They don't have a plan except BDS
Don’t forget infrastructure week.
Crickets
Biden's signature legislative victory, thus far
And Biden is the cause of it all.
Reagan also granted amnesty to millions of illegels, they have left Reagan's legacy in the rear view mirror, along with there integrity.
Produce more oil. Invest in our oil and natural gas in the billions under condition they lower prices below cost.
No.
I know of no change in the calculation, they changed the basket of goods, which doesn’t change the number.
What else?
i don't know how to write it all without spending far too much time on it. that's a starting point.
using less oil isn't going to lower their expenses.
None of which come from you. They come from gas stations. These are franchises. these producers are making money from selling oil to an open market. the prices are up because the cost of the final product getting to the gas station is so high, as it is everywhere. These gas stations, stores, etc, are barely scraping by as it is.
Sounds like a great Democratic Party campaign ad “get used to it!”
LOLOLOLOL watching you people squirm is so fun, you can’t justify why after Trump ran such a great economy you’ve pissed it away in less then a year after promising dementia Joe meant the “adults were back in charge” and now you’re so desperate you want to re-litigate the 1980 election? Pffft tell me where that gets you.
Which part of Simpson-Mazzoli did you disagree with? That bill was one of those compromises that people are always screaming for and likely a major reason why Congress isn't trusted to negotiate in good faith on immigration.
Trump didn’t “run” the economy, no more than a rooster made the sun rise. Trump sailed on the economic waves Obama created.
Be prepared for the usual Fox News bullet points.
I could not care much less what NBER thinks about almost anything.The organization that dates US business cycles doesn't use two consecutive quarters of negative growth as a metric for determining recessions.
Q: The financial press often states the definition of a recession as two consecutive quarters of decline in real GDP. How does that relate to the NBER's recession dates?
A: Most of the recessions identified by our procedures do consist of two or more consecutive quarters of declining real GDP, but not all of them. In 2001, for example, the recession did not include two consecutive quarters of decline in real GDP. In the recession from the peak in December 2007 to the trough in June 2009, real GDP declined in the first, third, and fourth quarters of 2008 and in the first and second quarters of 2009. Real GDI declined for the final three quarters of 2001 and for five of the six quarters in the 2007–2009 recession.
Q: Why doesn't the committee accept the two-quarter definition?
A: There are several reasons. First, we do not identify economic activity solely with real GDP, but consider a range of indicators. Second, we consider the depth of the decline in economic activity. The NBER definition includes the phrase, “a significant decline in economic activity." Thus real GDP could decline by relatively small amounts in two consecutive quarters without warranting the determination that a peak had occurred. Third, our main focus is on the monthly chronology, which requires consideration of monthly indicators. Fourth, in examining the behavior of production on a quarterly basis, where real GDP data are available, we give equal weight to real GDI. The difference between GDP and GDI—called the “statistical discrepancy”—was particularly important in the recessions of 2001 and 2007–2009.
