GDP Growth Was Greater During the Bush Years Than Under Obama

[francoHFW]

It cost about 3 trillion dollars of debt to NOT have Hoovervilles, dingbats.

 

[healthmyths]

Despite All of His Bush-Bashing… GDP Growth Was Greater During the Bush Years Than Under Obama

Posted by Jim Hoft on Sunday, January 6, 2013, 12:29 PM


It’s not news that Barack Obama likes to blame George Bush’s ‘failed policies’ for all of the problems in America today. But now we know that after four years of Barack Obama the economic growth during the Bush years was greater …

Continue reading →
Despite All of His Bush-Bashing… GDP Growth Was Greater During the Bush Years Than Under Obama | The Gateway Pundit

Bush was handed what some say was a surplus, or at the least a very sound economy. Obama was handed the remnants of what Bush left us...an economic disaster on a scale of the great depression.

OK probably for the UMPTEENTH TIME I posting what OBVIOUSLY YOU don't know much less REMEMBER!!!
Did these EVENTS HAPPEN???

A) Didn't the marvelous dot.com ( that Clinton phony surplus bubble)* bust occur? YES! What did it cost?
1) $5 trillion in market losses which meant the taxpayers who had tax liabilities of $60 billion from 2002 and beyond GONE!
2) 300,000 jobs lost due to dot.com busts....billions in payroll taxes!!!

Do YOU think those people that had $5 trillion in losses DIDN"T report those losses in their ADJUSTED TAX INCOME over the next 30 years which is what IRS allows?
For example if a Dot.com investor loss $1 million of that $5 trillion that means the investor has 30 years to write off against taxable income $33,000.
So Instead of having a tax on $1 million or at 35% $350,000 by subtracting $33,000 from $1 million that means taxes of 35% on $966,000 or $338,000 a loss to the US treasury of $12,000 from just this $1 million of the $5 trillion!
Or for every $1 million in losses $12,000 loss in tax revenue or on the $5 trillion nearly $60 billion in tax revenue for each year from 2003 and 30 years forward.

B) Did 9/11 happen??? YES what did that cost?
1) Then we had 9/11 which cost $2 trillion or at the above example another $24 billion in loss tax revenue from 2004 and next 30 years.
2)145,00 jobs lost in NYC alone due to 9/11... what did that cost? Billions in payroll taxes!

and regarding hurricanes... THE WORST SEASONS not hurricanes like Sandy SEASONS!!!
C) DID the worst hurricane SEASONS not hurricanes SEASONS occur? YES what did that cost?
Hurricanes cost $1 trillion.. at the above another $12 billion in loss tax revenue.
Collectively Federal tax revenue Loss due to the $8 trillion in losses nearly $100 billion a year from 2003 and next 30 years!

Then payroll taxes
Assuming 300,000 jobs lost due to dot.com bust -- 145,000 lost due to 9/11 (remember airlines didn't fly for 3 days!) 400,000 jobs lost due to hurricanes..
850,000 jobs lost.
So at say an average of $30,000 per job and Social Security and Medicare EMPLOYEE pays 7.65% or $2,295 paid by employee.. BUT I imagine you and many like you forget the EMPLOYER matches that and also pays $2,295 or a total of $4,590 paid in by Employee and Employer!
$4,590 times 850,000 jobs or near $4 billion a year due to those LOST jobs in Federal REVENUE!

So between these two tax revenue generators losing over $100 billion a year all due to what... EVENTS beyond ANYONE's control!!!

NOW did those events happen BEYOND any President's control??? YES!

And IN spite of dot.com/9/11/hurricanes...
GDP when Bush took office 2001 $12.355,271,000,000
GDP when Bush left office 2008 $14,359,490,000,000
---------------------------------------------------------------------
A 16% increase in GDP or $2 TRILLION !

SO PLEASE BE HONEST AND ADMIT the above FACTS and EVENTS OCCURRED!!!

 

[mikegriffith1]

Yes, it is amazing to see liberals engage in seeing the Emperor's New Clothes when it comes to Obama's economic record. Under Obama:

* Median family income has dropped by over $4,000
* The unemployment rate has been over or near 8% for over 36 consecutive months
* The number of people on food stamps is at an all-time high
* The dollar has lost 15% of its value
* Gas prices have stayed above $3 a gallon for over 36 consecutive months
* The number of people living in poverty has risen substantially

This is not to mention the fact that Obama has piled up more debt in 4 years than Bush did in 8 years. Bush added $4.9 trillion to the national debt in 8 years ($5.7 to $10.6 trillion). Obama has added $5.8 trillion in 4 years ($10.6 to $16.4 trillion).

 

[mjollnir]

We don't have any growth rate. At best it's static.

static is better than the free fall into economic ruin that Bush left Obama

All engineered by democrats.

Please be less fucking stupid.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

GDP Growth Was Greater During the Bush Years Than Under Obama

.

.

.

.

 

[Katzndogz]

static is better than the free fall into economic ruin that Bush left Obama

All engineered by democrats.

Please be less fucking stupid.

I just don't drink democrat kool aid and know that the economic crisis was engineered by democrats. They are following the Cloward-Piven plan. Of course they engineered it, it's right in there.

 

[Freemason9]

It's been suggested that as much as 1.3% of the annual GDP growth in the Bush recovery years came from deficit spending. And this was during RECOVERY.

If you look at the history of the Bush recession, you will see that it began when the fed started raising the prime rate "in response" to a growing threat of inflation (yes, this happened when there was a budget SURPLUS). The rising interest rates predictably slowed the economy; Bush used that as a pretext for cutting taxes; the tax reduction plunged us back into deficit spending; the rest is history.

Bush and his cronies conspired to create the recession, which was necessary to defend the need for tax cuts as a means of "stimulating the economy."

 

[Mr. Shaman]

The economy Bush got was just beginning to slide into recession.

Two Huge Flaws in the Legend of the Clinton Economy

give it up. If anyone but Bush was handed that economy...

there was no recession when Bush took office

Because Bush took office and knew what he was doing. Democrats couldn't really crash the economy until they had control over it for two full years.

Lil' Dumbya's
GREATEST HITS!!!​

 

[Dot Com]

Yep. RIP Bu$h II tax-cuts

 

[mjollnir]

All engineered by democrats.

Please be less fucking stupid.

I just don't drink democrat kool aid and know that the economic crisis was engineered by democrats. They are following the Cloward-Piven plan. Of course they engineered it, it's right in there.

I see you fear giant, radioactive space weasels are aren't legally able to purchase or possess sporks because of your criminal history.

 

[bayoubill]

Despite All of His Bush-Bashing… GDP Growth Was Greater During the Bush Years Than Under Obama

Posted by Jim Hoft on Sunday, January 6, 2013, 12:29 PM


It’s not news that Barack Obama likes to blame George Bush’s ‘failed policies’ for all of the problems in America today. But now we know that after four years of Barack Obama the economic growth during the Bush years was greater …

Continue reading →
Despite All of His Bush-Bashing… GDP Growth Was Greater During the Bush Years Than Under Obama | The Gateway Pundit

it's Bush's fault that Obama is such an incompetent fuck-up...

 

[Katzndogz]

No matter how much democrats bash Bush, obama's policies will still fail. They can't get away from it. All democrats can do is deny it's happening. They celebrate each policy of failure as it comes along. In fact, democrats can look at the most failed policies and call them a success.

 

[Freemason9]

No matter how much democrats bash Bush, obama's policies will still fail. They can't get away from it. All democrats can do is deny it's happening. They celebrate each policy of failure as it comes along. In fact, democrats can look at the most failed policies and call them a success.

Do you know what else is true?

Republican policies fail. THEREFORE, the American political system fails. Is this a consequence of the economic system?