Job growth, income, and GDP is better under democrat presidents - by a lot.

The American middle classes and working poor think it's just super duper swell .....

wjjwjwjqjqqmwm.png
 
NO, it does NOT mean "negative GDP" (which would be GDP of less than zero). You get the dunce cap for saying that. HERE is what recession means >>

re·ces·sion
[rəˈseSH(ə)n]

NOUN

  1. a period of temporary economic decline during which trade and industrial activity are reduced, generally identified by a fall in GDP in two successive quarters: So let's examine 2015/2016. >> View attachment 662371
    As we see, GDP had a "fall" from 3.5 to 2.6 (reduction # 1) Then fell from 2.6 to 2.2 (reduction # 2). The fell from 2.2 to 1.8 (reduction # 3). The fell from 1.8 to 1.4 (fourth reduction)
    So was the reduction from 3.5 to 2.2 (fall in GDP in two successive quarters) was the first.
  2. Reduction from 2.6 to 1.8 was the second.
  3. Reduction from 2.2 to 1.4 was the third. (Triple Recession)
  4. The first 6 years of Obama were post-recession bounce, where GDP ordinarily increases no matter who is president. The last 2 years which could be attributed to him, he was a failure.
  5. It also was already explained to you that 2018/2019 didn't NEED to be mentioned as I was telling Billy000 about the transition from Obama to Trump, as he erroneously said Trump inherited a good economy from Obama.


















































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































Idiot, recession is NEGATIVE GDP GROWTH, aka contraction.

+1.6% GDP GROWTH IS.....POSITIVE GROWTH, even if it may have slowed from prior growth rate.

Give it up, you are obviously too stupid for this.
 
Idiot, recession is NEGATIVE GDP GROWTH.

1.6% GDP GROWTH IS.....POSITIVE GROWTH.
I just explained to you what a recession is, with a link to the definition, and showed you the Obama triple recession. If you are incapable of learning, not my problem.
 
I just explained to you what a recession is, with a link to the definition, and showed you the Obama triple recession. If you are incapable of learning, not my problem.

Recession is NEGATIVE GDP GROWTH for 2 consequitive Qs. You keep confusing slowed growth, for negative growth, because you are completely clueless.

If we have 3% growth Q1 followed by 2% Q2 growth, then both Qs had positive growth, even if growth slowed in Q2.

There was only one recession during Obama's 8 years, the one he inherited in 2009. Learn that and stop making a total fool of yourself.
 
Recession is NEGATIVE GDP GROWTH for 2 consequitive Qs. You keep confusing slowed growth, for negative growth, because you are completely clueless.

There was only one recession during Obama's 8 years, the one he inherited in 2009.
re·ces·sion
[rəˈseSH(ə)n]

NOUN
  1. a period of temporary economic decline during which trade and industrial activity are reduced, generally identified by a fall in GDP in two successive quarters:
Some people have to be told twice (or 3 times) in order to see Obama's 3 recessions.- :rolleyes:
 
re·ces·sion
[rəˈseSH(ə)n]

NOUN
  1. a period of temporary economic decline during which trade and industrial activity are reduced, generally identified by a fall in GDP in two successive quarters:
Some people have to be told twice (or 3 times) in order to see Obama's 3 recessions.- :rolleyes:

Moron + 1.6% GDP GROWTH...is growth.

Decline is NEGATIVE GDP GROWTH.

Economic activity still increased when growth rate fell from 2% to 1% for example. Only when GDP growth turns negative is there an economic contraction.
 
Moron + 1.6% GDP GROWTH...is growth.

Decline is NEGATIVE GDP GROWTH.

Economic activity still increased when growth rate fell from 2% to 1% for example. Only when GDP growth turns negative is there an economic contraction.
re·ces·sion
[rəˈseSH(ə)n]

NOUN
  1. a period of temporary economic decline during which trade and industrial activity are reduced, generally identified by a fall in GDP in two successive quarters:
Some people have to be told twice (or 3 times) in order to see Obama's 3 recessions.-
 
re·ces·sion
[rəˈseSH(ə)n]

NOUN
  1. a period of temporary economic decline during which trade and industrial activity are reduced, generally identified by a fall in GDP in two successive quarters:
Some people have to be told twice (or 3 times) in order to see Obama's 3 recessions.-

Ok moron let's do it this way:

Post two consequitive Qs with NEGATIVE GDP growth 2010-2016.

Make absolutely certain that GDP growth is NEGATIVE, in both months. Make absolutely certain that there was economic contraction, not growth, in both months.
 
Last edited:
LOL

You're beyond senile, gramps. You refuted nothing as I posted links to your posts; the first one where you showed polls indicate a red wave... and then a second post where you said polls are unreliable.

You owned yourself with that one.
Is there a doctor in the house ? I mean really.

1656220981948.png
1656220997949.png
1656221021161.png
 
Ok moron let's do it this way:

Post two consequitive Qs with NEGATIVE GDP growth 2010-2016.

Make absolutely certain that GDP growth is NEGATIVE, in both months. Make absolutely certain that there was economic contraction, not growth, in both months.
I posted 3 of them in Post # 359, with a link from the BEA. If you can't read English and read graphs, not my problem.

Can you read this ?>> " a fall in GDP in two successive quarters:" If not, it's back to the 8th grade for you.
 
I posted 3 of them in Post # 359, with a link from the BEA. If you can't read English and read graphs, not my problem.

Can you read this ?>> " a fall in GDP in two successive quarters:" If not, it's back to the 8th grade for you.

Moron no you didn't, not a single Q had contraction, they were all GROWTH Q.

Here is what you said:

"As we see, GDP had a "fall" from 3.5 to 2.6 (reduction # 1) Then fell from 2.6 to 2.2 (reduction # 2). The fell from 2.2 to 1.8 (reduction # 3). The fell from 1.8 to 1.4 (fourth reduction)"

No a single one of those are Negative, they are all positive growth Q. You are talking about
a variance in the rate of growth, NOT CONTRACTION.

When economy grew 3.5% and then 2.6%, at no point did GDP decrease in either Q. It just increased at slower rate in Q2
 
No you didn't,

Moron no you didn't, not a single Q had contraction, they were all GROWTH Q.

Here is what you said:

"As we see, GDP had a "fall" from 3.5 to 2.6 (reduction # 1) Then fell from 2.6 to 2.2 (reduction # 2). The fell from 2.2 to 1.8 (reduction # 3). The fell from 1.8 to 1.4 (fourth reduction)"

No a single one of those are Negative, they are all positive growth Q. A you are talking about us variance in the rate of growth, NOT CONTACTION.
Oh, shut the hell up, you fckin asshole - learn to read.:bigbed:
 
That's also been refuted repeatedly. Ho hum.

LOLOLOLOL

It's hysterical how you think you get to make up your own numbers. :lmao:

The numbers don't change just because you're senile. They are what they are.

Obama ... 1.9%
Trump .... 1.3%
 
NO, it does NOT mean "negative GDP" (which would be GDP of less than zero). You get the dunce cap for saying that. HERE is what recession means >>

re·ces·sion
[rəˈseSH(ə)n]

NOUN

  1. a period of temporary economic decline during which trade and industrial activity are reduced, generally identified by a fall in GDP in two successive quarters: So let's examine 2015/2016. >>
    1656217518108-png.662371

    As we see, GDP had a "fall" from 3.5 to 2.6 (reduction # 1) Then fell from 2.6 to 2.2 (reduction # 2). The fell from 2.2 to 1.8 (reduction # 3). The fell from 1.8 to 1.4 (fourth reduction)
    So was the reduction from 3.5 to 2.2 (fall in GDP in two successive quarters) was the first.
  2. Reduction from 2.6 to 1.8 was the second.
  3. Reduction from 2.2 to 1.4 was the third. (Triple Recession)
  4. The first 6 years of Obama were post-recession bounce, where GDP ordinarily increases no matter who is president. The last 2 years which could be attributed to him, he was a failure.
  5. It also was already explained to you that 2018/2019 didn't NEED to be mentioned as I was telling Billy000 about the transition from Obama to Trump, as he erroneously said Trump inherited a good economy from Obama.

You're batshit insane, gramps. :cuckoo:

Forget for the moment those aren't even the correct GDP figures as there were not two consecutive quarters of decline in 2016... 2.4, 1.2, 2.4, 2.0...

Forget for the moment you're idiotically calling every quarter after the 2nd one a separate recession...

Even the NBER, who track recessions, knows you’re fucked in the head as no recession was recorded in 2016...

 
re·ces·sion
[rəˈseSH(ə)n]

NOUN
  1. a period of temporary economic decline during which trade and industrial activity are reduced, generally identified by a fall in GDP in two successive quarters:
Some people have to be told twice (or 3 times) in order to see Obama's 3 recessions.-

LOL

According to your [il]logic, gramps, we had 5 recessions in Trump's first 2 years...



Are ya feeling stupid yet?
 

Forum List

Back
Top