Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Exactly. And as folks come off Social Security Disability and Food Stamps into entry level jobs, they shift the average down slightly, which is perfectly expected in a solid expansion like this.Very nice. With unemployment this low, this probably means that people are still re-entering.
Wage growth, very nice.
Nice, nice, nice.
.
What the heck are you talking about? You claim to be an expert...and you call that report ‘nice, nice, nice’?
Weekly earnings were down (due to less hours worked). And the hourly earnings were only up a pathetic 6 cents (not even a 1/4 of 1% by my quick math).
Plus, the Household Survey showed a LOSS of employed (103,000 people). How can you praise the unemployment rate on one hand and then COMPLETELY ignore the survey numbers it is based on?
Employment Situation Summary Table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted
Employment Situation Summary Table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted
And the Establishment Survey job number (with it’s silly Birth/Death Model) is a semi-joke.
If you are SUCH an ‘expert’...you should be aware of all of the above. Yet you seem blissfully unaware of any bad news in the report.
No offense intended...just sayin’.
I just have to ask, Have you no shame? And, Do you think people are so dumb that they will not easily see how dishonestly selective you are being?
You cherry-pick a tiny handful of stats that are more than offset by other--more important--stats, and then you act like the April jobs numbers are bad. Just absurd.
Wages? Up?
Jobs? 263,000 new jobs.
Female unemployment? All-time low.
Black and Hispanic unemployment? All-time lows.
Unemployment rate? The lowest in 50 YEARS.
The U-6? The lowest in well over a decade.
But, no, you ignore all this and focus on weekly hours and loss of employment. Did your eyes just miss the part where the report said that "Over the month, the number of unemployed persons decreased by 387,000 to 5.8 million"? Did you get that? The number of UNemployed people DEcreased by 387,000.
No link to your graph, huh? Got it.antontoo wrote:Trump's first full 8 quarters are 50% better than Obama's....Yes economy is doing good so far with Trump, but it has done well under Obama...Obama's 2.9% in 2015 was followed Q1-16 growth of 1.6%
Trump's 2.9% growth in 2018 was followed by Q1-19 growth of 3.2% which is twice as good. Your question is easy enough to answer, but the first question you need to answer is:
"WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE US ECONOMY?"
Once you know that answer you will understand why Trump continues to enjoy such amazing economic success with nearly inflation free growth rates, fifty percent higher than Obama's.
Despite 50% higher GDP growth rates and several interest rate hikes by the Fed, Trump has run up LESS debt than Obama did over the same time period at the end of Obama's presidency....by the way, that was without a 1.5Trillion dollar tax-cutting stimulus and what shaping up to be trillion dollar deficits...
Trump has been President for 833 days and the Federal debt has increased by
$2,080,195,217,284.10 during that time.
Over Obama's final 833 days, he ran the debt up $2,088,824,525,722.20. So Trump is better on this measure in nominal terms and significantly better on an inflation adjusted basis.
833 days is his ENTIRE Presidency and he has run up LESS debt in his entire presidency than Obama did in his time as President, of the same length, and near to the same period on the calendar as possible....you can have a huge increase in very short period of time that is not representative of the average...
Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)
We most certainly do....we do not have “50%” more GDP growth ...
Obama's last 8 full quarters averaged 1.94%.
4th 16 1.8
3rd 16 1.9
2nd 16 2.3
1st 16 1.5
4th 15 0.4
3rd 15 1
2nd 15 3.3
1st 15 3.3
Trump's first 8 full quarters averaged 2.91%
1st 19 3.2
4th 18 2.2
3rd 18 3.4
2nd 18 4.2
1st 18 2.2
4th 17 2.3
3rd 17 2.8
2nd 17 3
Trump's growth rate is 50% better than Obama's "new normal.".
The facts speak for themselves, Trump is simply much better at this than Obama was. Don't be sad about this. You were satisfied with Obama's growth and Trump's is 50% better. Be happy for your fellow Americans.
You are just a liar. I posted the entire GDP growth graph, it speaks for itself.
Bullshit, you buffoon. Mine was annual. I linked my source, you link yours.You must be in your 20's or 30's thinking you have it all figured out.Not sure who you're talking to when you say "retard", anton.
Let me ask you....how can this not be Trump's economy when he got rid of the Obama regulations?
Think about it before you answer.
Also, you might want to look at 'Real GDP' growth. It's more accurate than GDP growth.
Let me help you with that.
Real GDP growth, anton
Dec 31, 2018 2.97%.......Trump
Dec 31, 2017 2.47%.......Trump
Dec 31, 2016 1.88%.......Obama
Dec 31, 2015 2.00%.......Obama
Please don't get all emotional and call me names when you get done looking at those numbers.
...please stop opening your mouth, you have NO IDEA what you are saying or why.
These are the annual basis REAL GDP growth numbers
And you still have not at all answered anything I said, because you obviously have trouble understanding the difference between mere correlations and what it takes to even begin to establish macroeconomic causations.
US Real GDP Growth Rate by Year
Dec 31, 2018 2.97%
Dec 31, 2017 2.47%
Dec 31, 2016 1.88%
Dec 31, 2015 2.00%
Dec 31, 2014 2.70%
Dec 31, 2013 2.61%
Dec 31, 2012 1.47%
Dec 31, 2011 1.61%
Dec 31, 2010 2.57%
Dec 31, 2009 0.18%
I'll go with an economic source over your political source any day...especially Fact Check.
Please note the 2% rate in 2015 and then the 1.88% in 2016, showing a weakening economy
under the pressures from Obama's regulations.
Now.....for you sonny....Go Pound Sand!
You fucking Idiot, the numbers are from BEA just like your numbers. However I’m using the standard ANNUAL basis, while you are using a non-standard period comparison.
Not only were his economic recovery numbers anemic, he also had the fed reserve
lending rate at nearly 0% his entire time in office. Which was historic, and he couldn't kick start
a strong economy given that. Hell, that had to be embarrassing.
Who knew rightwingers would get this excited about sub 3% growth with no “4,5 or even 6%” in sight.
Go look up definition of ANNUAL BASIS directly from BEA, and while you are down there look at what those numbers are.
It's labeled. Federal Reserve Economic Data (FRED)No link to your graph, huh? Got it.antontoo wrote:Trump's first full 8 quarters are 50% better than Obama's....Yes economy is doing good so far with Trump, but it has done well under Obama...
Despite 50% higher GDP growth rates and several interest rate hikes by the Fed, Trump has run up LESS debt than Obama did over the same time period at the end of Obama's presidency....by the way, that was without a 1.5Trillion dollar tax-cutting stimulus and what shaping up to be trillion dollar deficits...
Trump has been President for 833 days and the Federal debt has increased by
$2,080,195,217,284.10 during that time.
Over Obama's final 833 days, he ran the debt up $2,088,824,525,722.20. So Trump is better on this measure in nominal terms and significantly better on an inflation adjusted basis.
833 days is his ENTIRE Presidency and he has run up LESS debt in his entire presidency than Obama did in his time as President, of the same length, and near to the same period on the calendar as possible....you can have a huge increase in very short period of time that is not representative of the average...
Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)
We most certainly do....we do not have “50%” more GDP growth ...
Obama's last 8 full quarters averaged 1.94%.
4th 16 1.8
3rd 16 1.9
2nd 16 2.3
1st 16 1.5
4th 15 0.4
3rd 15 1
2nd 15 3.3
1st 15 3.3
Trump's first 8 full quarters averaged 2.91%
1st 19 3.2
4th 18 2.2
3rd 18 3.4
2nd 18 4.2
1st 18 2.2
4th 17 2.3
3rd 17 2.8
2nd 17 3
Trump's growth rate is 50% better than Obama's "new normal.".
The facts speak for themselves, Trump is simply much better at this than Obama was. Don't be sad about this. You were satisfied with Obama's growth and Trump's is 50% better. Be happy for your fellow Americans.
You are just a liar. I posted the entire GDP growth graph, it speaks for itself.
Bullshit, you buffoon. Mine was annual. I linked my source, you link yours.You must be in your 20's or 30's thinking you have it all figured out....please stop opening your mouth, you have NO IDEA what you are saying or why.
These are the annual basis REAL GDP growth numbers
And you still have not at all answered anything I said, because you obviously have trouble understanding the difference between mere correlations and what it takes to even begin to establish macroeconomic causations.
US Real GDP Growth Rate by Year
Dec 31, 2018 2.97%
Dec 31, 2017 2.47%
Dec 31, 2016 1.88%
Dec 31, 2015 2.00%
Dec 31, 2014 2.70%
Dec 31, 2013 2.61%
Dec 31, 2012 1.47%
Dec 31, 2011 1.61%
Dec 31, 2010 2.57%
Dec 31, 2009 0.18%
I'll go with an economic source over your political source any day...especially Fact Check.
Please note the 2% rate in 2015 and then the 1.88% in 2016, showing a weakening economy
under the pressures from Obama's regulations.
Now.....for you sonny....Go Pound Sand!
You fucking Idiot, the numbers are from BEA just like your numbers. However I’m using the standard ANNUAL basis, while you are using a non-standard period comparison.
Not only were his economic recovery numbers anemic, he also had the fed reserve
lending rate at nearly 0% his entire time in office. Which was historic, and he couldn't kick start
a strong economy given that. Hell, that had to be embarrassing.
Who knew rightwingers would get this excited about sub 3% growth with no “4,5 or even 6%” in sight.
Go look up definition of ANNUAL BASIS directly from BEA, and while you are down there look at what those numbers are.
Exactly. And as folks come off Social Security Disability and Food Stamps into entry level jobs, they shift the average down slightly, which is perfectly expected in a solid expansion like this.Very nice. With unemployment this low, this probably means that people are still re-entering.
Wage growth, very nice.
Nice, nice, nice.
.
What the heck are you talking about? You claim to be an expert...and you call that report ‘nice, nice, nice’?
Weekly earnings were down (due to less hours worked). And the hourly earnings were only up a pathetic 6 cents (not even a 1/4 of 1% by my quick math).
Plus, the Household Survey showed a LOSS of employed (103,000 people). How can you praise the unemployment rate on one hand and then COMPLETELY ignore the survey numbers it is based on?
Employment Situation Summary Table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted
Employment Situation Summary Table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted
And the Establishment Survey job number (with it’s silly Birth/Death Model) is a semi-joke.
If you are SUCH an ‘expert’...you should be aware of all of the above. Yet you seem blissfully unaware of any bad news in the report.
No offense intended...just sayin’.
I just have to ask, Have you no shame? And, Do you think people are so dumb that they will not easily see how dishonestly selective you are being?
You cherry-pick a tiny handful of stats that are more than offset by other--more important--stats, and then you act like the April jobs numbers are bad. Just absurd.
Wages? Up?
Jobs? 263,000 new jobs.
Female unemployment? All-time low.
Black and Hispanic unemployment? All-time lows.
Unemployment rate? The lowest in 50 YEARS.
The U-6? The lowest in well over a decade.
But, no, you ignore all this and focus on weekly hours and loss of employment. Did your eyes just miss the part where the report said that "Over the month, the number of unemployed persons decreased by 387,000 to 5.8 million"? Did you get that? The number of UNemployed people DEcreased by 387,000.
We felt the drop in income we experienced under Obama in 2015 and 2016 as he left, and we felt the shift from falling income to rising income once Trump took over.
Year end numbers:
Cherry picking is misusing a sub-set to represent a whole set, I used the WHOLE set of Trump's full quarters, and compared them to an equally sized set of Obama's quarters, nearest in time, which is the fairest possible comparison.LOLTrump's first full 8 quarters are 50% better than Obama's....Yes economy is doing good so far with Trump, but it has done well under Obama...Obama's 2.9% in 2015 was followed Q1-16 growth of 1.6%....We had 2.9% GDP growth in 2015 just as we had in 2018, to listen to you thats not possible without Trump.By the way, unemployment is down to 3.6%
263,000 new jobs, inflation is at .9%, and wages up 3%.
Have a good day, anton.
Trump's 2.9% growth in 2018 was followed by Q1-19 growth of 3.2% which is twice as good. Your question is easy enough to answer, but the first question you need to answer is:
"WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE US ECONOMY?"
Once you know that answer you will understand why Trump continues to enjoy such amazing economic success with nearly inflation free growth rates, fifty percent higher than Obama's.
Despite 50% higher GDP growth rates and several interest rate hikes by the Fed, Trump has run up LESS debt than Obama did over the same time period at the end of Obama's presidency....by the way, that was without a 1.5Trillion dollar tax-cutting stimulus and what shaping up to be trillion dollar deficits...
Trump has been President for 833 days and the Federal debt has increased by
$2,080,195,217,284.10 during that time.
Over Obama's final 833 days, he ran the debt up $2,088,824,525,722.20. So Trump is better on this measure in nominal terms and significantly better on an inflation adjusted basis.
Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)
The differences between Obama's failed approach and Trump's successful approach will become clear as soon as you figure out the answer to this question:
"WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE US ECONOMY?"
Cherry Pick much?
Compare Trumps first eight quarters to Obama’s?
Want to compare the economy Obama was given vs the economy Trump was given?
Actually, Obama's are slightly worse, on a nominal basis and about 4.8% worse on an inflation adjusted basis. My point was that while folks claim Obama was better on the debt in his second term than Trump, this is simply untrue....2,080, 195, 217,284 debt for Trump
2,088, 824,525,722 debt for Obama
Nearly identical yet you call Obama’s debt significantly better
He's working his ass off and getting us results and he's donating his paycheck to charity, what the hell else could we ask for?Exactly. And as folks come off Social Security Disability and Food Stamps into entry level jobs, they shift the average down slightly, which is perfectly expected in a solid expansion like this.Very nice. With unemployment this low, this probably means that people are still re-entering.
Wage growth, very nice.
Nice, nice, nice.
.
What the heck are you talking about? You claim to be an expert...and you call that report ‘nice, nice, nice’?
Weekly earnings were down (due to less hours worked). And the hourly earnings were only up a pathetic 6 cents (not even a 1/4 of 1% by my quick math).
Plus, the Household Survey showed a LOSS of employed (103,000 people). How can you praise the unemployment rate on one hand and then COMPLETELY ignore the survey numbers it is based on?
Employment Situation Summary Table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted
Employment Situation Summary Table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted
And the Establishment Survey job number (with it’s silly Birth/Death Model) is a semi-joke.
If you are SUCH an ‘expert’...you should be aware of all of the above. Yet you seem blissfully unaware of any bad news in the report.
No offense intended...just sayin’.
I just have to ask, Have you no shame? And, Do you think people are so dumb that they will not easily see how dishonestly selective you are being?
You cherry-pick a tiny handful of stats that are more than offset by other--more important--stats, and then you act like the April jobs numbers are bad. Just absurd.
Wages? Up?
Jobs? 263,000 new jobs.
Female unemployment? All-time low.
Black and Hispanic unemployment? All-time lows.
Unemployment rate? The lowest in 50 YEARS.
The U-6? The lowest in well over a decade.
But, no, you ignore all this and focus on weekly hours and loss of employment. Did your eyes just miss the part where the report said that "Over the month, the number of unemployed persons decreased by 387,000 to 5.8 million"? Did you get that? The number of UNemployed people DEcreased by 387,000.
We felt the drop in income we experienced under Obama in 2015 and 2016 as he left, and we felt the shift from falling income to rising income once Trump took over.
Year end numbers:
Does That graph show Beast fear, more Obammy policy to come? Everyone pulling out to sidelines for more economic uncertainty. Straight down when they "were a lock" (according to MadCow) to win. Bullet dodged , DJT gets in.....the trend is headed up since.
Very nice. With unemployment this low, this probably means that people are still re-entering.
Wage growth, very nice.
Nice, nice, nice.
.
What the heck are you talking about? You claim to be an expert...and you call that report ‘nice, nice, nice’?
Weekly earnings were down (due to less hours worked). And the hourly earnings were only up a pathetic 6 cents (not even a 1/4 of 1% by my quick math).
Plus, the Household Survey showed a LOSS of employed (103,000 people). How can you praise the unemployment rate on one hand and then COMPLETELY ignore the survey numbers it is based on?
Employment Situation Summary Table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted
Employment Situation Summary Table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted
And the Establishment Survey job number (with it’s silly Birth/Death Model) is a semi-joke.
If you are SUCH an ‘expert’...you should be aware of all of the above. Yet you seem blissfully unaware of any bad news in the report.
No offense intended...just sayin’.
I just have to ask, Have you no shame? And, Do you think people are so dumb that they will not easily see how dishonestly selective you are being?
You cherry-pick a tiny handful of stats that are more than offset by other--more important--stats, and then you act like the April jobs numbers are bad. Just absurd.
Wages? Up?
Jobs? 263,000 new jobs.
Female unemployment? All-time low.
Black and Hispanic unemployment? All-time lows.
Unemployment rate? The lowest in 50 YEARS.
The U-6? The lowest in well over a decade.
But, no, you ignore all this and focus on weekly hours and loss of employment. Did your eyes just miss the part where the report said that "Over the month, the number of unemployed persons decreased by 387,000 to 5.8 million"? Did you get that? The number of UNemployed people DEcreased by 387,000.
Exactly. And as folks come off Social Security Disability and Food Stamps into entry level jobs, they shift the average down slightly, which is perfectly expected in a solid expansion like this.Very nice. With unemployment this low, this probably means that people are still re-entering.
Wage growth, very nice.
Nice, nice, nice.
.
What the heck are you talking about? You claim to be an expert...and you call that report ‘nice, nice, nice’?
Weekly earnings were down (due to less hours worked). And the hourly earnings were only up a pathetic 6 cents (not even a 1/4 of 1% by my quick math).
Plus, the Household Survey showed a LOSS of employed (103,000 people). How can you praise the unemployment rate on one hand and then COMPLETELY ignore the survey numbers it is based on?
Employment Situation Summary Table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted
Employment Situation Summary Table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted
And the Establishment Survey job number (with it’s silly Birth/Death Model) is a semi-joke.
If you are SUCH an ‘expert’...you should be aware of all of the above. Yet you seem blissfully unaware of any bad news in the report.
No offense intended...just sayin’.
I just have to ask, Have you no shame? And, Do you think people are so dumb that they will not easily see how dishonestly selective you are being?
You cherry-pick a tiny handful of stats that are more than offset by other--more important--stats, and then you act like the April jobs numbers are bad. Just absurd.
Wages? Up?
Jobs? 263,000 new jobs.
Female unemployment? All-time low.
Black and Hispanic unemployment? All-time lows.
Unemployment rate? The lowest in 50 YEARS.
The U-6? The lowest in well over a decade.
But, no, you ignore all this and focus on weekly hours and loss of employment. Did your eyes just miss the part where the report said that "Over the month, the number of unemployed persons decreased by 387,000 to 5.8 million"? Did you get that? The number of UNemployed people DEcreased by 387,000.
We felt the drop in income we experienced under Obama in 2015 and 2016 as he left, and we felt the shift from falling income to rising income once Trump took over.
Year end numbers:
Bad News for Libs? ABC Can Barely Speak of 50-Year Low in Unemployment
The news was shocking on Friday morning when the Labor Department reported the economy added 263,000 new jobs -- higher than expected -- lowering the unemployment rate to 3.6 percent, the lowest in fifty years. Would the networks acknowledge this news, or try to dodge it like last Friday's surprisingly strong 3.2 percent growth in GDP? ABC and CBS skipped that, and NBC gave it ten seconds. This Friday, Curtis Houck noted on Twitter that CBS and NBC had full reports on Friday night, but ABC's World News Tonight was done with it in 18 seconds.
Curtis Houck
✔@CurtisHouck
Video: This is what classic liberal media bias looks like --> Amidst the news of a booming economy with an expectations-shattering jobs report and the lowest unemployment since 1969, @ABCWorldNews Tonight with @DavidMuir only gives it an 18-second brief
DAVID MUIR: A major headline about the American economy for you tonight. The U.S. adding 263,000 jobs in April, far more than expected. Unemployment falling to 3.6 percent. That's the lowest level since 1969. The Dow responding, jumping 197 points today, closing at 26,504.
This "major headline" arrived halfway through the newscast, after heart-tugging stories on a newborn being dropped during delivery and a story on a family of four dying in Ohio from carbon monoxide poisoning...and a full Jon Karl story on Trump and Russia.
Bad News for Liberals? ABC Can Barely Speak of 50-Year Low in Unemployment
He's working his ass off and getting us results and he's donating his paycheck to charity, what the hell else could we ask for?Exactly. And as folks come off Social Security Disability and Food Stamps into entry level jobs, they shift the average down slightly, which is perfectly expected in a solid expansion like this.Very nice. With unemployment this low, this probably means that people are still re-entering.
Wage growth, very nice.
Nice, nice, nice.
.
What the heck are you talking about? You claim to be an expert...and you call that report ‘nice, nice, nice’?
Weekly earnings were down (due to less hours worked). And the hourly earnings were only up a pathetic 6 cents (not even a 1/4 of 1% by my quick math).
Plus, the Household Survey showed a LOSS of employed (103,000 people). How can you praise the unemployment rate on one hand and then COMPLETELY ignore the survey numbers it is based on?
Employment Situation Summary Table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted
Employment Situation Summary Table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted
And the Establishment Survey job number (with it’s silly Birth/Death Model) is a semi-joke.
If you are SUCH an ‘expert’...you should be aware of all of the above. Yet you seem blissfully unaware of any bad news in the report.
No offense intended...just sayin’.
I just have to ask, Have you no shame? And, Do you think people are so dumb that they will not easily see how dishonestly selective you are being?
You cherry-pick a tiny handful of stats that are more than offset by other--more important--stats, and then you act like the April jobs numbers are bad. Just absurd.
Wages? Up?
Jobs? 263,000 new jobs.
Female unemployment? All-time low.
Black and Hispanic unemployment? All-time lows.
Unemployment rate? The lowest in 50 YEARS.
The U-6? The lowest in well over a decade.
But, no, you ignore all this and focus on weekly hours and loss of employment. Did your eyes just miss the part where the report said that "Over the month, the number of unemployed persons decreased by 387,000 to 5.8 million"? Did you get that? The number of UNemployed people DEcreased by 387,000.
We felt the drop in income we experienced under Obama in 2015 and 2016 as he left, and we felt the shift from falling income to rising income once Trump took over.
Year end numbers:
Does That graph show Beast fear, more Obammy policy to come? Everyone pulling out to sidelines for more economic uncertainty. Straight down when they "were a lock" (according to MadCow) to win. Bullet dodged , DJT gets in.....the trend is headed up since.
Cherry picking is misusing a sub-set to represent a whole set, I used the WHOLE set of Trump's full quarters, and compared them to an equally sized set of Obama's quarters, nearest in time, which is the fairest possible comparison.LOLTrump's first full 8 quarters are 50% better than Obama's....Yes economy is doing good so far with Trump, but it has done well under Obama...Obama's 2.9% in 2015 was followed Q1-16 growth of 1.6%....We had 2.9% GDP growth in 2015 just as we had in 2018, to listen to you thats not possible without Trump.
Trump's 2.9% growth in 2018 was followed by Q1-19 growth of 3.2% which is twice as good. Your question is easy enough to answer, but the first question you need to answer is:
"WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE US ECONOMY?"
Once you know that answer you will understand why Trump continues to enjoy such amazing economic success with nearly inflation free growth rates, fifty percent higher than Obama's.
Despite 50% higher GDP growth rates and several interest rate hikes by the Fed, Trump has run up LESS debt than Obama did over the same time period at the end of Obama's presidency....by the way, that was without a 1.5Trillion dollar tax-cutting stimulus and what shaping up to be trillion dollar deficits...
Trump has been President for 833 days and the Federal debt has increased by
$2,080,195,217,284.10 during that time.
Over Obama's final 833 days, he ran the debt up $2,088,824,525,722.20. So Trump is better on this measure in nominal terms and significantly better on an inflation adjusted basis.
Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)
The differences between Obama's failed approach and Trump's successful approach will become clear as soon as you figure out the answer to this question:
"WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE US ECONOMY?"
Cherry Pick much?
Compare Trumps first eight quarters to Obama’s?
Want to compare the economy Obama was given vs the economy Trump was given?
Actually, Obama's are slightly worse, on a nominal basis and about 4.8% worse on an inflation adjusted basis. My point was that while folks claim Obama was better on the debt in his second term than Trump, this is simply untrue....2,080, 195, 217,284 debt for Trump
2,088, 824,525,722 debt for Obama
Nearly identical yet you call Obama’s debt significantly better
As a percentage of GDP, the debt was in a sharp climb as Obama left office.
Trump has halted that rise and kept it flat over his Presidency.
He's doing a much better job than anyone expected, he plans to even do better than this, his success is our success, give the man room to work!
Cherry picking is misusing a sub-set to represent a whole set, I used the WHOLE set of Trump's full quarters, and compared them to an equally sized set of Obama's quarters, nearest in time, which is the fairest possible comparison.LOLTrump's first full 8 quarters are 50% better than Obama's....Yes economy is doing good so far with Trump, but it has done well under Obama...Obama's 2.9% in 2015 was followed Q1-16 growth of 1.6%
Trump's 2.9% growth in 2018 was followed by Q1-19 growth of 3.2% which is twice as good. Your question is easy enough to answer, but the first question you need to answer is:
"WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE US ECONOMY?"
Once you know that answer you will understand why Trump continues to enjoy such amazing economic success with nearly inflation free growth rates, fifty percent higher than Obama's.
Despite 50% higher GDP growth rates and several interest rate hikes by the Fed, Trump has run up LESS debt than Obama did over the same time period at the end of Obama's presidency....by the way, that was without a 1.5Trillion dollar tax-cutting stimulus and what shaping up to be trillion dollar deficits...
Trump has been President for 833 days and the Federal debt has increased by
$2,080,195,217,284.10 during that time.
Over Obama's final 833 days, he ran the debt up $2,088,824,525,722.20. So Trump is better on this measure in nominal terms and significantly better on an inflation adjusted basis.
Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)
The differences between Obama's failed approach and Trump's successful approach will become clear as soon as you figure out the answer to this question:
"WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE US ECONOMY?"
Cherry Pick much?
Compare Trumps first eight quarters to Obama’s?
Want to compare the economy Obama was given vs the economy Trump was given?
Actually, Obama's are slightly worse, on a nominal basis and about 4.8% worse on an inflation adjusted basis. My point was that while folks claim Obama was better on the debt in his second term than Trump, this is simply untrue....2,080, 195, 217,284 debt for Trump
2,088, 824,525,722 debt for Obama
Nearly identical yet you call Obama’s debt significantly better
As a percentage of GDP, the debt was in a sharp climb as Obama left office.
Trump has halted that rise and kept it flat over his Presidency.
He's doing a much better job than anyone expected, he plans to even do better than this, his success is our success, give the man room to work!
Wrong.
I am an ‘anyone’ and he is doing a FAR worse job then I expected.
What about the fiscal deficit - currently projected to be well over a trillion?
U.S. budget deficit to top $1-trillion in 2019: budget experts - Reuters
That is TOTALLY irresponsible during a period of economic growth.
"Well Under?" Trump's First full 8 quarters have averaged 2.91%, a 50% increase than Obama's last 8 quarters that averaged 1.94% that the left claimed we should be satisfied with as the "new normal"...Solid expansion? LOL.Exactly. And as folks come off Social Security Disability and Food Stamps into entry level jobs, they shift the average down slightly, which is perfectly expected in a solid expansion like this.Very nice. With unemployment this low, this probably means that people are still re-entering.
Wage growth, very nice.
Nice, nice, nice.
.
What the heck are you talking about? You claim to be an expert...and you call that report ‘nice, nice, nice’?
Weekly earnings were down (due to less hours worked). And the hourly earnings were only up a pathetic 6 cents (not even a 1/4 of 1% by my quick math).
Plus, the Household Survey showed a LOSS of employed (103,000 people). How can you praise the unemployment rate on one hand and then COMPLETELY ignore the survey numbers it is based on?
Employment Situation Summary Table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted
Employment Situation Summary Table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted
And the Establishment Survey job number (with it’s silly Birth/Death Model) is a semi-joke.
If you are SUCH an ‘expert’...you should be aware of all of the above. Yet you seem blissfully unaware of any bad news in the report.
No offense intended...just sayin’.
I just have to ask, Have you no shame? And, Do you think people are so dumb that they will not easily see how dishonestly selective you are being?
You cherry-pick a tiny handful of stats that are more than offset by other--more important--stats, and then you act like the April jobs numbers are bad. Just absurd.
Wages? Up?
Jobs? 263,000 new jobs.
Female unemployment? All-time low.
Black and Hispanic unemployment? All-time lows.
Unemployment rate? The lowest in 50 YEARS.
The U-6? The lowest in well over a decade.
But, no, you ignore all this and focus on weekly hours and loss of employment. Did your eyes just miss the part where the report said that "Over the month, the number of unemployed persons decreased by 387,000 to 5.8 million"? Did you get that? The number of UNemployed people DEcreased by 387,000.
We felt the drop in income we experienced under Obama in 2015 and 2016 as he left, and we felt the shift from falling income to rising income once Trump took over.
Year end numbers:
Well under 3% Real GDP growth...
Actually despite the 50% improvement in Real GDP, Trump's increase in the debt is actually a bit improved over Obama's in nominal terms and much much better as a percentage of GDP.... - while running massive fiscal deficits which partially artificially stimulate the economy - is ‘solid expansion’ to you?...
That's a good question. We lagged our potential real GDP growth for many years under Obama. Trump crossed us over that line last year and is still charging ahead with the recent quarter a full 3.2% better than the previous one, he's doing a hell of a job, far better than anyone but him predicted, and he's donating his paycheck to charity, for goodness sake's man, get out of his way and let the man work! When he succeeds, we ALL succeed and that's what this is all about....And just what Real GDP growth level is the minimum for ‘solid expansion’ to you?
Trump's First full 8 quarters have averaged 2.91%
At the start of Trump's Presidency the "Experts" confidently told us:
If Trump thinks he can get more than 3% economic growth, he's dreaming.
That's a projection, not hard numbers. When it comes Trump, the polls and projections are always wrong.... What about the fiscal deficit - currently projected to be well over a trillion?Cherry picking is misusing a sub-set to represent a whole set, I used the WHOLE set of Trump's full quarters, and compared them to an equally sized set of Obama's quarters, nearest in time, which is the fairest possible comparison.LOLTrump's first full 8 quarters are 50% better than Obama's....Yes economy is doing good so far with Trump, but it has done well under Obama...Obama's 2.9% in 2015 was followed Q1-16 growth of 1.6%
Trump's 2.9% growth in 2018 was followed by Q1-19 growth of 3.2% which is twice as good. Your question is easy enough to answer, but the first question you need to answer is:
"WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE US ECONOMY?"
Once you know that answer you will understand why Trump continues to enjoy such amazing economic success with nearly inflation free growth rates, fifty percent higher than Obama's.
Despite 50% higher GDP growth rates and several interest rate hikes by the Fed, Trump has run up LESS debt than Obama did over the same time period at the end of Obama's presidency....by the way, that was without a 1.5Trillion dollar tax-cutting stimulus and what shaping up to be trillion dollar deficits...
Trump has been President for 833 days and the Federal debt has increased by
$2,080,195,217,284.10 during that time.
Over Obama's final 833 days, he ran the debt up $2,088,824,525,722.20. So Trump is better on this measure in nominal terms and significantly better on an inflation adjusted basis.
Debt to the Penny (Daily History Search Application)
The differences between Obama's failed approach and Trump's successful approach will become clear as soon as you figure out the answer to this question:
"WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE US ECONOMY?"
Cherry Pick much?
Compare Trumps first eight quarters to Obama’s?
Want to compare the economy Obama was given vs the economy Trump was given?
Actually, Obama's are slightly worse, on a nominal basis and about 4.8% worse on an inflation adjusted basis. My point was that while folks claim Obama was better on the debt in his second term than Trump, this is simply untrue....2,080, 195, 217,284 debt for Trump
2,088, 824,525,722 debt for Obama
Nearly identical yet you call Obama’s debt significantly better
As a percentage of GDP, the debt was in a sharp climb as Obama left office.
Trump has halted that rise and kept it flat over his Presidency.
He's doing a much better job than anyone expected, he plans to even do better than this, his success is our success, give the man room to work!
U.S. budget deficit to top $1-trillion in 2019: budget experts - Reuters
That is TOTALLY irresponsible during a period of economic growth.
He's working his ass off and getting us results and he's donating his paycheck to charity, what the hell else could we ask for?Exactly. And as folks come off Social Security Disability and Food Stamps into entry level jobs, they shift the average down slightly, which is perfectly expected in a solid expansion like this.What the heck are you talking about? You claim to be an expert...and you call that report ‘nice, nice, nice’?
Weekly earnings were down (due to less hours worked). And the hourly earnings were only up a pathetic 6 cents (not even a 1/4 of 1% by my quick math).
Plus, the Household Survey showed a LOSS of employed (103,000 people). How can you praise the unemployment rate on one hand and then COMPLETELY ignore the survey numbers it is based on?
Employment Situation Summary Table B. Establishment data, seasonally adjusted
Employment Situation Summary Table A. Household data, seasonally adjusted
And the Establishment Survey job number (with it’s silly Birth/Death Model) is a semi-joke.
If you are SUCH an ‘expert’...you should be aware of all of the above. Yet you seem blissfully unaware of any bad news in the report.
No offense intended...just sayin’.
I just have to ask, Have you no shame? And, Do you think people are so dumb that they will not easily see how dishonestly selective you are being?
You cherry-pick a tiny handful of stats that are more than offset by other--more important--stats, and then you act like the April jobs numbers are bad. Just absurd.
Wages? Up?
Jobs? 263,000 new jobs.
Female unemployment? All-time low.
Black and Hispanic unemployment? All-time lows.
Unemployment rate? The lowest in 50 YEARS.
The U-6? The lowest in well over a decade.
But, no, you ignore all this and focus on weekly hours and loss of employment. Did your eyes just miss the part where the report said that "Over the month, the number of unemployed persons decreased by 387,000 to 5.8 million"? Did you get that? The number of UNemployed people DEcreased by 387,000.
We felt the drop in income we experienced under Obama in 2015 and 2016 as he left, and we felt the shift from falling income to rising income once Trump took over.
Year end numbers:
Does That graph show Beast fear, more Obammy policy to come? Everyone pulling out to sidelines for more economic uncertainty. Straight down when they "were a lock" (according to MadCow) to win. Bullet dodged , DJT gets in.....the trend is headed up since.
Give the man time! He's dropped the debt as percentage of GDP by 5 points in just two years, Obama INCREASED it by 4 points over his last two years....How about a deficit well under a trillion? ...
The hard data shows that Trump has slowed the growth in the debt, while increasing GDP growth by a 50%.
It went down under Obama in 2015. It means nothing.He's working his ass off and getting us results and he's donating his paycheck to charity, what the hell else could we ask for?Exactly. And as folks come off Social Security Disability and Food Stamps into entry level jobs, they shift the average down slightly, which is perfectly expected in a solid expansion like this.I just have to ask, Have you no shame? And, Do you think people are so dumb that they will not easily see how dishonestly selective you are being?
You cherry-pick a tiny handful of stats that are more than offset by other--more important--stats, and then you act like the April jobs numbers are bad. Just absurd.
Wages? Up?
Jobs? 263,000 new jobs.
Female unemployment? All-time low.
Black and Hispanic unemployment? All-time lows.
Unemployment rate? The lowest in 50 YEARS.
The U-6? The lowest in well over a decade.
But, no, you ignore all this and focus on weekly hours and loss of employment. Did your eyes just miss the part where the report said that "Over the month, the number of unemployed persons decreased by 387,000 to 5.8 million"? Did you get that? The number of UNemployed people DEcreased by 387,000.
We felt the drop in income we experienced under Obama in 2015 and 2016 as he left, and we felt the shift from falling income to rising income once Trump took over.
Year end numbers:
Does That graph show Beast fear, more Obammy policy to come? Everyone pulling out to sidelines for more economic uncertainty. Straight down when they "were a lock" (according to MadCow) to win. Bullet dodged , DJT gets in.....the trend is headed up since.Give the man time! He's dropped the debt as percentage of GDP by 5 points in just two years, Obama INCREASED it by 4 points over his last two years....How about a deficit well under a trillion? ...
That's real progress, give the man time to work!
