I know you love living in the past, because you're fucking idiot that has trouble with the difficulties of teh real world.
Ironic coming from the guy ignoring the facts on the economy under Bush.
Bush isn't in office anymore.
Thankfully. That was the worst president in history.
It is Obama, the current president, who had a the most expensive plan promising fix to economy, he failed miserably.
Back in reality the economy is on an upswing since Bush crashed it.
Stocks under Bush:
Stocks under Clinton:
From big gay Rueters...lol:
http://blogs.reuters.com/globalinvesting/2009/01/16/the-end-of-the-bush-stock-market/
It looks like you made the mental failure of finding other places that had used Reuters graphs to prove a point and had attributed them as the source. A rookie mistake.
Or more likely a rookie troll since you can't counter the facts.
And for good measure here's Obama vs. Bush.
Another of spike's untimely, outdated, unsourced graphic traced back to a blogspot post in the comment section of the HuffPo
Looks like you made the same mistake here. To cut short the trolling here's a backup graph straight from
Yahoo Finance:
You can clearly see how it crashes at the end of the Bush term and then greatly recovers once Obama is in office.
Nice source graph that ends in '06
On GDP and economic growth:
"amid the fact that under Bush administration, the U.S economic growth was the lowest since the World War II. Eight years of Bush administration were known for the largest expansion of federal government spending compared to the six preceding presidents. In eight years, President Bush increased discretionary federal outlays by 104 percent compared to 11 percent increase under President Clinton....
...Recently, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimated that letting the Bush tax cuts expire would create a net gain of $22 billion in economic activity. Hence, allowing high-income tax cuts expire would, on impact, result in a net gain of $42 billion in economic activity which is about five times the economic stimulus from extending high-income tax cuts."
http://www.citizeneconomists.com/blogs/2010/11/22/bush-tax-cuts-and-economic-growth/
"For the forty years from 1961 to 2000, the president was from the Democratic Party half of the time and from the Republican Party for the rest. Each side had four presidents in those 40 years. During the administrations of the four Democrats, real GDP expanded 4.1% per annum, 1.2 percentage points faster than the average growth during Republican administrations of 2.9% per annum. Growth over the 7.5 years that George W. Bush has been president has averaged just 2.3% per annum.
The Democrat administrations achieved the three fastest rates of growth and four of the top five on that ranking. Real GDP advanced at an annualized rate of 5.2% during the Kennedy years, 5.1% during the Johnson years, and 3.6% when the Clinton administration was in power. GDP rose 3.5% per annum in the Reagan years despite a severe recession in 1981-2. Growth averaged a respectable 3.2% per annum when the Carter administration governed — and yes, some people no doubt were better off in 1980 than 1976 — and the Nixon years experienced growth of 3.0% per annum. In none of these presidential periods was growth substantially less than the 3.4% average pace for the whole second half of the 20th century.
Both Bush presidential periods and the Ford years experienced growth of barely more than 2.0%. The growth rate in the first Bush presidency was 2.1%, identical to the performance of the Ford Administration. The current Bush administration has achieved marginally faster growth of 2.3% per annum. However, that pace has also been substantially less than the long-term trend."
http://currencythoughts.com/2008/09/26/us-gdp-growth-under-different-presidencies/
You're linking a post that starts "Here's an interesting article". Also the quote you quoted isn't on the page you linked. Are you really having so much trouble that you fail at basic trolling like this? :facepalm:
let's just put that
"old record" into perspective for you...lets come up to present time and look at unemployment.
HuffPo says:Nearly Half Of America Says U.S. Nearing Great Depression: CNN Poll
Lets see an up-to-date graph of Obama's "unexpected" employment growth.
Source: Market Ticker.
There is no "perspective" unless we put it in context. Which we can do quite handily with this:
Obama produced unproductive federal jobs, not private sector jobs.
This is a lie as we can see from simply reading the graph above. See where it says "Private Sector". Get with it.
Predictions? That don't really have anything to do with Obama?
**I notice in this graph we generally have a
steady increase in revenues despite the Bush tax cuts.
-- Just say'n
Again, you don't seem to understand how time work, we are in 2011.
See how they dip way under spending right after the cuts?
Let look at present time context.
Sure, this is what they caused:
....feel free to rummage though the solid numbers on pretty graphs they have made available for you at Heritage.
Most of these are irrelevant to the current discussion and of course they're from Heritage. Not exactly reliable.
Simple truth is.... there in not honest and accurate economic metric that shows Obama and his policies to be a success. In fact he is a failure of historic proportions.
Actually Bush was a failure of historic proportions and it's been pretty easy to demonstrate the vast improvement under Obama in all these key areas.
"Obama said"
Undoubtedly the best thing Obama has done for the benefit of United States.
That once your side got power and began to show its true colors that real Americans had a gag-reflex and overwhelming voted conservative in the majority of the nation, a historic election all be told. (liberal infested shit-holes Bering the exception.)
So by that logic once the Bush administration showed it's true colors real Americans had a gag-reflex and overwhelming voted liberal in two consecutive elections in the majority of the nation, a historic elections all be told. (conservative infested shit-holes Bering the exception.)
So to summarize Obama and Clinton fared far better than Bush in just about all economic indicators. You have been unable to face clear facts, tried to troll and mis-attribute sources, and failed to refute even one of my claim with facts of your own.
I pretty much thought that's how it would go with some child temper tantrums thrown in and you behaved predictably. You even declared you're running away after this because you knew this shit you tried wouldn't hold up for a second. Pretty sad.