lustylaffer's Sugar High...comments

WTF's Avatar
  • WTF
  • 02-19-2020, 11:31 AM
03-01-2019, 02:49 PM #1 lustylad
Premium Access



Join Date: Jan 8, 2010
Location: Steeler Nation
Posts: 14,033
Encounters: 7


Where is WTF? Is He On A "Sugar High"?
This is for all those pathetic Trump-haters who can't stop whining fecklessly about our healthy economy.


The Trump Boom Is No Mere ‘Sugar High’

The tax cuts primed the productive economy for long-term growth, not a short-term buzz.


By Stephen Moore
Dec. 9, 2018 5:50 p.m. ET

Liberals are tripping over themselves to explain why the economy has performed so much better under Donald Trump than it did under Barack Obama. The economy has grown by nearly 4% over the past six months, and the final number for 2018 is expected to come in at between 3% and 3.5%. The U.S. growth rate has doubled since Mr. Obama’s last year in office.

When Mr. Trump was elected, many Democratic pundits predicted an economic and stock-market meltdown. Then the economy started surging and they abruptly changed their tune, arguing that Mr. Trump was simply riding a global growth wave. That narrative was shattered when U.S. growth kept steaming ahead even as global growth - especially in China and Germany - stalled.

The latest liberal spin is that the economy is on a “sugar high” from deficit-financed tax cuts and spending hikes. When the rush wears off, they warn, watch out for a crash landing. It’s true that in fiscal 2018 the budget deficit swelled to nearly $800 billion, or about 4.2% of gross domestic product. But the Bureau of Economic Analysis estimates that the economic “contribution” from extra government spending added only 0.23 percentage point to growth in 2018. So even without all the budget bloat, the economy would still be growing well above 3%.

The same BEA data confirm that this year’s growth comes predominantly from a boom in production and investing - particularly in construction, manufacturing, and oil and gas development. While the housing market is weak, consumers are spending more as their wages rise. Small-business and consumer confidence remain at or near historic highs.

The real contradiction in the “sugar high” argument is that it ignores the slow growth of the Obama years, which featured an avalanche of debt spending. Deficits as a share of GDP were 9.8% in 2009, 8.6% in 2010, 8.3% in 2011 and 6.7% in 2012. Where was the sugar high then? Instead of the expected burst in output coming out of the 2008-09 recession, borrowing more than $1 trillion a year for four years yielded the worst recovery since the Great Depression. Even excluding 2009, Mr. Obama’s deficits averaged more than 5% of GDP throughout the rest of his presidency but produced less growth than Mr. Trump has with lower deficits.

This wasn’t what Keynesians expected. Mr. Obama’s economic team predicted 4% growth every year coming out of the recession. Instead the “sugar high” from record peacetime deficits produced measly 2% growth. By 2016 GDP was running about $2 trillion below the trend line of a normal recovery.

The fastest growth rate over the past three decades was recorded in Bill Clinton’s second term, when federal government spending fell from 21.5% to 18% of GDP and deficits disappeared into surpluses. So much for the idea that deficit spending is a stimulant.

Mr. Trump’s fiscal policies have produced more growth than Mr. Obama’s because they were designed to incentivize businesses to invest, hire and produce more here at home. The Obama “stimulus,” by contrast, went for food stamps, unemployment benefits, ObamaCare subsidies, “cash for clunkers” and failed green energy handouts.

Massive government spending blitzes don't produce “sugar highs” or anything like them. Even some conservatives erroneously argue that military spending stimulates the economy. But as Milton Friedman said, the government can only put money into the economy that it first takes out.

Those pushing the “sugar high” fallacy also don’t realize that the Trump tax cuts aren’t going away soon. The 2017 business tax cuts can’t cause a recession in 2019 or 2020 because they don’t expire until 2025. They aren’t sugar pills.

The biggest threats to the economic boom and financial markets today are a deflationary Federal Reserve and the specter of a global trade war. Solve those problems and the American economy can keep flying high on its own power. And Mr. Trump’s critics will be proved wrong again.


Mr. Moore is a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation, an economic consultant with FreedomWorks and co-author, with Arthur Laffer, of “Trumponomics: Inside the America First Plan to Revive Our Economy.”
WTF's Avatar
  • WTF
  • 02-19-2020, 11:33 AM
Is this the same Steven Moore that was rejected for a Fed position....for good reason it seems!
Are you that attention starved the you START a thread with someone else's post and than respond to a thread you just started with that post...pitiful...pitiful. You're as bad as "HoseHummer" AKA ASSWIPE!!
You found you buddy tiny yet??
WTF's Avatar
  • WTF
  • 02-19-2020, 03:06 PM
Are you that attention starved the you START a thread with someone else's post and than respond to a thread you just started with that post...pitiful...pitiful. You're as bad as "HoseHummer" AKA ASSWIPE!!
You found you buddy tiny yet?? Originally Posted by bb1961
Have you found your pea brain yet . My guess is it is next to the Kool-Aid.


  • oeb11
  • 02-19-2020, 04:44 PM
Ftw - best be careful - the Fascist DPST's do not appreciate Christianity - one of the first things on their hit list when they assume "Power"!
BlisswithKriss's Avatar
03-01-2019, 02:49 PM #1 lustylad
Premium Access



Join Date: Jan 8, 2010
Location: Steeler Nation
Posts: 14,033
Encounters: 7


Where is WTF? Is He On A "Sugar High"?
This is for all those pathetic Trump-haters who can't stop whining fecklessly about our healthy economy.


The Trump Boom Is No Mere ‘Sugar High’

The tax cuts primed the productive economy for long-term growth, not a short-term buzz.


By Stephen Moore
Dec. 9, 2018 5:50 p.m. ET

Liberals are tripping over themselves to explain why the economy has performed so much better under Donald Trump than it did under Barack Obama. The economy has grown by nearly 4% over the past six months, and the final number for 2018 is expected to come in at between 3% and 3.5%. The U.S. growth rate has doubled since Mr. Obama’s last year in office.

When Mr. Trump was elected, many Democratic pundits predicted an economic and stock-market meltdown. Then the economy started surging and they abruptly changed their tune, arguing that Mr. Trump was simply riding a global growth wave. That narrative was shattered when U.S. growth kept steaming ahead even as global growth - especially in China and Germany - stalled.

The latest liberal spin is that the economy is on a “sugar high” from deficit-financed tax cuts and spending hikes. When the rush wears off, they warn, watch out for a crash landing. It’s true that in fiscal 2018 the budget deficit swelled to nearly $800 billion, or about 4.2% of gross domestic product. But the Bureau of Economic Analysis estimates that the economic “contribution” from extra government spending added only 0.23 percentage point to growth in 2018. So even without all the budget bloat, the economy would still be growing well above 3%.

The same BEA data confirm that this year’s growth comes predominantly from a boom in production and investing - particularly in construction, manufacturing, and oil and gas development. While the housing market is weak, consumers are spending more as their wages rise. Small-business and consumer confidence remain at or near historic highs.

The real contradiction in the “sugar high” argument is that it ignores the slow growth of the Obama years, which featured an avalanche of debt spending. Deficits as a share of GDP were 9.8% in 2009, 8.6% in 2010, 8.3% in 2011 and 6.7% in 2012. Where was the sugar high then? Instead of the expected burst in output coming out of the 2008-09 recession, borrowing more than $1 trillion a year for four years yielded the worst recovery since the Great Depression. Even excluding 2009, Mr. Obama’s deficits averaged more than 5% of GDP throughout the rest of his presidency but produced less growth than Mr. Trump has with lower deficits.

This wasn’t what Keynesians expected. Mr. Obama’s economic team predicted 4% growth every year coming out of the recession. Instead the “sugar high” from record peacetime deficits produced measly 2% growth. By 2016 GDP was running about $2 trillion below the trend line of a normal recovery.

The fastest growth rate over the past three decades was recorded in Bill Clinton’s second term, when federal government spending fell from 21.5% to 18% of GDP and deficits disappeared into surpluses. So much for the idea that deficit spending is a stimulant.

Mr. Trump’s fiscal policies have produced more growth than Mr. Obama’s because they were designed to incentivize businesses to invest, hire and produce more here at home. The Obama “stimulus,” by contrast, went for food stamps, unemployment benefits, ObamaCare subsidies, “cash for clunkers” and failed green energy handouts.

Massive government spending blitzes don't produce “sugar highs” or anything like them. Even some conservatives erroneously argue that military spending stimulates the economy. But as Milton Friedman said, the government can only put money into the economy that it first takes out.

Those pushing the “sugar high” fallacy also don’t realize that the Trump tax cuts aren’t going away soon. The 2017 business tax cuts can’t cause a recession in 2019 or 2020 because they don’t expire until 2025. They aren’t sugar pills.

The biggest threats to the economic boom and financial markets today are a deflationary Federal Reserve and the specter of a global trade war. Solve those problems and the American economy can keep flying high on its own power. And Mr. Trump’s critics will be proved wrong again.


Mr. Moore is a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation, an economic consultant with FreedomWorks and co-author, with Arthur Laffer, of “Trumponomics: Inside the America First Plan to Revive Our Economy.” Originally Posted by WTF
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
HoeHummer's Avatar
Good ones, WTF.

You sure roped beebsy and his girlfriend!

They were crush smashing each other’s boxes.

LOLLING!
BlisswithKriss's Avatar
Just for your info and give your ignorant brain a jolt...
I hardly think dishing up an opinion from an ultra Reich wing “foundation” is giving us an honest assessment of the Trump failures.
The Heritage Foundation is just a Reich wing propaganda machine that’s been around for years spewing their repugnant gobbledegook.
So of course they’re going to paint a rosy picture of El Douchebag
Just like the Cato Institution......same shite different cast.

NEXT !!
So to the OP - bitch did you get back to me on my bet? Put your money where your mouth is!!!
BlisswithKriss's Avatar
Ftw - best be careful - the Fascist DPST's do not appreciate Christianity - one of the first things on their hit list when they assume "Power"! Originally Posted by oeb11
I very much doubt you have one clue the real definition of FASCISM is...have you
Scrotum breath.
Just like you’re clueless about anything to do with politics but you sure as hell enjoy drinking the Fool Aid handed out by El DoucheBag. The King of the Con.
Ok go back to your single wide ghetto where you belong...
  • oeb11
  • 02-19-2020, 05:54 PM
name calling, scatology, nothing cogent or constructive.

Just Trumpeting your Fascist DPST narrative

Thank you - too blind with hate to understand poster.
WTF's Avatar
  • WTF
  • 02-19-2020, 05:56 PM
So to the OP - bitch did you get back to me on my bet? Put your money where your mouth is!!! Originally Posted by Austin Ellen

Chill Granny...

Let's get a Democratic nominee first.

I know at your age time is speeding up but put the brakes on your Depends...
WTF's Avatar
  • WTF
  • 02-19-2020, 05:59 PM
Just for your info and give your ignorant brain a jolt...
I hardly think dishing up an opinion from an ultra Reich wing “foundation” is giving us an honest assessment of the Trump failures.
The Heritage Foundation is just a Reich wing propaganda machine that’s been around for years spewing their repugnant gobbledegook.
So of course they’re going to paint a rosy picture of El Douchebag
Just like the Cato Institution......same shite different cast.

NEXT !! Originally Posted by BlisswithKriss
FYI...that was a repost of lustylad from early 2018 when he was crowing....I'm just feeding him some of his crow.
Ha! I got an extra pack of depends for you too sugar - you are going to need them!



Chill Granny...

Let's get a Democratic nominee first.

I know at your age time is speeding up but put the brakes on your Depends... Originally Posted by WTF
WTF's Avatar
  • WTF
  • 02-19-2020, 06:46 PM
Ha! I got an extra pack of depends for you too sugar - you are going to need them! Originally Posted by Austin Ellen
Not if the Dems nominate Bloomberg...