Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The quote that matters starts around 1:25, when Elmendorf says that, according to CBO's estimates, with the stimulus legislation in place, "the level of GDP would be a little lower at the end. That is, a net negative effect on the growth of GDP over 10 years." Elmendorf then confirms that CBO estimates that the economic drag will continue in the following decade:
SESSIONS: And in the next 10 years, since you’re carrying that debt and paying interest on it and the stimulus value is long since gone, it would be a continual negative of some effect?
ELMENDORF: Yes, it would represent a drag on the level of GDP beyond that, if no other actions were taken.
Well you should vote for the Beast, Clinton her plan is more Obama and More Taxes for Benefits I will never see. (Plus I do not trust Clinton with her track record)
Lets say for augment the labor states this president are with the realm of error. Surprising if you look at the numbers Obama has been taking a all time high to roughly 5.3 %. But I still feel these numbers are corrupted.
There you guys go again! I have posted in another thread that right-wingers are more interested in feelings than facts. I know that it feels wrong to you even though it's a fact, but that's just what it is - a fact. Your feeling isn't going to change that fact, sorry.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GHOSTRIDER AZ
Gw All time lo was 4.7% in 2007. Not bad but, these numbers are with the margin of error. One point I wish to expand GW economy was on track until the Housing market crisis. which we know was started by Carter ran thru President Clinton ( expanded) and finally crash at the end of 2008. (Under bush)
Basically the Republicans are still refusing to take responsibility for the housing crash. Blame Carter and Clinton? Really? If I built a car in the 1970 and years later George W. Bush crashed that car into a crowd of people, somehow I am to blame? Not the person behind the wheel?
Oh Please! The buck stops with George W. Environment changes, times changes, policies that worked decades before could be outdated and unworkable. It's GW's job to identify these laws and update them. Not only did he only do his job, he was ACTIVELY derailing efforts by the state attorney general to warn and investigate the fraudulent lending YEARS before the housing crashed.
The housing crash is squarely Bush's fault, aided by the Republican majority. Sorry, no amount of spin is going to deflect that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GHOSTRIDER AZ
As far as his economic plan Democrats easily dismiss any thing that would cut the budge an d make the budget for America. What was interesting how every there are similarities from both candidates while other points are miles apart.
I do like the Tax table and paying 15% is a 50% reduction in taxes. Clintons plan Middle American gets squeezed .
Aug 5, 2016 - Donald Trump has announced his team of economic advisers, a group that includes many of ... The team is being led by Trump's national policy director, Stephen Miller, along with Dan Kowalski, ..... Congressional Approval.
Trump's so called team has little experience and filled with the type of big business globalists that he supposedly is running against.
The economic experts all laughed at his insane "plan".
But I reckon there are always gullible people who vote Trump.
.
The quote that matters starts around 1:25, when Elmendorf says that, according to CBO's estimates, with the stimulus legislation in place, "the level of GDP would be a little lower at the end. That is, a net negative effect on the growth of GDP over 10 years." Elmendorf then confirms that CBO estimates that the economic drag will continue in the following decade:
SESSIONS: And in the next 10 years, since you’re carrying that debt and paying interest on it and the stimulus value is long since gone, it would be a continual negative of some effect?
ELMENDORF: Yes, it would represent a drag on the level of GDP beyond that, if no other actions were taken.
Tell me how you know more than the CBO on the issue.. I'll wait to hear about your vast knowledge and experience
I think the point was it's the clowns running the show, ie the current establishment politicians who I and many feel have been running our country into the ground for decades now who are "flat out ripping off" you/I/all the taxpayers. An almost 20 trillion debt with the middle class disappearing, infrastructure crumbling, programs like ssn and medicaid underfunded, etc. and all these clowns do is kick the can down the road/nothing is ever solved and kicked down the road with endless spending/wasting yours and my tax dollars. That kind of thing.
As for the "expert" economists/armchair self anointed "experts" who get on these shows and write articles and babble about we need to do this/that/the other thing and are largely in left field based on the predictions I've been following for years, these self appointed "Experts" are people I wouldn't trust hosing off one's driveway.
If people like the trump's of the world aren't your cup of tea and all you see is negative in them regardless of the far more value they create in jobs and creating value/things you and I use everytday that politicians could only dream of creating, you're probably living in the wrong type of society, capitalism. It's not sunday school/perfect but the other alternative for you is a more socialist society. I also find it most interesting how you bust on the not always pretty sides of capitalism but don't mention a word about our self-serving/bought off clowns in the political world running so many big parts of our life in a most pathetic/beyond inefficient/self-serving manner.
Clinton does not address the National debt of 20 trillion dollars and tax rates will go up to pay for her "programs" Clintonites are into the Idea of Clinton and Bill .
She thinks the issues that Obama ha created over 8 years will just go away.
Clinton people are blind to Sec. Clintons Security Violations ad the money she draws from suspect sources.
Trump is the outsider and the establishment Never thought Trump would get this far and would go against a wimp likes Jeb Bush (Mr. Mellow).
There you guys go again! I have posted in another thread that right-wingers are more interested in feelings than facts. I know that it feels wrong to you even though it's a fact, but that's just what it is - a fact. Your feeling isn't going to change that fact, sorry.
Basically the Republicans are still refusing to take responsibility for the housing crash. Blame Carter and Clinton? Really? If I built a car in the 1970 and years later George W. Bush crashed that car into a crowd of people, somehow I am to blame? Not the person behind the wheel?
Oh Please! The buck stops with George W. Environment changes, times changes, policies that worked decades before could be outdated and unworkable. It's GW's job to identify these laws and update them. Not only did he only do his job, he was ACTIVELY derailing efforts by the state attorney general to warn and investigate the fraudulent lending YEARS before the housing crashed.
The housing crash is squarely Bush's fault, aided by the Republican majority. Sorry, no amount of spin is going to deflect that.
Trump's so called team has little experience and filled with the type of big business globalists that he supposedly is running against.
The economic experts all laughed at his insane "plan".
But I reckon there are always gullible people who vote Trump.
.
That is the problem with Liberals they nerve look deeper than they have to even though the facts are right in front of your Liberal Socialist heart. Matter of fact Liberals are famous about "How they Feel" ,Frankly tired of the PC culture that has been created by Libs and Democrats alike.
The Housing Crash is a long issue that Democrats have been involved with.(some Rep too) It was started by President Carter and Bill Clinton saw this gain as his economy weaken. So the Clinton administration open up the flood gates.
Acorn sued Bank of America fro unfair lending practices and the Last resort lender of Fannie Mae and Mac. Dems, Water, Frank , Dodd actively protected William Raines for miss management and fraud. during the Bush administration. Bush went before a Dem Controlled Congress and Congress protected Rains.
Bush pumped18 million dollars to voter those Loans and it was too little too late.
Then it crashed. History in a nut shell.
It worked from JFK, Reagan and the Bushes. GW had a Growth rate of GDP of 5 %until the crash. Obama Growth rates are 1.1 % while China is outpacing us @ 6%.
Clintons budget resembles Trumps in some aspects . So what you are saying is Clintons Proposal is a train wreck waiting to happen.
You guys got layoff of the Smoke. Its making Liberals crazy
Democrats drive me crazy gimmick plans like the Stimulus which the money was lost and no today can figure out where the money went! Your unemployment's numbers do not apply to those who has given up. The actual rate is 9% You success has been minimized because of the creditability of the Obama Administration to issue accurate numbers.
I don't know how to state this in a nice way but it is clear that you don't have any idea what you are talking about.
There was no money "lost" on the stimulus plan. The idea of government stimulus during a recession is deeply routed in Keynesian economics. It's based upon the fact that your spending is my income and my spending is your income -- and when we both cut back spending, we get a recession or depression. That's what happened in 2008. To relieve that, the government became demand of last resort. It resulted in jump-starting the economy and reducing unemployment. More employees paying taxes paid for the stimulus.
As for unemployment numbers, there is no “true” unemployment rate, just various indicators of the state of the labor market. Fortunately, these indicators pretty much move in tandem, so we’re not usually confused about whether the market is getting better or worse. But they do measure somewhat different things, and which one you want to look at depends on what questions you’re asking.
...
Clintons budget resembles Trumps in some aspects . So what you are saying is Clintons Proposal is a train wreck waiting to happen.
...
While you write that, you provide no argument as to why that is so. Therefore, I'll provide you the comparison between Trump's budget and Clinton's. On taxes, Trump wants to eliminate the inheritance tax, that only applies to estates worth over $10.6 million (gee, who does that help?) He also lowers the top rates. The bulk of Trump's tax-plan favors the wealthy, even though he tells you he's the champion of the working class. His plan lowers revenue from between $4 trillion and $10 trillion, over ten years. So, if you are concerned about that $20 trillion in debt, that debt gets much worse under Trump.
Trump's spending plan cuts nothing and increases defense spending. He just said today that Medicaid should be increased. He also said he would balance the budget. So, his plan lowers revenue and increases spending, while he says it will balance the budget. This is at odds with mathematical reality.
Clinton's tax plan raises taxes, only on the wealthy, and adds $1.1 trillion in revenues. Her spending plan adds education and childcare programs.
hahaha.. beb0P doesnt understand that these things are "not" a waste of money becaue they are tax write offs etc.. Furthermore, economists, and investors, arent even close to the same thing. And even if they were, your reply doesnt answer the question given they would be according to you "saving" and thus RICH..
You don't seem to know that planes and boats are not the only items that qualifies for tax write off. There are much better assets that actually appreciates and/or generates income but can still be a tax write off. But I suspect this is news to you.
Many economists are also investors. Did you not know that? I never said saving would make a person rich. I would explain to you what I said but you won't get it. Everything I've said is basic investing, somehow, you seem to be rather unfamiliar with it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
Trumps "billions" of debt, actually created TENS of trillions of dollars in wealth, but if debt is so bad, why do you celebrate it so often when its the government? I dont think I've seen anyone flip flop more than you just did, all in the same posting..
You seem to have a habit of completely missing the point. I have never said debt is bad, in fact I have repeatedly said debt in and of itself is neither good nor bad; and repeated that to you several times before because you keep not getting it or misquoting me.
I said taking on too much risk is bad. Investing is about risk to reward, not debt to reward.
.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As the Smoke clears!
