The Obama economy - It never really stopped.

  • 76 results
  • 1
  • 2
Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

167864

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#51 LJS9502_basic
Member since 2003 • 167864 Posts

@joshrmeyer said:

Football time, football analogy: Tom Brady retires from the New England Patriots. Arguably the best QB ever. He gets the credit for how good the team is. Now a new QB comes in and does just as good as Brady. Do you dismiss Brady as great? Do you assume the new QB is just riding the current team to success? Or do you acknowledge the new QB may just be as good if not better than Brady was?

That is the most bizarre analogy I've see here yet. Football...smh.

Avatar image for Jacanuk
Jacanuk

19322

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#52 Jacanuk
Member since 2011 • 19322 Posts
@joshrmeyer said:

Football time, football analogy: Tom Brady retires from the New England Patriots. Arguably the best QB ever. He gets the credit for how good the team is. Now a new QB comes in and does just as good as Brady. Do you dismiss Brady as great? Do you assume the new QB is just riding the current team to success? Or do you acknowledge the new QB may just be as good if not better than Brady was?

What a strange handegg analogy.

Do not really "prove/disprove" anything

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

167864

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#53 LJS9502_basic
Member since 2003 • 167864 Posts

@Jacanuk said:
@joshrmeyer said:

Football time, football analogy: Tom Brady retires from the New England Patriots. Arguably the best QB ever. He gets the credit for how good the team is. Now a new QB comes in and does just as good as Brady. Do you dismiss Brady as great? Do you assume the new QB is just riding the current team to success? Or do you acknowledge the new QB may just be as good if not better than Brady was?

What a strange handegg analogy.

Do not really "prove/disprove" anything

Really lame to use the term hand egg. Hint: it's called football because it's a game played on foot.

Avatar image for Jacanuk
Jacanuk

19322

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#54 Jacanuk
Member since 2011 • 19322 Posts
@LJS9502_basic said:

Really lame to use the term hand egg. Hint: it's called football because it's a game played on foot.

Not really.

Football is football you know what 90% of the world calls football.

American handegg is American handegg since it´s played you know with your hands.

Avatar image for joshrmeyer
JoshRMeyer

10486

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#55 JoshRMeyer
Member since 2015 • 10486 Posts

@Jacanuk: You can't even start the game without kicking the ball... Then there's punts and field goals also. One of the more important positions on the team is the kicker. Sure soccer is more suited to be called football, but here in the states, it's been this way for 100+ years. My analogy wasn't proving anything, hence the question marks.

Avatar image for comp_atkins
comp_atkins

36002

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#56  Edited By comp_atkins
Member since 2005 • 36002 Posts
@LJS9502_basic said:
@Jacanuk said:
@joshrmeyer said:

Football time, football analogy: Tom Brady retires from the New England Patriots. Arguably the best QB ever. He gets the credit for how good the team is. Now a new QB comes in and does just as good as Brady. Do you dismiss Brady as great? Do you assume the new QB is just riding the current team to success? Or do you acknowledge the new QB may just be as good if not better than Brady was?

What a strange handegg analogy.

Do not really "prove/disprove" anything

Really lame to use the term hand egg. Hint: it's called football because it's a game played on foot.

as opposed to what? on your hands and knees? in the sky?

Avatar image for Jacanuk
Jacanuk

19322

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 42

User Lists: 0

#57 Jacanuk
Member since 2011 • 19322 Posts
@joshrmeyer said:

@Jacanuk: You can't even start the game without kicking the ball... Then there's punts and field goals also. One of the more important positions on the team is the kicker. Sure soccer is more suited to be called football, but here in the states, it's been this way for 100+ years. My analogy wasn't proving anything, hence the question marks.

Do you know why it´s called football? which is btw inaccurate and why the rest of the world calls that kind of sport Rugby.

Anyways the analogy was strange and not sure what you wanted to do with it.

Avatar image for sonicare
sonicare

57007

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#58 sonicare
Member since 2004 • 57007 Posts

Whats the dumbest thing is attributing the economy to any president.

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

167864

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#59 LJS9502_basic
Member since 2003 • 167864 Posts

@Jacanuk said:
@joshrmeyer said:

@Jacanuk: You can't even start the game without kicking the ball... Then there's punts and field goals also. One of the more important positions on the team is the kicker. Sure soccer is more suited to be called football, but here in the states, it's been this way for 100+ years. My analogy wasn't proving anything, hence the question marks.

Do you know why it´s called football? which is btw inaccurate and why the rest of the world calls that kind of sport Rugby.

Anyways the analogy was strange and not sure what you wanted to do with it.

Because it was played on foot as opposed to games on horse. All games that developed from soccer were played ON FOOT. Rugby came from soccer by the way.

Avatar image for sonicare
sonicare

57007

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#60 sonicare
Member since 2004 • 57007 Posts

I'll say it again. People give the president way too much credit and blame for the US economy. The US economy is enormous, over 20 trillion GDP, and while a president can have some influence over it, most of the time, the reasons for it jumping up or down have little to do with the executive branch. It's not an Obama or Trump economy.

Avatar image for joebones5000
joebones5000

2867

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#61 joebones5000
Member since 2016 • 2867 Posts

@sonicare said:

I'll say it again. People give the president way too much credit and blame for the US economy. The US economy is enormous, over 20 trillion GDP, and while a president can have some influence over it, most of the time, the reasons for it jumping up or down have little to do with the executive branch. It's not an Obama or Trump economy.

COMPLETE HORSE SHIT!

The policies of the Bush Jr. and Obama admins were 100% different. So were the economies of Clinton and Bush Jr.

Both Clinton and Obama had wildly successful economies. Bush Jr's was a smelly turd for 8 years.

Same thing happened with Reagan. He cut taxes and nearly wrecked the economy. He only started seeing improvement after he was forced to cancel many of his outrageous and idiotic tax cuts.

Avatar image for JimB
JimB

2620

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 4

User Lists: 0

#62 JimB
Member since 2002 • 2620 Posts

The Obama economy was eight years of recession. If Clinton had been elected it would have been twelve years.

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

167864

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#63 LJS9502_basic
Member since 2003 • 167864 Posts

@JimB said:

The Obama economy was eight years of recession. If Clinton had been elected it would have been twelve years.

The recession was due to the last president that destroyed the economy much like this one is doing.

Avatar image for comp_atkins
comp_atkins

36002

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#64 comp_atkins
Member since 2005 • 36002 Posts
@JimB said:

The Obama economy was eight years of recession. If Clinton had been elected it would have been twelve years.

this is patently false.

the great recession lasted from December 2007 to June 2009 by the standard definition of what a recession is.

Avatar image for joebones5000
joebones5000

2867

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#65 joebones5000
Member since 2016 • 2867 Posts

@JimB said:

The Obama economy was eight years of recession. If Clinton had been elected it would have been twelve years.

Let me ask you a serious question. Assuming you aren't just very weakly trolling, why would you write something so demonstrably false? It only makes you look foolish.

Avatar image for sonicare
sonicare

57007

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#66 sonicare
Member since 2004 • 57007 Posts

@joebones5000 said:
@sonicare said:

I'll say it again. People give the president way too much credit and blame for the US economy. The US economy is enormous, over 20 trillion GDP, and while a president can have some influence over it, most of the time, the reasons for it jumping up or down have little to do with the executive branch. It's not an Obama or Trump economy.

COMPLETE HORSE SHIT!

The policies of the Bush Jr. and Obama admins were 100% different. So were the economies of Clinton and Bush Jr.

Both Clinton and Obama had wildly successful economies. Bush Jr's was a smelly turd for 8 years.

Same thing happened with Reagan. He cut taxes and nearly wrecked the economy. He only started seeing improvement after he was forced to cancel many of his outrageous and idiotic tax cuts.

You're simply cherry picking events that meet your agenda. Reagan inherited a disaster of an economy - so he had very little to wreck. Jimmy Carter suffered through horrid stagflation that led to him being a one term president, but again, a lot of those events were not due to his policies. Clinton took over an economy that had just started to come out of a recession, but then also oversaw the dot com bubble that led to an enormous crash of the market. So was he good on some things and bad on others, or was the economy just doing what the US economy does? What exactly did Bush do that caused the economy to crash? What great policies did obama pass that led the economy to be wildly successful?

Avatar image for sonicare
sonicare

57007

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#67 sonicare
Member since 2004 • 57007 Posts

@joebones5000 said:
@sonicare said:

I

I'll even take it a step further. Over the last 3 years, Donald Trump has done almost ever conceivable thing to ruin an economy, and yet the US economy keeps trucking along despite his actions. Further proof that economies are not that dependent on the incumbent president. REad some econ textbooks - hopefully from nonpartisan writers - and you'll see those theories echoed.

Avatar image for mattbbpl
mattbbpl

17622

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#68 mattbbpl
Member since 2006 • 17622 Posts

@sonicare said:

I'll even take it a step further. Over the last 3 years, Donald Trump has done almost ever conceivable thing to ruin an economy, and yet the US economy keeps trucking along despite his actions. Further proof that economies are not that dependent on the incumbent president. REad some econ textbooks - hopefully from nonpartisan writers - and you'll see those theories echoed.

Sonic, I really want to agree with you here because it is in many ways true (because the president alone can pass limited policy without others having a hand in it), but using it as a blanket statement has become a blanket dodge when attributing economic effects to policy. Just as Obama had undeniable and in many cases profound effects on the economy due to the policies that he and [usually] Congress passed at the time, I'd argue that Trump has had similar economic effects (although I'd argue less immediately profound, to be fair) on the economy as well due to policies that he and [usually] Congress has passed as well.

I think we can agree on that much, yes?

Avatar image for joebones5000
joebones5000

2867

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#69 joebones5000
Member since 2016 • 2867 Posts

@sonicare said:
@joebones5000 said:
@sonicare said:

I

I'll even take it a step further. Over the last 3 years, Donald Trump has done almost ever conceivable thing to ruin an economy, and yet the US economy keeps trucking along despite his actions. Further proof that economies are not that dependent on the incumbent president. REad some econ textbooks - hopefully from nonpartisan writers - and you'll see those theories echoed.

Effects aren't felt overnight. He's heading toward his recession right now!

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

167864

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#70 LJS9502_basic
Member since 2003 • 167864 Posts

@sonicare said:

I'll even take it a step further. Over the last 3 years, Donald Trump has done almost ever conceivable thing to ruin an economy, and yet the US economy keeps trucking along despite his actions. Further proof that economies are not that dependent on the incumbent president. REad some econ textbooks - hopefully from nonpartisan writers - and you'll see those theories echoed.

Well we are heading to a recession.

Avatar image for SolidSnake35
SolidSnake35

58923

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 7

User Lists: 3

#71 SolidSnake35
Member since 2005 • 58923 Posts

Recession incoming. Who wants to be president during it?

Avatar image for sonicare
sonicare

57007

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#72 sonicare
Member since 2004 • 57007 Posts

@LJS9502_basic said:
@sonicare said:

I'll even take it a step further. Over the last 3 years, Donald Trump has done almost ever conceivable thing to ruin an economy, and yet the US economy keeps trucking along despite his actions. Further proof that economies are not that dependent on the incumbent president. REad some econ textbooks - hopefully from nonpartisan writers - and you'll see those theories echoed.

Well we are heading to a recession.

It's possible, but the US economy has always been cyclical. Periods of expansion are followed by short periods of retraction - typically every 7-10 years, so we are certainly overdue. This has been the case for close to the last 100 years. I think Trump is a terrible president, but I wouldn't credit or blame him with the economy at this time. It's far, far bigger than him.

The global economy has been sliding for quite some time. If you invested in the MSCI index, for example, you would have lost money over the last 7 years. It's been dragging for quite some time and some countries like Germany, Brazil, UK, etc. are in serious risk of recessions. China's economy still growing, but its growth rate has been slowing quite signficantly. Even before bonehead's tarriff war.

I'm not trying to defend trump if the economy slides, but I think that attributing an economies success and failure to a president is an incredible oversimplification.

Avatar image for joebones5000
joebones5000

2867

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#73  Edited By joebones5000
Member since 2016 • 2867 Posts

Damn, and now we just learned that Trump's job creation numbers are actually 500k less than reported. Wow. This is horrible. Obama did so much better.

https://thehill.com/policy/finance/458354-federal-analysis-economy-created-half-a-million-fewer-jobs-than-was-reported

Avatar image for Serraph105
Serraph105

34187

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#74 Serraph105
Member since 2007 • 34187 Posts

@joebones5000 said:

Damn, and now we just learned that Trump's job creation numbers are actually 500k less than reported. Wow. This is horrible. Obama did so much better.

https://thehill.com/policy/finance/458354-federal-analysis-economy-created-half-a-million-fewer-jobs-than-was-reported

But hey, at least the national deficit will be over a trillion dollars.

Avatar image for joebones5000
joebones5000

2867

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#75 joebones5000
Member since 2016 • 2867 Posts

@Serraph105 said:
@joebones5000 said:

Damn, and now we just learned that Trump's job creation numbers are actually 500k less than reported. Wow. This is horrible. Obama did so much better.

https://thehill.com/policy/finance/458354-federal-analysis-economy-created-half-a-million-fewer-jobs-than-was-reported

But hey, at least the national deficit will be over a trillion dollars.

And the deficit will grow by $800 billion more than expected. Yay, "conservatism" and "fiscal responsibility"!!!

https://www.theblaze.com/news/cbo-deficit-800-billion-higher-than-expected

Avatar image for LJS9502_basic
LJS9502_basic

167864

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#76 LJS9502_basic
Member since 2003 • 167864 Posts

@sonicare said:
@LJS9502_basic said:
@sonicare said:

I'll even take it a step further. Over the last 3 years, Donald Trump has done almost ever conceivable thing to ruin an economy, and yet the US economy keeps trucking along despite his actions. Further proof that economies are not that dependent on the incumbent president. REad some econ textbooks - hopefully from nonpartisan writers - and you'll see those theories echoed.

Well we are heading to a recession.

It's possible, but the US economy has always been cyclical. Periods of expansion are followed by short periods of retraction - typically every 7-10 years, so we are certainly overdue. This has been the case for close to the last 100 years. I think Trump is a terrible president, but I wouldn't credit or blame him with the economy at this time. It's far, far bigger than him.

The global economy has been sliding for quite some time. If you invested in the MSCI index, for example, you would have lost money over the last 7 years. It's been dragging for quite some time and some countries like Germany, Brazil, UK, etc. are in serious risk of recessions. China's economy still growing, but its growth rate has been slowing quite signficantly. Even before bonehead's tarriff war.

I'm not trying to defend trump if the economy slides, but I think that attributing an economies success and failure to a president is an incredible oversimplification.

Yes it's cyclical but bad policy can exacerbate the problem and he has done so.

Avatar image for sonicare
sonicare

57007

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 19

User Lists: 0

#77 sonicare
Member since 2004 • 57007 Posts

@joebones5000 said:
@Serraph105 said:
@joebones5000 said:

Damn, and now we just learned that Trump's job creation numbers are actually 500k less than reported. Wow. This is horrible. Obama did so much better.

https://thehill.com/policy/finance/458354-federal-analysis-economy-created-half-a-million-fewer-jobs-than-was-reported

But hey, at least the national deficit will be over a trillion dollars.

And the deficit will grow by $800 billion more than expected. Yay, "conservatism" and "fiscal responsibility"!!!

https://www.theblaze.com/news/cbo-deficit-800-billion-higher-than-expected

The tax cut was incredibly irresponsible. Why I won't vote republican until it's repealed.