REMINDER: THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to monitor the Forums. However, THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to review any materials submitted to or posted on the Forums, and remove, delete, redact or otherwise modify such materials, in its sole discretion and for any reason whatsoever, at any time and from time to time, without notice or further obligation to you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to display or post any materials provided by you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to disclose, at any time and from time to time, any information or materials that we deem necessary or appropriate to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, contract obligation, legal or dispute process or government request. Click on the following hyperlinks to further read the applicable Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
He should thank Greta's generation because he's putting $1T/year on a credit card bill he and his geezed out base won't be around to throw in on.
things were still on the downswing even after Bush's recovery actCalling the first 2-3 years of Obama “growth” is a stretch. Anyone who was unemployed during that time will remember.
Same goes with unemployment rates.
For sure. However by saying "more than a decade" intentionally states, by definition, that you've had 10+ years of growth. That would push that growth at a minimum to January 2010 as the starting point, if not earlier, which is absolutely laughable. IMO it's insulting to the people who actually struggled during that time.things were still on the downswing even after Bush's recovery act
a testament to the delayed effects of economic interventionism
Is growth when GDP growth resumes after 2 or more quarters of negative GDP growth, aka a recession, or is there some formula where facts care about people's feelings we need to incorporate?For sure. However by saying "more than a decade" intentionally states, by definition, that you've had 10+ years of growth. That would push that growth at a minimum to January 2010 as the starting point, if not earlier, which is absolutely laughable. IMO it's insulting to the people who actually struggled during that time.
There were some good aspects to the ACA, such as pre-existing conditions, but tying health insurance to employers was a mistake for job growth at that time.
Yeah, because your generation has it covered. Every generation says the same thing. Then they mature.ok, die, boomers
Fixed.Yeah, because your generation has it covered. Every generation says the same thing. Then they regress into spoiled 3 year olds.
Without us you wouldn’t have a job that allows you to post on the internet all day long you ungrateful prick. Kick the side fins out of your decrepit thruster and show us your t!ts.Fixed.
Our generation is on track to be just as bad. Since about 1980 there's been roughly a half hour with no deficit spending. There's nothing mature about thinking there is something good about blowing $1T/year this many years into an expansion.Yeah, because your generation has it covered. Every generation says the same thing. Then they mature.
I consider your post to be threatening and by extension bullying. Come verga.
You'll be less cranky after your nap.Without us you wouldn’t have a job that allows you to post on the internet all day long you ungrateful prick. Kick the side fins out of your decrepit thruster and show us your t!ts.
A testament to kicking the can down the road to create a bigger bubble in the future.things were still on the downswing even after Bush's recovery act
a testament to the delayed effects of economic interventionism
Quarterly or annually? Obama had a few over 4%, a number Trump has not achieved once. In fact, Trump's last quarters were barely above 2% and that's while juicing the economy at Barry Bonds level.What you and your accomplice Barry are doing is called "cherry picking". What your graph omits is the economic growth before Obama took office. The growth rate looked roughly like the growth rate leading out of the disastrous economic downturn caused by the 2006-07 Democrat tax-and-spend congress combined with Obama's impositions of draconian restrictions on economic freedom. Sure, people are going to get tired of being on unemployment rations and take lesser jobs. And the economy will start rising again, but it's no thanks to Obummer.
Barry's peak unemployment rate was 10%. Trump has the lowest unemployment rate since WWII. Obummer never saw a a GDP growth rate as high as 3%. Trump has not seen one below 3%. You can't stifle an economy, then hand out money to your political cronies, and expect that to represent a "stimulus".
Normally growth rates are attributable to congress, the people who hold the purse strings. However, in Barry's case, he smacked capitalists so hard that he multiplied the Democrat congress's spending downturn by two. All Trump had to do to look like an economic genius was to remove Obummer's restrictions.
.