Not A Rosy Outlook

[Bigfatbillsfan]

Damn, that's weak. Have you ever considered that you might be in over your head here?

 

haha no.

 

Most of the real working of the economy and the CBO seem to go right over the top of your head. The only stuff you do understand is what is explained to you by right wing web sites. Have you read the report yet? How about the publications that came before? The above quotes were only a small portion of the last few publications taken out of context when looked at on the larger scale. There are many, many factors that effect the economic recovery. This is just one of them.

 

Not to mention I would rather have a slower more sustained recovery than one that jumps and dips. This was the largest crash in history.

[3rdnlng]

haha no.

 

Most of the real working of the economy and the CBO seem to go right over the top of your head. The only stuff you do understand is what is explained to you by right wing web sites. Have you read the report yet? How about the publications that came before? The above quotes were only a small portion of the last few publications taken out of context when looked at on the larger scale. There are many, many factors that effect the economic recovery. This is just one of them.

 

Not to mention I would rather have a slower more sustained recovery than one that jumps and dips. This was the largest crash in history.

 

You're hopeless. You and Davey in a contest to be Mr. Irrelevant.

[Magox]

haha no.

 

Most of the real working of the economy and the CBO seem to go right over the top of your head. The only stuff you do understand is what is explained to you by right wing web sites. Have you read the report yet? How about the publications that came before? The above quotes were only a small portion of the last few publications taken out of context when looked at on the larger scale. There are many, many factors that effect the economic recovery. This is just one of them.

 

Not to mention I would rather have a slower more sustained recovery than one that jumps and dips. This was the largest crash in history.

Ok, provide the proper context for us, here are the facts of their conclusions, the U.S debt will be higher than they expected topping over a Trillion dollars, meaning every year in office it's topped that number, they expect GDP growth to be slower than expected, they originally forecast 2.7% now they are forecasting 2.2% and originally they expected the Unemployment rate to be around 8.2% and now the forecast 8.8%.

 

 

Here is the rightwing news outlet politicos take on it today, pertaining to this subject

 

A new CBO report grabbed lots of headlines for projecting the deficit will top $1 trillion this year — making Obama the first president ever to pile up $1 trillion or more every year in office. That’s not great politics. But it’s not even the worst news contained in the CBO report. The unemployment number is.

 

The CBO projects unemployment will rise, hitting 8.8 percent in the third quarter of the year, the heart of the campaign. That’s terrible politics. Obama advisers have told us repeatedly on background that if unemployment is above 8.5 percent in the final months of the campaign, it will be extremely hard, if not impossible, to win. The advisers say independents will not return to Obama if it looks like economic growth is anemic and uncertain and it looks like his policies did little, if anything, to create new jobs under his watch.

 

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0212/72329.html#ixzz1lEbJ5yZK

 

 

Now please, provide for us the correct context of the report

[Rob's House]

haha no.

 

Most of the real working of the economy and the CBO seem to go right over the top of your head. The only stuff you do understand is what is explained to you by right wing web sites. Have you read the report yet? How about the publications that came before? The above quotes were only a small portion of the last few publications taken out of context when looked at on the larger scale. There are many, many factors that effect the economic recovery. This is just one of them.

 

Not to mention I would rather have a slower more sustained recovery than one that jumps and dips. This was the largest crash in history.

Can you explain it to me? I've been waiting for years for a liberal to give me a logical explanation of yall's economic theory. So far, nothing. Maybe you can be that guy. Maybe you could explain how money works or how wealth is created? Or maybe you could explain something really complex like which direction a rise in price shifts the supply curve and why.

 

 

Here is the rightwing news outlet politicos take on it today, pertaining to this subject

 

Careful, I'm not sure this one has the where-with-all to catch the sarcasm.

[Bigfatbillsfan]

Ok, provide the proper context for us, here are the facts of their conclusions, the U.S debt will be higher than they expected topping over a Trillion dollars, meaning every year in office it's topped that number, they expect GDP growth to be slower than expected, they originally forecast 2.7% now they are forecasting 2.2% and originally they expected the Unemployment rate to be around 8.2% and now the forecast 8.8%.

 

 

Here is the rightwing news outlet politicos take on it today, pertaining to this subject

 

 

 

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0212/72329.html#ixzz1lEbJ5yZK

 

 

Now please, provide for us the correct context of the report

 

The Correct context of the article would be the fact that the CBO is hamstrung by complex rules that prevent it from providing any explanations of reality beyond the information given to it to work with. What I can't seem to track back is where the CBO is getting the information it's using to produce the report.

[3rdnlng]

The Correct context of the article would be the fact that the CBO is hamstrung by complex rules that prevent it from providing any explanations of reality beyond the information given to it to work with. What I can't seem to track back is where the CBO is getting the information it's using to produce the report.

 

 

Can you actually be this dumb and still be able communicate? So, the big government's supposedly bi-partisan CBO is probably full of schit but gives the decision makers the info they need to make decisions? Go big government!

 

Wait a second, are you pBills?

[Magox]

The Correct context of the article would be the fact that the CBO is hamstrung by complex rules that prevent it from providing any explanations of reality beyond the information given to it to work with. What I can't seem to track back is where the CBO is getting the information it's using to produce the report.

Ummm, no. You are confused, what you are referring to is when they score legislation and the effects it will have. When they score pieces of legislation, that is based on data that they receive from members of congress. When the CBO forecasts the national annual deficit and its further out years, that is based on current policy. When the CBO forecast GDP growth and unemployment figures, that is based on macro economic data.

 

Let me tell you whats happened here, you saw a right wing link, you jumped the gun, and you automatically dismissed it without reading the meat of the CBOreport. Now, you are attempting to justify your error and rather than just admitting that you made a mistake you are digging a deeper hole and looking more and more foolish with every response you post.

 

 

The fact that you said

What I can't seem to track back is where the CBO is getting the information it's using to produce the report.

is astonishingly ignorant. Really??? What are you questioning? Their motives? How they derived their conclusion? What? You want to compare your macroeconomic data along side theirs and compare data? Maybe you and your team will come up with a more appropriate and logical set of data points and conclusions over the vast CBO macroeconomic team.

[DC Tom]

Let me tell you whats happened here, you saw a right wing link, you jumped the gun, and you automatically dismissed it without reading the meat of the CBOreport. Now, you are attempting to justify your error and rather than just admitting that you made a mistake you are digging a deeper hole and looking more and more foolish with every response you post.

 

Fight the good fight, BigFatBillsFan. Never apologize on PPP or admit you're wrong. It's a sign of weakness.

 

 

There's a reason your initials are BFBF...you're twice the dumbass he ever was.

[meazza]

There's a reason your initials are BFBF...you're twice the dumbass he ever was.

 

[IDBillzFan]

The Correct context of the article would be the fact that the CBO is hamstrung by complex rules that prevent it from providing any explanations of reality beyond the information given to it to work with. What I can't seem to track back is where the CBO is getting the information it's using to produce the report.

I'm with you, so don't listen to these dolts when they mock you. We both know the truth: how can CBO score the health care bill SO favorably, and yet score the economy so poorly? It makes no sense. And then it hit me: clearly the data they were given for the health care bill was accurate, and the data on the economy was somehow skewed to make Obama look bad.

 

Fight the good fight, BF². You're not wrong. It's just that no one is as smart as you are, and you just need to explain it to them on a level they'll comprehend.

[Bigfatbillsfan]

I'm with you, so don't listen to these dolts when they mock you. We both know the truth: how can CBO score the health care bill SO favorably, and yet score the economy so poorly? It makes no sense. And then it hit me: clearly the data they were given for the health care bill was accurate, and the data on the economy was somehow skewed to make Obama look bad.

 

Fight the good fight, BF². You're not wrong. It's just that no one is as smart as you are, and you just need to explain it to them on a level they'll comprehend.

 

Dear god

 

The point is, the CBO doesn't know everything. What they gave was a forecast. Could they be right, perhaps. But my guess is when they scored the healthcare bill favorably you thought they were full of ****. Am I right?

 

Ummm, no. You are confused, what you are referring to is when they score legislation and the effects it will have. When they score pieces of legislation, that is based on data that they receive from members of congress. When the CBO forecasts the national annual deficit and its further out years, that is based on current policy. When the CBO forecast GDP growth and unemployment figures, that is based on macro economic data.

 

Let me tell you whats happened here, you saw a right wing link, you jumped the gun, and you automatically dismissed it without reading the meat of the CBOreport. Now, you are attempting to justify your error and rather than just admitting that you made a mistake you are digging a deeper hole and looking more and more foolish with every response you post.

 

 

The fact that you said is astonishingly ignorant. Really??? What are you questioning? Their motives? How they derived their conclusion? What? You want to compare your macroeconomic data along side theirs and compare data? Maybe you and your team will come up with a more appropriate and logical set of data points and conclusions over the vast CBO macroeconomic team.

 

I'll give you that you may be right on the difference between scoring and forecasting.

 

However, It's not ignorant to ask where they got their data from. And if I gave the data to another team they may come up with something different.

 

I don't contest the fact that Obama is in trouble for the next election. It doesn't take a CBO report to conclude that.

[GG]

However, It's not ignorant to ask where they got their data from. And if I gave the data to another team they may come up with something different.

 

Ok, find a forecaster that predicts that the economy will grow at 4% next year, which is what's needed to lift employment and return to historic growth rates. Even Obama's pail carrier, Mark Zandi remains pessimistic.

 

Let's see the data.

[Bigfatbillsfan]

Ok, find a forecaster that predicts that the economy will grow at 4% next year, which is what's needed to lift employment and return to historic growth rates. Even Obama's pail carrier, Mark Zandi remains pessimistic.

 

Let's see the data.

 

Did you even bother reading the rest of that post?

[OCinBuffalo]

Dear god

 

The point is, the CBO doesn't know everything. What they gave was a forecast. Could they be right, perhaps. But my guess is when they scored the healthcare bill favorably you thought they were full of ****. Am I right?

Quit while you're behind. We all know how this works. Garbage In, Garbage Out. The problem for you here is that you are claiming that the macroeconomic data is garbage, and it isn't. In contrast, the healthcare data that was input was utter crap, and used 3 years(the most generous interpretation for you) of revenue coming in, without costs going out, to attain it's phony deficit-neutral status.

 

And, we don't want the CBO going out and getting it's own input data, because then we will never be able to catch the turds doing what they did with Obamacare. No, we want the CBO to be reliant on the political people giving them data, so that when the data is exposed as fanciful, as it was with Obamacare, there are political consequences for those political people, and they don't get to blame the bureaucracy.

 

The reason people are against Obamacare, is that it is fundamentally based on 80% lie, and only 20% truth.

I'll give you that you may be right on the difference between scoring and forecasting.

 

However, It's not ignorant to ask where they got their data from. And if I gave the data to another team they may come up with something different.

 

I don't contest the fact that Obama is in trouble for the next election. It doesn't take a CBO report to conclude that.

That's the entire point of this thread.

You don't have a problem with the conclusion....you have a problem with how they arrived at it?

 

Hmmmm, focusing on the machinations/ideology, and not on the results. Isn't that the same approach Obama took to the economy?

 

I have an idea for your team of economic experts: you could go find the very best economic professors at places like Harvard, Berkley, and Stanford....and one guy from Chicago, just to make it look good.

 

Those of you who want final proof as to whether BFBF is an idiot? See if he gets the above sentence.

[TPS]

Seems to me all this report is predicting is that we'll be back to the long run ratio of taxes to GDP in 2 years. Maybe their headline should have read, "Taxes to shoot back up to historical average in 2 years"?????