Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: RetiredNow who wrote (1050197)	1/23/2018 5:34:11 PM
From: Mongo2116	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573994

Obama was in charge...history will credit him...deal with it!!

To: RetiredNow who wrote (1050197)	1/23/2018 6:09:55 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1573994

Mindmeld, What conventional wisdom claims did the trick was a profligate amount of debt spending, $2.5 trillion in QE, and zero percent interest rates for many years. I still remember when John Fowler denounced Bush's deficits and claimed that we were living in a "credit card economy." He said that if you took the annual deficit away from GDP growth, you'd actually end up with a recession. Now let's apply that logic to Obama's final year in office. In 2016, the GDP grew by 1.6%, which itself represented a slowdown. Given that the GDP that year was $18.5T, that meant that the economy only grew by $296B. Now what was the federal deficit for that year? $580B. In other words, the federal government was spending $580B of money it did not have to keep an economy going. Without that deficit, the economy would have been in a recession. By the way, Obama said that the era of 3% GDP growth is over. Given that the GDP growth figure in 2017 will likely be around 3%, does that mean he can't claim ownership for it? Tenchusatsu