re: We have a great economy, folks.

quote:

---

Obama didn't do any tax cut

---

payroll tax cuts were part of the stimulus

and he did make 98-99% of the bush tax cuts permanent, whereas they would have expired

quote:

---

why do you think Trump has been successful in growing the economy where Obama was a failure

---

i wouldn't characterize it that way, there's a great deal more to it. we are near the top of the business cycle, and trump didn't put us there

quote:

---

What percent of the package?

---

enough to make "obama didn't do a tax cut" false

quote:

---

So, the business cycle is 8 years and it just happened to hit high when Trump was elected? Really?

---

a business cycle takes however long it takes

and it hasn't hit its high yet

this is becoming boring as shite, make your damn point already

quote:

---

if the tax cut by Obama was .0000000000001% of the stimulus how did it cause growth?

---

was it in fact that percentage of it? a second ago you said it was 0%.

quote:

---

Really? So a business cycle can take 500 years before an uptick?

---

huh?

quote:

---

Ah, so if the growth rate hits 6% next quarter it's not really Trump policies. It's the business cycle?

---

huh?

quote:

---

My point is that the left excuse of 'growth due to stimulus' is wrong.

---

you have definitely fallen short of proving that, man. far short.

quote:

---

The reason Obama had a flat line economy ... the worst in the history of US economic recoveries post recession, is because of Biz Con.

---

not falsifiable, except for the "flat line economy" part, which is wrong

quote:

---

I predicted it here 10 years ago. I was right.
And when Trump was elected I predicted here that Business capital would be released due to decreased regulations and confidence that Trump was business friendly. I was right again.

---

ah, now this claim is almost meaningful enough so that it can actually be discussed a bit.

did you know that gross private investment was the single worst major component of this quarter's gdp measure? do you know enough of the mechanics to see how this flies in the face of your biz con & "capital release" argument?

quote:

---

was it in fact that percentage of it? a second ago you said it was 0%.

---

It may be zero. You can't tell me what it was.

quote:

---

Really? So a business cycle can take 500 years before an uptick? huh?

---

You said it was any length of time. What do you not understand about my response?

quote:

---

Ah, so if the growth rate hits 6% next quarter it's not really Trump policies. It's the business cycle? huh?

---

Well, not you're just being purposefully ignorant (or maybe it's real). You said we haven't reached it yet.

quote:

---

you have definitely fallen short of proving that, man. far short.

---

Wrong. I'm beating the hell out of your logic that stimulus = growth and you don't even realize it.

quote:

---

not falsifiable, except for the "flat line economy" part, which is wrong

---

No, it's not wrong. 1% average growth after recession is unprecedented flat line.

quote:

---

did you know that gross private investment was the single worst major component of this quarter's gdp measure? do you know enough of the mechanics to see how this flies in the face of your biz con & "capital release" argument?

---

No, it doesn't. Gross private investment is much higher in Trump's adm than it was in Obama's. If other contributors to growth under Trump are even better it doesn't negate the Obama comparison,.

quote:

---

not off the top of my head. i can tell you it wasn't zero, as you asserted.

---

Then it might be infinitesimal which means zero effect on growth. Which is what we're discussing.

quote:

---

an "uptick" within a continuous expansion? what are you even talking about? it really sounds like you don't remember the definition of "business cycle" here

---

No, not a continuous expansion. I asked how long a cycle is. You said '????' Therefore, by your logic it could take 500 years.

quote:

---

we are near the top of the cycle, and we have taken significant deficit-financed action to speed it up. if we saw 6% for q3, i would interpret that as a bigger keynesian stimulus than expected by a good bit

---

OK, you said you didn't understand my response and now you finally answer it. Further economic expansion is not due to Trump.

quote:

---

First of all, 1% growth is by definition not a flat line. Second of all, it's closer to 2%, even if you fully blame the 2009 part of the recession on obama, as you are.

---

It is flat line in historical comparisons. .00001% would be 'growth' by Obama's standards. That's why when quarters had less than 1% he touted 'another consecutive quarter of growth.'
That's like a running back who averages 1 yard per carry. 'But I was never tackled for a loss.'

quote:

---

Gross private investment growth, as evidenced by these numbers

---

Why does your chart indicate a decrease in Obama's last year and an increase after the election of Trump?

quote:

---

Then it might be infinitesimal

---

now that we've firmly established that you were 100% talking out of your arse on the subject, about 30% of obama's ARRA stimulus was in the form of tax cuts or credits

quote:

---

No, not a continuous expansion. I asked how long a cycle is.

---

yeah, it's clear now you don't know the concept

quote:

---

Further economic expansion is not due to Trump.

---

wow. wrong again, and the streak is getting impressive.

trump is the person most directly responsible for this deficit-driven stimulus. but it's not the reason the economy itself is growing steadily. it's just speeding it up some temporarily, and possibly at the expense of a downturn happening sooner and/or worse.

quote:

---

It is flat line in historical comparisons.

---

haha

quote:

---

Why does your chart indicate a decrease in Obama's last year and an increase after the election of Trump?

---

probably because late 2015 thru 2016 was a very weak year for investment

why do you ignore the harmful contribution of investment to the q2 number in light of your claim to have been "proven right" about business confidence and investment due to trump's policies?

quote:

---

NO. Credits are to coerce behavior.

---

payroll tax credit? they "coerce" the behavior of being on a payroll in the exact same way as a reduction in the rate. period.

quote:

---

It's clear now you can't answer the question.

---

we've established with no doubt that the question was gibberish

quote:

---

You have just proven my point. You have clearly stated that growth is NOT credited to Trump now and future growth will not be credited to Trump. You expect a downturn but if it doesn't happen then it's not because of Trump.

---

given what i said, and what you say here, you're hand-waving an incredible amount with your use of the word "growth". or, you're just outright making up an interpretation of what i said.

a downturn will happen at some point. maybe it will be because of trump, maybe it won't. we'll have to see how/when it happens. this has no bearing on whether deficit-spending increases or deficit-financed tax cuts temporarily speed growth

quote:

---

OTOH, when Obama was president his stimulus = growth. And when growth didn't happen it was not Obama... it was Bush's fault, it was the business cycle, or it was 'the new normal' or it was republican opposition in Congress.

---

stimulus under BOTH obama and trump sped/speeds up growth in the short term. both were deficit-financed, so both will come at the expense of something longer-term. in obama's case, it may already have in his later years, as deficits wound down for a short-lived couple of years. but while the sugar high is kicking, you can't say as much about what's happening with the fundamental economy, like with productivity gains.

glad you bailed on your shitty Biz Con argument. you thought you had been proven right and the evidence said literally the opposite of what you just assumed it said

We have a ticking time bomb. Our debt to gdp ratio is unsustainable.
People from both sides need to wake up and wake up fast. The gdp could have been 20% and we would still be on a sinking ship.

quote:

---

I hate the talking point that buybacks only help the wealthy. The whole country and economy and anyone with any investments benefits from higher stock prices.

---

Unless real wages increase, the largest segment of the workforce is not gaining. They are losing. Its that simple. The squeeze is always at the bottom because the distribution of the added wealth is controlled by those at the top. It is not human nature to share equally or proportionately.

quote:

---

Yes, you did.

---

Let me just quote your hack-phrased question, and my own response:

quote:

---

Zach: So, why do you think Trump has been successful in growing the economy where Obama was a failure?

90pp: i wouldn't characterize it that way, there's a great deal more to it. we are near the top of the business cycle, and trump didn't put us there

---

quote:

---

Those were not anecdotes. Those are facts about economic numbers. You addressed NONE of them.

---

Your anecdotes most certainly were anecdotes, and they didn't even try to compare the situation of cash-sitting pre-Trump to the present. I more than addressed them, by providing a more comprehensive measure of investment, and a way to compare them over time. The facts contradict your story, in no uncertain terms.

quote:

---

BS.

---

quote:

---

Really quick! What are your favorite meals at home?

---

nothing good for a mature person's preferences. usually meat i grill or skillet and a shitload of a single veggie