Was it really Obama who started this economic boom?

[Lumpenproletariat]

Is Obama right to claim credit for Trump's booming economy?

No, Trump has to be given 90% of the credit, because he's the one who is increasing the federal deficits, whereas under Obama the deficit came down from $1.5 trillion to under 500 billion.

This increased deficit is a de facto economic stimulus which surely would create some economic boom.

This "stimulus" is at least $800 billion, since Trump took over. That's easily more than enough to produce Trump's recent good economic numbers. If that much is pumped into the economy, it is sure to create extra boom in the economy.

The national debt will soon reach 22 trillion (now $21,700,000,000,000 http://www.usdebtclock.org/ ). Going up about 1 trillion per year under Trump.

Though it went up fast under Obama, that was mainly in his first 2 or 3 years and can be blamed mostly on the crash of '08. This current surge of national debt cannot be blamed on anything like that, but is a voluntary choice by Trump and the Republicans, who could realistically have kept the deficit down.

So Trump and the Republicans have to be given most of the credit for the current economic surge.

Remember -- if we want more "growth" and "job creation" to make America great again, we have to follow the innovative Trump formula of increasing the national debt another trillion bucks every year. And to keep it going, that will have to increase to 1.5 or 2 trillion per year -- whatever it takes to keep America great and impose greater and greater debt onto the future.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Well, the economic boom started under Obama without the massive explosion in deficits and then continued under Trump with the massive explosion in deficits.

 

[Elixir]

Is Obama right to claim credit for Trump's booming economy?

No, Trump has to be given 90% of the credit, because he's the one who is increasing the federal deficits, whereas under Obama the deficit came down from $1.5 trillion to under 500 billion.

This increased deficit is a de facto economic stimulus which surely would create some economic boom.

This "stimulus" is at least $800 billion, since Trump took over. That's easily more than enough to produce Trump's recent good economic numbers. If that much is pumped into the economy, it is sure to create extra boom in the economy.

The national debt will soon reach 22 trillion (now $21,700,000,000,000 http://www.usdebtclock.org/ ). Going up about 1 trillion per year under Trump.

Though it went up fast under Obama, that was mainly in his first 2 or 3 years and can be blamed mostly on the crash of '08. This current surge of national debt cannot be blamed on anything like that, but is a voluntary choice by Trump and the Republicans, who could realistically have kept the deficit down.

So Trump and the Republicans have to be given most of the credit for the current economic surge.

Remember -- if we want more "growth" and "job creation" to make America great again, we have to follow the innovative Trump formula of increasing the national debt another trillion bucks every year. And to keep it going, that will have to increase to 1.5 or 2 trillion per year -- whatever it takes to keep America great and impose greater and greater debt onto the future.

I believe that most rethuglicans initially set out to support tax reform, and to spend the money where it would actually stimulate the economy (middle class consumers). But their eyes got real wide when they saw $1,500,000,000,000.00 on the table, and quickly decided they better grab theirs before the rabble could get their hands on it. Once the wisdom of letting their donors run off with the bag became clear to them, the choice was clear: support Cheato, or go home and get a real job.

 

[dismal]

Well, the economic boom started under Obama without the massive explosion in deficits and then continued under Trump with the massive explosion in deficits.

Ignoring, of course, that there was a massive explosion of deficits under Obama. And that the economy was sluggish.

 

[Ford]

It isn't really a boom at all. Just the continuation of a slow, steady recovery that has lasted longer than expected.

 

[Horatio Parker]

Obama's stimulus was $800B IIRC. We were further behind at that point, too.

Also much of Obama's debt remained on the Fed's books and wasn't spent. It is being retired gradually. In fact, I've read that it's one reason the stock market has hit the doldrums - the QE stuff is diverting money away.

AFAICT, Trump's tax cut runs about $250B/year. But there's also "Trumped up expectations" showing up in household debt, which is increasing. With wages flat, that's unsustainable.

But with the usual rhetoric, Obama had a weak recovery, and Trump is enjoying a boom(not counting stocks). IOW what's just ok for a Dem is phenomenal for Trump.

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

The president doesn't have a lot of control over the economy. Really. What he does have - the federal budget - is a power shared with congress. Mostly congress, he can only veto or sign.

The Chairman of the Federal Reserve has far more power.

 

[blastula]

Well, the economic boom started under Obama without the massive explosion in deficits and then continued under Trump with the massive explosion in deficits.

Ignoring, of course, that there was a massive explosion of deficits under Obama. And that the economy was sluggish.

Ignoring that the worldwide recession caused the deficits and downturn.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

So Trump and the Republicans have to be given most of the credit for the current economic surge.

Are you under the impression that there is an audience of massively stupid people reading your posts? This isn't a Trump rally.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I can't wait to hear about the Obama Inflation.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I can't wait to hear about the Obama Inflation.

Not to mention the time that he packed radical conservatives onto the Supreme Court in order to overturn Roe v Wade.

Fucking Obama.

 

[Elixir]

Trump is enjoying a boom(not counting stocks)...

Dump $1.5t into the economy - even if it's almost all to Corporations and billionaires - and an artificial and short-lived "boom" is what one would expect. Even with that, recent stock performance has been some of the worst of the last 8 years.
Interestingly, the market seems to have already built in some correction for the possibility of a Dem House and all the investigations that could follow from it... Dow up 108 ATM...

 

[poster]

Is Obama right to claim credit for Trump's booming economy?

No, Trump has to be given 90% of the credit, because he's the one who is increasing the federal deficits, whereas under Obama the deficit came down from $1.5 trillion to under 500 billion.

This increased deficit is a de facto economic stimulus which surely would create some economic boom.

This "stimulus" is at least $800 billion, since Trump took over. That's easily more than enough to produce Trump's recent good economic numbers. If that much is pumped into the economy, it is sure to create extra boom in the economy.

The national debt will soon reach 22 trillion (now $21,700,000,000,000 http://www.usdebtclock.org/ ). Going up about 1 trillion per year under Trump.

Though it went up fast under Obama, that was mainly in his first 2 or 3 years and can be blamed mostly on the crash of '08. This current surge of national debt cannot be blamed on anything like that, but is a voluntary choice by Trump and the Republicans, who could realistically have kept the deficit down.

So Trump and the Republicans have to be given most of the credit for the current economic surge.

Remember -- if we want more "growth" and "job creation" to make America great again, we have to follow the innovative Trump formula of increasing the national debt another trillion bucks every year. And to keep it going, that will have to increase to 1.5 or 2 trillion per year -- whatever it takes to keep America great and impose greater and greater debt onto the future.

Sarcasm? Right?

 

[GenesisNemesis]

I am sure that people who understand economics will agree that economic crashes only ever occur when the president is a democrat.

 

[PyramidHead]

Why do we tolerate a system that periodically goes belly-up and needs to be rescued by elected officials who bail out the rich at the expense of everyone else? Do people really think the current state of our economy is something that we need to decide who to give credit for? Why, when there are people with so much more than they could ever possibly need and simultaneously those with not enough to survive, do we not instead ask who is to blame for this mess?

We have had a string of neoliberal administrations pretty much since the New Deal, and this is the inevitable outcome of their policies: cycles of boom and bust, massive inequality, corporate profits spiraling to unprecedented heights, stagnating real wages, longer shifts, multiple jobs required when one used to be enough, crippling debt, and to cap everything off the planetary environment is on track to become a lot more hostile to our existence thanks to all these activities. But yeah, let's all bicker about which president should receive the applause.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Why do we tolerate a system that periodically goes belly-up and needs to be rescued by elected officials who bail out the rich at the expense of everyone else? Do people really think the current state of our economy is something that we need to decide who to give credit for? Why, when there are people with so much more than they could ever possibly need and simultaneously those with not enough to survive, do we not instead ask who is to blame for this mess?

Because they give a lot of money to the people who are supposed to be keeping them in check.

 

[funinspace]

Why do we tolerate a system that periodically goes belly-up and needs to be rescued by elected officials who bail out the rich at the expense of everyone else? Do people really think the current state of our economy is something that we need to decide who to give credit for? Why, when there are people with so much more than they could ever possibly need and simultaneously those with not enough to survive, do we not instead ask who is to blame for this mess?

We have had a string of neoliberal administrations pretty much since the New Deal, and this is the inevitable outcome of their policies: cycles of boom and bust, massive inequality, corporate profits spiraling to unprecedented heights, stagnating real wages, longer shifts, multiple jobs required when one used to be enough, crippling debt, and to cap everything off the planetary environment is on track to become a lot more hostile to our existence thanks to all these activities. But yeah, let's all bicker about which president should receive the applause.

Yup, it was soooooo stable before the Neoliberals took over. We should go back to the gold standard!

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

 

[ruby sparks]

Why do we tolerate a system that periodically goes belly-up and needs to be rescued by elected officials who bail out the rich at the expense of everyone else? Do people really think the current state of our economy is something that we need to decide who to give credit for? Why, when there are people with so much more than they could ever possibly need and simultaneously those with not enough to survive, do we not instead ask who is to blame for this mess?

We have had a string of neoliberal administrations pretty much since the New Deal, and this is the inevitable outcome of their policies: cycles of boom and bust, massive inequality, corporate profits spiraling to unprecedented heights, stagnating real wages, longer shifts, multiple jobs required when one used to be enough, crippling debt, and to cap everything off the planetary environment is on track to become a lot more hostile to our existence thanks to all these activities. But yeah, let's all bicker about which president should receive the applause.

Too many possible answers to that excellent question imo. Not many of them involve things that I am expert in. But yeah.

- - - Updated - - -

Why do we tolerate a system that periodically goes belly-up and needs to be rescued by elected officials who bail out the rich at the expense of everyone else? Do people really think the current state of our economy is something that we need to decide who to give credit for? Why, when there are people with so much more than they could ever possibly need and simultaneously those with not enough to survive, do we not instead ask who is to blame for this mess?

We have had a string of neoliberal administrations pretty much since the New Deal, and this is the inevitable outcome of their policies: cycles of boom and bust, massive inequality, corporate profits spiraling to unprecedented heights, stagnating real wages, longer shifts, multiple jobs required when one used to be enough, crippling debt, and to cap everything off the planetary environment is on track to become a lot more hostile to our existence thanks to all these activities. But yeah, let's all bicker about which president should receive the applause.

Yup, it was soooooo stable before the Neoliberals took over. We should go back to the gold standard!

I don't think Pyramidhead was suggesting that it necessarily had to do with neoliberals taking over as such. I took it as a general comment about modern (American) capitalism, if anything.

Oh no, you're right. I'm wrong. He was. Whoops.

I see that there have apparently been 29 boom-and-bust cycles (in the USA) since 1929. I'm assuming that goes back, roughly, to the origins of the New Deal he is referring to, or thereabouts. Though I also read that such cycles were analysed as far back as the early 1800's, and possibly earlier, which makes me wonder how much they are and were a product of the Industrial revolution and the rise of industrialists and businessmen. It may be that this is already well-known to those with a better grasp of economics than me.

 

[poster]

Why do we tolerate a system that periodically goes belly-up and needs to be rescued by elected officials who bail out the rich at the expense of everyone else? Do people really think the current state of our economy is something that we need to decide who to give credit for? Why, when there are people with so much more than they could ever possibly need and simultaneously those with not enough to survive, do we not instead ask who is to blame for this mess?

We have had a string of neoliberal administrations pretty much since the New Deal, and this is the inevitable outcome of their policies: cycles of boom and bust, massive inequality, corporate profits spiraling to unprecedented heights, stagnating real wages, longer shifts, multiple jobs required when one used to be enough, crippling debt, and to cap everything off the planetary environment is on track to become a lot more hostile to our existence thanks to all these activities. But yeah, let's all bicker about which president should receive the applause.

I think it's all about controlling inflation at the legislative level. Congress funnels money in the way of tax breaks to the rich because they know the money will be hoarded or spent sparingly for causes that benefit the Republican party. Denying the Federal Government money so that it can't be spent with more government programs than are already mandated and spending money in specific markets like defence is a republican congresses way of controling inflation and keeping the security well funded.

Congress doesn't trust the fed so it does it's own inflation control. It's actually pretty smart.

The question is, as it always is, is, is it fair? Everyone knows it's not fair, but we are so stuck in a mindset of thinking this is the only way for economic sustainability.

Growth is the problem. We need to, IMO, change the idea that everything needs to grow economically. The numbers today are absurd. During the baseball world series, Mastercard was recognized for donating ten million dollars to cancer research like it's no big deal. One company donates that kind of money and it's a drop in the bucket and not enough? That's crazy. Money is becoming meaningless to young people because of the prediciment these people find themselves in in paying for almost anything. Fucking telephones cost a thousand dollars, ffs. It's insane.

 

[Opoponax]

So Trump and the Republicans have to be given most of the credit for the current economic surge.

Are you under the impression that there is an audience of massively stupid people reading your posts? This isn't a Trump rally.

I had the same thought. Something along the lines of, "Who does he think his audience is for this?"

He's been around here long enough so that he should know better.