In Biden's first year, economic growth reached a 37-year high

[Into the Night]

Idiots on the left won't panic until the lights turn off. Of course, then it is too late.

Atlas Shrugged.

 

[Into the Night]

Given the fact 2021 had the best economic growth in almost 40 years, and unemployment is now well under 4%, the economy is likely to make it hard for Democrats to hold onto Congress. After all, Republicans are the party for upper-class tax cuts, and more people are pushing up into the higher tax brackets now, so that sounds increasingly appealing. Meanwhile, Democrats are the party for enhancing the social safety net, and growing prosperity means fewer people think they'll actually need that safety net. When voters start thinking of themselves less as a working class and more as people well on their way to being wealthy, it plays to the Republican strengths.

You see the result of that in the pattern of presidential elections. When have we ever had sub-5% unemployment when a Republican DIDN'T win the presidential election? FDR and Truman ended the Great Depression and led us to sub-4% unemployment, so the voters rewarded them by electing a Republican president. And it was only after he led us into three recessions that the voters realized their error and put a Democrat back in the White House. Kennedy and Johnson brought unemployment down from the 6.6% left by Eisenhower to just 3.4%, so naturally the voters rewarded them by putting Nixon in office. It was only after Nixon and Ford had totally fucked up the economy that voters returned the Dems to the White House.

Thanks to sky-high monetary fiscal stimulus, the Republicans managed to grow the economy in the 1980s, and held the White House for 12 years, until they'd screwed things up badly enough that Clinton took the helm, with 7.3% unemployment. As soon as he had unemployment back down under 4%, though (where it had last been in the early 1970's), the people were feeling rich enough they thought they didn't need Democratic policies, and they installed another Republican into the presidency. Once he'd fucked things up badly, the people realized their error and installed Obama into the White House to clean up Bush's mess. At the time unemployment was 7.8%, and Obama drove it down to just 4.7%.... which naturally means it was time for more DERP from the voters, and Trump became president. Only after he drove the unemployment rate back up did the voters change course and give us another Democrat to clean up the mess. He inherited an economy with 6.4% unemployment.

Now Biden's got unemployment down under 4% and people are feeling rich again. It's not hard to guess what comes next. Anyone who has watched this show for long enough can anticipate the next scene. People are pushing up into those higher tax brackets and feeling like they'll never again need government economic help, so the field is set for the Republicans to take control again.

You can't lie your way to prosperity either.

 

[Into the Night]

You picked the one that you thought worked best for purposes of your partisan rhetoric. If in a few months gas prices are down but overall inflation is up, you'll change your pick.

Just hoping against hope. Gotit. I see desperation in your comments.

 

[Into the Night]

[/FONT][/SIZE][/COLOR]
No. Halfwits imagine that others don't know that deficits add to public debt.

That would be you.

Incorrect. Have you never seen an interstate highway?

And there are no returns for it. The money the government spends on them doesn't even maintain them.

The idea of using spending to stimulate the economy to help grow out of a recession is standard economic theory, practiced practically everywhere in the world at least since the 1930's.

Keynesian economics doesn't work. You can't print your way to prosperity.

 

[Into the Night]

That takes me back. Back in the Obama years, pretty much every indicator was heading in the right direction --

Down?

real incomes were rising,

No. Inflation was out of control. That is not real income.

poverty and unemployment and deficits were falling,

Lie. People were thrown out of work.

etc. At the time, a wingnut I was arguing with used that exact same phrase, "Potemkin economy," to predict an imminent collapse.

It was already collapsing.

Of course, the economy went right on growing throughout the Obama presidency,

Lie.

and even had plenty of momentum after he left,

Lie.

until the Trump Recession started.

What Trump Recession??

It was DEMOCRATS that started the economic depression by shutting down the economy, jackass.

It's quaint to see that golden oldie played again.

Fuck your 'golden oldie'.

 

[Into the Night]

How is biden to blame for a world wide inflation cycle?

Pivot fallacy. We are talking about America.

You just want to hate on America

That would be YOU. Inversion fallacy.

You blame America for what Putin and China caused huh asshole traitor

Random phrase. Ignored.

 

[Into the Night]

You assholes caused that crash with Republican economic ideas shit brick

No. DEMOCRATS did.

 

[Into the Night]

Bush and team caused the 2008 crash lie fuck

Nope. Democrats did.

 

[Into the Night]

Stop lying.

I don't think he can.

 

[Lionfish]

Despite repukes and their media sources of anti-Biden lies, smear tactics and disinformation from the beginning of the sewer element, this deplorable influence cannot get around the facts versus its lies to attempt the manipulate the thinking of society for uncivilized and evil reasons:

Kevin McCarthy argued last year that Joe Biden's policies "have stalled our recovery," adding, "Bidenomics is bad for America." Yeah, about that...

As a presidential candidate in 2016, Donald Trump made bold predictions about the kind of economic growth the United States would see if he were elected. Americans would celebrate, the Republican said, as annual GDP growth reached 4 percent for the first time in decades.

It was among the most jarring of Trump's broken promises. Even before the pandemic, GDP growth in Trump's first three years failed to reach 3 percent."

Bottom line:

But as it turns out, the U.S. economy was able to reach growth rates unseen in a generation, but it happened under President Joe Biden."

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow...economic-growth-reached-38-year-high-n1288089

CNN’s Enten: Polling Shows GOP Will Take Huge House Majority –Best Position in over 80 Years

 

[Mina]

CNN’s Enten: Polling Shows GOP Will Take Huge House Majority –Best Position in over 80 Years

I wouldn't be surprised. Republicans sell upper-class tax cuts, and the extraordinary income growth on Biden's watch has resulted in a high share of Americans starting to push up into higher brackets. Meanwhile, Democrats fight for an enhanced social safety net, but with Biden having led us to unemployment rates well under 4%, a very small percentage of Americans feel they might need that. This is a perfect storm.

Seriously, when has unemployment EVER been under 5% without it favoring Republicans in the election? The fairly consistent modern pattern is that Democrats are given the presidency by voters after Republicans have made a mess of our economy, and the Dems are tasked with cleaning it up. Then, once they've done so, people get complacent and vote Republicans back in. That's the story of 1952, 1968, 2000, and 2016, for example. In each such year, years of Democratic executive power had led us to rock-bottom unemployment, and so voters felt safe to gamble with the "have your cake and eat it too" party, and Republicans retook power (and led us to catastrophe). The same dynamics are at work this year.

 

[Lionfish]

 

[gfm7175]

When discussing fiscal stimulus, anyone with a brain will, of course, discuss changes to the deficit, not changes to the debt, for obvious reasons.

Anyone with a brain will, of course, instantly realize upon hearing the word "deficit" squawked over and over again, that Mina is half-wit Democrat operative, parroting the Party programming.

Consider it in the context of a business, instead of a government, to see the point more easily. Let's say you work at a company that had $1 million of sales last year, while running a deficit of $100,000.

Very simplistically speaking:

Income: $1 million
Expenses: $1.1 million
Retained Earnings: -$100,000

This is a hit on equity and is unsustainable if this keeps happening time and time again.

That guy gets fired and you inherit the company, and cut the advertising budget, leaving the company with a $50,000 deficit, and, say $1.1 million in sales.

Apparently some or all of the expenses other than advertising have increased over the prior year then, if there's a $50,000 deficit at the end of the subsequent year even though sales have increased over the prior year and the advertising expense is down from the prior year.

Very simplistically speaking:

Income: $1.1 million
Expenses: $1.15 million
Retained Earnings: -$50,000

This is a hit on equity and is unsustainable if this keeps happening time and time again.

Now, someone with no knowledge of business might conclude you did a worse job that your predecessor,

It would appear that I effectively just continued my predecessor's policies except I decided to cut the advertising budget by $50,000 which resulted in a $50,000 lower deficit than the prior year. I, like my predecessor, have failed to correct the earnings problem. Since retained earnings is still decreasing year by year, which is a hit on equity, the business still needs some sort of outside funding (bank loan, donation, subsidy, investor, etc) in order to continue operating. In the end, I have failed just as my predecessor had failed.

since debt is now even higher than you inherited.

Not necessarily. Maybe this business, rather than seeking out a loan, sought out additional investors or received donations of some sort?

You haven't specified anything about this company's liability situation beyond making this vague claim that it had liabilities under the predecessor and that its liabilities have now increased under my watch. Until now, you've only spoken of the company's income and expenses, which appear on an income statement and then periodically get closed into retained earnings, an equity account. An equity account is not a liability account.

However, for sake of conversation, regarding this and any other future reference of "debt", I will assume that this company, under its predecessor and now under my watch, has resorted to taking out loans from incompetent banks in order to continue its operations for the time being.

But among people who aren't blithering imbeciles,

So now you're leaving this conversation?

that would be seen as a step in the right direction....

No, it would be seen as a business continuing to fail, albeit now at a slower pace than before.

you relied less on new borrowing to advertise products,

... but I am still relying on new borrowing from incompetent banks in order to continue operations.

but still managed to boost sales.

Yup. So? I am still failing to fix the earnings problem, as my predecessor did.

If you keep heading in the same direction,

... the business will fail, albeit now at a slower pace than before.

boosting sales and dropping deficits,

IOW, continuing to lose money, albeit now at a slower pace than before.

debt will become a less and less burdensome problem, relative to revenues,

No, it will become an increasingly more burdensome problem (as I continue to take on more and more debt in order to continue operations).

and eventually you'll even be able to start paying down debt.

Not when I still have an unresolved earnings problem. So long as my earnings problem remains, my debt will only continue to increase until the point that no one is willing to loan me any more money, no one is willing to donate to or invest in my business, and my business collapses from the weight of the debt... IOW, a debt crash.

Likewise (even though a government is NOT a business and this whole thing has been a false equivalence anyway), so long as the SODC continues to spend more money than it collects from the citizenry, its debt will continue to increase and increase until it collapses from the weight of the debt... IOW, a debt crash.

However, being a government (instead of a business), the SODC also has the ability to "print more money". It can instead choose to "print more money" in order to stay afloat, but printing money without a corresponding increase in wealth results in skyrocketing inflation (as anyone who isn't a Democrat operative such as yourself is seeing happen right now under the Biden Regime). This option is unsustainable as well, as it will eventually lead to a cash crash.

Debt crash or cash crash. Neither are any good.

 

[gfm7175]

Mine's 160. That would be a deadly hot room. You?

Mine's 200.

 

[Mina]

Mine's 200.

We must be using different scales.

 

[gfm7175]

You picked the one that you thought worked best for purposes of your partisan rhetoric. If in a few months gas prices are down but overall inflation is up, you'll change your pick.

You really don't know jack shit about economics or businesses, do you? Ask me how I know.

 

[Mina]

Very simplistically speaking:

Income: $1 million
Expenses: $1.1 million
Retained Earnings: -$100,000

Very simplistic, indeed. In reality, a company can continue to grow debt indefinitely, the same as a country. The issue is the ratio of debt service to one's ability to pay. The problem comes when deficits are rising faster than earns (or GDP in the case of a country), which will tend to increase debt not just in absolute terms, but relative terms as well, making it an increasing burden.

Am I right to assume you have no actual business experience?

 

[gfm7175]

100 to 0. We won't see a recession for a year or two (if then).

We're already in a DEPRESSION, dude... We have been for a while now, and it's only going to get worse.

 

[Mina]

You really don't know jack shit about economics or businesses, do you? Ask me how I know.

I know a great deal about both. I have an undergraduate degree in economics and an advanced degree in finance, both from elite universities, and I get paid about a quarter of a million dollars per year to consult with big businesses on finance issues related to M&A decisions.

But, tell me, what is it about that line you quoted that made you think I didn't know about economics or business, specifically?

 

[Grokmaster]

Despite repukes and their media sources of anti-Biden lies, smear tactics and disinformation from the beginning of the sewer element, this deplorable influence cannot get around the facts versus its lies to attempt the manipulate the thinking of society for uncivilized and evil reasons:

Kevin McCarthy argued last year that Joe Biden's policies "have stalled our recovery," adding, "Bidenomics is bad for America." Yeah, about that...

As a presidential candidate in 2016, Donald Trump made bold predictions about the kind of economic growth the United States would see if he were elected. Americans would celebrate, the Republican said, as annual GDP growth reached 4 percent for the first time in decades.

It was among the most jarring of Trump's broken promises. Even before the pandemic, GDP growth in Trump's first three years failed to reach 3 percent."

Bottom line:

But as it turns out, the U.S. economy was able to reach growth rates unseen in a generation, but it happened under President Joe Biden."

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow...economic-growth-reached-38-year-high-n1288089

NO ONE IS BUYING THE BULLSHIT OF REGAINING WHAT WE ALREADY HAD BEFORE THE CHINADEMTHUG PANDEMIC AS "RECORD GROWTH".

MOST AMERICANS ARE NOT AS STUPID AS THE DUNCE-O-CRATS THINK WE ARE:

Overwhelming Majority Of Americans Think The Economy Is ‘Poor’: POLL





https://dailycaller.com/2022/06/06/80-percent-americans-economy-bad-inflation-poll/