The economy under wan, feeble socialist Obama has grown at an anemic rate compared to the rates under the healthy, happy free-marketeer Reagan.
Ronald Reagan’s economic plan saw GDP surge at a 3.5% clip – 4.9% after the recession. That’s a 32% bump.
During the Obama years, thanks to his big government policies, the US economy has stalled. Today the quarterly GDP was announced. The GDP for the first quarter of 2015 braked more sharply than expected at only a .2% pace. The US economy has grown an anemic 9.6% during the Obama years (excluding today’s dismal number).
Who woulda thunk it?
Everyone who didnt’ skip Econ 101 to go to a Noam Chomsky speech, that’s who.
Let er rip. Lever up bitches!
Quarterly economic reports are estimates, always revised and, if I remember correctly, the reports issued by this Administration are always revised downward. Two-tenths of a percent is optimistic.
Prosperity comes from economic growth.
Not from borrowing.
Not from redistribution.
In a slow growth/no growth economy, wealth is transferred from the have-nots to the haves. This is because the haves can invest more than the have-nots, and any increase in their capital can only come from the have-nots. This has been known for over two centuries.
It ain’t rocket science.
If it’s 9.6% overall, I am pretty sure that’s behind population growth. And that doesn’t even count that inflation rates don’t count some pretty basic expenditures, either. Ouch.
But of course trillions of dollars of spending draining the supply of capital, along with trillions more in new taxes and regulation costs, don’t deter anyone from positive economic activity. Nosirree. Everybody acts on economic stimuli until we realize it hurts the economy not to hire someone, right?
I could fertilize all of Nebraska with a day’s worth of Democratic economic rhetoric.
speaking of economic social engineering with results that no one anticipated:
http://www.mprnews.org/story/2015/04/30/green-line-train-pedestrian-accident
who could have foreseen that?
Want to know what’s pathetic about that GDP figure? Obama goosed the underlying numbers redefining GDP and including a bunch of stuff like R&D spending that Reagan never counted in his GDP numbers. Without those inclusions the Obama recovery would be even more anemic.
Cesaire, I’m thinking they should rename the Green Line the “Soylent Green Line.”