
 
cpwill said:
This is good news.


Hey, though, how does this compare to other Recoveries?
Click to expand...

Pretty good for a recovery after a financial crisis, and much better than our peers around the world.
 
According to the BEA, defense spending increased 16% in Q3, compared with 0.9% in Q2.

There is a big chink of the GDP gain.


Oh, and apparently, exports rose while imports shrank (so obviously a stronger dollar did not help that, as I said above).

And real personal consumption and durable/non durable goods declined from the previous quarter.

News Release: Gross Domestic Product




The bottom line, once again, is this makeup of the Q3 growth is not sustainable in the long run.
 
Threegoofs said:
Thanks, Obama!
Click to expand...

:) And if he had actually attempted to accelerate, rather than decelerate, domestic energy production, you would be correct. Instead, this is a perfect example of businesses and people succeeding in spite of government rather than thanks to.
 
DA60 said:
According to the BEA, defense spending increased 16% in Q3, compared with 0.9% in Q2.

There is a big chink of the GDP gain.
Click to expand...

Yeah - Bubba pretty much laid that one out.
 
cpwill said:
:) And if he had actually attempted to accelerate, rather than decelerate, domestic energy production, you would be correct. Instead, this is a perfect example of businesses and people succeeding in spite of government rather than thanks to.
Click to expand...

Yes. Never give credit when it doesn't fit with your predetermined conclusions.
 
Threegoofs said:
Yes. Never give credit when it doesn't fit with your predetermined conclusions.
Click to expand...

Would you like to actually get into a debate on whether or not the Obama administration has sought to expand or slow domestic energy production?
 
cpwill said:
Would you like to actually get into a debate on whether or not the Obama administration has sought to expand or slow domestic energy production?
Click to expand...

LOL. It reminds of all the liberals who spun the stats to laughingly claim that Obama was not a big spender. LOL

Every other word that comes out his mouth is" Big Goverment "

Interspersed with how Republicans have obstructed him from more Big Government.
 
Threegoofs said:
Not really. I'm just amused by the ideological stance.
Click to expand...

:shrug: this isn't actually an ideological argument (that would be the "how"). It's a historical one (the "what").
 
cpwill said:
Gas prices are down which helps out pretty much everyone, and U.S. production is way up. We are on our way to North American Energy Independence, a goal for decades. Care to tell us why that is?
Click to expand...
Um because oil prices were high enough to spur fracking production in shale areas (which have high extraction costs and high drop-offs/short term production) and global demand is slack....and forecast to remain so thru 2015.

Of course, Obama, more than anyone is responsible for the global macro characteristics of oil demand and supply.

I also enjoy the implication that US production is a patriotic activity by international oil corps.

And it would be a shame for the US to reduce our dependence on oil...to help make us "energy independent".
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Um because the price was high enough to spur fracking production in shale areas (which have high extraction costs and high drop-offs/short term production) and global demand is slack....and forecast to remain so thru 2015.

Of course, Obama, more than anyone is responsible for the global macro characteristics of oil demand and supply.
Click to expand...

Meh. He has impacts.

That being said, the question was whether or not businesses were succeeding in spite of the Administration or not. The Fracking industry is a clear example of one that is.

I also enjoy the implication that US production is a patriotic activity by international oil corps.

And it would be a shame for the US to reduce our dependence on oil...to help make us "energy independent".
Click to expand...

reducing our need to depend upon Middle Eastern oil is just smart policy. Which is why it has been the stated goal of every administration for the past two decades.
 
cpwill said:
:shrug: this isn't actually an ideological argument (that would be the "how"). It's a historical one (the "what").
Click to expand...
LOL....sure...your view of "Obama is stopping US oil production" is not an ideological argument.

Wow.
 
cpwill said:
Meh. He has impacts.
Click to expand...
Actually, right now and for the past few years, the GOP controlled House has had more of an impact on US demand than the POTUS.

That being said, the question was whether or not businesses were succeeding in spite of the Administration or not.
Click to expand...
Again, the US House has had more impact on US demand.
The Fracking industry is a clear example of one that is.
Click to expand...
An ideological view that ignores the global macro realities.



reducing our need to depend upon Middle Eastern oil is just smart policy. Which is why it has been the stated goal of every administration for the past two decades.
Click to expand...
Um, the Dick Cheney is notorious for his rejection of reducing oil consumption, and like you, wants to focus on supply.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
LOL....sure...your view of "Obama is stopping US oil production" is not an ideological argument.

Wow.
Click to expand...

But the courageous and poor, beleaguered energy companies are somehow succeeding despite this all out Progressive attack on them.
 
Threegoofs said:
But the courageous and poor, beleaguered energy companies are somehow succeeding despite this all out Progressive attack on them.
Click to expand...
Crying and crawling, damaged by massive tax breaks, all the way to the bank.

"Don't cry for me, America"....
 
cpwill said:
Meh. He has impacts.

That being said, the question was whether or not businesses were succeeding in spite of the Administration or not. The Fracking industry is a clear example of one that is.



reducing our need to depend upon Middle Eastern oil is just smart policy. Which is why it has been the stated goal of every administration for the past two decades.
Click to expand...

There's no substance to the energy independence argument. International firms produce, refine and sell oil on the international market at international market prices. Even with more production and refining happening in the US, the supplies are still subject to the international economy, including price swings due to middle eastern oil production/sales. It doesn't matter where the oil is coming from: when there is a sharp drop in supply, oil prices will spike. So energy independence is impossible, for any country.
 
Fletch said:
That's a good number. What exactly did Obama have to do with it though?
Click to expand...
"The bad buck stops there, the good one doesn't".......or....."You didn't (build) earn that!"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom