Now you know why I called you a Trump convert!Distortion on steroids? It's simple. IT'S CALLED HIGH SCHOOL MATH. Take the average of 2.3% and 2.9%. Add to one and raise to the 40th power. Subtract 100%. Do the same for 1.6% growth. Compare the results.
Boy if I did know better my head would still be spinning after reading that distortion on steroids!Originally Posted by WTF
Fuck the entire idea of “income inequality”, it’s just stupid. Some people are just smarter, more motivated and hard working than others and nothing is going to change that. The only way to make income more equal is to make everyone equally poor. That’s been tried and ends up with millions in chains or worse. Originally Posted by JacuzzmeIf you kneecap the overachievers everyone's worse off. Who's going to do the work and take the risks in this country?
Fuck the entire idea of “income inequality”, it’s just stupid. Some people are just smarter, more motivated and hard working than others and nothing is going to change that. The only way to make income more equal is to make everyone equally poor. That’s been tried and ends up with millions in chains or worse. Originally Posted by JacuzzmeYeah, those Walton heirs, 7 people worth a (reported) total of 250 billion, are just so much smarter and hard working.
Yeah, those Walton heirs, 7 people worth a (reported) total of 250 billion, are just so much smarter and hard working.Well you can always move to North Korea.
Uh, haven't I already read this somewhere before?
The only reason you say that 2018 and 2019 were unmitigated failures is because Trump, a Republican, was president. GDP growth of 2.3% to 2.9% isn't bad. Compare to 1.6% average under Obama, during which time the USA was rebounding (very anemically) from a bad recession.
If you could maintain 2.6% GDP growth (average of 2018 and 2019) for 40 years, then the economy would grow by 179%. If you just do the 1.6% average during the Obama administration, that's just 88% growth.
That's not to say that who's president has much to do with GDP growth. It doesn't. Originally Posted by Tiny
Distortion on steroids? It's simple. IT'S CALLED HIGH SCHOOL MATH. Take the average of 2.3% and 2.9%. Add to one and raise to the 40th power. Subtract 100%. Do the same for 1.6% growth. Compare the results.The distortions are the numbers you selectively plugged in.
And you should show some APPRECIATION. And some GRATITUDE. I gave you a gift today. And this is how you repay me. Originally Posted by Tiny
The distortions are the numbers you selectively plugged in.I used the numbers from your post, 2.3% and 2.9%. And averaged them. Like I said, who’s president doesn’t make much difference in GDP growth. My argument with what you implied in the earlier post was that 2.3% to 2.9% is low. It’s not. And your claim that 2018 and 2019 were unmitigated disasters. 2019 in particular was a great year for the Workingman— close to record low unemployment and sharply rising median household income.
How about you use the Trump GDP 4 year average...much like you used the Obama entirety GDP average.
While your at it take into account the trillion dollar deficits Trump was running even BEFORE the pandemic and plug the added cost that will cost in intrest payments especially with intrest rising back to it's normal historical levels.
I do appreciate you posting such simple distortions that even a non economic guru like myself can easily refute.
So yes, I agree you used simpleton math ,I'm just pointing out the distorted numbers. Originally Posted by WTF
If you kneecap the overachievers everyone's worse off. Who's going to do the work and take the risks in this country?Who did it BEFORE the Reagan tax cuts?
. Originally Posted by Tiny
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/gdp-g...121008953.html
Here’s a look at average GDP growth rates under the last six U.S. presidents:
Jimmy Carter (D): 3.25%
Ronald Reagan (R): 3.48%
George H.W. Bush (R): 2.25%
Bill Clinton (D): 3.88%
George W. Bush (R): 2.2%
Barack Obama (D): 1.62%
Donald Trump (R): 0.95%
In his first four years in office, Trump has had by far the lowest average U.S. GDP growth rate of any of the last seven U.S. presidents Originally Posted by WTF
That's not to say that who's president has much to do with GDP growth. It doesn't. Originally Posted by Tiny
Like I said, who’s president doesn’t make much difference in GDP growth. Originally Posted by TinyDo you want me to say it a third time?
Who did it BEFORE the Reagan tax cuts?Wiping out the billionaire class, like Bernie Sanders wants to do, would not be good for the masses.
I love how the wealthy have brainwashed the masses to argue against the masses own best intrest!
What we we do without Elon? Answer....there'd just be another Elon.
So let us all quit the wealthy worship.
You may find it hard to believe but the country would be better off with a thousand Millionaires than one Billionaire. Originally Posted by WTF
I used the numbers from your post, 2.3% and 2.9%. And averaged them. Like I said, who’s president doesn’t make much difference in GDP growth. My argument with what you implied in the earlier post was that 2.3% to 2.9% is low. It’s not. And your claim that 2018 and 2019 were unmitigated disasters. 2019 in particular was a great year for the Workingman— close to record low unemployment and sharply rising median household income. Originally Posted by TinyI implied that it was a disaster compared to what was promised....3% GDP
Wiping out the billionaire class, like Bernie Sanders wants to do, would not be good for the masses. Originally Posted by TinyIf replaced by thousand of Millionaires?
I implied that it was a disaster compared to what was promised....3% GDPOK, I'll say it a third time. WHO'S PRESIDENT DOESN'T MAKE MUCH DIFFERENCE IN GDP GROWTH. Maybe if I elaborate it will sink in. You've got the business cycle, growth in the labor force, changes in productivity, changes in technology, globalization, investment, Congress, conditions in China and other countries, wars, Congress, epidemics (e.g. COVID) and lots of other factors that can affect GDP growth
That is why I have accused you of distortions.
You've copied lustylad's habit of using Obama's entire GDP average and selective on Trump numbers. Use Trump's entire GDP average...I've provided in the post above.
What you've actually argued is that Obama's last three years are comparative to Trumps first three. Originally Posted by WTF