VolStrom
He/Him/Gator Hater
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2008
- Messages
- 19,704
- Likes
- 30,377
My prediction is we will start seeing more and more stories of a looming World War due to the Brexit vote.
HRC, Barry O and other Libs in this country will beat the drum too in order to try and scare US voters.
We shall see.
I always find it funny when people say that. Like the 8 years under Bush were the worst. Some of yall have seriously short memories and a total lack of economic/business acumen.
Quicker recovery after 911 than the stagnant growth under this turd, It only took Peelosi and dingy Harry one year and Bill Clinton's community reinvestment act to bring the economy go its knees.. short memory is right.
Quicker recovery from 9/11? That's your barometer of economic acumen when comparing to having to dig out from a economic collapse that - oh by the way, began during Bush's term?
The starting points and underlying causes are not remotely equal. It's like pointing out how super a bicycle is because its easier to repair than Maserati.
Quicker recovery from 9/11? That's your barometer of economic acumen when comparing to having to dig out from a economic collapse that - oh by the way, began during Bush's term?
The starting points and underlying causes are not remotely equal. It's like pointing out how super a bicycle is because its easier to repair than Maserati.
Don't go round slinging bullsh!t when everyone knows it's all you're doing. It's unbecoming when we all know fear mongering is the dem/libs greatest tool.
Who is the only POTUS in US history to NEVER hit 3% growth? Hint: he used to go by Barry.
Which POTUS has accumulated more debt than all former POTUS COMBINED? Hint: same fella as the other question.
"Democrats would no doubt like to attribute the large [Democrat-Republican] growth gap to macroeconomic policy choices, but the data do not support such a claim," the researchers wrote in a report aimed at determining why the economy tended to post better numbers under Democratic administrations. "If anything, and we would not make too much of small differences, both fiscal and monetary policy actions seem to be a bit more stabilizing when a Republican is president even though Federal Reserve chairmen appointed by Democrats preside over faster growth than Federal Reserve chairmen appointed by Republicans by a wide margin."
The study ultimately determined that differences in performance come down to "'good luck,' with perhaps a touch of 'good policy.'" Democrats, for example, have been beneficiaries of a greater number of oil shocks which has helped control inflation and has put more disposable income into the hands of consumers.
Quicker recovery from 9/11? That's your barometer of economic acumen when comparing to having to dig out from a economic collapse that - oh by the way, began during Bush's term?
The starting points and underlying causes are not remotely equal. It's like pointing out how super a bicycle is because its easier to repair than Maserati.
Ahh, the cherry picked line items from an article chock full of unappealing facts the clearly show that Obama was in fact no the only POTUS not to achieve a 3% GDP growth.
But let's not let the facts get in the way of chain email outrage.
The collapse that began under Bush was due to democrat policies,i.e. the community reinvestment act which forced banks to approve deadbeats such as yourself loans that would never be repaid. These garbage loans were then bundled and sold and when reality struck the shlt hit the fan,your arrogance and condescension knows no bounds. I was merely pointing out the difficulty in recovering from the worst tragedy in our history as opposed to the eight years of doubling the debt with record tax revenues. It's very simple, if the majority of the people are satisfied with Owebama they'll vote for your nag. You've been wrong on Trump at every juncture including his nomination.