Hillary Clinton

Home Archive Politics Hillary Clinton
ptown_trojans_1's avatar

ptown_trojans_1

Moderator

7,632 posts
Feb 29, 2016 1:05 PM
QuakerOats;1783822 wrote:We have just concluded the 8th straight year of sub-3% growth --- the worst stretch ever. You are absolutely correct that it is obama's policies that have crushed economic growth, investment and incentive. It started with obamaKare which has done nothing but pervert job creation along with wrecking insurance and starting to impact actual care. Then you look at his regulatory agencies and the job-destroying agenda that goes along with every executive fiat and appointment - from EPA to NLRB to OHSA to MSHA to banking and on down the line. It is practically a nightmare to be in manufacturing in this country anymore; it is no wonder that this once-formidable sector of our economy has largely moved offshore. His assault on capitalism and free enterprise will kill us if not reversed quickly.
No freaking way. Here you go again saying something is the worst ever, when in reality, it is not.
Go back and look at the 1930s, and then the late 1800s.
Feb 29, 2016 1:05pm
like_that's avatar

like_that

1st Team All-PWN

26,625 posts
Feb 29, 2016 1:38 PM
ZWICK 4 PREZ;1783797 wrote:No, he asked for citation on something he knows would be impossible to cite. Which is why I asked him for citation proving otherwise, which would be impossible to cite.
So then why did you say it when there is no proof either way?
Feb 29, 2016 1:38pm
ZWICK 4 PREZ's avatar

ZWICK 4 PREZ

Senior Member

7,733 posts
Feb 29, 2016 1:46 PM
like_that;1783855 wrote:So then why did you say it when there is no proof either way?

Why not? Have you ever said anything you witnessed and/or believed that you didn't have unequivocal proof either way? Or perhaps probably normal people didn't ask you to cite it?
Feb 29, 2016 1:46pm
like_that's avatar

like_that

1st Team All-PWN

26,625 posts
Feb 29, 2016 1:54 PM
ZWICK 4 PREZ;1783858 wrote:Why not? Have you ever said anything you witnessed and/or believed that you didn't have unequivocal proof either way? Or perhaps probably normal people didn't ask you to cite it?
There is a difference between that and speaking with certainty/absolute statements when you're actually speaking out of your ass.
Feb 29, 2016 1:54pm
ZWICK 4 PREZ's avatar

ZWICK 4 PREZ

Senior Member

7,733 posts
Feb 29, 2016 1:57 PM
like_that;1783860 wrote:There is a difference between that and speaking with certainty/absolute statements when you're actually speaking out of your ass.

dude.. lol whatever you say.
Feb 29, 2016 1:57pm
A

Al Bundy

Senior Member

4,180 posts
Feb 29, 2016 2:04 PM
ptown_trojans_1;1783835 wrote:No freaking way. Here you go again saying something is the worst ever, when in reality, it is not.
Go back and look at the 1930s, and then the late 1800s.
The stretch in the 1930s wasn't as long as the current stretch below 3% growth. http://useconomy.about.com/od/GDP-by-Year/a/US-GDP-History.htm
Feb 29, 2016 2:04pm
like_that's avatar

like_that

1st Team All-PWN

26,625 posts
Feb 29, 2016 2:05 PM
Typical zwick, never can man up.
Feb 29, 2016 2:05pm
B

BR1986FB

Senior Member

24,104 posts
Feb 29, 2016 2:15 PM
like_that;1783870 wrote:Typical LIBERAL, never can man up.
Fixed
Feb 29, 2016 2:15pm
Q

QuakerOats

Senior Member

8,740 posts
Feb 29, 2016 2:18 PM
ptown_trojans_1;1783835 wrote:No freaking way. Here you go again saying something is the worst ever, when in reality, it is not.
Go back and look at the 1930s, and then the late 1800s.
Hopefully, Barack Obama hasn’t “fundamentally transformed” the American economy. The Bureau of Economic Analysis recently reported that the United States has experienced 10 straight years of GDP growth below 3% — a first since the agency started to track the data in 1929. Furthermore, a report that Obama’s economic advisers sent to Congress predicted much of the same economic activity for the next few years. It predicted the once great American economy would only increase the GDP by 2.7% for 2016, and decline after that. This isn’t normal, as every American recovery since the 1960s experienced an average GDP growth of 3.9%. Sen. Dan Coats, who chairs Congress' Joint Economic Committee, said he will investigate the causes of the crippled economy at an upcoming hearing. “In order to boost GDP,” Coats said, “we need to overhaul our tax code and strip away unnecessary government regulations to give employers the confidence they need grow their businesses and create new jobs. Congress can take action to help grow our economy, but we need a willing partner in the White House.” Indeed, Americans need to see past Obama’s economic fantasies and elect someone who understands that the American economy needs Liberty to thrive.




I deal in facts and reality, unlike liberals.
Feb 29, 2016 2:18pm
ZWICK 4 PREZ's avatar

ZWICK 4 PREZ

Senior Member

7,733 posts
Feb 29, 2016 2:21 PM
BR1986FB;1783873 wrote:Fixed
Hates liberals.

On a thread about a Liberal.
Feb 29, 2016 2:21pm
HitsRus's avatar

HitsRus

Senior Member

9,206 posts
Feb 29, 2016 2:26 PM
It has nothing to do with Obamacare or taxes.

You don't own a small business, do you? I will tell you definitively that it does....as well as over regulation.
Our hiring practices have been "transformed".
Feb 29, 2016 2:26pm
B

BR1986FB

Senior Member

24,104 posts
Feb 29, 2016 2:28 PM
ZWICK 4 PREZ;1783878 wrote:Hates liberals.

On a thread about a Liberal.
No, just extreme liberals.
Feb 29, 2016 2:28pm
ZWICK 4 PREZ's avatar

ZWICK 4 PREZ

Senior Member

7,733 posts
Feb 29, 2016 2:29 PM
HitsRus;1783880 wrote:You don't own a small business, do you? I will tell you definitively that it does....as well as over regulation.

I completely agree small businesses need tax reform and exemptions. You won't hear disagreements from me. Big businesses need tax reforms also, just the other way.
Feb 29, 2016 2:29pm
Q

QuakerOats

Senior Member

8,740 posts
Feb 29, 2016 2:29 PM
Compare and contrast to:

The longest consecutive stretch of years in which the United State saw real GDP grow by 3.0 percent or better was the seven year period from 1983-1989, during the presidency of Ronald Reagan.




a time when virtually everyone did well.

The difference between Reagan and obama is simply immeasurable.
Feb 29, 2016 2:29pm
ZWICK 4 PREZ's avatar

ZWICK 4 PREZ

Senior Member

7,733 posts
Feb 29, 2016 2:30 PM
BR1986FB;1783881 wrote:No, just extreme liberals.
that's not what you said 1 post prior.
Feb 29, 2016 2:30pm
ptown_trojans_1's avatar

ptown_trojans_1

Moderator

7,632 posts
Feb 29, 2016 2:35 PM
QuakerOats;1783876 wrote:Hopefully, Barack Obama hasn’t “fundamentally transformed” the American economy. The Bureau of Economic Analysis recently reported that the United States has experienced 10 straight years of GDP growth below 3% — a first since the agency started to track the data in 1929. Furthermore, a report that Obama’s economic advisers sent to Congress predicted much of the same economic activity for the next few years. It predicted the once great American economy would only increase the GDP by 2.7% for 2016, and decline after that. This isn’t normal, as every American recovery since the 1960s experienced an average GDP growth of 3.9%. Sen. Dan Coats, who chairs Congress' Joint Economic Committee, said he will investigate the causes of the crippled economy at an upcoming hearing. “In order to boost GDP,” Coats said, “we need to overhaul our tax code and strip away unnecessary government regulations to give employers the confidence they need grow their businesses and create new jobs. Congress can take action to help grow our economy, but we need a willing partner in the White House.” Indeed, Americans need to see past Obama’s economic fantasies and elect someone who understands that the American economy needs Liberty to thrive.




I deal in facts and reality, unlike liberals.
The facts since 1929, correct.
However, to it is the worst growth ever, is simply not true.
If you collectively take the growth from 1929 to 1941, that is worse than now, even with the spike in the early 1930s. The same data shows that.
I would also say the peaks and valleys from late the 1880s, with the various booms and busts, were much worse than today.

My whole point is you are suggesting this is the worst growth in US history, I am saying, only if you look at it from a recently standpoint, is that the case.
Nice shot at the end chief.
Feb 29, 2016 2:35pm
like_that's avatar

like_that

1st Team All-PWN

26,625 posts
Feb 29, 2016 2:39 PM
ptown_trojans_1;1783889 wrote:The facts since 1929, correct.
However, to it is the worst growth ever, is simply not true.
If you collectively take the growth from 1929 to 1941, that is worse than now, even with the spike in the early 1930s. The same data shows that.
I would also say the peaks and valleys from late the 1880s, with the various booms and busts, were much worse than today.

My whole point is you are suggesting this is the worst growth in US history, I am saying, only if you look at it from a recently standpoint, is that the case.
Nice shot at the end chief.
Don't let the main point get in your way, it's still very shitty growth.
Feb 29, 2016 2:39pm
ptown_trojans_1's avatar

ptown_trojans_1

Moderator

7,632 posts
Feb 29, 2016 2:40 PM
like_that;1783890 wrote:Don't let the main point get in your way, it's still very shitty growth.
Very true.
Still, growth. But, as you said, shitty growth.
Feb 29, 2016 2:40pm
Dr Winston O'Boogie's avatar

Dr Winston O'Boogie

Senior Member

1,799 posts
Feb 29, 2016 5:47 PM
Unfortunately, I believe the coronation will proceed. I really do hope that if Trump were elected, he'd push for charges brought. Not to the detriment of the country, of course. But if it would perhaps end the Clinton era in Washington, that'd be wonderful.
Feb 29, 2016 5:47pm
Apple's avatar

Apple

Prost!

2,620 posts
Mar 1, 2016 9:18 AM
Dr Winston O'Boogie;1783935 wrote:Unfortunately, I believe the coronation will proceed. I really do hope that if Trump were elected, he'd push for charges brought. Not to the detriment of the country, of course. But if it would perhaps end the Clinton era in Washington, that'd be wonderful.
It would be quite the accomplishment for ANYONE to first knock out the Bushs and then the Clintons. Even if it means we end up with Trump, on the whole, America would be in a better place.
Mar 1, 2016 9:18am
I

isadore

Senior Member

7,762 posts
Mar 1, 2016 9:32 AM
Apple;1783999 wrote:It would be quite the accomplishment for ANYONE to first knock out the Bushs and then the Clintons. Even if it means we end up with Trump, on the whole, America would be in a better place.
gosh a ruddies Apple in Germany in November, 1932 election "it would be quite and accomplishment for Anyone to knock out Wels and those damn liberal socials SPDers. Even if we end up with Hilter, on the whole, Germany would be a better place."
Mar 1, 2016 9:32am
MontyBrunswick's avatar

MontyBrunswick

Senior Member

846 posts
Mar 1, 2016 9:33 AM
Hillary is going to lock up the nomination today and be on her way to presidency!!!!!!
Mar 1, 2016 9:33am
B

BoatShoes

Senior Member

5,703 posts
Mar 1, 2016 9:38 AM
Apple;1783999 wrote:It would be quite the accomplishment for ANYONE to first knock out the Bushs and then the Clintons. Even if it means we end up with Trump, on the whole, America would be in a better place.
Sadly, in reality, it's not that simple and you're probably wrong - but hence the appeal of Trump.
Mar 1, 2016 9:38am
HitsRus's avatar

HitsRus

Senior Member

9,206 posts
Mar 1, 2016 9:48 AM
Wow...I agree with boatshoes....imagine that! I don't think Trump would be a very good president....his 'appeal' is just not a very good reason to elect him to such an important office.
Mar 1, 2016 9:48am