- Joined
- Dec 9, 2009
- Messages
- 134,496
- Reaction score
- 14,621
- Location
- Houston, TX
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Why are the failures of Socialists always called a "surprise", or "unexpected"? Answer: Socialist propagandists masquerading as journalists cannot help themselves.The U.S. economy posted a stunning drop of 0.1 percent in the fourth quarter, defying expectations for slow growth...
The economy shrank from October through December for the first time since the recession ended...
The Commerce Department said Wednesday that the economy contracted at an annual rate of 0.1 percent in the fourth quarter. That's a sharp slowdown from the 3.1 percent growth rate in the July-September quarter.
The surprise contraction could raise fears about the economy's ability to handle tax increases that took effect in January and looming spending cuts.
GDP Shows Surprise Drop for U.S. in Fourth Quarter
Cutting spending OR raising taxes will cause recession, especially with the $1 trillion you guys need to balance. A minor recession is enevitable when balancing a deficit so large.
Cutting spending OR raising taxes will cause recession, especially with the $1 trillion you guys need to balance. A minor recession is enevitable when balancing a deficit so large.
Wrong, cutting spending in a private sector economy will have limited effect. Unleash the private sector and force people like you to accept personal responsibility is the only way for this country to thrive. Only socialists believe we need a 3.8 trillion dollar and growing Federal Govt. and have no problem with high unemployment, high debt, and low economic growth, the new socialist normal. Welcome to Greece II and the Obama economy.
We didn't cut spending OR raise taxes in the 4th quarter of 2012.
Well yes, cutting federal spending will most certainly help cause a recession.
What do you mean by me taking personal responsibility? I live in a country were our budget is not far off from being balanced.
As a socialist I believe in none of these horse**** stereotypes you've listed. A balanced budget is needed in any gov't, socialist or free market.
The 7 or 8% unemployment is not that high, honestly. Underemployment should be a bigger issue.
I read the article after posting that. Article does cite defence spending cuts though. My statement still stands regardless.
Your opinion noted, but obviously you have no understanding of our free market economy and the components of tha teconomy
In this country there are 23 million unemployed/under employed/discouraged workers and that is the new normal here.
Name for me one successful socialist country with low unemployment, high economic growth, and no debt?
Doubt seriously that you have any clue as to how a private sector economy works or really what is going on with yours.
Not a big surprise. Holiday spending was down, so post holiday, which is a traditionally low time of year, was bound to be down also. Though gas prices are down from a high water mark of last year, they are still high. Couple this with continued rise in food and other necessities, and the economy has to shrink. Pay is not increasing to meet the new demands on basics, so less to spend on other things. All the "stimulus" in the world is not going to change this, unless of course we hand out enough to keep pace with inflation on basic needs.
To me, this is not the first "negative" growth we have had during that time period. Anytime growth does not keep pace with inflation on basic needs, then it is not really growth. With new EPA requirements hitting the electric power industry, continued inflation on food stuffs, continued high prices for housing, etc, it will only get worse. Credit, government manipulation and other factors have created a false "high" in the economy and it will at some point have to make a gross adjustment back to where it should be. This is going to hurt and there is no real way to prevent it.
Whatever, ditto to you.
Which is about 8 or 9%, higher than it should be, but not astronomical like many make it out to be.
The People's Republic of China. Virtually no unemployment, an economy growing at 10%, and very low gov't debt.
I read the article after posting that. Article does cite defence spending cuts though. My statement still stands regardless.
Whatever, ditto to you.
Which is about 8 or 9%, higher than it should be, but not astronomical like many make it out to be.
The People's Republic of China. Virtually no unemployment, an economy growing at 10%, and very low gov't debt.
Cutting spending OR raising taxes will cause recession, especially with the $1 trillion you guys need to balance. A minor recession is enevitable when balancing a deficit so large.
How much growth did it display before the introduction of "capitalist zones"?
LOL, China? how do you know what is going on in China? By the way do you want China wages? a billion people in China living in poverty and dependent on the govt. Now that is a liberal socialist dream world.
The grass is always greener on the otherside until you get there and even when a liberal gets there it is always someone else's fault for the actual conditions there thus more govt. spending needed to make the grass greener.
Whilst totally communist, I'm not sure. Honestly. All I know is with their current controlled free market, they're one of the fastest grow economies.
Your statement doesn't create an argument that justifies the decline in GDP over the 4th quarter. While in theory your point may be correct in some circumstances, it has nothing to do with what happened here. The defense spending cuts were $497 billion over 10 years. That means that we're looking at a total of $49.7 billion-ish for the next 12 months, and NOT all at once during the 4th quarter...(in fact, if you divide it by 4 you end up with $12.425 billion over three months).
Our GDP is over $13 trillion. How does $12.425 billion (ish) in defense spending cuts (some of which would have left the U.S. without entering into our economy anyway) make up the "bulk" of a 2.6% loss in growth?
Not much. It was the introduction of the capitalist zones and foreign investment that spurned their growth. A lot of that growth is predicated upon the fact that labor is so much cheaper there. Their previous socialist economy left them in such poverty that they now that they have dropped it, they are seeing major growth. They have to grow, since they couldn't really shrink anymore and with the labor cost differential with the rest of the world and their allowing these new zones, it is only natural that they grow. Take away the labor cost differential, and then see where they would be. Even their growth though is totally dependent upon exports to other parts of the world, internally, they cannot support growth yet.
We didn't cut spending OR raise taxes in the 4th quarter of 2012.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?