Obama Destroys Economy with Socialism

[maxparrish]

Actually, if you add up the first three quarters of this year compared to the first three quarters of last year, the economy is performing worse than it did last year. In other words, if we get 3.5% growth for the fourth quarter as we did last year, then 2014 will be worse than 2013 was. One quarter doesn't really tell you very much.

From here:

1Q13 - 3.42%
2Q13 - 3.26%
3Q13 - 3.71%
============
Total - 10.39%
Avg - 3.46%

1Q14 - 3.28%
2Q14 - 4.27%
3Q14 - 4.05%
===========
Total - 11.6%
Avg - 3.87%

The 4th quarter 2014 results need to be 3.36% to make 2014 match 2013's growth. 4Q13 had a huge jump of 4.57%

With the drop of fuel prices looking to be a shot in the arm of both industry and consumers, I expect 4Q14 to beat that 3.36% handily.

While I have no idea who the "multp" web address is, these numbers are totally inconsistent with the Bureau of Economic Analysis (the set commonly referred to in public discussion): http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/2014/pdf/gdp3q14_3rd_fax.pdf.

For example, the 'touchstone" of economic data shows a negative 2 percent the first quarter of 2014, and less than 2 percent the second quarter of 2013.

Edit Update:

I suspect your numbers are for nominal growth, not real growth. In any event, if you wish to capture the real record start with this graph:

http://economicsone.com/page/6/

As you can see, while the recession only lasted 18 months, bottoming in the summer of 2009, the pace of the recovery has been horrible. Folks finally tossing their unemployment check stubs in the air in celebration seems a bit sad.

 

[maxparrish]

- - - Updated - - -

Define fascism,please.

Fascism (n.)

1. An action taken by Obama or another senior Democrat.

"Obama's dictatorial demand to the White House kitchen staff that they prepare turkey sandwiches for the Cabinet meeting was indicative of the rampant fascism pervading his adminstration and was reminiscent of the terrors of the Third Reich.

Actually that was an example of his micro-aggression, i.e. micro-fascism.

 

[James Brown]

From here:

1Q13 - 3.42%
2Q13 - 3.26%
3Q13 - 3.71%
============
Total - 10.39%
Avg - 3.46%

1Q14 - 3.28%
2Q14 - 4.27%
3Q14 - 4.05%
===========
Total - 11.6%
Avg - 3.87%

The 4th quarter 2014 results need to be 3.36% to make 2014 match 2013's growth. 4Q13 had a huge jump of 4.57%

With the drop of fuel prices looking to be a shot in the arm of both industry and consumers, I expect 4Q14 to beat that 3.36% handily.

While I have no idea who the "multp" web address is, these numbers are totally inconsistent with the Bureau of Economic Analysis (the set commonly referred to in public discussion): http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/2014/pdf/gdp3q14_3rd_fax.pdf.

For example, the 'touchstone" of economic data shows a negative 2 percent the first quarter of 2014, and less than 2 percent the second quarter of 2013.

That site cites the BEA.

Why is this board the only place I've seen that's talking about negative quarterly growth?

Edit: Well, googling around I see that the BEA did report negative first quarter growth for 1Q14. My mistake.

 

[James Brown]

So the takeaway from Boneyard Bill's post is that we should not be grateful for Obama, in that the economy--which is growing at a healthy clip under Obama's watch--is not growing quite as fast as last year--which was also under Obama's watch--mostly due to an unseasonably cold North American winter getting 2014 off to a sluggish start.

Or perhaps bill's cautionary post is more subtle than I can understand.

 

[dismal]

So the takeaway from Boneyard Bill's post is that we should not be grateful for Obama, in that the economy--which is growing at a healthy clip under Obama's watch--is not growing quite as fast as last year--which was also under Obama's watch--mostly due to an unseasonably cold North American winter getting 2014 off to a sluggish start.

Or perhaps bill's cautionary post is more subtle than I can understand.

How about we be grateful that neither Obama nor the spendy Keynesians have had much to do with the economy these last few years and it's recovering like it always does.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Big boom and bust cycles are always a good thing for the 1%. The people we think of in the least this time of year.

 

[funinspace]

So the takeaway from Boneyard Bill's post is that we should not be grateful for Obama, in that the economy--which is growing at a healthy clip under Obama's watch--is not growing quite as fast as last year--which was also under Obama's watch--mostly due to an unseasonably cold North American winter getting 2014 off to a sluggish start.

Ignoring the reference to BB...I'm not sure about the "grateful to Obama" part as that makes lots of assumptions on what part he played, when there are many actors. I am also not saying the McCain would have done better, as I suspect he would have done worse. Pres. Obama came into office with a mess cascading into his lap. And yes, the economy seems to have finally gotten some strength lately. Anywho, the below chart provides a decent picture showing how meager this recovery has been (regardless of blame):

 

[boneyard bill]

Actually, if you add up the first three quarters of this year compared to the first three quarters of last year, the economy is performing worse than it did last year. In other words, if we get 3.5% growth for the fourth quarter as we did last year, then 2014 will be worse than 2013 was. One quarter doesn't really tell you very much.

Obama's economic policies are not socialism. They are much more like fascism.

Fascism is an economic system in which the government uses its regulatory powers for benefit of large industrial and financial institutions. It is usually accompanied by high levels of corruption and the failure of government to prosecute criminal activities by such powerful entities.

 

[boneyard bill]

So the takeaway from Boneyard Bill's post is that we should not be grateful for Obama, in that the economy--which is growing at a healthy clip under Obama's watch--is not growing quite as fast as last year--which was also under Obama's watch--mostly due to an unseasonably cold North American winter getting 2014 off to a sluggish start.

Or perhaps bill's cautionary post is more subtle than I can understand.

While I certainly don't think we should be grateful to Obama for the performance of the economy, that is not the point. First quarter growth was extremely sluggish but rose spectacularly in the second quarter. I would suggest that what we are dealing with here are simple statistical anomalies that led to the low first quarter and the rapid second quarter growth. The "take away" from my post was that you shouldn't get too excited about a single quarter's statistics, and that is clear when you realize that we are still behind 2013 over all and 2013 wasn't great year.

But a second take away should be that we shouldn't go by a single composite number like GDP in the first place. There is a lot of market data out there that doesn't look so good. Overall, the short term looks to be mixed, but the long term looks horrible.

 

[boneyard bill]

So the takeaway from Boneyard Bill's post is that we should not be grateful for Obama, in that the economy--which is growing at a healthy clip under Obama's watch--is not growing quite as fast as last year--which was also under Obama's watch--mostly due to an unseasonably cold North American winter getting 2014 off to a sluggish start.

Or perhaps bill's cautionary post is more subtle than I can understand.

How about we be grateful that neither Obama nor the spendy Keynesians have had much to do with the economy these last few years and it's recovering like it always does.

Oh no. The economy isn't recovering "like is always does." This recovery has been extremely slow, and that is especially disturbing when you consider that severe downturns like 07 to 09 usually produce robust recoveries.

 

[Davka]

How about we be grateful that neither Obama nor the spendy Keynesians have had much to do with the economy these last few years and it's recovering like it always does.

Oh no. The economy isn't recovering "like is always does." This recovery has been extremely slow, and that is especially disturbing when you consider that severe downturns like 07 to 09 usually produce robust recoveries.

Really? When was the last time we had an equivalent downturn, pray tell?

 

[Deepak]

Actually, if you add up the first three quarters of this year compared to the first three quarters of last year, the economy is performing worse than it did last year. In other words, if we get 3.5% growth for the fourth quarter as we did last year, then 2014 will be worse than 2013 was. One quarter doesn't really tell you very much.

Obama's economic policies are not socialism. They are much more like fascism.

Fascism is an economic system in which the government uses its regulatory powers for benefit of large industrial and financial institutions. It is usually accompanied by high levels of corruption and the failure of government to prosecute criminal activities by such powerful entities.

You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

http://www.pegc.us/archive/Articles/eco_ur-fascism.pdf

 

[crispy]

again?

http://money.cnn.com/2014/12/23/news...html?iid=HP_LN*http://money.cnn.com/2014/12/23/news...html?iid=HP_LN

oh yeah!

(hey maybe its a new meme )

 

[ZiprHead]

again?

http://money.cnn.com/2014/12/23/news...html?iid=HP_LN*http://money.cnn.com/2014/12/23/news...html?iid=HP_LN

oh yeah!

(hey maybe its a new meme )

Both links are 404s for me.

 

[untermensche]

So the takeaway from Boneyard Bill's post is that we should not be grateful for Obama, in that the economy--which is growing at a healthy clip under Obama's watch--is not growing quite as fast as last year--which was also under Obama's watch--mostly due to an unseasonably cold North American winter getting 2014 off to a sluggish start.

Or perhaps bill's cautionary post is more subtle than I can understand.

How about we be grateful that neither Obama nor the spendy Keynesians have had much to do with the economy these last few years and it's recovering like it always does.

Obama has been bombing and droning and maintaining wars all over the place.

He has been spending a lot. Unless you think non-stop war is cheap.

The problem is there is way too little Keynesian spending.

That is why the recovery is so sluggish.

The only time things are ever improving for the working man is when there is a lot of Keynesian spending and strong unions.

That is why things have been worse and worse for the working man over the last 40 years.

But of course there are those who imagine all is good when it only the lives of the rich that are improving.

 

[dismal]

How about we be grateful that neither Obama nor the spendy Keynesians have had much to do with the economy these last few years and it's recovering like it always does.

Obama has been bombing and droning and maintaining wars all over the place.

He has been spending a lot. Unless you think non-stop war is cheap.

The problem is there is way too little Keynesian spending.

That is why the recovery is so sluggish.

The only time things are ever improving for the working man is when there is a lot of Keynesian spending and strong unions.

That is why things have been worse and worse for the working man over the last 40 years.

But of course there are those who imagine all is good when it only the lives of the rich that are improving.

You don't seem to have a firm grasp of spendy Keynesianism. They think you can end the depression by fighting a world war and cause prosperity by burying jars full of money in the ground.

Also, spending has not been going up. It went up a lot in 2008-9 but is flat to down since.

 

[boneyard bill]

Oh no. The economy isn't recovering "like is always does." This recovery has been extremely slow, and that is especially disturbing when you consider that severe downturns like 07 to 09 usually produce robust recoveries.

Really? When was the last time we had an equivalent downturn, pray tell?

That's just the point. The recent recession was the worst since the Great Depression so the recovery should be more robust than usual. After the 80-82 recession, we had growth rates of over 7%. This recovery has a growth rate in the 2% range.

 

[boneyard bill]

Fascism is an economic system in which the government uses its regulatory powers for benefit of large industrial and financial institutions. It is usually accompanied by high levels of corruption and the failure of government to prosecute criminal activities by such powerful entities.

You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means.

http://www.pegc.us/archive/Articles/eco_ur-fascism.pdf

I'm sorry, but I'm not going to take the trouble to read a multi-page article on Umberto Eco's non-authoritative reminiscence about fascism. The definition I offered refers to fascist economic thinking. There are, of course, other elements to fascism, especially the political. But this discussion is about economics.

 

[Underseer]

US economy grows incredible 5%

http://money.cnn.com/2014/12/23/news/economy/us-gdp-economy-5-percent-growth/index.html?iid=HP_LN

Don't be absurd. Obama caused the economic devastation we experienced under the Bush administration, while Bush caused the incredible economic success (well, success for rich people, anyway) experienced under the Obama administration. People who have not been duped by the International Media Conspiracy have long known that the Democrat party is in possession of a time machine. That's how we know FDR was responsible for the Great Depression.

 

[Wizardry]

Actually, if you add up the first three quarters of this year compared to the first three quarters of last year, the economy is performing worse than it did last year. In other words, if we get 3.5% growth for the fourth quarter as we did last year, then 2014 will be worse than 2013 was. One quarter doesn't really tell you very much.

Obama's economic policies are not socialism. They are much more like fascism.

Fascism is an economic system in which the government uses its regulatory powers for benefit of large industrial and financial institutions. It is usually accompanied by high levels of corruption and the failure of government to prosecute criminal activities by such powerful entities.

This definition of fascism describes every government in the history of the world.