Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-27-2018, 07:37 AM
 
14,221 posts, read 6,960,195 times
Reputation: 6059

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ColoradoOnMyMind View Post
However you spin it, 4.1 is an excellent number. If we have success with our trade efforts-coupled with the continued tax cut effects then watch out.

3% for the year is looking very good right now.
A meaningless arbitrary number. Its blatantly obvious that we need far more than that to just give the workers a small increase in pay. Currently its not happening. Wages have been flat for 20 years. Obama had two years of 2.9% GDP growth and it did nothing. No one cares about this. People care about median income growth. We had skyrocketing income growth in the 50 year period from the 1930s to 1980. Then labor was crushed and Wall Street decided to hoard national income growth into fewer and fewer hands. This isnt addressed at all.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-27-2018, 07:38 AM
 
29,483 posts, read 14,643,964 times
Reputation: 14443
Quote:
Originally Posted by prospectheightsresident View Post
Didn't leftist "economists" say that 3% economic growth under President Trump and his policies was "impossible?"



https://www.marketwatch.com/story/th...ted-2016-10-31


Donald Trump Could Stunt Economic Growth If Elected President | Fortune


https://www.cnbc.com/2016/10/27/if-t...ommentary.html


https://www.breitbart.com/video/2016...trump-elected/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-27-2018, 07:41 AM
 
Location: Kansas City, MISSOURI
20,865 posts, read 9,532,948 times
Reputation: 15579
We still haven't had 3% GDP growth under Trump, on a yearly basis.

As pointed out already, on a quarterly basis 3% growth happened many times under Obama, so that's hardly what leftists were referring to.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-27-2018, 07:43 AM
 
Location: Long Island
32,816 posts, read 19,480,794 times
Reputation: 9618
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair View Post
Then why are blue states wealthier, better educated and the most innovative?

Red states are moochers.

Please explain the 'justice' of New Jersey and Illinois having to support Mississippi and Alabama?

I dont get it.


1. define what a red or blue state is




2. the liberal states have the most welfare, most homeless, and more cost of living...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-27-2018, 07:43 AM
 
Location: New Orleans, La. USA
6,354 posts, read 3,653,965 times
Reputation: 2522
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oklazona Bound View Post
Good economic news coming out in the morning. I believe this shows the effects of tax cuts and repatriated money. Two things that were not going to happen if Hillary had won. If Gary Johnson had won we would have similar tax cuts IMHO. And getting anything over 4% in this late a stage in the recovery since 2009 would be very impressive.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/st...ort-2018-07-26

Second-quarter GDP data on Friday is set to be released at 8:30 a.m. Eastern and may reflect one of the fastest rates of economic expansion since a 5.2% print in the third quarter of 2014, and if it comes out ahead of that figure, it would be the best GDP report since 2003, writes MarketWatch's Steve Goldstein.


https://www.cbsnews.com/news/u-s-sec...top-4-percent/

U.S. second-quarter GDP growth expected to top 4%
The Bush tax cuts of 2001 and 2003 were very similar to the Trump tax cuts. Why didn't the Bush tax cuts increase GDP?
https://www.ctj.org/pdf/gwbdata.pdf
https://www.forbes.com/sites/janetno...nalysis-finds/


GDP growth rate by year,

1998- 4.5%
1999- 4.7%
2000- 4.1%
2001- 1.0%
2002- 1.8%
2003- 2.8%
2004- 3.8%
2005- 3.3%
2006- 2.7%
2007- 1.8%
2008- (negative) 0.3%

Why was GDP growth higher before the Bush tax cuts?

https://www.thebalance.com/us-gdp-by-year-3305543



And in 2019 GDP is projected to decrease by 0.3%, and in 2020 GDP is projected to decrease an additional 0.4%.

Why won't the Trump tax cuts increase GDP growth in 2019 and 2020?

https://www.thebalance.com/us-economic-outlook-3305669
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-27-2018, 07:43 AM
 
Location: Los Altos Hills, CA
36,658 posts, read 67,519,268 times
Reputation: 21239
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCALMike View Post
A meaningless arbitrary number. Its blatantly obvious that we need far more than that to just give the workers a small increase in pay. Currently its not happening. Wages have been flat for 20 years. Obama had two years of 2.9% GDP growth and it did nothing. No one cares about this. People care about median income growth. We had skyrocketing income growth in the 50 year period from the 1930s to 1980. Then labor was crushed and Wall Street decided to hoard national income growth into fewer and fewer hands. This isnt addressed at all.
True but they vote against their own interests just to spite liberals so the fact they are so gleeful about growth that really only benefits huge corporations doesnt matter to them, so long as the right wing uber rich are 'winning', they dont care that they themselves are actually losing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-27-2018, 07:44 AM
 
Location: Kansas City, MISSOURI
20,865 posts, read 9,532,948 times
Reputation: 15579
Quote:
Originally Posted by James Bond 007 View Post
We still haven't had 3% GDP growth under Trump, on a yearly basis.

As pointed out already, on a quarterly basis 3% growth happened many times under Obama, so that's hardly what leftists were referring to.
Here are the annual numbers:

2009: -2.5 %
2010: 2.6%
2011: 1.6%
2012: 2.2%
2013: 1.8%
2014: 2.5%
2015: 2.9%
2016: 1.6%
2017: 2.2%

Source: https://www.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cf...&1906=a&1911=0
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-27-2018, 07:46 AM
 
45,676 posts, read 24,008,400 times
Reputation: 15559
I suspect we should still have a great economy because of all the companies that have yet to open their expansions announced in 2014. Trump is riding the gravy train of years of profit. WOO HOO.

And yes I'm impressed he hasn't blown up the train yet.

And yes -- folks should be careful not to be too boastful --- as mentioned -- this GDP growth hasn't been seen since 2014 and that year the GDP averaged out at 2.6 -- not near the 3 or 4 y'all are hoping for.

It's good -- Americans are resilient and have been enjoying a slow steady economy for years now....woo hoo.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-27-2018, 07:47 AM
 
17,342 posts, read 11,277,677 times
Reputation: 40973
Some of you can continue to whine all you want to, but the numbers are great right now. Accept it because everyone knows when you are complaining, it's all about sour grapes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-27-2018, 07:51 AM
 
14,221 posts, read 6,960,195 times
Reputation: 6059
Quote:
Originally Posted by moneill View Post
I suspect we should still have a great economy because of all the companies that have yet to open their expansions announced in 2014. Trump is riding the gravy train of years of profit. WOO HOO.

And yes I'm impressed he hasn't blown up the train yet.

And yes -- folks should be careful not to be too boastful --- as mentioned -- this GDP growth hasn't been seen since 2014 and that year the GDP averaged out at 2.6 -- not near the 3 or 4 y'all are hoping for.

It's good -- Americans are resilient and have been enjoying a slow steady economy for years now....woo hoo.
But median wages have been flat for the past 20 years and have currently been shrinking in the past quarter.

Why should we care about GDP growth but not income growth for Joe Sixpack? Makes no sense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:11 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top