Trump Admin no longer forecasting 3% growth

[Conservative]

With an elementary understanding of how the economy works, you would know the answer. Unemployment is a lagging indicator and it trails the economy by a few quarters to a year. That is why, while unemployment rose during the first year of Obama's presidency, it was due to Bush's Great Recession.


Economic indicator - Wikipedia

Lagging indicator, you mean taking employment from 146 million up to 152 million 9 years later at a cost of 9.3 trillion added to the debt including the 842 BILLION dollar shovel ready jobs stimulus? Please stop and think for a change, yes, Obama wasn't in office with 146 million employed in January 2008 but the democrats were and if employment reached that high why wouldn't that be the base? Why would a stimulus program signed February 2009 see employment going from 142 million down to 138 million in 2009 and then 139 million in 2010, still well below the 146 million that wasn't hit until 2014

By the way context matters, see if this resonates with you

Labor Force Statistics from the Current Population Survey
Original Data Value

Series Id: LNS12032194
Seasonally Adjusted
Series title: (Seas) Employment Level - Part-Time for Economic Reasons, All Industries
Labor force status: Employed
Type of data: Number in thousands
Age: 16 years and over
Hours at work: 1 to 34 hours
Reasons work not as scheduled: Economic reasons
Worker status/schedules: At work part time
Years: 2009 to 2019

Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
2009 8046 8796 9145 8908 9113 9024 8891 9029 8847 8979 9114 9098
2010 8530 8936 9233 9178 8845 8577 8500 8800 9246 8837 8873 8935
2011 8470 8464 8645 8652 8576 8427 8281 8788 9166 8657 8447 8171
2012 8305 8238 7775 7913 8101 8072 8082 7974 8671 8203 8166 7943
2013 8151 8178 7722 7964 7937 8103 8099 7816 7764 7936 7718 7827
2014 7296 7299 7435 7509 7254 7422 7402 7177 7020 7025 6898 6856
2015 6808 6671 6629 6608 6628 6383 6249 6423 6043 5811 6174 6084
2016 5941 5978 6066 6006 6467 5748 5926 5995 5918 5971 5738 5621
2017 5753 5603 5455 5279 5234 5266 5281 5237 5179 4912 4866 4986
2018 4982 5115 4969 4952 4920 4736 4588 4368 4656 4630 4781 4657
2019 5147 4310 4499

Are those numbers part of the employment numbers you want to tout for Obama?

 

[Conservative]

Let's see. Bush cut taxes by $200 billion dollars a year in his two tax cuts ('01 and '03). Then he doubled defense spending from $300 billion a year to $600 billion a year. That is $500 billion of deficit per year that is directly attributable to Bush 43 policy. Then Bush 43 cratered the economy and caused a loss of income tax revenue for 2 years of of the Obama presidency, costing $1 trillion tax shortfall. That is $5 trillion of deficit right there directly attributable to Bush 43. Obama had a $1 trillion stimulus, so now we are accounting for 6 trillion of the 10 trillion. Throw in normal inflation in govt. spending and you account for another trillion or two. But at least half of Obama's debt came directly from Bush policy, and Obama had to start in a deep economic hole dug by Bush.

There is no accuracy or context in your post, how did half of Obama's debt come from Bush? TARP was a loan and repaid, the 842 billion stimulus wasn't Bush's and still 3-4 million taxpayers were lost, Bush didn't take over GM, didn't sell of Chrysler, didn't fund a supplemental for Afghanistan. Again no independent would ever give Obama credit for the results you claim as facts don't support your claims

What Ended the Great Recession?

 

[Born Free]

Let's see. Bush cut taxes by $200 billion dollars a year in his two tax cuts ('01 and '03). Then he doubled defense spending from $300 billion a year to $600 billion a year. That is $500 billion of deficit per year that is directly attributable to Bush 43 policy. Then Bush 43 cratered the economy and caused a loss of income tax revenue for 2 years of of the Obama presidency, costing $1 trillion tax shortfall. That is $5 trillion of deficit right there directly attributable to Bush 43. Obama had a $1 trillion stimulus, so now we are accounting for 6 trillion of the 10 trillion. Throw in normal inflation in govt. spending and you account for another trillion or two. But at least half of Obama's debt came directly from Bush policy, and Obama had to start in a deep economic hole dug by Bush.

Yeah, however your beloved Obama borrowed twice what Bush borrowed. Yeah he borrowed 10 Trillion in just 8 yrs and what did we get for it. The worst recovery in US History. My dog could do a hell of a lot better than that.

 

[MTAtech]

Yeah, however your beloved Obama borrowed twice what Bush borrowed. Yeah he borrowed 10 Trillion in just 8 yrs and what did we get for it. The worst recovery in US History. My dog could do a hell of a lot better than that.

I'll ask you what I have asked the other ~100 or so times you made the same statement: The deficits in the early portion of the Obama Administration weren't caused because Obama went on a spending spree. They were caused mainly by reduced revenues from the recession. So, what should Obama have done to address what you think was the big problem at that time, deficits (not the real problem, unemployment)? Should he have raised taxes to cover the shortfall or slash spending -- cutting benefits just as the unemployed need benefits to feed their families -- both which would have made the recession worse?

 

[What if...?]

Their 2019 Economic Report of the President has scaled back its growth projection to below 3%. See page 527, “current-law baseline forecast is for output growth to moderate as the capital-to-output ratio asymptotically approaches a higher steady-state level in response to business tax reform, and as the near-term effects of the TCJA’s individual provisions on the rate of growth dissipate into a permanent level effect.” That blather means that the Trump tax cuts temporarily stimulated the economy by jacking up the deficit, but now that stimulative effect is wearing off, the growth level is expected to sink below 3% a year.

In other words, the "mediocre" economic growth that those with Trump Devotion Syndrome (TDS) have been telling us existed under Obama, is going to be the standard for the Trump Administration. Gone are the 4-6% growth projections previously boasted about.

To re-emphasize my point, the 2017 tax-cut gave the economy a temporary and slight jolt at a huge permanent cost to the Treasury.

Who could have guessed?

(Except anybody paying attention since Reagan)

 

[What if...?]

It is fascinating to watch liberal progressive "americans" crow gleefully about the countries potential woes.

Is that what you think it is?

Sounds like "we told you this would happen" to me.

I know I said there'd be a sugar high and then it would end and all we'd have is more wealth transferred upward with no net benefit for the majority.

That's what happens every time republicans hand out tax cuts to the upper crust.

 

[What if...?]

It's good you put Americans in quotes. I thought they were all moving to Canada after the 2016 election. I guess it's going to well down here. They love what is bad for America. They cheer even the worst disasters because they can't wait to blame it on Trump. I think these traitors should all be deported.

By definition you can't deport those who didn't "port" in the first place.

Look it up!

 

[What if...?]

Perhaps the the ****hole countries could use a few "good" people.

I don't think the white nationalists would have a good time there.

 

[What if...?]

I am afraid we'll face a recession relatively soon given the irresponsible Trump tax cuts, but I don't root for one. I think we need to kick Trump out, but I am not stupid enough to root for a recession to accomplish it, because it will hurt me and my fellow Americans.

Stupid should be painful.

 

[Born Free]

I'll ask you what I have asked the other ~100 or so times you made the same statement: The deficits in the early portion of the Obama Administration weren't caused because Obama went on a spending spree. They were caused mainly by reduced revenues from the recession. So, what should Obama have done to address what you think was the big problem at that time, deficits (not the real problem, unemployment)? Should he have raised taxes to cover the shortfall or slash spending -- cutting benefits just as the unemployed need benefits to feed their families -- both which would have made the recession worse?

Surely you've seen this:

JFK video cut taxes to help the economy - Yahoo Video Search Results

 

[MTAtech]

Surely you've seen this:

JFK video cut taxes to help the economy - Yahoo Video Search Results

JFK cut top tax-rates from 91%, which many economists argue is confiscatory, to 70%. Are you really suggesting that the top federal rate should be 70%? If you are merely arguing that cutting taxes from whatever rate is good, then you might as well argue that the rate should be zero, which makes no sense.

 

[Conservative]

JFK cut top tax-rates from 91%, which many economists argue is confiscatory, to 70%. Are you really suggesting that the top federal rate should be 70%? If you are merely arguing that cutting taxes from whatever rate is good, then you might as well argue that the rate should be zero, which makes no sense.

Why do you keep doing this to yourself and posting the same argument over and over again about TAX Rates. what is it about you who keeps promoting higher taxes taking money out of the pockets of citizens and away from the states but only on rich people? You keep ignoring that 44% of the income earning Americans paying ZERO in Federal Income taxes because of tax laws?

You don't seem to understand that we don't need a 4.7 trillion dollar Federal Gov't and that all social responsibilities belong in the states and local communities that are affected by the people who need those kind of services. Neighbor helping neighbor is what this country was built on and you don't promote that understanding with higher taxes and more dollars going to the federal gov't.

Obviously nothing is going to change your mind on this issue as you are going to say the same thing over and over again ignoring the actual results including Charitable giving records set because people are keeping more of what they earn and yes that includes rich people and corporations.

 

[Tbird19482]

Why do you keep doing this to yourself and posting the same argument over and over again about TAX Rates. what is it about you who keeps promoting higher taxes taking money out of the pockets of citizens and away from the states but only on rich people? You keep ignoring that 44% of the income earning Americans paying ZERO in Federal Income taxes because of tax laws?

You don't seem to understand that we don't need a 4.7 trillion dollar Federal Gov't and that all social responsibilities belong in the states and local communities that are affected by the people who need those kind of services. Neighbor helping neighbor is what this country was built on and you don't promote that understanding with higher taxes and more dollars going to the federal gov't.

Obviously nothing is going to change your mind on this issue as you are going to say the same thing over and over again ignoring the actual results including Charitable giving records set because people are keeping more of what they earn and yes that includes rich people and corporations.

You keep crying about people who are below the poverty level , some working two jobs just to make ends meet and not saying a word about what the 42% of all large corporations ( after the Trump tax cuts the GAO says it will be over 65% ) making millions and Billions in US profits not pay a cent in US income taxes.
YES they do pay other types of taxes and so do the poor but the poor aren't making Billions like Amazon and GE are
have a nice day

 

[Conservative]

You keep crying about people who are below the poverty level , some working two jobs just to make ends meet and not saying a word about what the 42% of all large corporations ( after the Trump tax cuts the GAO says it will be over 65% ) making millions and Billions in US profits not pay a cent in US income taxes.
YES they do pay other types of taxes and so do the poor but the poor aren't making Billions like Amazon and GE are
have a nice day

Crying? No, being realistic, there is absolutely no reason that every working American shouldn't be paying something in Federal Income Taxes regardless of the amount. Your so called compassion for the poor is nothing more than liberal rhetoric because quite frankly if you gave a damn about the poor you would demand that all that money spent by the federal gov't on social programs would actually benefit the poor and not create dependence and debt

Other kinds of taxes are irrelevant as they are all use taxes, don't use the service, you don't pay the taxes, FICA for example funds SS and Medicare so if you aren't going to collect SS and Medicare you don't pay the taxes. If you don't drive you don't pay excise taxes on gasoline. What you continue to offer is typical liberal lip service to real problems in this country only promoting class envy, jealousy, and ignorance of the taxes you pay. This country was built on equal out opportunity NOT equal outcome which somehow you people want to create

People and corporations making money is part of what made this country great. Sorry that success passed you buy but corporations aren't people but they employ people and those people pay taxes as do the corporations which provides great services to the state, local communities and charities.

 

[Born Free]

You keep crying about people who are below the poverty level , some working two jobs just to make ends meet and not saying a word about what the 42% of all large corporations ( after the Trump tax cuts the GAO says it will be over 65% ) making millions and Billions in US profits not pay a cent in US income taxes.

Some working two jobs, SOOOO, people have been working two jobs from the first day a jobs were offered.

YES they do pay other types of taxes and so do the poor but the poor aren't making Billions like Amazon and GE are have a nice day

So if you make money, that's a mortal sin against society. According to you no one should make money over a certain amount and anything over is given to the poor. Why do we have poor people and homeless people? Christ the homeless in San Francisco are all over the streets, pissing and ****ting in the streets and leaving needles everywhere. Pelosi lives in SF and you would sure think she would give a little attention to the poor and homeless, but no. She wants an open border and walls are immoral, and she highly supports her sanctuary city, but she is adamant that Trump not to drop off one illegal in her neighborhood. What a pathetic hypocrite.

 

[Tbird19482]

Crying? No, being realistic, there is absolutely no reason that every working American shouldn't be paying something in Federal Income Taxes regardless of the amount. Your so called compassion for the poor is nothing more than liberal rhetoric because quite frankly if you gave a damn about the poor you would demand that all that money spent by the federal gov't on social programs would actually benefit the poor and not create dependence and debt

Other kinds of taxes are irrelevant as they are all use taxes, don't use the service, you don't pay the taxes, FICA for example funds SS and Medicare so if you aren't going to collect SS and Medicare you don't pay the taxes. If you don't drive you don't pay excise taxes on gasoline. What you continue to offer is typical liberal lip service to real problems in this country only promoting class envy, jealousy, and ignorance of the taxes you pay. This country was built on equal out opportunity NOT equal outcome which somehow you people want to create

People and corporations making money is part of what made this country great. Sorry that success passed you buy but corporations aren't people but they employ people and those people pay taxes as do the corporations which provides great services to the state, local communities and charities.

so You and Born free would make every PERSON who worked pay an income tax on every cent they make.
It doesn't matter to you two iF these people don't make enough to live on and let large Corporations not pay a cent on the millions if not billions they make in US profits.
Poor people just like large Corporations also pay other types of taxes, use tax, sales tax ( that most Corporations do not pay and IF they do they unlike the poor get to deduct it from their income taxes )and other types of taxes ( and most large Corporations get to deduct these use taxes , sales tax and any most any other type of tax they pay from their income taxes , under cost of goods sold ) and poor people don't .
Yes tax the very poor and not large Corporations making millions if not billions in US profits
we see how you are take frm the poor and give to the very rich
Have a nice day

 

[Conservative]

so You and Born free would make every PERSON who worked pay an income tax on every cent they make.
It doesn't matter to you two iF these people don't make enough to live on and let large Corporations not pay a cent on the millions if not billions they make in US profits.
Poor people just like large Corporations also pay other types of taxes, use tax, sales tax ( that most Corporations do not pay and IF they do they unlike the poor get to deduct it from their income taxes )and other types of taxes ( and most large Corporations get to deduct these use taxes , sales tax and any most any other type of tax they pay from their income taxes , under cost of goods sold ) and poor people don't .
Yes tax the very poor and not large Corporations making millions if not billions in US profits
we see how you are take frm the poor and give to the very rich
Have a nice day

You bet as everyone living in this country owes something back to the country and obviously you have no idea what Federal Income Taxes fund. Taxing the poor? Without national security there is no economy for these people to work in but maybe you would be better suited for a socialist country where everything is "free?"

Your lack of understanding of a corporation is also evident. Feel very sorry for you in your own ignorance as to what benefits the corporations provide for the state and local communities as obviously you want more going to the federal bureaucrats to provide what you want and not always what you need. Bureaucrats love people like you

You have a nice day because it does appear that all this negativity is bothering you a lot making it tough to have a nice day

 

[Tbird19482]

Some working two jobs, SOOOO, people have been working two jobs from the first day a jobs were offered.



So if you make money, that's a mortal sin against society. According to you no one should make money over a certain amount and anything over is given to the poor. Why do we have poor people and homeless people? Christ the homeless in San Francisco are all over the streets, pissing and ****ting in the streets and leaving needles everywhere. Pelosi lives in SF and you would sure think she would give a little attention to the poor and homeless, but no. She wants an open border and walls are immoral, and she highly supports her sanctuary city, but she is adamant that Trump not to drop off one illegal in her neighborhood. What a pathetic hypocrite.

Where did I every say any such BS?

" So if you make money, that's a mortal sin against society. According to you no one should make money over a certain amount and anything over is given to the poor. "

and as to your question why do we have poor people
lack of education, discrimination and other things
I don't give a dang about where " Pelosi ' lives
I am talking about in the whole US.
YOU like Conservative would rather tax everybody on every dollar they earn ( even if they don't make enough money to live on and are in poverty ) then tax large Corporations making millions and billions in uS profits
Have a nice day
have a nice day

 

[Tbird19482]

You bet as everyone living in this country owes something back to the country and obviously you have no idea what Federal Income Taxes fund. Taxing the poor? Without national security there is no economy for these people to work in but maybe you would be better suited for a socialist country where everything is "free?"

Your lack of understanding of a corporation is also evident. Feel very sorry for you in your own ignorance as to what benefits the corporations provide for the state and local communities as obviously you want more going to the federal bureaucrats to provide what you want and not always what you need. Bureaucrats love people like you

You have a nice day because it does appear that all this negativity is bothering you a lot making it tough to have a nice day

well one more thing , you say " corporations aren't people "
well Corporations are entities and so are people and Corporations get all the rights of an entities as many rights as people if not more.

So if we don't have poor people help pay for our national security we won't have them?
So why don't we have large Corporations pay income taxes that help pay for our national security?
so if they don't pay for our national security like the poor don't we won't have them either?
and as for " Your lack of understanding of a corporation is also evident."
I have owned two companies , I started them and when they got big I sold them and made money on them and I laso have a college degree in Business
so I do know about how companies work.
and again we all see that you want to give everything to large Corporations making millions if not Billions in US profits on the backs of the working people and the poor
Yes there are benefits to having Corporations making profits and supplying jobs but they also get the benifits that are derived from people paying income taxes with out paying them
YES they like the working class and the poor also pay other taxes.
The poor and middle class pay sales taxes and some use tax, gas tax property tax where they can not deduct them from their income taxes and large Corporations can
Again you and Born Free would tax working people and the poor on very dollar they earn working and NOT have a large Corporation making millions if not Billions in US profits that get the benefits from those income taxes pay a cent.
YES take from the poor and hard working middle clas and give to billion dollar corporations
Have a nice day

 

[ataraxia]

It is fascinating to watch liberal progressive "americans" crow gleefully about the countries potential woes.

No. It's more a feeling of "I told you so".

 

[Conservative]

well one more thing , you say " corporations aren't people "
well Corporations are entities and so are people and Corporations get all the rights of an entities as many rights as people if not more.

So if we don't have poor people help pay for our national security we won't have them?
So why don't we have large Corporations pay income taxes that help pay for our national security?
so if they don't pay for our national security like the poor don't we won't have them either?
and as for " Your lack of understanding of a corporation is also evident."
I have owned two companies , I started them and when they got big I sold them and made money on them and I laso have a college degree in Business
so I do know about how companies work.
and again we all see that you want to give everything to large Corporations making millions if not Billions in US profits on the backs of the working people and the poor
Yes there are benefits to having Corporations making profits and supplying jobs but they also get the benifits that are derived from people paying income taxes with out paying them
YES they like the working class and the poor also pay other taxes.
The poor and middle class pay sales taxes and some use tax, gas tax property tax where they can not deduct them from their income taxes and large Corporations can
Again you and Born Free would tax working people and the poor on very dollar they earn working and NOT have a large Corporation making millions if not Billions in US profits that get the benefits from those income taxes pay a cent.
YES take from the poor and hard working middle clas and give to billion dollar corporations
Have a nice day

So your business experience tells you it is better for a corporation to pay taxes to the federal gov't vs paying more into retirement, healthcare expenses and raises along with dividends all that reduce the taxable income? Guess there is great benefits in selling lemonade stands.

Guess having a free ride is contagious on someone else's dollars

 

[Tbird19482]

So your business experience tells you it is better for a corporation to pay taxes to the federal gov't vs paying more into retirement, healthcare expenses and raises along with dividends all that reduce the taxable income? Guess there is great benefits in selling lemonade stands.

Guess having a free ride is contagious on someone else's dollars

So just how many large Corporations took what they got back in the Trump tax cuts and put it back into their employees retirement, Healthcare or any other benefits for their employees? ( not a lot of them gave their employees a " Bonus " with that money )
Not many, most of them put it back into stock buy backs and investments over seas just like under Reagan and Bush II )
My point to you and Born free is that these corporations are " Entities" and have all the same rights as an actual person and they get to deduct a lot more
They get to deduct all the use, sales and property taxes ( remember the ones YOU cry about , the ones the people in high tax state use to be able to deduct, ( sales/ income taxes, property tax ) the ones that the low tax states didn't and those taxes helped support those lower taxes states? YES the Blue high tax states still get a LOT less back from the Federal Government then the lower taxed red states, I would love to see the Federal Government make the states take back control of the federal programs they get now ( and fund them , by themselves ) BUT have the money that the Fed sends back to the states divided up equally on a per person basis, that way the Higher taxed Blue states would get back as much per person as every other state.
have a nice afternoon

 

[Conservative]

So just how many large Corporations took what they got back in the Trump tax cuts and put it back into their employees retirement, Healthcare or any other benefits for their employees? ( not a lot of them gave their employees a " Bonus " with that money )
Not many, most of them put it back into stock buy backs and investments over seas just like under Reagan and Bush II )
My point to you and Born free is that these corporations are " Entities" and have all the same rights as an actual person and they get to deduct a lot more
They get to deduct all the use, sales and property taxes ( remember the ones YOU cry about , the ones the people in high tax state use to be able to deduct, ( sales/ income taxes, property tax ) the ones that the low tax states didn't and those taxes helped support those lower taxes states? YES the Blue high tax states still get a LOT less back from the Federal Government then the lower taxed red states, I would love to see the Federal Government make the states take back control of the federal programs they get now ( and fund them , by themselves ) BUT have the money that the Fed sends back to the states divided up equally on a per person basis, that way the Higher taxed Blue states would get back as much per person as every other state.
have a nice afternoon

Why do you care? Do you know the difference between gross income and taxable income? Apparently not. How do you explain the drop in TAXABLE income from corporations? Think that pay raises, bonuses, health benefit and pension payments, dividends had any role in the taxable income?

keep showing how envious you are of what others make and pay in taxes and keep ignoring tax laws and how blue states with higher state and local taxes have been using those deductions to pay lower federal taxes that Red States cannot do

 

[akyron]

No. It's more a feeling of "I told you so".

Yeah. I hear rumors that in 2020, Avenatti will want to run against Trump. Dear Lord. Talk about an Alien vs. Predator matchup.

We really need to bring some class and integrity (not to mention sanity) back to the office of the presidency.

Avenatti charged with embezzling millions from paraplegic client in new indictment

Fake news articles somehow just don't seem to gain as much traction among liberals

Matthew Dowd: Clinton Has 95% Chance To Win, Will Win By 5 Million Votes

Scientist predicts 99% chance of Clinton win

"The odds are overwhelming for a Hillary Clinton Victory"


We all know your idea of class, integrity, and sanity. You seem ill equipped to do accurate analysis of much so far but keep practicing. Even a broken clock can be right twice a day albeit briefly.

 

[Tbird19482]

So your business experience tells you it is better for a corporation to pay taxes to the federal gov't vs paying more into retirement, healthcare expenses and raises along with dividends all that reduce the taxable income? Guess there is great benefits in selling lemonade stands.

Guess having a free ride is contagious on someone else's dollars

I guess " having a free ride is contagious on someone else's dollars" seeing that large Corporations get a tax cut and don't pay a cent in US income taxes are doing it.
I see you like the fact that large Corporations making millions and Billions in US profits don't pay even ONE cent of US income taxes and all that burden falls on the people mostly on the hard working middle class who do pay Income taxes.
Heck you are so far right you want anybody that even earns one dollar pay income tax on it and let large Corporations pay nothing
Yes tax the heck out of the person who works and let large Corporations making million and Billions in US profits ( even if they get the benefits of those income taxes ) not pay a cent
YES rob the poor and give to the rich
typical right winger
Have a nice evening