Park Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 Aside from Europe's lack of federal direction is this: From the Wall Street Journal http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2012/07/31/government-cutbacks-separate-this-expansion-from-others/ The recoveries and expansions that occurred in the Bush, Clinton and Reagan eras all saw government spending increase along with most other major drivers of growth. But in the current Obama recovery, which began in 2009, total public outlays have decreased at an annualized rate of 1.5%, according to a Dow Jones/Wall Street Journal analysis of newly revised government data. Much of the attention in this election season has been focus on government spending that ballooned at the end of the most recent recession and during the early part of the recovery. But since the middle of 2010, that aid to growth has fallen off when adjusted for inflation. In fact, state and local governments have now cut outlays for 11 consecutive quarters, leading spending to contract at a 2.4% rate since the second quarter of 2009. Slower federal spending has now also become a drag on growth, contracting at a 0.2% annualized rate, the analysis of data the Commerce Department released last week found. By comparison, federal spending grew at an annualized 3.5% rate during the longer of two Regan-era recoveries and grew at a 3.8% pace during the George W. Bush recovery and expansion from 2001 through 2007. Both periods benefited from increased defense spending as the Cold War reached its climax and the U.S. fought wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
KD in CA Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 So if we had only stayed in Iraq longer and spent more money, the recovery would have worked. Another Obama screw-up.
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 Oh oh oh, Mr. Kotter, MR. KOTTER pick me! Because: Obama bad!
DC Tom Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 So if we had only stayed in Iraq longer and spent more money, the recovery would have worked. Another Obama screw-up.
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 So if we had only stayed in Iraq longer and spent more money, the recovery would have worked. Another Obama screw-up. Oooops, looks I was beat to the punch... Nice work KD.
Park Posted August 3, 2012 Author Posted August 3, 2012 So if we had only stayed in Iraq longer and spent more money, the recovery would have worked. Another Obama screw-up. Can't get anything past you smart Conservatives
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 Can't get anything past you smart Conservatives You sneaky Asians! I am on to you. Signed, CarpHunterinIllinois
Doc Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 (edited) In Barry's own words, it's all on him and he should be a 1-term president. Well, that is until he realized he didn't and couldn't fix it and started blaming Dubya. Edited August 3, 2012 by Doc
3rdnlng Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 Let me see If I understand things. We had a deficit in 2009 of 1.3 trillion and since we've kept it somewhere around that ever since, Obama has kept spending at a minimum and is really a fiscal conservative?
Gary M Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 In Barry's own words, it's all on him and he should be a 1-term president. Well, that is until he realized he didn't and couldn't fix it and started blaming Dubya.
Park Posted August 3, 2012 Author Posted August 3, 2012 Let me see If I understand things. We had a deficit in 2009 of 1.3 trillion and since we've kept it somewhere around that ever since, Obama has kept spending at a minimum and is really a fiscal conservative? You should never use the word "understand" because you don't. Deficits are not just about spending.
GG Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 Can't get anything past you smart Conservatives But that is precisely the reason why the blogger data shows that graph. Eliminate the war spending from the calculations and a far different picture emerges. It's fairly simple, Obama passed the largest economic stimulus bill in history. It did nothing to jump start growth. Doubling down is not going to accelerate growth because the private sector doesn't trust Obama and will sit out another four years on the sideline. So for all the people who are struggling out there in this economy should consider if they're willing to have five more years of stagnation if they're pushing the Obama button on election day.
truth on hold Posted August 3, 2012 Posted August 3, 2012 (edited) Its true what the OP posts. And its a sad state of affairs that on one hand we need serious reductions in government jobs and spending which will be a near term drag as the economy adjusts, and the other the opposition will make the reduced near term growth an election issue. This applies to both parties, the only possible buffer is a voting populace that understands this and factor it into their political assessment. Btw we're not in a recession Edited August 3, 2012 by Joe_the_6_pack
Park Posted August 4, 2012 Author Posted August 4, 2012 But that is precisely the reason why the blogger data shows that graph. Eliminate the war spending from the calculations and a far different picture emerges. It's fairly simple, Obama passed the largest economic stimulus bill in history. It did nothing to jump start growth. Doubling down is not going to accelerate growth because the private sector doesn't trust Obama and will sit out another four years on the sideline. So for all the people who are struggling out there in this economy should consider if they're willing to have five more years of stagnation if they're pushing the Obama button on election day. So you are actually arguing that the economic stimulus did nothing? I think you need to prove that or at least tell us how more money didn't actually do anything.
GG Posted August 4, 2012 Posted August 4, 2012 So you are actually arguing that the economic stimulus did nothing? I think you need to prove that or at least tell us how more money didn't actually do anything. Is that what I wrote, Dave?
ExiledInIllinois Posted August 4, 2012 Posted August 4, 2012 ...the private sector doesn't trust Obama and will sit out another four years on the sideline. Really can't argue with this. It is the God's honest truth!
TheMadCap Posted August 5, 2012 Posted August 5, 2012 (edited) Because the evil corporations and greedy business owners don't like black people, and are purposely trying to screw Obama... (an actual quote from one of my family members who is a huge, union/democratic supporter) Edited August 5, 2012 by TheMadCap
fjl2nd Posted August 6, 2012 Posted August 6, 2012 Let me see If I understand things. We had a deficit in 2009 of 1.3 trillion and since we've kept it somewhere around that ever since, Obama has kept spending at a minimum and is really a fiscal conservative? Look at Federal tax revenues and get back to us.
Recommended Posts