Recession

362,167 Views | 3205 Replies | Last: 1 day ago by boognish_bear
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The_barBEARian said:

whiterock said:

The_barBEARian said:

whiterock said:

J.R. said:

whiterock said:

Jack Bauer said:

Wait. The Trump administration was bragging about 5-7% GDP and now we are excited it "jumped" to 2%??

2% was 2nd QTR; +5% was 3rd qtr.

If you will recall, I told you this would happen. All that trade deal investment money is starting to hit the GDP numbers. It should sustain for the next 24-36 months.

It's a radical change of business model. No longer are we trying to stimulate the economy by engaging in deficit spending g to stimulate consumption. We are instead growing consumption by growing employment. Latter is sustainable. Former is not.

But it is big change and people are typically afraid of change.

huh? Deficit spending stopped is not factual. You seen the debt added via Piggy?

Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 ended yesterday. Although official figures have not yet been released, our preliminary estimates show high and rising deficits and debt. For FY 2026, we estimate:
  • A budget deficit of $2.0 trillion, or 6.2% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
  • Debt held by the public of $32.3 trillion, or 100% of GDP.
  • Spending of $7.4 trillion, or 22.9% of GDP.
  • Revenue of $5.4 trillion, or 16.7% of GDP.
  • Interest costs of $1.1 trillion, a record 3.4% of GDP.
  • Interest was the second largest line item in the budget, costing more than defense or Medicare.
At $2.0 trillion, we estimate budget deficits were about $210 billion above FY 2025 levels, $135 billion above the Congressional Budget Office's (CBO) February projections, and about $305 billion higher than what the Council of Economic Advisers had projected.




C + I + G + T = GDP

I didn't make a claim about stopping deficit spending. I pointed out the plain and well-known macroeconomic impact of using investment rather than government spending to drive GDP growth.

But since you mentioned it, this admin (Bessent in particular) has been quite direct about their plan to deal with the deficit: hold govt spending (G) steady and grow the economy (via I) to reduce the deficit as a percentage of GDP. Thus far, they're doing EXACTLY that - holding the deficit steady while accelerating GDP growth (via trade deal investments) at more than 2x historical rates.

We can't just cut a $1.9T deficit to zero in a budget cycle. It would cause the most harmful recession in our history, dwarfing the Great Depression of the 1930s. Because, you see, government spending is part of the GDP equation. Every single dollar cut to govt spending cut lowers top-line GDP numbers. That's why admins of both parties have been so reluctant to actually cut spending - the political costs of budget cuts dwarf the political costs of deficits. Within that fiscal burrito is another politically destabilizing reality: entitlements spending is 60% of our budget, so there is no pathway to rapid balancing of the budget without cutting Medicare, Medicaid, AND Social Security.

Why don't you lead by example and refuse to accept a Social Security check?


Your profilgate war for Israel demolished any hope of rolling back inflation and getting back to pre-Covid America

FLBear is a reflexive cynic. You're just plumb effin' stupid. I mean really….




I might be, but I'm right about you destroying this country for Israel... whiterock, the white savior of the ME!


You're the one who's hyper-obsessed about the Middle East. I'm pointing out examples of success here, like this one in Ohio., which is directly derivative of admin policy.

whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Jack Bauer said:

FLBear5630 said:

Jack Bauer said:

Revised Numbers:
July: -10,000 (31,000 adjustment down)
August: 133,000 (29,000 adjustment down)
September: 29,000 (90,000 forecasted)




Anyone who listens to this guy, there is no hope...


There are people in this country who actually believe 100% of job losses are either government or illegal aliens and that's a good thing..

They're getting increasingly desperate to find things to carp about as the economic growth accelerates.


Jack Bauer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

Jack Bauer said:

FLBear5630 said:

Jack Bauer said:

Revised Numbers:
July: -10,000 (31,000 adjustment down)
August: 133,000 (29,000 adjustment down)
September: 29,000 (90,000 forecasted)




Anyone who listens to this guy, there is no hope...


There are people in this country who actually believe 100% of job losses are either government or illegal aliens and that's a good thing..

They're getting increasingly desperate to find things to carp about as the economic growth accelerates.




Yes, things are going great..

BUDOS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Instead of Trump's interpretation and narcissistic take of Make America Great Again or MAGA, perhaps we should consider a new one such as one of the following:

Make America Growing Again: Shifting the narrative toward continuous economic development, innovation, and infrastructure expansion.

Make America Golden Again: Evoking a prosperous "golden age" of wealth, high living standards, and optimism.

The_barBEARian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

The_barBEARian said:

whiterock said:

The_barBEARian said:

whiterock said:

J.R. said:

whiterock said:

Jack Bauer said:

Wait. The Trump administration was bragging about 5-7% GDP and now we are excited it "jumped" to 2%??

2% was 2nd QTR; +5% was 3rd qtr.

If you will recall, I told you this would happen. All that trade deal investment money is starting to hit the GDP numbers. It should sustain for the next 24-36 months.

It's a radical change of business model. No longer are we trying to stimulate the economy by engaging in deficit spending g to stimulate consumption. We are instead growing consumption by growing employment. Latter is sustainable. Former is not.

But it is big change and people are typically afraid of change.

huh? Deficit spending stopped is not factual. You seen the debt added via Piggy?

Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 ended yesterday. Although official figures have not yet been released, our preliminary estimates show high and rising deficits and debt. For FY 2026, we estimate:
  • A budget deficit of $2.0 trillion, or 6.2% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
  • Debt held by the public of $32.3 trillion, or 100% of GDP.
  • Spending of $7.4 trillion, or 22.9% of GDP.
  • Revenue of $5.4 trillion, or 16.7% of GDP.
  • Interest costs of $1.1 trillion, a record 3.4% of GDP.
  • Interest was the second largest line item in the budget, costing more than defense or Medicare.
At $2.0 trillion, we estimate budget deficits were about $210 billion above FY 2025 levels, $135 billion above the Congressional Budget Office's (CBO) February projections, and about $305 billion higher than what the Council of Economic Advisers had projected.




C + I + G + T = GDP

I didn't make a claim about stopping deficit spending. I pointed out the plain and well-known macroeconomic impact of using investment rather than government spending to drive GDP growth.

But since you mentioned it, this admin (Bessent in particular) has been quite direct about their plan to deal with the deficit: hold govt spending (G) steady and grow the economy (via I) to reduce the deficit as a percentage of GDP. Thus far, they're doing EXACTLY that - holding the deficit steady while accelerating GDP growth (via trade deal investments) at more than 2x historical rates.

We can't just cut a $1.9T deficit to zero in a budget cycle. It would cause the most harmful recession in our history, dwarfing the Great Depression of the 1930s. Because, you see, government spending is part of the GDP equation. Every single dollar cut to govt spending cut lowers top-line GDP numbers. That's why admins of both parties have been so reluctant to actually cut spending - the political costs of budget cuts dwarf the political costs of deficits. Within that fiscal burrito is another politically destabilizing reality: entitlements spending is 60% of our budget, so there is no pathway to rapid balancing of the budget without cutting Medicare, Medicaid, AND Social Security.

Why don't you lead by example and refuse to accept a Social Security check?


Your profilgate war for Israel demolished any hope of rolling back inflation and getting back to pre-Covid America

FLBear is a reflexive cynic. You're just plumb effin' stupid. I mean really….




I might be, but I'm right about you destroying this country for Israel... whiterock, the white savior of the ME!


You're the one who's hyper-obsessed about the Middle East. I'm pointing out examples of success here, like this one in Ohio., which is directly derivative of admin policy.




They''ll create jobs alright... for H1-b's. Seen it happen time after time here in Texas
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The_barBEARian said:

whiterock said:

The_barBEARian said:

whiterock said:

The_barBEARian said:

whiterock said:

J.R. said:

whiterock said:

Jack Bauer said:

Wait. The Trump administration was bragging about 5-7% GDP and now we are excited it "jumped" to 2%??

2% was 2nd QTR; +5% was 3rd qtr.

If you will recall, I told you this would happen. All that trade deal investment money is starting to hit the GDP numbers. It should sustain for the next 24-36 months.

It's a radical change of business model. No longer are we trying to stimulate the economy by engaging in deficit spending g to stimulate consumption. We are instead growing consumption by growing employment. Latter is sustainable. Former is not.

But it is big change and people are typically afraid of change.

huh? Deficit spending stopped is not factual. You seen the debt added via Piggy?

Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 ended yesterday. Although official figures have not yet been released, our preliminary estimates show high and rising deficits and debt. For FY 2026, we estimate:
  • A budget deficit of $2.0 trillion, or 6.2% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
  • Debt held by the public of $32.3 trillion, or 100% of GDP.
  • Spending of $7.4 trillion, or 22.9% of GDP.
  • Revenue of $5.4 trillion, or 16.7% of GDP.
  • Interest costs of $1.1 trillion, a record 3.4% of GDP.
  • Interest was the second largest line item in the budget, costing more than defense or Medicare.
At $2.0 trillion, we estimate budget deficits were about $210 billion above FY 2025 levels, $135 billion above the Congressional Budget Office's (CBO) February projections, and about $305 billion higher than what the Council of Economic Advisers had projected.




C + I + G + T = GDP

I didn't make a claim about stopping deficit spending. I pointed out the plain and well-known macroeconomic impact of using investment rather than government spending to drive GDP growth.

But since you mentioned it, this admin (Bessent in particular) has been quite direct about their plan to deal with the deficit: hold govt spending (G) steady and grow the economy (via I) to reduce the deficit as a percentage of GDP. Thus far, they're doing EXACTLY that - holding the deficit steady while accelerating GDP growth (via trade deal investments) at more than 2x historical rates.

We can't just cut a $1.9T deficit to zero in a budget cycle. It would cause the most harmful recession in our history, dwarfing the Great Depression of the 1930s. Because, you see, government spending is part of the GDP equation. Every single dollar cut to govt spending cut lowers top-line GDP numbers. That's why admins of both parties have been so reluctant to actually cut spending - the political costs of budget cuts dwarf the political costs of deficits. Within that fiscal burrito is another politically destabilizing reality: entitlements spending is 60% of our budget, so there is no pathway to rapid balancing of the budget without cutting Medicare, Medicaid, AND Social Security.

Why don't you lead by example and refuse to accept a Social Security check?


Your profilgate war for Israel demolished any hope of rolling back inflation and getting back to pre-Covid America

FLBear is a reflexive cynic. You're just plumb effin' stupid. I mean really….




I might be, but I'm right about you destroying this country for Israel... whiterock, the white savior of the ME!


You're the one who's hyper-obsessed about the Middle East. I'm pointing out examples of success here, like this one in Ohio., which is directly derivative of admin policy.




They''ll create jobs alright... for H1-b's. Seen it happen time after time here in Texas

….but he's cracking down on them.


We are transitioning from a consumption economy to a production economy. That takes time. It is going well. Very well.

Jack Bauer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

The_barBEARian said:

whiterock said:

The_barBEARian said:

whiterock said:

The_barBEARian said:

whiterock said:

J.R. said:

whiterock said:

Jack Bauer said:

Wait. The Trump administration was bragging about 5-7% GDP and now we are excited it "jumped" to 2%??

2% was 2nd QTR; +5% was 3rd qtr.

If you will recall, I told you this would happen. All that trade deal investment money is starting to hit the GDP numbers. It should sustain for the next 24-36 months.

It's a radical change of business model. No longer are we trying to stimulate the economy by engaging in deficit spending g to stimulate consumption. We are instead growing consumption by growing employment. Latter is sustainable. Former is not.

But it is big change and people are typically afraid of change.

huh? Deficit spending stopped is not factual. You seen the debt added via Piggy?

Fiscal Year (FY) 2026 ended yesterday. Although official figures have not yet been released, our preliminary estimates show high and rising deficits and debt. For FY 2026, we estimate:
  • A budget deficit of $2.0 trillion, or 6.2% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP).
  • Debt held by the public of $32.3 trillion, or 100% of GDP.
  • Spending of $7.4 trillion, or 22.9% of GDP.
  • Revenue of $5.4 trillion, or 16.7% of GDP.
  • Interest costs of $1.1 trillion, a record 3.4% of GDP.
  • Interest was the second largest line item in the budget, costing more than defense or Medicare.
At $2.0 trillion, we estimate budget deficits were about $210 billion above FY 2025 levels, $135 billion above the Congressional Budget Office's (CBO) February projections, and about $305 billion higher than what the Council of Economic Advisers had projected.




C + I + G + T = GDP

I didn't make a claim about stopping deficit spending. I pointed out the plain and well-known macroeconomic impact of using investment rather than government spending to drive GDP growth.

But since you mentioned it, this admin (Bessent in particular) has been quite direct about their plan to deal with the deficit: hold govt spending (G) steady and grow the economy (via I) to reduce the deficit as a percentage of GDP. Thus far, they're doing EXACTLY that - holding the deficit steady while accelerating GDP growth (via trade deal investments) at more than 2x historical rates.

We can't just cut a $1.9T deficit to zero in a budget cycle. It would cause the most harmful recession in our history, dwarfing the Great Depression of the 1930s. Because, you see, government spending is part of the GDP equation. Every single dollar cut to govt spending cut lowers top-line GDP numbers. That's why admins of both parties have been so reluctant to actually cut spending - the political costs of budget cuts dwarf the political costs of deficits. Within that fiscal burrito is another politically destabilizing reality: entitlements spending is 60% of our budget, so there is no pathway to rapid balancing of the budget without cutting Medicare, Medicaid, AND Social Security.

Why don't you lead by example and refuse to accept a Social Security check?


Your profilgate war for Israel demolished any hope of rolling back inflation and getting back to pre-Covid America

FLBear is a reflexive cynic. You're just plumb effin' stupid. I mean really….




I might be, but I'm right about you destroying this country for Israel... whiterock, the white savior of the ME!


You're the one who's hyper-obsessed about the Middle East. I'm pointing out examples of success here, like this one in Ohio., which is directly derivative of admin policy.




They''ll create jobs alright... for H1-b's. Seen it happen time after time here in Texas

….but he's cracking down on them.


We are transitioning from a consumption economy to a production economy. That takes time. It is going well. Very well.




Is that Ms "7% GDP" herself??
Doc Holliday
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whitetrash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Doc Holliday said:



Uh oh...little barbearian the whippersnapper is going to blow a gasket.

FLBear5630
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Doc Holliday said:




Much easier to be against Government social spending at 30 with 40 years work to go. At 65 it is a different picture. Even if you dont want to use, having the option helps a lot of people.
Jack Bauer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Doc Holliday
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FLBear5630 said:

Doc Holliday said:




Much easier to be against Government social spending at 30 with 40 years work to go. At 65 it is a different picture. Even if you dont want to use, having the option helps a lot of people.
Would totally work if wasn't a retar de d pyramid scheme
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BUDOS
How long do you want to ignore this user?

The original Social Security system created in 1935 was designed to be actuarially and fiscally self-sustaining through dedicated payroll tax contributions, but its financing structure shifted significantly over time.

Original Design and Funding
Contributory model: The Social Security Administration designed the system so that worker and employer contributions funded retirement benefits.

Initial reserve plan: The original 1935 Act envisioned a large, fully funded reserve account that would accumulate interest.

Pay-as-you-go shift: The 1939 amendments and 1940s adjustments shifted the system toward a pay-as-you-go model where current taxes pay current benefits.

Structural and Demographic Changes
Benefit expansions: Lawmakers added survivor, dependent (1939), and disability (1956) benefits, expanding payouts without permanently matching revenue.

Demographic shifts: Longer life expectancies and the retirement of the Baby Boomer generation increased the beneficiary-to-worker ratio.

Solvency adjustments: Congress repeatedly intervened with tax hikes and age adjustments, such as the 1983 bipartisan reforms, to maintain viability
FLBear5630
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Doc Holliday said:

FLBear5630 said:

Doc Holliday said:




Much easier to be against Government social spending at 30 with 40 years work to go. At 65 it is a different picture. Even if you dont want to use, having the option helps a lot of people.
Would totally work if wasn't a retar de d pyramid scheme


Within 5 years of retirement all that matters is the pyramid doesn't collapse. Medicare, especially.

You spend 40 years supporting the system for the generation ahead of you, them when it is your turn thd next generation says no. That becomes an issue. Perspective changes when time is no longer in your side.
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Paul taking the ratio

historian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A drop was inevitable. Housing was far too high. The economy routinely corrects itself when these things happen.
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
historian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Social Security is a Ponzi scheme, the biggest one ever. It's only survived for decades because it's been perpetrated by the government. Ironically, it could collapse because the government has mismanaged it for decades.
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
historian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Good summary. I don't think congress has gone anything to shore it up since 1983. In this century, Congress has infamously pretended it was fine and there were no problems. Too many stuck their heads in the sand.
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
historian
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sen Paul is correct.
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
boognish_bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.