(no message)
(no message)
2.1 is fine. And it’s only a quarter. Most see about 2.3 for the year. That’s fine. Same as before Trump. Low unemployment, modest gdp growth. I wish he hadn’t used deficit spending to get it but other than that I have few complaints
His GDP will still likely be around Barry.
He has also continued to drive up debt like Barry.
bump", which is indeed over. You need to give business some time to change their long-term plan and re-invest the money saved from tax cuts. You claim you used to be a R. This is just economics 101 for every freshmen R.
expectation of a very large corporate tax cut that led to big share buy backs.
You are not a freaking moron, because you already know this - Of course tax cuts promote growth. They also increase debt. We could cut taxes all day and, shit, who knows, achieve 2.6% growth next year. Problem is that we can't pay our bills if we do that. And it will catch up with us.
You know debt is caused by over-spending. If a man bring home $$ 10% more every year, but his woman spends $$ 20% more every year, they'll still be in debt. Let's make law, mandatory for balance of federal budget. will you?
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
There is a reason why budget sequestration happened on 2013, not on 2012, not on 2016. The windows for R to fight budget cut is very narrow. Again you know it. Don't post like propaganda. Trying to fool posters here only make you look like a fool.
Same applies to Trump 1 trillion infrastructure proposal. D said, ok, if you want it pass, we need to add another 1 trillion of other spending including climate change to make it 2 trillion under the name of infrastructure bill.
Also why didn’t the R’s stand up for spending cuts in 2017 while passing that tax cut under your theory?
Pssst.......they don’t believe in them. They are the the D party light. Orange is a D on spending, period. The D’s want to add 2 trillion in spending, the R’s just 1 trillion? And that’s what you support? Bot moron.
(no message)