Let the nation default?

[IcebergSlim]

Notice how Obama is nowhere to be found on that list. Coincidence? I think not. At least make it look good for your guy.

Your reasoning skills are below average. I made it several years ago when Obama had only been President for a year or two.

GDP has grown by 1.6% per year since the end of 2008.

It's grown by 2.23 % per year (compounded) between Q2 2009 and q2 2013......

 

[Toro]

Notice how Obama is nowhere to be found on that list. Coincidence? I think not. At least make it look good for your guy.

Your reasoning skills are below average. I made it several years ago when Obama had only been President for a year or two.

GDP has grown by 1.6% per year since the end of 2008.

It's grown by 2.23 % per year (compounded) between Q2 2009 and q2 2013......

This graph is from the first quarter of the year after they were elected. So to be consistent, I started in Q1/09. I downloaded the data from the St Louis Fed Fred site and used the following formula (Y/X)^(1/4.5)-1 where X=$14,574.6 and Y=15,679.7 to get 1.6%.

 

[Toro]

Your reasoning skills are below average. I made it several years ago when Obama had only been President for a year or two.

GDP has grown by 1.6% per year since the end of 2008.

It's grown by 2.23 % per year (compounded) between Q2 2009 and q2 2013......

This graph is from the first quarter of the year after they were elected. So to be consistent, I started in Q1/09. I downloaded the data from the St Louis Fed Fred site and used the following formula (Y/X)^(1/4.5)-1 where X=$14,574.6 and Y=15,679.7 to get 1.6%.

FTR, if we start from Q3/09, X=$14,356.9 and the exponent becomes (1/4), the compounded average growth rate is 2.2%.

 

[IcebergSlim]

Your reasoning skills are below average. I made it several years ago when Obama had only been President for a year or two.

GDP has grown by 1.6% per year since the end of 2008.

It's grown by 2.23 % per year (compounded) between Q2 2009 and q2 2013......

This graph is from the first quarter of the year after they were elected. So to be consistent, I started in Q1/09. I downloaded the data from the St Louis Fed Fred site and used the following formula (Y/X)^(1/4.5)-1 where X=$14,574.6 and Y=15,679.7 to get 1.6%.

Couple of suggestions.....Inauguration was on Jan 20th.....and it doesn't seem appropriate to burden Obama with The Wages of Supply Side Idiocy....I recommend starting with q2..

When I looked at that FRED (bea) series the 15,679,677,000 number is as of 4/1/13.....that would make the equation (y/x)^(1/4)-1.....

 

[Toro]

Couple of suggestions.....Inauguration was on Jan 20th.....and it doesn't seem appropriate to burden Obama with The Wages of Supply Side Idiocy....I recommend starting with q2..

That's fair. However, most of Q1 was under Obama, as it is for most other Presidents. So to be consistent, Obama should be judged like the other Presidents.

An argument against this is that the President isn't in office long enough in the first quarter to have much of an effect. An argument for this is that markets are rational and discount the effect of a President in advance of him being sworn in, even discounting the election results before the election. Thus, even though he hasn't been sworn in, agents are adjusting expectations for the new President though he has yet to pass any laws. I split the baby in half and started as of Jan 1.

When I looked at that FRED (bea) series the 15,679,677,000 number is as of 4/1/13.....that would make the equation (y/x)^(1/4)-1.....

4/1/13 annotates the start of the quarter. The number is as of the end of the quarter. So 4/1/13 means the end of the second quarter of 2013. Thus, the start of the Obama series on Jan 1, X is Q4/08, which is GDP as of December 31 2008 annotated as 10/1/08.

Having said all that, I'm not going to be excessively dogmatic. But still, even if we say 2.2%, it's still not exactly a top shelf performance.

 

[IcebergSlim]

Couple of suggestions.....Inauguration was on Jan 20th.....and it doesn't seem appropriate to burden Obama with The Wages of Supply Side Idiocy....I recommend starting with q2..

That's fair. However, most of Q1 was under Obama, as it is for most other Presidents. So to be consistent, Obama should be judged like the other Presidents.

I do that for all such calculations.....

An argument against this is that the President isn't in office long enough in the first quarter to have much of an effect. An argument for this is that markets are rational and discount the effect of a President in advance of him being sworn in, even discounting the election results before the election. Thus, even though he hasn't been sworn in, agents are adjusting expectations for the new President though he has yet to pass any laws. I split the baby in half and started as of Jan 1.

That may hold for capital market participants, but they are not a very good proxy for GDP.

When I looked at that FRED (bea) series the 15,679,677,000 number is as of 4/1/13.....that would make the equation (y/x)^(1/4)-1.....

4/1/13 annotates the start of the quarter. The number is as of the end of the quarter. So 4/1/13 means the end of the second quarter of 2013. Thus, the start of the Obama series on Jan 1, X is Q4/08, which is GDP as of December 31 2008 annotated as 10/1/08.

Having said all that, I'm not going to be excessively dogmatic. But still, even if we say 2.2%, it's still not exactly a top shelf performance.

You are correct about the dating convention.....my bad....

2.2% isn't great...it is, however better than the guy before him eked out over 8 years.....it is also within the range expected under the Reinhart/Rogoff assumptions regarding recoveries from "balance sheet" recessions...

it is also worth noting that this has been achieved largely in the absence of sustained supportive fiscal policy....

 

[KissMy]

The Fed allows orderly default as it steadily defaults $85 billion a month. Banking panic crisis & disorderly defaults happened regularly prior to the Fed.

 

[thanatos144]

Again there will be no default unless the President and Congress does something illegal

 

[QuickHitCurepon]

The Fed allows orderly default as it steadily defaults $85 billion a month. Banking panic crisis & disorderly defaults happened regularly prior to the Fed.

Dude seriously, the congress and OBAMA are really, truly looking for a solution.

 

[KissMy]

Again there will be no default unless the President and Congress does something illegal

The default in April 1979, ended up costing taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars. The Treasury Department blamed it on a crush of paperwork partly caused by lawmakers who — this will sound familiar — bickered too long before raising the nation's debt limit. It was lawmakers determined to attach a strong balanced budget amendment to the bill. They finally relented, the day before Social Security checks were expected to start bouncing. The tumult contributed to Treasury's failure to redeem $122 million in maturing T-bills, touted as one of the world's safest investments.

Many bond holders were forced to join & file a class-action lawsuit against thr US treasury. Some investors that April and May waited more than a week for their money. Treasury blamed problems with its newfangled word-processing equipment. The system was stressed, officials said, when the booming popularity of T-bills collided with the last-minute debt ceiling increase from Congress.

Investors called it a "default" and sued for interest to cover the gap. Treasury called it a "delay." It ushered in an 8% rise in interest rates that took 8 years to return to previous level. That cost taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars.

 

[KissMy]

With days to go before the US could default on its debt, China's state media aired its frustrations with the shutdown, saying it was time to consider a "de-Americanized" system.

China state media blasts US shutdown, calls for a 'de-Americanized' world - Behind The Wall

BEIJING –With days to go before the United States debt default deadline, Beijing aired its frustrations with the shutdown Sunday, saying it was time to consider a “de-Americanized” world order.

With $1.28 trillion in U.S. Treasuries, China is easily the biggest foreign holder of American debt.

China has also funneled billions of dollars into private American investments – to the tune of an estimated $54 billion in 2012 alone.

 

[Toro]

They say that every time.

 

[thanatos144]

Again there will be no default unless the President and Congress does something illegal

The default in April 1979, ended up costing taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars. The Treasury Department blamed it on a crush of paperwork partly caused by lawmakers who — this will sound familiar — bickered too long before raising the nation's debt limit. It was lawmakers determined to attach a strong balanced budget amendment to the bill. They finally relented, the day before Social Security checks were expected to start bouncing. The tumult contributed to Treasury's failure to redeem $122 million in maturing T-bills, touted as one of the world's safest investments.

Many bond holders were forced to join & file a class-action lawsuit against thr US treasury. Some investors that April and May waited more than a week for their money. Treasury blamed problems with its newfangled word-processing equipment. The system was stressed, officials said, when the booming popularity of T-bills collided with the last-minute debt ceiling increase from Congress.

Investors called it a "default" and sued for interest to cover the gap. Treasury called it a "delay." It ushered in an 8% rise in interest rates that took 8 years to return to previous level. That cost taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars.

Then its a good thing we don't have a Democrat ran congress like they did back then to make the same banking mistake

 

[KissMy]

Debt Limit Bill H.R.2534 passed & signed into law April 2nd, 1979 the day before Social Security Checks bounced caused the US Treasury to default on April T-Bills & interest rates to double.

 

[hortysir]

Debt Limit Bill H.R.2534 passed & signed into law April 2nd, 1979 the day before Social Security Checks bounced caused the US Treasury to default on April T-Bills & interest rates to double.

Carter

Same failed tax&spend policies
Abysmal foreign policy
American hostages 444days in captivity
Double digit interest rates
Gas lines around the block


But it'll work THIS time

 

[BreezeWood]

http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/10/10/

Obama’s approval rating ticks up to 47 percent

While the shutdown has wounded the Republican Party, Obama’s overall political standing remains stable in the poll.
...........


For one thing, the health-care law has become more popular since the shutdown began. Thirty-eight percent see the Affordable Care Act (or “Obamacare”) as a good idea, versus 43 percent who see it as a bad idea – up from 31 percent good idea, 44 percent bad idea last month.

In addition, 50 percent say they oppose totally eliminating funding for the law, even if it that means a partial shutdown of the government. That’s up from 46 percent who said they opposed that move in a Sept. 2013 CNBC poll.

at least the majority of Americans have maintained a degree of maturity ...

what's interesting but not in the pol according to a pol reported on NPR radio the members of the Tea Party themselves are ecstatic with the shutdown and possible default - that is not surprising but the fact such a small minority nationally can have so great an impact on the country is and how "stupid" the situation has become.

.

 

[IcebergSlim]

Debt Limit Bill H.R.2534 passed & signed into law April 2nd, 1979 the day before Social Security Checks bounced caused the US Treasury to default on April T-Bills & interest rates to double.

Carter

Same failed tax&spend policies
Abysmal foreign policy
American hostages 444days in captivity
Double digit interest rates
Gas lines around the block


But it'll work THIS time

Let’s look at each key component, spending, regulation, and taxes, in turn. Contrary to popular belief, the relationship between the party in the White House and government outlays is the opposite of what one might expect.

Under Carter, total government outlays as a percent of gross domestic product averaged a relatively stable 20.8 percent. Over the next 12 years, when Republicans Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush resided in the White House, spending increased, averaging 22.2 percent of GDP.

The trend reversed under the Democratic leadership of Bill Clinton. Government on average consumed 19.8 percent of GDP during his term.

Finally, Republicans under George W. Bush undid the progress made during the Clinton years with spending rising from just 18.2 percent of GDP in his first year, to 20.7 percent by the time he left office.​

Carter Shows Where Obama Needs to Go: Kevin Hassett - Bloomberg

I'm gonna take a wild guess and say that you cast 2 votes for each of the most profligate POTUS of the post WW2 era, probably ever....

am I right?

 

[KissMy]

Debt Limit Bill H.R.2534 passed & signed into law April 2nd, 1979 the day before Social Security Checks bounced caused the US Treasury to default on April T-Bills & interest rates to double.

Carter

Same failed tax&spend policies
Abysmal foreign policy
American hostages 444days in captivity
Double digit interest rates
Gas lines around the block


But it'll work THIS time

 

[RKMBrown]

Tell me where to send the dime......

https://secure.piryx.com/donate/0aIqxE3m/Ted-Cruz-Victory-Committee/
or
https://secure.piryx.com/donate/Zfzr1DPt/MarcoRubio/

So if I send a nickel to each of those Teabaggers, you will come up with some evidence to back up your assertions?

Why don't you just saddle up Rembrandt P*ssyhorse and hie off into the sunset?

What part of you are not paying me enough confused you? I think I'll stay right here tinker bell, why don't you move me.

 

[Noomi]

Two days until disaster. Are the Repubs going to stop their hissy fit and do the right thing?