If the Kenyan spent $10T and you loved it..Don’t you want Trump to spend at least that?

[toobfreak]

If the Kenyan spent $10T and you loved it..Don’t you want Trump to spend at least that?

Someone had to pay for Bush's two wars and the Great Bush Recession.

Funny considering that those two wars were caused by Clinton. Had he been doing his job instead of worrying about blow jobs, they never would have happened. And oddly, that great Bush recession, 90% of it all occurred under Obama. Funny how that worked out.

 

[skews13]

Really now. How much of the deficit do you think increased military spending accounts for?

25%? If I were to guess.

FY 19 spending for the DOD was up 75 billion dollars, or 0.075 trillion.

FY-19 deficit was 1.113 trillion dollars.

The increase in military spending accounted for 6.7% of the deficit for FY19

I was off but still 7% more than BHO was spending. I do know that the major problem is entitlements.

Bullshit. Social Security, and Medicare are paid for through payroll taxes, and by law can't add to the debt.

The major problem is tax cuts for the rich, and military spending.

Before Reagans tax cuts, the debt was 967 billion. Every dime of that $23 trillion is directly tied to tax cuts for the rich, and military spending, that has led to the borrowing of money and the interest tied to those loans.

Just as soon as the tax cuts under Trump, Bush Jr., and Reagan are rolled back, and military spending is frozen, the national debt will begin to decline overnight.

Fortunately, the younger generations have grown wise to this through education, through internet mass media, and can no longer be bullshitted by right wing media sources.

Trickle down is getting ready to go the way of coal.

Payroll taxes aren’t high enough. Learn something before your criticize it. What about Medicaid? Want to put your status on this board on the line that entitlements are the primary reasons we have a budget deficit?

I never mentioned Medicaid.

Reading comprehension problems?

I love it when Republicans talk about rebuilding the military. We've been spending half a trillion on the military for decades, but the military needs rebuilding?

You have to be the worlds biggest dumbass if you believe that, but P.T. Barnum was talking about conservatives when he coined the phrase, "there's a sucker born every minute".

Military spending is nothing but a slush fund, and it needs to be cut in half, and permanently frozen.

Then we reduce the retirement age for social security and medicare both to age 62, permanently, and end the income level caps on SS, and Medicare payroll tax, tax capital gains as income, and impose a 1 cent tax on all Wall St. daily transactions.

This is not only doable, but just requires the right voting population voting in the right people to make it happen.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

NO!!! What Obama did was stupid because I cannot even tell where the $10Trn went. I at least know that many of the monies DJT is spending is going toward our military.

Really now. How much of the deficit do you think increased military spending accounts for?

25%? If I were to guess.

FY 19 spending for the DOD was up 75 billion dollars, or 0.075 trillion.

FY-19 deficit was 1.113 trillion dollars.

The increase in military spending accounted for 6.7% of the deficit for FY19

I was off but still 7% more than BHO was spending. I do know that the major problem is entitlements.

And Obama was spending more than Bush II was spending who was spending more than Bill was spending who was spending more than Bush I...and so forth and so on.

One thing that is for certain...our military is not underfunded.

There is plenty of Fraud Waste and Abuse in all branches of government, President Trump should cut 50% of government spending and that still would be too much spending. At least we would be on a surplus finally on tax revenues. But again, Libtards dont want this they want to bankrupt America with the Cloward and Piven Strategy.

The Cloward–Piven strategy is a political strategy outlined in 1966 by American sociologists and political activists Richard Cloward and Frances Fox Piven that called for overloading the U.S. public welfare system in order to precipitate a crisis that would lead to a replacement of the welfare system with a socialist system of "a guaranteed annual income and thus an end to poverty".[1][2]

Of course, every time a Socialist system gets into place that country goes in major economic meltdown, just look at Venezuela, Cuba, and other shithole countries...

 

[Harpy Eagle]

There is plenty of Fraud Waste and Abuse in all branches of government, President Trump should cut 50% of government spending and that still would be too much spending. At least we would be on a surplus finally on tax revenues. But again, Libtards dont want this they want to bankrupt America with the Cloward and Piven Strategy.
.

Is that why Trump submitted the largest spending request in the history of our country?

Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[Mikeoxenormous]

There is plenty of Fraud Waste and Abuse in all branches of government, President Trump should cut 50% of government spending and that still would be too much spending. At least we would be on a surplus finally on tax revenues. But again, Libtards dont want this they want to bankrupt America with the Cloward and Piven Strategy.
.

Is that why Trump submitted the largest spending request in the history of our country?

Thanks for clearing that up.

And I thought it was Congress that had the money strings? I guess you would be okay if the government shut down, because he vetoes the bill? Would you blame him for that or Congress for the PORK?

 

[Harpy Eagle]

And I thought it was Congress that had the money strings? I guess you would be okay if the government shut down, because he vetoes the bill? Would you blame him for that or Congress for the PORK?

You do know that the POTUS starts the budgeting process by presenting to Congress his spending request. The last one Trump submitted was the largest ever...thus I blame them all, both the POUTS and Congress.

 

[jwoodie]

This is my profession.

What, exactly, is your "profession?" Are you a government employee?

CFP/Investment Advisor, Partner, Author, ChFC/CLU, 7/65/63.

And you?
.

Attorney, MBA, MPA, JD but I don't use that to bolster my arguments. Now please answer the following questions:

1. You have attributed current GDP growth to Obama's "trajectory" and implied the same for our decreasing unemployment rate. Do you also attribute National Debt growth to Obama's trajectory?

2. Do you attribute any GDP growth or low unemployment to President Trump?

3. Do you attribute the record stock market to Obama? Or Trump?

4. Did you advise your client(s) to invest or divest after Trump's election? Why?

 

[keepitreal]

We’ve all read numerous posts and editorials from folks telling us how great their lives were during the Super Negro’s eight year reign of terror....It’s no secret that he spent like an 18 year old sailor would in a whorehouse full of virgin Playboy models.

Ironically, many of the authors of said posts are now bitching about the spending under this Trump Administration. Why are these same people so sure their lives won’t continue to improve?

Congress does the spending

There is alot of money being added to the deficit
that is due to Obamacare and the costs of illegals

 

[Mac1958]

This is my profession.

What, exactly, is your "profession?" Are you a government employee?

CFP/Investment Advisor, Partner, Author, ChFC/CLU, 7/65/63.

And you?
.

Attorney, MBA, MPA, JD but I don't use that to bolster my arguments. Now please answer the following questions:

1. You have attributed current GDP growth to Obama's "trajectory" and implied the same for our decreasing unemployment rate. Do you also attribute National Debt growth to Obama's trajectory?

2. Do you attribute any GDP growth or low unemployment to President Trump?

3. Do you attribute the record stock market to Obama? Or Trump?

4. Did you advise your client(s) to invest or divest after Trump's election? Why?

1. Yes. Obama engaged in traditional Keynesian economics, which was needed more than at any time since the Great Depression. There goes the debt. It was nice to see that deficit was on an overall downward trajectory from its peak in 2010. Conversely, Trump has engaged in Keynesian economics during a non-recessionary period, something Keynes himself would have frowned upon. But he'll blame someone else.

2. The employment rate has continued its downward trajectory. A person with even the most remedial chart-reading skills can see that. Unfortunately, the GDP is currently at 1.9%. Sure, he can crow about that if he wants. It's a shame he's calling this a "great" economy at 1.9%, though. Too bad fundamental honesty is foreign to him. I've seen estimates that the China trade situation has shaved .2% to .4% off our GDP, and I'll give him that, too, although he'll blame someone else.

3. Neither. Obama did the only thing he could do, stand back while the Fed poured $4.5T into markets to stabilize and bring us out of the disaster he inherited. That, combined with how far the market had already dropped, was largely responsible for the stock market growth. Record low interest rates (not a particularly good sign) have buoyed the market since then, along with steady corporate profits. Unfortunately, we've been in a manufacturing recession for a while, but Trump will blame someone else (assuming he even knows about it).

4. No experienced advisor worth their salt tells their clients to sell over the results of a presidential election. No. Full speed ahead, with regular allocations and controls, based on a client's risk profile.


And finally, regarding you and your profession: You won't see me lecturing you on the law on either a micro or macro level, because I don't pretend to know the law nearly as well as you do. That would be "dishonest". You also won't see me lecturing a mechanic on how to rebuild a transmission, because I don't know much about that, either. That would be "dishonest". And, that's just normal, adult common sense, a basic humility, and a respect for others. People don't "know" about markets and economics because someone on the radio talks about those things, or because they read one-sided accounts about them on political websites.
.

 

[NoVote]

1. Yes. Obama engaged in traditional Keynesian economics, which was needed more than at any time since the Great Depression.

 

[Mac1958]

1. Yes. Obama engaged in traditional Keynesian economics, which was needed more than at any time since the Great Depression.

View attachment 291717

Yes, some intelligent, Trump-level economic analysis there, always impressive.
.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

NO!!! What Obama did was stupid because I cannot even tell where the $10Trn went. I at least know that many of the monies DJT is spending is going toward our military.

Really now. How much of the deficit do you think increased military spending accounts for?

25%? If I were to guess.

FY 19 spending for the DOD was up 75 billion dollars, or 0.075 trillion.

FY-19 deficit was 1.113 trillion dollars.

The increase in military spending accounted for 6.7% of the deficit for FY19

I was off but still 7% more than BHO was spending. I do know that the major problem is entitlements.

And Obama was spending more than Bush II was spending who was spending more than Bill was spending who was spending more than Bush I...and so forth and so on.

One thing that is for certain...our military is not underfunded.

It was during the sequester

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

25%? If I were to guess.

FY 19 spending for the DOD was up 75 billion dollars, or 0.075 trillion.

FY-19 deficit was 1.113 trillion dollars.

The increase in military spending accounted for 6.7% of the deficit for FY19

I was off but still 7% more than BHO was spending. I do know that the major problem is entitlements.

Bullshit. Social Security, and Medicare are paid for through payroll taxes, and by law can't add to the debt.

The major problem is tax cuts for the rich, and military spending.

Before Reagans tax cuts, the debt was 967 billion. Every dime of that $23 trillion is directly tied to tax cuts for the rich, and military spending, that has led to the borrowing of money and the interest tied to those loans.

Just as soon as the tax cuts under Trump, Bush Jr., and Reagan are rolled back, and military spending is frozen, the national debt will begin to decline overnight.

Fortunately, the younger generations have grown wise to this through education, through internet mass media, and can no longer be bullshitted by right wing media sources.

Trickle down is getting ready to go the way of coal.

Payroll taxes aren’t high enough. Learn something before your criticize it. What about Medicaid? Want to put your status on this board on the line that entitlements are the primary reasons we have a budget deficit?

I never mentioned Medicaid.

Reading comprehension problems?

I love it when Republicans talk about rebuilding the military. We've been spending half a trillion on the military for decades, but the military needs rebuilding?

You have to be the worlds biggest dumbass if you believe that, but P.T. Barnum was talking about conservatives when he coined the phrase, "there's a sucker born every minute".

Military spending is nothing but a slush fund, and it needs to be cut in half, and permanently frozen.

Then we reduce the retirement age for social security and medicare both to age 62, permanently, and end the income level caps on SS, and Medicare payroll tax, tax capital gains as income, and impose a 1 cent tax on all Wall St. daily transactions.

This is not only doable, but just requires the right voting population voting in the right people to make it happen.

Medicaid is an entitlement as well. Dumb Leftist.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

Really now. How much of the deficit do you think increased military spending accounts for?

25%? If I were to guess.

FY 19 spending for the DOD was up 75 billion dollars, or 0.075 trillion.

FY-19 deficit was 1.113 trillion dollars.

The increase in military spending accounted for 6.7% of the deficit for FY19

I was off but still 7% more than BHO was spending. I do know that the major problem is entitlements.

And Obama was spending more than Bush II was spending who was spending more than Bill was spending who was spending more than Bush I...and so forth and so on.

One thing that is for certain...our military is not underfunded.

It was during the sequester

Nope, not even then.

 

[berg80]

If the Kenyan spent $10T and you loved it..Don’t you want Trump to spend at least that?

Someone had to pay for Bush's two wars and the Great Bush Recession.

Funny considering that those two wars were caused by Clinton. Had he been doing his job instead of worrying about blow jobs, they never would have happened. And oddly, that great Bush recession, 90% of it all occurred under Obama. Funny how that worked out.

I don't suppose you'd care to explain how you blame Obama for the horrible economic conditions he inherited would you? Oh, and how was it Bill Clinton's fault that Dubya decided to deceive Congress and the American people in order to justify the invasion and botched occupation of Iraq? You've got some splainin' to do.

 

[toobfreak]

If the Kenyan spent $10T and you loved it..Don’t you want Trump to spend at least that?

Someone had to pay for Bush's two wars and the Great Bush Recession.

Funny considering that those two wars were caused by Clinton. Had he been doing his job instead of worrying about blow jobs, they never would have happened. And oddly, that great Bush recession, 90% of it all occurred under Obama. Funny how that worked out.

I don't suppose you'd care to explain how you blame Obama for the horrible economic conditions he inherited would you? Oh, and how was it Bill Clinton's fault that Dubya decided to deceive Congress and the American people in order to justify the invasion and botched occupation of Iraq? You've got some splainin' to do.

Look Whackjob Troll, before I put you on permanent Ignore as just another useless partisan meathead pustule, we all know the "economic disaster" of the late 2000s was the doing of the democratic-led House and Barney Frank and their banking and SNL reforms they and Barry Obumma supported in the Senate. Presidents don't control or direct economies other than to perhaps spur them on through confidence or concerns just as the economic jump when Trump took office.

And the whole Bin Laden thing happened in 2001 because Clinton repeatedly passed on opportunities to get him earlier which might have stopped that. The evidence for invading Iraq as a response was well considered and presented to the UN on a multi-national level and agreed upon by many nations and fully endorsed by both Democrats and Republicans alike, including many of your famous favorites. It later turned out that some of the intelligence was wrong and that the WMD that Iraq had was more degraded than realized after many years storage in the desert. But that does not change the fact that Saddam was still at that time a major sponsor and enabler of al-Quada.

AS to having any "explaning" to do to you, go such ass. Bye. Life is too short to waste on pinheads like you.

 

[jwoodie]

1. Yes. Obama engaged in traditional Keynesian economics, which was needed more than at any time since the Great Depression. There goes the debt. It was nice to see that deficit was on an overall downward trajectory from its peak in 2010. Conversely, Trump has engaged in Keynesian economics during a non-recessionary period, something Keynes himself would have frowned upon. But he'll blame someone else.

2. The employment rate has continued its downward trajectory. A person with even the most remedial chart-reading skills can see that. Unfortunately, the GDP is currently at 1.9%. Sure, he can crow about that if he wants. It's a shame he's calling this a "great" economy at 1.9%, though. Too bad fundamental honesty is foreign to him. I've seen estimates that the China trade situation has shaved .2% to .4% off our GDP, and I'll give him that, too, although he'll blame someone else.

3. Neither. Obama did the only thing he could do, stand back while the Fed poured $4.5T into markets to stabilize and bring us out of the disaster he inherited. That, combined with how far the market had already dropped, was largely responsible for the stock market growth. Record low interest rates (not a particularly good sign) have buoyed the market since then, along with steady corporate profits. Unfortunately, we've been in a manufacturing recession for a while, but Trump will blame someone else (assuming he even knows about it).

4. No experienced advisor worth their salt tells their clients to sell over the results of a presidential election. No. Full speed ahead, with regular allocations and controls, based on a client's risk profile.


And finally, regarding you and your profession: You won't see me lecturing you on the law on either a micro or macro level, because I don't pretend to know the law nearly as well as you do. That would be "dishonest". You also won't see me lecturing a mechanic on how to rebuild a transmission, because I don't know much about that, either. That would be "dishonest". And, that's just normal, adult common sense, a basic humility, and a respect for others. People don't "know" about markets and economics because someone on the radio talks about those things, or because they read one-sided accounts about them on political websites.

To summarize:

1. Keneysian economics: Good if Obama does it, bad if Trump does it. Same for national debt.

2. Economy and unemployment rate: Same as above.

3. Stock Market: If up, no credit to Trump. If down, blame Trump.

4. Presidential elections have no effect on investments. See above.

Lecturing to others is fine as long as you are doing the lecturing. Because you are the only honest, normal, humble and respectful adult with common sense in the room.

 

[Mac1958]

1. Yes. Obama engaged in traditional Keynesian economics, which was needed more than at any time since the Great Depression. There goes the debt. It was nice to see that deficit was on an overall downward trajectory from its peak in 2010. Conversely, Trump has engaged in Keynesian economics during a non-recessionary period, something Keynes himself would have frowned upon. But he'll blame someone else.

2. The employment rate has continued its downward trajectory. A person with even the most remedial chart-reading skills can see that. Unfortunately, the GDP is currently at 1.9%. Sure, he can crow about that if he wants. It's a shame he's calling this a "great" economy at 1.9%, though. Too bad fundamental honesty is foreign to him. I've seen estimates that the China trade situation has shaved .2% to .4% off our GDP, and I'll give him that, too, although he'll blame someone else.

3. Neither. Obama did the only thing he could do, stand back while the Fed poured $4.5T into markets to stabilize and bring us out of the disaster he inherited. That, combined with how far the market had already dropped, was largely responsible for the stock market growth. Record low interest rates (not a particularly good sign) have buoyed the market since then, along with steady corporate profits. Unfortunately, we've been in a manufacturing recession for a while, but Trump will blame someone else (assuming he even knows about it).

4. No experienced advisor worth their salt tells their clients to sell over the results of a presidential election. No. Full speed ahead, with regular allocations and controls, based on a client's risk profile.


And finally, regarding you and your profession: You won't see me lecturing you on the law on either a micro or macro level, because I don't pretend to know the law nearly as well as you do. That would be "dishonest". You also won't see me lecturing a mechanic on how to rebuild a transmission, because I don't know much about that, either. That would be "dishonest". And, that's just normal, adult common sense, a basic humility, and a respect for others. People don't "know" about markets and economics because someone on the radio talks about those things, or because they read one-sided accounts about them on political websites.

To summarize:

1. Keneysian economics: Good if Obama does it, bad if Trump does it. Same for national debt.

2. Economy and unemployment rate: Same as above.

3. Stock Market: If up, no credit to Trump. If down, blame Trump.

4. Presidential elections have no effect on investments. See above.

Lecturing to others is fine as long as you are doing the lecturing. Because you are the only honest, normal, humble and respectful adult with common sense in the room.

Well, no.

But I do believe that what you describe is what you perceive, I truly do.

I keep providing serious, specific responses to Trumpsters on the economy. I need to stop doing that! You guys aren't serious. You're Trumpsters!


.

 

[Zorro!]

It cost a lot to recover from the republican caused economy collapse

Trump turned the economy around in less than six months...the magic kenyan didn't want the economy to turn around...dems love poor folk....

Trump didn't turn anything around. The economy was, and had been on an upward trajectory for quite a while when Trump was inaugurated.

There is Obama's final year GDP trajectory and it's not "upward".

If you want to see what an upward trajectory looks like, look no further than Trump's first two years:

IMPEACHMENT IN A TIME OF PROSPERITY

The Democrats insist that President Trump is a threat to the republic, although no one can explain why. Meanwhile, their mantra has gone from “It’s the economy, stupid” to “Economy? What’s that?” The Labor Department issued its November jobs report this morning, and it is spectacular. CNBC reports: The jobs market turned in a stellar performance in November, with nonfarm payrolls surging by 266,000 and the unemployment rate falling to 3.5%, according to Labor Department numbers released Friday.

Those totals easily beat the Wall Street consensus. Economists surveyed by Dow Jones had been looking for solid job growth of 187,000 and saw the unemployment rate holding steady from October’s 3.6%.​

Wages Rise:

Average hourly earnings rose by 3.1% from a year ago, while the average workweek held steady at 34.4 hours.​

In addition to the robust November gains, revisions brought up totals from the two previous months. September’s estimate went up 13,000 to 193,000 and the initial October count increased by 28,000 to 156,000. …​

“This is a blowout number and the U.S. economy continues to be all about the jobs,” Tony Bedikian, head of global markets for Citizens Bank said in a note. “The unemployment rate is at a 50-year low and wages are increasing.​

Dems Recession Hopes Die:

“Today’s job report, more than any other report in recent months, squashed any lingering concerns about an imminent recession in the US economy,” said Gad Levanon, head of the Conference Board’s Labor Market Institute. “Employment growth also shows no signs of slowing further despite the historically low unemployment rate.”​

The Democrats have mostly avoided talking about the Trump boom, while hoping for a recession to give them something to run on next year.

So it seems likely that the Democrats will have to keep talking about Ukraine, which is a poor substitute for issues the voters actually care about.

 

[BrokeLoser]

There is Obama's final year GDP trajectory and it's not "upward".

If you want to see what an upward trajectory looks like, look no further than Trump's first two years:

IMPEACHMENT IN A TIME OF PROSPERITY

The Democrats insist that President Trump is a threat to the republic, although no one can explain why. Meanwhile, their mantra has gone from “It’s the economy, stupid” to “Economy? What’s that?” The Labor Department issued its November jobs report this morning, and it is spectacular. CNBC reports: The jobs market turned in a stellar performance in November, with nonfarm payrolls surging by 266,000 and the unemployment rate falling to 3.5%, according to Labor Department numbers released Friday.

Those totals easily beat the Wall Street consensus. Economists surveyed by Dow Jones had been looking for solid job growth of 187,000 and saw the unemployment rate holding steady from October’s 3.6%.​

Wages Rise:

Average hourly earnings rose by 3.1% from a year ago, while the average workweek held steady at 34.4 hours.​

In addition to the robust November gains, revisions brought up totals from the two previous months. September’s estimate went up 13,000 to 193,000 and the initial October count increased by 28,000 to 156,000. …​

“This is a blowout number and the U.S. economy continues to be all about the jobs,” Tony Bedikian, head of global markets for Citizens Bank said in a note. “The unemployment rate is at a 50-year low and wages are increasing.​

Dems Recession Hopes Die:

“Today’s job report, more than any other report in recent months, squashed any lingering concerns about an imminent recession in the US economy,” said Gad Levanon, head of the Conference Board’s Labor Market Institute. “Employment growth also shows no signs of slowing further despite the historically low unemployment rate.”​

The Democrats have mostly avoided talking about the Trump boom, while hoping for a recession to give them something to run on next year.

So it seems likely that the Democrats will have to keep talking about Ukraine, which is a poor substitute for issues the voters actually care about.

But but but… Harpy Eagle often says the Super Negro handed Trump a thriving economy on the up and up? Is he lying?