In Blow to Trump, America’s Trade Deficit in Goods Hits Record $891 Billion

[Conservative]

Nope.. my opinion is supported by the evidence. We know the economic trends prior to Trump taking over.. the result of the economy recovering. The economic trend continued on the same line....]
The actual economic results are not the result of trump improving the economy... if anything the evidence suggests that trumps trade war and trumps government shutdown hurt the economy.

Your fawning over trump.. your emperor is clear.

No apparently you don't because you never post data showing those economic trends, why is that? You afraid that the declining GDP growth is going to be seen and cannot accept the fact that you are wrong? Same line? LOL, so rising GDP is all that matters, not how much? thanks for showing how easily it is for a so called conservative to actually post as a liberal

 

[jaeger19]

No apparently you don't because you never post data showing those economic trends, why is that? You afraid that the declining GDP growth is going to be seen and cannot accept the fact that you are wrong? Same line? LOL, so rising GDP is all that matters, not how much? thanks for showing how easily it is for a so called conservative to actually post as a liberal

Not afraid at all.. you should know me better by now.

So lets start with the facts:

We’ve previously compared U.S. economic performance under Obama and under Trump during Trump’s first year in office. But overseeing a strong economy is not the same as accomplishing a “turnaround.” Can Trump take credit? Or did today’s trends start before he took office?

The Facts:
According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the U.S. economy added 2,188,000 jobs in 2017 — Trump’s first year in office. So far, it has added 1,306,000 jobs in 2018. But the economy added more jobs in every year of Obama’s second term than it did in Trump’s first year. This holds true when examining the average number of jobs added per month. (We are counting average monthly jobs created from February to January because the January data is collected the week of Jan. 12, before a president takes the oath of office on Jan. 20.) The monthly numbers suggest Trump is continuing an existing trend.


Shortly after Trump took office in February 2017, the unemployment rate was 4.7 percent. It has declined at a faster pace than the Congressional Budget Office predicted at the beginning of Trump’s term, but the unemployment rate had already stabilized. It was ranging between 4.6 and 5 percent starting in August 2015. That represents over a five-point decline since unemployment peaked at 10 percent in October 2009, nine months after Obama took office.
Looking at another variation of the unemployment rate, the U6 number, which takes this into account, unemployment was 7.4 percent in August, down from 9.2 percent when Trump took office. Still, that’s a far cry from its peak — 17.1 percent in October 2009.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/09/18/trump-economy-versus-obama-economy/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.9236ceebad49

 

[jaeger19]

Over the course of Obama’s first year in office, GDP dropped 2.5 percent. In 2010, GDP growth recovered, surging 2.5 percent. Growth was already positive when Trump took office, jumping from 1.6 percent in 2016 to 2.2 percent in 2017. Trump might point us to quarterly GDP growth. The economy is estimated to have gained 4.2 percent in the second quarter of 2018, but that still pales in comparison with the 5.1 percent and 4.9 percent growth in the second and third quarters of 2014 under Obama.

Just more facts.

Another measure of an economy’s health is the deficit-to-GDP ratio. In other words, how much a country is earning vs. how much it is spending. The measure ballooned to 9.8 percent in 2009 when the recession was at its peak and the stimulus act was passed. By 2016, it had gone down to 3.1 percent. In Trump’s first year, it went up to 3.4 percent. That’s unusual, because the economy is doing well, but it reflects the impact of Trump’s tax cut on government revenue. The increase in the federal deficit may make it hard for the government to respond to the next economic crisis. So if Trump is taking credit for the impact of the tax cut on economic growth, he needs to accept blame for the boost in the deficit.

Seven months after that fact check, our conclusion is largely the same. Real median wages for all workers have been steadily increasing since 2014. In the last quarter of 2017, they plunged below their rate when Trump took office but have since recovered to about the same level. In other words, after an initial bump, wages are basically where Obama left them.

Sorry dude..but just another giant fail on your part Con.

 

[Conservative]

Not afraid at all.. you should know me better by now.

So lets start with the facts:



https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...economy/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.9236ceebad49

I prefer Treasury data which of course is foreign to you but that is the official data which you want to ignore. Then there is context which of course is another foreign concept to you as part time jobs for economic reasons are included in the employment numbers for both and Obama's with those great job increases were over 8 million, Trump is at 4.3 million. Apparently a part time job is the same to you as a full time job. You buy the bottom line like most liberals so stop with the rhetoric and bull****, change your

interesting how the Washington Post article quotes Trump in July 2018, didn't realize that July was the end of the year

By the way those aren't facts those are leftwing spin that fools radicals but not people capable of understanding data. By the way is a job lost that returns a job created?

Recession starts and employment 146 million in January 2008, January 2017 152 million, looks to me like 6 million jobs created by the U.S. economy in 9 years, no population growth, no economic growth, and of course a very successful stimulus. Included in those 152 million were 5.8 million part time for economic reasons, Trump has 157 million with 4.2 million part time for economic reasons. Wonder if that will ever resonate with you?

 

[tecoyah]

n Blow to Trump, America’s Trade Deficit in Goods Hits Record $891 Billion

He does not care and neither does his base so.....no biggy.

 

[Conservative]

Just more facts.






Sorry dude..but just another giant fail on your part Con.

So now quarterly growth is what matters to you and of course has absolutely nothing to do with gov't spending that impacts GDP growth. Interesting how that so called booming quarterly growth didn't show up in the yearly numbers, wonder why?

Here is why you won't post percentage change in growth plus the fact that 2.5% growth on a 19 trillion dollar economy isn't nearly as good at the 2.9% growth on a 20 trillion dollar economy. Keep showing just how poorly informed you are

T

able 1.1.1. Percent Change From Preceding Period in Real Gross Domestic Product
[Percent]
Bureau of Economic Analysis
Last Revised on: July 27, 2018 - Next Release Date August 29, 2018

Line 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Line
1 Gross domestic product -2.5 2.6 1.6 2.2 1.8 2.5 2.9 1.6

Stimulus spending is part of GDP growth which inflates GDP

 

[jaeger19]

I prefer Treasury data which of course is foreign to you but that is the official data which you want to ignore. Then there is context which of course is another foreign concept to you as part time jobs for economic reasons are included in the employment numbers for both and Obama's with those great job increases were over 8 million, Trump is at 4.3 million. Apparently a part time job is the same to you as a full time job. You buy the bottom line like most liberals so stop with the rhetoric and bull****, change your

interesting how the Washington Post article quotes Trump in July 2018, didn't realize that July was the end of the year

By the way those aren't facts those are leftwing spin that fools radicals but not people capable of understanding data. By the way is a job lost that returns a job created?

Recession starts and employment 146 million in January 2008, January 2017 152 million, looks to me like 6 million jobs created by the U.S. economy in 9 years, no population growth, no economic growth, and of course a very successful stimulus. Included in those 152 million were 5.8 million part time for economic reasons, Trump has 157 million with 4.2 million part time for economic reasons. Wonder if that will ever resonate with you?

Yawn... you like treasury data because you don't understand it.. you don't have a clue of its context...

No one here is ignoring treasury data.. we just understand it.. while you do not.

The facts have already been presented. We had an economic downturn.. the economy then recovered.. and continues to recover... Trump is just a political beneficiary of that recovery. Done by the hard work of the American worker... not the result of government. The trend started under Obama.. and continues under trump.. that's the facts.

yelp..cry and whine all you want.. the facts are there.. they have been presented to you.. and you have no rebuttal..

 

[jaeger19]

So now quarterly growth is what matters to you and of course has absolutely nothing to do with gov't spending that impacts GDP growth. Interesting how that so called booming quarterly growth didn't show up in the yearly numbers, wonder why?

Here is why you won't post percentage change in growth plus the fact that 2.5% growth on a 19 trillion dollar economy isn't nearly as good at the 2.9% growth on a 20 trillion dollar economy. Keep showing just how poorly informed you are

T

Stimulus spending is part of GDP growth which inflates GDP

By the way.. 2.5% growth on a 19 trillion dollar economy compared to 2.9% growth on a later 20 trillion dollar economy, simply shows the continuation of a trend.

 

[Conservative]

Yawn... you like treasury data because you don't understand it.. you don't have a clue of its context...

No one here is ignoring treasury data.. we just understand it.. while you do not.

The facts have already been presented. We had an economic downturn.. the economy then recovered.. and continues to recover... Trump is just a political beneficiary of that recovery. Done by the hard work of the American worker... not the result of government. The trend started under Obama.. and continues under trump.. that's the facts.

yelp..cry and whine all you want.. the facts are there.. they have been presented to you.. and you have no rebuttal..

Got it, yearly treasury data is always trumped by Washington Post data based on July numbers 2018. Do you realize how stupid that comment is of yours we paid Debt service and all our expenses on Treasury data not Washington post media reports

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

 

[Conservative]

Yawn... you like treasury data because you don't understand it.. you don't have a clue of its context...

No one here is ignoring treasury data.. we just understand it.. while you do not.

The facts have already been presented. We had an economic downturn.. the economy then recovered.. and continues to recover... Trump is just a political beneficiary of that recovery. Done by the hard work of the American worker... not the result of government. The trend started under Obama.. and continues under trump.. that's the facts.

yelp..cry and whine all you want.. the facts are there.. they have been presented to you.. and you have no rebuttal..

That is typical leftwing rhetoric when you cannot refute the official data claiming that I don't understand Treasury data but am supposed to understand Washington Post data? LOL, keep letting me make you look foolish. Facts are indeed facts, Employment data includes Part time for economic reasons, facts are indeed facts, a job lost that returns isn't a job created, facts are indeed facts, 146 million to 152 million is 6 million new jobs created in 9 years. Trump has 5 million in two

Interesting how you have such little pride in yourself that you let the left manipulate you and make you look foolish

 

[Conservative]

By the way.. 2.5% growth on a 19 trillion dollar economy compared to 2.9% growth on a later 20 trillion dollar economy, simply shows the continuation of a trend.

Yep posted that trend 2.9%, 1.6% and 1.2%. Got to love liberal math and attempts to prop up failure

 

[Conservative]

By the way.. 2.5% growth on a 19 trillion dollar economy compared to 2.9% growth on a later 20 trillion dollar economy, simply shows the continuation of a trend.

Oh, by the way, GDP growth(bea.gov) for Obama 14.7 trillion to 18.9 trillion in 8 years, Trump 18.9 trillion to 20.9 trillion in 2 years. Glad you never worked for me as you wouldn't have survived 2 years let alone the 8 that Obama had

 

[Casca XV]

Revenues are down, not up.

A number of other countries have large economies, notably China, Germany, Japan and S. Korea. Even though Germany had zero growth in the 4th quarter the notion that they don’t have money to buy foreign products is overblown.

This quarter, U.S. growth is expected to drop dramatically. That doesn’t mean that we can’t buy foreign products.

Nice try, 2018 had the highest total tax revenue in US history. US Federal Tax Revenue by Year next time try not putting up a graph that cuts off half way through the year.

On the day it fell the USSR had the second biggest economy in the world and it fell for mostly economic reasons. Bigger is not always better.

Here in America we have a prosperous fairly well paid middle class with real purchasing power. China thanks to Democratic Socialism has a rich Government & Crony Capitalist elite with a slave labor middle class who can buy very little.

Many other countries especially in Europe are economically declining. Their Lefties economic policies relied on the US covering their military defense and unfair trade practices, but President Trump is putting America first, for the first time since Reagan.

 

[noonereal]

In Blow to Trump, America’s Trade Deficit in Goods Hits Record $891 Billion.

This guy is the ultimate American disaster.

 

[MTAtech]

Nice try, 2018 had the highest total tax revenue in US history. US Federal Tax Revenue by Year next time try not putting up a graph that cuts off half way through the year.

On the day it fell the USSR had the second biggest economy in the world and it fell for mostly economic reasons. Bigger is not always better.

Here in America we have a prosperous fairly well paid middle class with real purchasing power. China thanks to Democratic Socialism has a rich Government & Crony Capitalist elite with a slave labor middle class who can buy very little.

Many other countries especially in Europe are economically declining. Their Lefties economic policies relied on the US covering their military defense and unfair trade practices, but President Trump is putting America first, for the first time since Reagan.

According to your link, above, 2018 was a whopping $1 billion more than 2017 -- and that included income taxes in April 2018 raised under the old tax rates. Moreover, your figures are nominal, non-adjusted for inflation.

 

[MTAtech]

...
Many other countries especially in Europe are economically declining. Their Lefties economic policies relied on the US covering their military defense and unfair trade practices, but President Trump is putting America first, for the first time since Reagan.

List of countries by real GDP growth rate (2017)

Italy 1.5
Switzerland 1.6
United Kingdom 1.6
Japan 1.7
Norway 1.9
Sweden 2.1
Denmark 2.2
United States 2.2
France 2.3
Germany 2.4
Finland 2.7
Netherlands 2.8
Spain 2.9
Canada 3
South Korea 3.0
Israel 3.2
Hong Kong 3.7
Hungary 3.9
Iceland 3.9
Czech Republic 4.2
Indonesia 5.0
India 6.6
China 6.8
Ireland 7.2

 

[Casca XV]

List of countries by real GDP growth rate (2017)

Italy 1.5
Switzerland 1.6
United Kingdom 1.6
Japan 1.7
Norway 1.9
Sweden 2.1
Denmark 2.2
United States 2.2
France 2.3
Germany 2.4
Finland 2.7
Netherlands 2.8
Spain 2.9
Canada 3
South Korea 3.0
Israel 3.2
Hong Kong 3.7
Hungary 3.9
Iceland 3.9
Czech Republic 4.2
Indonesia 5.0
India 6.6
China 6.8
Ireland 7.2

So GDP growth from 2 years ago is relevant? A year before Trump tax cuts and trade policies took effect. Enjoy your "L."

 

[MTAtech]

So GDP growth from 2 years ago is relevant? A year before Trump tax cuts and trade policies took effect. Enjoy your "L."

A. There are no 2019 GDP numbers.
B. 2018 numbers aren't entirely available.
C. Yes, 2017 numbers are relevant to discredit your claim that 'countries especially in Europe are economically declining.' They aren't.

The U.S. 2018 GDP numbers are marginally better and the trade policies have been a disaster. That's what this thread reveals.

I know this is a shock to you since you are used to Trump lying and you swearing to his lies.

 

[Conservative]

A. There are no 2019 GDP numbers.
B. 2018 numbers aren't entirely available.
C. Yes, 2017 numbers are relevant to discredit your claim that 'countries especially in Europe are economically declining.' They aren't.

The U.S. 2018 GDP numbers are marginally better and the trade policies have been a disaster. That's what this thread reveals.

I know this is a shock to you since you are used to Trump lying and you swearing to his lies.

I know this reality escapes you but what was first qtr. 2017 which were Obama's numbers? As for Europe, maybe you ought to consider moving there as their recovery from the recession was slower and worse than ours by a long shot. Are you ever going to address the reality of our GDP and the 2 trillion growth in two years vs. Obama; 4.2 trillion in 8 including the gov't stimulus that skewed those results higher?

 

[MTAtech]

I know this reality escapes you but what was first qtr. 2017 which were Obama's numbers? As for Europe, maybe you ought to consider moving there as their recovery from the recession was slower and worse than ours by a long shot. Are you ever going to address the reality of our GDP and the 2 trillion growth in two years vs. Obama; 4.2 trillion in 8 including the gov't stimulus that skewed those results higher?

A) 2017's U.S. annual GDP number was 2.2%. The 2018 number was 2.9%. That is well within the standard deviation of historical GDP rates by year, and therefore is not a consequential difference.
B) The slower recovery in Europe from the Great Recession was because Europe addressed the recession with austerity. The U.S. addressed the recession with fiscal and monetary stimulus. Notably, Republicans at the time were also advocating for austerity. Thanks for finally admitting that the Obama stimulus programs worked.
C) As stated a number of times, real GDP did NOT grow by $2 trillion in two years. You have been corrected repeatedly and still you post misleading numbers again. Real GDP was $18.7 trillion at the end of 2016 and $17.7 trillion at the end of 2018. That's a gain of one trillion, which isn't especially remarkable -- no different from 2013 to 2015.

 

[Conservative]

A) 2017's U.S. annual GDP number was 2.2%. The 2018 number was 2.9%. That is well within the standard deviation of historical GDP rates by year, and therefore is not a consequential difference.
B) The slower recovery in Europe from the Great Recession was because Europe addressed the recession with austerity. The U.S. addressed the recession with fiscal and monetary stimulus. Notably, Republicans at the time were also advocating for austerity. Thanks for finally admitting that the Obama stimulus programs worked.
C) As stated a number of times, real GDP did NOT grow by $2 trillion in two years. You have been corrected repeatedly and still you post misleading numbers again. Real GDP was $18.7 trillion at the end of 2016 and $17.7 trillion at the end of 2018. That's a gain of one trillion, which isn't especially remarkable -- no different from 2013 to 2015.

Spin as usual, approx 50% of GDP in Europe is Gov spending which is why recovery was slow and you want that model here?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

 

[jaeger19]

Yep posted that trend 2.9%, 1.6% and 1.2%. Got to love liberal math and attempts to prop up failure

Yeah.. but think about that again.. your lack of understanding is glaring.

 

[Conservative]

Yeah.. but think about that again.. your lack of understanding is glaring.

Absolutely stunning how you believe the liberal interpretation of actual data is accurate when the reality is you and others interpreting that data are clueless. Typical liberal claim that I don't understand the official data that you tried to refute with Washington Post reports.

 

[MTAtech]

Spin as usual, approx 50% of GDP in Europe is Gov spending which is why recovery was slow and you want that model here?

Agreed -- at least the fact Europe has a higher p% of govt spending. Your analysis however is faulty, that govt spending per se is the cause. Let's say 50% of European GDP is government spending. What happens when government decides to stop spending during austerity? That's right, it contracts the economy. The flaw in your thinking is ideological -- you are hostile to government, so government spending is necessarily evil, when the problem is macroeconomic -- slowing government spending is contractionary. Europe during the recession should have spent more, not less.

 

[Conservative]

Agreed -- at least the fact Europe has a higher p% of govt spending. Your analysis however is faulty, that govt spending per se is the cause. Let's say 50% of European GDP is government spending. What happens when government decides to stop spending during austerity? That's right, it contracts the economy. The flaw in your thinking is ideological -- you are hostile to government, so government spending is necessarily evil, when the problem is macroeconomic -- slowing government spending is contractionary. Europe during the recession should have spent more, not less.

that is exactly why the European economy was so slow to recover, too much emphasis on gov't spending whereas here the private sector is almost 2/3 of our economy and gov't spending about 25%. Cutting gov't spending here doesn't impact our economy here like it does in Europe but neither you or Obama understood that. I am NOT hostile to gov't spending only gov't overreach on those so called safety net programs you believe are beneficial. Those are state and local responsibilities not an opportunity for bureaucrats to buy votes and create dependence. Gov't spending in the right areas is a good thing, for example defense spending in the private sector which generates a good return on investment

Where does Europe get the money for all that gov't spending????? Oh, wait, taxes such as VAT, gasoline, sales taxes, and higher income taxes hurting consumer spending. You pointing out GDP growth in Europe is irrelevant unless you put the growth in context by line item