It's Official: Trump Tax Cuts Are Boosting Growth And Mostly Paying For Themselves

What will be the GDP for the year? Just under 3%?

 

Recession was over 5 months into the Obama administration before any stimulus was ever spent.

 

We've had many threads on the housing bubbles and I've stated my views there on numerous occasions.

But it is a fact that the bubble peaked in 2006 and started collapsing in 2007, before the Dems ever took control of Congress, and the recession was in full rout in 2009 when Obama took office.

Please cite where Obama "agreed" to be "totally be in charge" of the FY2009 budget. As noted in the several articles I cited above, including conservative sources, the vast bulk of FY2009 spending was already locked in before Obama took office.


As the various articles I've cited demonstrate,

 

Bush took office with the Republicans controlling Congress and a surplus budget and a golden opportunity to pay down the debt.

Which surplus was promptly squandered with revenue cuts and spending increases. Just like Reagan did before Bush and donald is doing now.

Standard Republican M.O. Bitch about deficits when a Dem is in office. Wildly expand the deficits when a Republican is in office.

Hypocrites.

 

CBO Budget Projections: After Two Years No Better Than Throwing Darts.



CBO projections more than two years into the future in the domain it perhaps studies most -- federal deficits -- are little better than random guesses.

Look at the chart above. It shows the deterioration of CBO predictive accuracy when it comes to the federal budget deficit. The circular markers show how accurate these predictions have been since 2009 in forecasting how large the federal budget deficit would be. As one can see, although CBO estimates are very good for the same year in which they are made, accuracy deteriorates rapidly. By year 3, CBO projections have actually been no better than luck.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapo...s-no-better-than-throwing-darts/#18819bbf67a2

 

That is very true. Predictions are notoriously wrong.

However, as to the effect of cutting tax revenues and increasing spending on deficits, we've seen the movie before, at least a couple times.

 

And a slowing economy that was in recession within a few weeks of his taking office. Once again your cherry picking.

I really have no interest in your trying to blame presidents or congress for recessions it's stupid to begin with and doesn't address what actions they take to mitigate the effects of them and help get us into full recovery. You don't want to discuss policies and results you just want to point fingers.

Or your simpleton view that Presidents control the budget and the economy and all things that happen are due to their actions. It shows a total lack of understanding of the economy and how the government works.

 

Yes like after the Democrats took the Congress in 2007. They squandered the paltry $161B deficit the Republicans handed them and took it to $1,400B in just two years and kept it over $1,000B for the next three and don't try to blame it on the recession or you will expose your hypocracy when you claim the Republicans surpluses were squander in 2000/2001.

 

Yes DEMOCRAT spending.

Oh and what was Obama doing in 2008?

 

yea, claiming taking the worst recession in 80 years with a UE of over 10%, down to under 5%, doubling the stock market to record highs and the most consecutive months of jobs growth of any other US president in history is the WORST fiscal policy in modern history just makes you look silly.

 

and you know this claim has been refuted. Repeating it is just moronic.

 

So what? The year [2007] they took the Congress and legislative control, a year before the recession began.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/110th_United_States_Congress

January 3, 2007 – January 3, 2009
Senate President Dick Cheney (R)
Senate Pres. pro tem Robert Byrd (D)
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D)
Members 100 senators
435 representatives
5 non-voting delegates
Senate Majority Democratic (coalition)
House Majority Democratic

 

strawman

They took the worst recession in 80 years, caused by republicans, and turned it around from a UE over 10%, to under 5%, doubled the stock market to record highs and had the most consecutive months of jobs growth of any other US president in history.
\

 

What is not true in this statement?

Yes like after the Democrats took the Congress in 2007. They squandered the paltry $161B deficit the Republicans handed them and took it to $1,400B in just two years and kept it over $1,000B for the next three and don't try to blame it on the recession or you will expose your hypocracy when you claim the Republicans surpluses were squander in 2000/2001.

 

none of this contradicts anything I said. The tax cuts were sold as paying for themselves, if GDP was at 4% or higher.

learn to read.

 

Everything except for the democrats taking control of congress in 2007, is not ture.

 

Trolling

The Republicans lost control of the Congress a year before the recession handing the Democrats an UE of 4.5%. Two years later the Democrats had it at 7.5% and passed their stimulus they promised would hold it to 8%. Two years later it was at 10% and stayed over 9% for the next three years, the worst unemployment record in modern history.

 

like strawman, you don't seem to know what trolling is either.

huh? It was still a republican administration. The economy was handed to Obama in the toilet, courtesy of republican incompetence.

They took the worst recession in 80 years, caused by republicans, and turned it around from a UE over 10%, to under 5%, doubled the stock market to record highs and had the most consecutive months of jobs growth of any other US president in history.

 

Is it true the deficit for 2007, the last Republican deficit, was just $161B?
Is it true two years later under Democrat budgets it was $1,400B?
Is it true it stayed over $1,000B for the next three?

 

Ohh, how very objective of you. That is why you repeatedly make the false claim that Democrats took over the government in 2007 whenever the Great Recession in mentioned.

The only simpleton thing is your pretense that Presidents have nothing to do with the budget, economy, or legislation.

 

Welcome to record new deficits. No wonder Paul Ryan is fleeing to the high ground.

 

True.

Is it also true that cause and effect in a complex economy is not immediate?

 

Incomes raise yearly, and the number of people who have taxable incomes grows yearly based on simple population growth. Claiming that just because revenues grew is beyond disingenuous to the debate because that in now way signals that the increases are released to tax breaks. Actually the inverse is happening as many have pointed out. Notice that the year over year the increases are getting smaller. It is that level of growth that shows that the Tax breaks mainly benefited those at the top when correlated with other economic data.

Im not saying that its all bad news, but to claim that the increase in income taxes somehow is related to the tax breaks just isnt true. Mainly base don the fact that they haven't been in effect long enough to even be measured

 

Trolling again.

Huh? Democrats controlled the House AND the Senate. Are you still trying to claim Bush could have and should have vetoed their 2009 Budget?

They took the last Republican UE of 4.5% and took it to 7.5% and then passed their stimulus on the promise it would hold it to 8% and instead it shot to 10% and you laughingly try to blame it on Republicans.

You seem to be stuck with trying to blame Republicans for not stopping your guys from their failed policies.

 

Is it true the worst recession in 80 years happened?

Your claims the democrats

is a direct result of the republican caused recession.