US 3rd quarter GDP revised up to 5% - best in 11 years.

[Engineer]

Actually QE has been going on for 6 years. It ended in Oct.

Maybe why the dollar is much stronger and oil is down? Strangely, exports are up here even with the stronger dollar.

 

[fskimospy]

Yep, the classic Eskimospy economic plan: when times are bad, focus on spending boatloads of tax money while maintaining high taxes on the rich; when times are good focus on taxes for the rich while maintaining high spending.

You even mentioning austerity is a fucking joke as you'll never carry it out, as soon as things start getting better you'll justify higher spending with "well, we had to cut back on this during the hard times so now it's the proper time to invest more in ______ (fill in ridiculous program here)."

Hahaha, when confronted with ideas that don't conform to how you want to view the world, just declare them not to exist.

I love how you guys are so invested in economics as a culture war that you can't even conceive of other people actually looking at it in an objective and rational manner. I guess that's why most of your ideas are spite-based, though.

 

[glenn1]

Of course they will raise interest rates when inflation rises.

I'll put "never raising interest rates" in the vault of more wrong predictions to check up on.

If only since that would completely skyrocket U.S. debt service and likely force a huge reduction in discretionary spending.

 

[fskimospy]

If only since that would completely skyrocket U.S. debt service and likely force a huge reduction in discretionary spending.

Haha, more spite based policy!

Higher interest rates won't skyrocket US debt service costs as a percentage of the federal budget as it will coincide with better economic performance and higher inflation, which means higher tax receipts.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

The wealth gap between middle and upper class is also at record levels.

Personally, not sure that I would brag about an economy that sets a record for wealth gap between the races as well as between middle and upper income households...

But I am glad that bshole is doing well...

Uno

Bazzzzzinga

C'mon! Where is it! Bring on the Obama Nation defense to these statistics somehow while triumphing his amazing accomplishments in our economy during his tenure.

 

[Matt1970]

Hahaha, when confronted with ideas that don't conform to how you want to view the world, just declare them not to exist.

I love how you guys are so invested in economics as a culture war that you can't even conceive of other people actually looking at it in an objective and rational manner. I guess that's why most of your ideas are spite-based, though.

 

[fskimospy]

clip

lol. You're not so far from glenn. While you don't have quite his rage against cities and your perceived enemies, you also view this through a highly ideological lens. I mean you've been advocating for spending cuts and deficit reduction throughout most, perhaps all of the time since the financial crisis. That's seriously at odds with macroeconomics 101.

Why would you advocate for policies that violate basic economics if not for ideological reasons?

 

[ivwshane]

lol. You're not so far from glenn. While you don't have quite his rage against cities and your perceived enemies, you also view this through a highly ideological lens. I mean you've been advocating for spending cuts and deficit reduction throughout most, perhaps all of the time since the financial crisis. That's seriously at odds with macroeconomics 101.

Why would you advocate for policies that violate basic economics if not for ideological reasons?

Because...his gut...or something.

 

[BoberFett]

The wealth gap between middle and upper class is also at record levels.

Personally, not sure that I would brag about an economy that sets a record for wealth gap between the races as well as between middle and upper income households...

But I am glad that bshole is doing well...

Uno

Nobody wants your "facts", just get on your knees and give praise to Obama, for he has saved us.

 

[ivwshane]

Bazzzzzinga

C'mon! Where is it! Bring on the Obama Nation defense to these statistics somehow while triumphing his amazing accomplishments in our economy during his tenure.

Why would anyone defend something that has been getting worse under most presidents for decades? Hell! Even Obama has acknowledged the problem. Are you some how blaming Obama for the problem? Exactly what policies has he implemented that has further increased the wealth gap?

 

[ivwshane]

Nobody wants your "facts", just get on your knees and give praise to Obama, for he has saved us.

I'm glad you two finally came around to what Obama has been concerned with.

http://m.nydailynews.com/news/polit...gap-defining-challenge-time-article-1.1961279

Tell me, what else do you agree with Obama on?

 

[fskimospy]

I'm glad you two finally came around to what Obama has been concerned with.

http://m.nydailynews.com/news/polit...gap-defining-challenge-time-article-1.1961279

Tell me, what else do you agree with Obama on?

It is pretty novel to see conservatives complaining about wealth inequality, particularly as it cuts across race. I'm sure if they had a chance to implement their preferred policies fixing that issue would be job #1 for them.

 

[Matt1970]

lol. You're not so far from glenn. While you don't have quite his rage against cities and your perceived enemies, you also view this through a highly ideological lens. I mean you've been advocating for spending cuts and deficit reduction throughout most, perhaps all of the time since the financial crisis. That's seriously at odds with macroeconomics 101.

Why would you advocate for policies that violate basic economics if not for ideological reasons?

Macroeconomics 101 tells you that you will pay the price down the road. Even Obama was campaigning on it.

Candidte Obama 2008: "The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion dollars for the first 42 presidents -- number 43 added $4 trillion dollars by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion dollars of debt that we are going to have to pay back -- $30,000 for every man, woman and child. That's irresponsible. It's unpatriotic."

It's strange how macroeconomics 101 changes depending on which side of the isle you are on, who is in the White House and what job you happen to be after.

 

[fskimospy]

Macroeconomics 101 tells you that you will pay the price down the road. Even Obama was campaigning on it.

Candidte Obama 2008: "The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion dollars for the first 42 presidents -- number 43 added $4 trillion dollars by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion dollars of debt that we are going to have to pay back -- $30,000 for every man, woman and child. That's irresponsible. It's unpatriotic."

It's strange how macroeconomics 101 changes depending on which side of the isle you are on, who is in the White House and what job you happen to be after.

No, macroeconomics doesn't change depending on who is in office, that's the point. Bush was running up debts during good economic times. That runs contrary to good economics. Obama was running up debt during bad times. That's entirely consistent with good economics.

You realize that these theories have been on the books for many, many years, right? They do not depend on who is in office and they were written before either Bush or Obama was even born.

Just because you change your thinking depending on who is in office doesn't mean that economics changes.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Why would anyone defend something that has been getting worse under most presidents for decades? Hell! Even Obama has acknowledged the problem. Are you some how blaming Obama for the problem? Exactly what policies has he implemented that has further increased the wealth gap?

Exxxxxxxxxcept you're always giving a circle jerk for how much the economy is "up". and jobs are "up". What could be better! We are in the christmas spirit! :awe:

 

[HomerJS]

It is pretty novel to see conservatives complaining about wealth inequality, particularly as it cuts across race. I'm sure if they had a chance to implement their preferred policies fixing that issue would be job #1 for them.

Its also interesting conservatives bitch about Obama not solving the wealth gap yet. Do they know its been happening since 1980??

 

[Engineer]

Exxxxxxxxxcept you're always giving a circle jerk for how much the economy is "up". and jobs are "up". What could be better! We are in the christmas spirit! :awe:

Jobs up don't mean shit (other than someone who is not unemployed) unless they are solid, middle class job types with benefits and McService jobs (not saying that the majority of job gains lately are one way or another as I've not checked).

 

[BoberFett]

It is pretty novel to see conservatives complaining about wealth inequality, particularly as it cuts across race. I'm sure if they had a chance to implement their preferred policies fixing that issue would be job #1 for them.

I'm not conservative, and you know that, but I understand that label helps with your rhetoric.

And personally, I don't give a damn about wealth inequality. But it is amusing to me that liberals who moan constantly about wealth equality are praising the Democrats for "fixing" the economy when in fact they've done nothing of the sort. The economy is fixed if you were already wealthy because the Democrats have continued the same policies they criticize Republicans for. Trickle down is trickle down even if you try to gussy it up with a fancy name like Quantitative Easing.

If you're happy with the economy, great. You can stop whining about inequality, because despite Obama's lip service he and the Democrats have no intention of doing anything about it.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

I see figures like these and employment, then I look around and see no one who has materially benefited. I look at median income, how the middle class is doing and I find nothing to be encouraged about.

So why the disconnect between what's happening in real peoples lives and these supposedly wonderful numbers?

 

[theeedude]

A guy who was lucky enough to get out before the bubble popped? That being said, I liked Clinton, Obama not so much.

You must be confusing Obama with Bush.
Most of the jobs created during the Clinton expansion stayed around. Obama fought against GOP austerity to rescue the economy.

 

[BoberFett]

No, macroeconomics doesn't change depending on who is in office, that's the point. Bush was running up debts during good economic times. That runs contrary to good economics. Obama was running up debt during bad times. That's entirely consistent with good economics.

You realize that these theories have been on the books for many, many years, right? They do not depend on who is in office and they were written before either Bush or Obama was even born.

Just because you change your thinking depending on who is in office doesn't mean that economics changes.

Where the hell were these good times under Bush? Have Democrats already forgotten about the steaming dump the economy took in 2002? Bush just did what the Democrats said should be done, he was stimulating the economy through deficit spending until it was roaring. And then it crashed. Now Obama has been deficit spending and the economy is roaring. I wonder what happens next... :hmm:

 

[fskimospy]

I'm not conservative, and you know that, but I understand that label helps with your rhetoric.

And personally, I don't give a damn about wealth inequality. But it is amusing to me that liberals who moan constantly about wealth equality are praising the Democrats for "fixing" the economy when in fact they've done nothing of the sort. The economy is fixed if you were already wealthy because the Democrats have continued the same policies they criticize Republicans for. Trickle down is trickle down even if you try to gussy it up with a fancy name like Quantitative Easing.

If you're happy with the economy, great. You can stop whining about inequality, because despite Obama's lip service he and the Democrats have no intention of doing anything about it.

I don't think any liberals claim to be happy with the economy, but this is undeniably good news. You may not be a conservative in exactly the same way as some of the other people on here, but I feel comfortable describing you as a conservative.

The idea that Obama and the democrats have no intention of doing anything about inequality is demonstrably false. What the hell is the ACA other than, among other things, an explicit attempt to give poorer people health care by taxing the rich?

Also that's not what QE is.

 

[theeedude]

I see figures like these and employment, then I look around and see no one who has materially benefited. I look at median income, how the middle class is doing and I find nothing to be encouraged about.

So why the disconnect between what's happening in real peoples lives and these supposedly wonderful numbers?

Are you kidding? You see no one who has benefited from the recovery?
I see new cars everywhere. I see old houses renovated or rebuilt all over the place. It's booming all around, you really have to be blind not to see it, or maybe have a short memory and not remember what it was like in 2008-2011.

 

[theeedude]

Where the hell were these good times under Bush? Have Democrats already forgotten about the steaming dump the economy took in 2002? Bush just did what the Democrats said should be done, he was stimulating the economy through deficit spending until it was roaring. And then it crashed. Now Obama has been deficit spending and the economy is roaring. I wonder what happens next... :hmm:

Deficit spending is not effective stimulus if it's going to the top in form of tax cuts. Then it just creates asset bubbles. It needs to go to the bottom to be spent to actually grow the economy. That was the failure of Bush "stimulus." Supply side doesn't work. Demand is king.

 

[Engineer]

Are you kidding? You see no one who has benefited from the recovery?
I see new cars everywhere. I see old houses renovated or rebuilt all over the place. It's booming all around, you really have to be blind not to see it, or maybe have a short memory and not remember what it was like in 2008-2011.

I see far fewer foreclosure papers stapled to houses but as for the rest, I agree with HR. I don't see much change around here at all. Maybe anecdotal but that's just the way and most of the people I know see it too. Don't see new cars but I do notice that the malls and restaurants are packed to the nines though. Prices for food, especially meats are skyrocketing, gas id down (at least for now), wages are flat at best (IMO). Since I just read that credit card amounts are rising again, I suspect some of the gain is on the backs of borrowing again (good or bad).

We already know where the majority of gains in the economy is going and it's not to the bottom 95% of the people. I'm not sure it's even starting to 'trickle' yet.