U.S. GDP grew at a 4.9% annual pace in the third quarter, better than expected

GDP doesn't matter to the average person bringing about it it's a weird flex.

 

I don't know about that. If GDP was -10%, it would matter biggly to the average person. Because a lot of them would lose their job.

Of course, I get it, for Republicans, good economic numbers NEVER matter when the opposition is in power. They only matter when their own guy is in power. For bad economic numbers, it's the other way around.

 

I think you're just looking for good numbers to boost up a lame duck president. Fear of Trump's return.

 

The Biden haters are just looking to deny good economic numbers, so they can get their idol reinstalled in the WH. See how that works?

BTW: I am not the one attributing the good GDP growth in the 3rd quarter to Biden. But then, I also didn't jump up and down about the magical Trump economy, when much more mediocre numbers were posted under Trump. But, I also don't subscribe to the "sky is falling" rhetoric that the Trump supporters peddle on here day in and out.

 

I don't have to one good economic number in a sea of economic turmoil is not a good Mark for a president.

Inflation is a way bigger problem

I don't hear that the sky is falling I hear and see and feel economic trouble because I buy things or I wish I could buy things.

The bigger problem facing people is inflation, also foreign conflicts I think we should stop doing that

 

Inflation has been coming down. It's lower than in the vast majority of other developed economies. Of course, it is much more useful for Republicans to pretend that inflation is still rampant.

As to foreign conflicts: We should stop doing what? We haven't started any. We aren't in any currently. In fact, ZERO American soldiers have lost their lives in combat in 2022. But then, again, it is much more convenient for Republicans to pretend that Biden is a war monger, so they can make political hay out of it.

As to buying things: Aren't Republicans for personal responsibility? If you can't buy things you wish you could, how is this Biden's fault? Can't yo get a better job? I also can't buy things I wish I could, but I don't blame politicians for it. It's rather caused by my son currently going to college, and we are paying his way.

 

first that sentence doesn't make sense. If inflation was going down that would be deflation. It's still going up just at a slower rate.

And that's not a flex it's admission that there are problems.

you admitted that it was when you said you're really bizarre sentence that inflation is going down meaning inflation is still happening it's just not as bad.

I'll grant you that it's just not as bad but that's not a flex.

As to foreign conflicts: We should stop doing what? [/QUOTE] involving ourselves in them.

The greatest thing Trump did was not get involved in foreign conflicts. I think that's the primary component of why he's so hated by leftists.

so that $100 billion dollars that we sent to Ukraine while ignoring our own population didn't really happen? How is it that Hamas in the Palestinian is really complex have American rifles?

Yeah we're involved Joe Biden made sure we got involved. He's part of the warhawk uniparty which does include Republicans as well.

the uniparty is a warmonger between the two facets of it over the past couple of decades they've involve themselves in 10 wars.

Soldiers don't have to lose their lives for us to be involved. How many veterans were denied life-saving benefits that they earned because Biden had to give 100 billion dollars to his buddy in Ukraine? Yeah soldiers died and Biden said **** you to their face.

you can't have personal responsibility if the government is stealing from you that's what inflation is printing more money to steal the value out of your savings account.

It's cannibalizing personal responsibility so that Biden can't pay off his corporate buddies and his boyfriend in the Ukraine.

it's Biden's faulted because he's inflating the currency. Even if you get a better job Biden is still stealing from your savings and how much is he going to take?

You don't blame politicians for inflating the currency? Who the hell do you blame?

 

Just addressing your first point:

Inflation is the decrease in the value (purchasing power) of money. Annual % inflation measures the rate with which money is devalued. Inflation was at 8-10% in mid 22, it is now at 3.8%, close to the inflation rate desired by the Fed, which is somewhere between 2-3%. This means that the inflation rate is down to almost its normal value. However, the 3-4% inflation rate has shown to be stubborn, as expected from historical data. It may take another year to get truly to normal, i.e. 2-3%.

From reading this forum, I have a feeling that a lot of conservatives misunderstand the definition of inflation. They seem to believe that to get rid of inflation, we must go back to the price level (value of money) BEFORE inflation hit. However, looking at history, this is VERY unlikely to happen, unless there is actually a bout of deflation. However, one should be careful what to wish for. Deflation sounds good to the uninformed, doesn't everyone dream of things getting cheaper and cheaper? In reality, persistent deflation is a death spiral of the economy. One just has to look at Japan in the 90s.

So, the take home message: No, prices WILL NOT go down to the level they were before the recent inflation, nor should they. The best we can hope for that inflation further decreases to the acceptable level of 2-3% annually.

 

Nope I don't misunderstand the definition of inflation.

 

Happen to have one with who creates the budget(hint:it is not in the executive branch)?

 

No, it doesn't. I was ready for this.

 

No, I was ready for this. Prepared for a long time.

 

Completely incorrect. Suicide is up, your complete lack of awareness of this is on you and your chosen sources. What you dont see, is because you choose not to see. Wages are not at all keeping up with inflation lmao.

 

Whose wages aren’t keeping up with inflation, YOURS?

 

Never claimed that at all. Nor are your attempts to make this discussion about me serving as effective refutation of the facts...those being that wages are not keeping up with inflation.

 

You have no idea what "lame duck" means, do you.

 

Well lame means crippled and duck means waterfowl.

So I'm going to suggest that it means crippled waterfowl.

 

With respect to politics?

I'll help you: In the case of the American Presidency it's when a President is in the last year or so of his second term, unable to run for office again. People begin to look past his Presidency and stop taking him seriously. President Biden is NOT a "lame duck".

 

I get what you are saying, but the post I was responding to was about the president and their influence on the deficit.
For the record, I don't really attribute most of the national debt to a president, but that doesn't mean they don't have influence.
Take W Bush for example. He had a lot to do with going to war in Iraq, and that had a major influence, but they hid the numbers for the cost of the war for years.

Here you go: http://goliards.us/adelphi/deficits/
It's a mixed bag. Is your Google broken? lol

 

So then it doesn’t really matter who is president and the argument is kinda dumb for both sides? That’s sort of what I thought.

 

Agree, mostly. A president can have influence over money spent, by opinion mostly, because the president is limited in actually spending money, but that's why I find this argument over a president having great influence over our national debt kind of ridiculous for the most part.
Congress actually plays a bigger part, but the greatest influence is disasters, both natural and man-made, wars, economic downturns, etc, etc, etc.
Where legislators do have a huge influence is how the funds are divided up. The budget overruns are where we get into trouble. Bailing out banks in 2008, for example.
That second post was kind of interesting, eh? Examining things according to Congressional group at the time is a little tricky, but they did a pretty good job of it.

 

I was describing Joe Biden's presidency as a crippled waterfowl I don't care about how you think I should use that word.

 

I was just trying to be informative. If you want to shun that information ... I guess I don't care either; no need to be snippy. IF you want to appear ignorant with regard to common political colloquialisms ... nobody's going to stop you.

 

I know lame duck refers to a session in the Congress I wasn't referring to that so there's no need to win for me

 

OK, I see what you did there. You lost the "lame duck president debate so, you changed the argument to ... Congress?

Nice try.