1.7%

[B-Man]

Please, please, please democrats, keep going along with President Obama's plan to run on his "economic recovery"

 

 

 

 

 

 

United States 2011 GDP: 1.7%

 

Real GDP increased 1.7 percent in 2011

 

(that is, from the 2010 annual level to the 2011 annual level),

 

 

compared with an increase of 3.0 percent in 2010.

 

 

 

 

Business Insider

 

Government News Release

 

 

 

.

[B-Large]

Nobody ever elaborated on what would have been different had an R been at the helm.

 

 

Frankly, with residential housing still slugging along and will for a long time, who expects a robust economy?

 

Heck, if basically free money can't fuel a recovery, what will? What new industry is ready to boom and bust??? Housing is done, Tech did a little more than a decade....

 

 

1.7% is still improvement, over say flat or negative....

 

and if I were a average Citizen, I would be saving my dollars and pay of debt, not out spending... much of middle class America had been hoodwinked in the real estate boom, don't expect anyting less than conservative behavior for a long time... IMHO

Edited January 27, 2012 by B-Large

[Magox]

Nobody ever elaborated on what would have been different had an R been at the helm.

 

 

Frankly, with residential housing still slugging along and will for a long time, who expects a robust economy?

 

Heck, if basically free money can't fuel a recovery, what will? What new industry is ready to boom and bust??? Housing is done, Tech did a little more than a decade....

 

 

1.7% is still improvement, over say flat or negative....

 

and if I were a average Citizen, I would be saving my dollars and pay of debt, not out spending... much of middle class America had been hoodwinked in the real estate boom, don't expect anyting less than conservative behavior for a long time... IMHO

Screw it I'll tell you.

 

McCain would have had a stimulus plan as well, it would of been slower, but equally ineffective, and most likely the recovery late 08 and early 09 would of been even weaker under McCain, simply because less money would of been spent, which means short-term weakness. There would of been less money for state and local governments, which means that many union state local gov workers would of been layed off, which of course would of had a residual effect on the economy.

 

Also, there very well may not have been so many extended unemployment benefits. That would of meant a weaker economy for the short-term.

 

Infrastructure projects, well there was so little in the first stimulus bill, I believe approximately 10% of it was used fo this, so at most there would of been slightly less under McCains plan.

 

Housing plan, well, negligible effect for Obama, and I'm sure McCain wouldn't have had anything muchbetter, not for short term anyway.

 

So end result for the short-term less economic growth.

 

 

Longer-term effect.

 

Those monies used to support local and state governments, only played a positive effect for the economy for a very short period. State jobs were based on R.E bubble era revenues, extremely overbloated, when the stimulus money ran out, those jobs were gone, hence the continued deterioriation o local and state gov. jobs. It's a painful natural process that has to play out.

 

Unemployment benefits, sure, it is helping prop up the economy, however it isalso encouraging SOME people to stay unemployed. There are more people who have been out of work over a 6 month period than an anytime in US history. There is what I call job atrophy occuring,people are losing job skills, people have lost hope and some people are content milking everything they can out of the government until they can't anymore, in the meantime they are falling further and further behind. If the workforce was the size that it was in 2008, the unemployment rate would be at 10.9%

 

Thats freaking amazing, this 8.5% number doesn't paint an accurate picture, at all. I find it more troubling that people feel so hopeless thatthey quit looking for a job all together, therefore dropping out of the workforce, making the jobless situation appear much better than it actually is.

 

Dodd Frank Bill, Obama Care and the EPAs ridiculous crusade have all been netjob killers, I don't believe its as much as the hardcore right wingers believe, but it has been without a doubt been a net negative on the margins.

 

The cost of capital has gone up which is never a good thing for companies that want to startup or expand. Also the psychology of added regulations is also playing a factor with companies.

 

 

Obamas policies helped in the short-term, but long-term policies have been corrosive.

[UConn James]

Nobody ever elaborated on what would have been different had an R been at the helm.

 

 

Frankly, with residential housing still slugging along and will for a long time, who expects a robust economy?

 

Heck, if basically free money can't fuel a recovery, what will? What new industry is ready to boom and bust??? Housing is done, Tech did a little more than a decade....

 

1.7% is still improvement, over say flat or negative....

 

and if I were a average Citizen, I would be saving my dollars and pay of debt, not out spending... much of middle class America had been hoodwinked in the real estate boom, don't expect anyting less than conservative behavior for a long time... IMHO

 

IIRC, we need to have ~3% growth in GDP each year to stay flat, to account for the population increase.

 

This is like the number of people at a party going from 10 to 15 and bringing a 10-inch pie instead of a 9-inch pie. Sure, there's more pie, but there's more people.

[DC Tom]

IIRC, we need to have ~3% growth in GDP each year to stay flat, to account for the population increase.

 

This is like the number of people at a party going from 10 to 15 and bringing a 10-inch pie instead of a 9-inch pie. Sure, there's more pie, but there's more people.

 

And the solution to that is: you cut the 10-inch pie into ten pieces, then levy a pie tax on the ten people who get pie, and give the pie tax to the people without pie, thereby creating more pie. [/DIN]

[/dev/null]

And the solution to that is: you cut the 10-inch pie into ten pieces, then levy a pie tax on the ten people who get pie, and give the pie tax to the people without pie, thereby creating more pie. [/DIN]

 

What kind of pie? Apple? Cherry? Pecan? Boston Cream? Or won't we know until we pass the Pie Tax?

[Jim in Anchorage]

What kind of pie? Apple? Cherry? Pecan? Boston Cream? Or won't we know until we pass the Pie Tax?

Have you ever tried to read those recipes?

[B-Man]

...........George C. Scott voice...........

 

 

" Mr. President, we must not allow a pie plate gap ! !"

 

 

 

 

Either way you cut it, the current administration's economic policies have extended the time frame for our inevitable recovery, not caused it.

 

Thats why the "stimulus" and "so called deficit reducing" obamacare bill were glossed over in his last (hopefully) SOTU messageand "I got Bin Laden" substituted.

 

 

.

[Chef Jim]

What kind of pie? Apple? Cherry? Pecan? Boston Cream? Or won't we know until we pass the Pie Tax?

 

I think it's a !@#$ing fruitcake.

[DC Tom]

What kind of pie? Apple? Cherry? Pecan? Boston Cream? Or won't we know until we pass the Pie Tax?

 

I don't have to tell you, because me and the pastry chef are in the drivers' seat. You can go sit in back.

[Koko78]

Damn Pie-tards.

 

Always hating on cake, boasting this pieist nonsense that somehow redistributing pies to the unwashed morons will fix the world. 'To each a pie according to his needs' is just populist drivel for the mindless sheep who are too stupid to see the cake right in front of their face.

[Cinga]

Damn Pie-tards.

 

Always hating on cake, boasting this pieist nonsense that somehow redistributing pies to the unwashed morons will fix the world. 'To each a pie according to his needs' is just populist drivel for the mindless sheep who are too stupid to see the cake right in front of their face.

 

Marie??? Is that you??

 

 

Darn, I thought she had a headache!!!

[B-Man]

Sorry Pie lovers............................back on track,

 

 

The economic chart that may doom the Obama presidency

By James Pethokoukis

January 27, 2012

 

In his State of the Union response the other night, Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels neatly summed up Mitt Romneys (who has a roughly 90 percent chance of being the GOP nominee according to Intrade) economic case against President Barack Obama: The president did not cause the economic and fiscal crises that continue in America tonight, but he was elected on a promise to fix them, and he cannot claim that the last three years have made things anything but worse.

 

In other words, the Obama Recovery stinks. Even if todays GDP reportfor the fourth quarter of 2011shows 3 percent growth or better, it would be just the fourth time that has happened since the economy began turning up in June 2009: 3.8 percent in the fourth quarter of 2009, 3.9 percent in the first quarter of 2010, and 3.8 percent in the second quarter of 2010. But no 3 percent-plus quarters since then.

 

The first nine quarters of the Reagan Recovery, by contrast, looked like this: 5.1 percent, 9.3 percent, 8.1 percent, 8.5 percent, 8.0 percent, 7.1 percent, 3.9 percent, 3.3 percent, 3.8, percent, 3.4 percent. In fact, the Reagan Boom went from the first quarter of 1983 until the second quarter of 1986 without notching a sub-3 percent GDP quarter.

 

So, while the Reagan Recovery quickly made up for lost years of growth, not so much for the Obama Recovery, as this chart in todays Wall Street Journal makes clear:

 

(Chart at link)

 

And few economists are expecting the Obama Recovery to take off anytime soon. The IMF predicts just 1.8 percent growth for 2012 (and thats assuming no EU sovereign debt meltdown). And the Federal Reserve sees growth in the 2.2 percent to 2.7 percent range with unemployment around 8.2 percent to 8.5 percent. Ugh!

 

American Enterprise

 

 

.

Edited January 28, 2012 by B-Man

[DC Tom]

Sorry Pie lovers............................back on track,

 

The economic chart that may doom the Obama presidency

 

That a pie chart, by any chance?

[Koko78]

The WSJ offers two explanations for the anemic rebound:

 

Economists say the nature of the recession helps explain the slow recovery. Aftershocks from the financial crisis have left banks reluctant to lend, making it hard for companies, and especially start-ups, to get access to capital. The housing market, which has historically helped lead the economy out of recession, remains deeply depressed.

 

Many business leaders say they are also being held back by policy-related uncertainty, everything from the threat of new regulations and higher taxes to the fear that political gridlock could hamper the government’s ability to respond to a new crisis. Recent economic research has given some weight to those complaints. A study by a trio of academic economists found that policy uncertainty has risen in recent years, and that periods of uncertainty have in the past corresponded with rising unemployment and slowing growth.

 

Oblambam better start praying to Allah that he can sell the average moron on it being the first explanation. Thankfully his campaign is just going to continue to blame Bush and Congress for all his policy failures, which, I think, got old with the voters over a year ago.

Edited January 28, 2012 by Koko78

[B-Man]

That a pie chart, by any chance?

 

I give up. . . . . . . . . . I guess you can't have your pie and eat it too.

 

 

 

 

 

Live Free or Pie ! ! !

[Magox]

To be fair, this downturn is much worse than the one in the late 70's early 80's, back then it was an inflation **** storm, which sucks, don't get me wrong, but inflation has a clear cut answer which is higher rates. It' painful, but it solves the problem, this what we are going through is a massive deleveraging process in not just in the private sector, but in all spectrums, including the public sector and consumer.

 

Just think of a continous ongoing massive rip current. Everytime the economy looks to improve it just keeps falling back because of this deleveraging process (rip current) that has to play out. Lenders are pulling back, consumers are repairing their balance sheets and state and local governments are shrinking (rightfully so).

 

Now, I'm not saying that the recovery couldn't be better, nonsensical burdensome regulations, an activist EPA, and uncertainty in taxes and new legislations and policies are without doubt restraining the recovery, but to compare the lack of this recovery to the one of Reagans would be a intellectually dishonest one to make.

 

Having said that, if I were a campaign manager I'd do it, because thats theonly arguments the left ever makes, intellectually dishonest ones

[/dev/null]

Live Free or Pie ! ! !

 

No Justice No Pie!

[Dave_In_Norfolk]

To be fair, this downturn is much worse than the one in the late 70's early 80's, back then it was an inflation **** storm, which sucks, don't get me wrong, but inflation has a clear cut answer which is higher rates. It' painful, but it solves the problem, this what we are going through is a massive deleveraging process in not just in the private sector, but in all spectrums, including the public sector and consumer.

 

Just think of a continous ongoing massive rip current. Everytime the economy looks to improve it just keeps falling back because of this deleveraging process (rip current) that has to play out. Lenders are pulling back, consumers are repairing their balance sheets and state and local governments are shrinking (rightfully so).

 

Now, I'm not saying that the recovery couldn't be better, nonsensical burdensome regulations, an activist EPA, and uncertainty in taxes and new legislations and policies are without doubt restraining the recovery, but to compare the lack of this recovery to the one of Reagans would be a intellectually dishonest one to make.

 

Having said that, if I were a campaign manager I'd do it, because thats theonly arguments the left ever makes, intellectually dishonest ones

You mean how Jimmy Carter raised interest rates to set the economy straighht for Reagan? Come on, just admit that

[Jim in Anchorage]

Unbelievable.