General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsJust heard Grover Norquest claim that the US experienced only 2%
growth under Obama because of higher taxes. CNN No. GOP would not allow Obama infrastructure spending or anything Keynesian because they were worried about the deficit. That is why growth did not come back quicker after the Republican sub prime mortgage crisis. Why is the GOP no longer worried about the deficit with their tax cuts?
pbmus
(12,422 posts)emulatorloo
(44,116 posts)AJT
(5,240 posts)Nothing left of the federal government but the military and the court system.
That's the real meaning of "Cut, Cut, Cut ".
no_hypocrisy
(46,083 posts)ProfessorGAC
(64,998 posts)...by others on this thread, the 2% is also a flat out lie! Provably false by any possible review of the metrics!
Cicada
(4,533 posts)Adjusting for inflation, using figures for real growth rather than including imaginary inflation, Clinton, who raised taxes a lot in 1994, had average annual gdp growth of 3.8%. Bush after huge tax cut had just slightly over 2%. Obama had about 1.5% but he inherited a raging recession. If you take away the first 18 months of recession he inherited then Obama is similar to Bush. Taxes probably have only a trivial impact. Economists predicted a slowdown after Clinton because the work force is shrinking. The baby boomers are retiring. That is why growth after Clinton has slowed. Also Obama deported 5 million illegals. Only some were replaced. Five million illegals certainly produce more than 1.5 trillion dollars per year, maybe more than 2 trillion. Maybe 75% was replaced but still that is a measurable loss. Bush and Obama had lower growth because of a smaller workforce.
Cicada
(4,533 posts)So fewer illegals cost maybe 100 billion, maybe a quarter of one percent net.
lastlib
(23,216 posts)They're only a weapon to bludgeon Dems with when then they get in the way of making the rich richer.