Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Elizabeth Warren endorses sending the economy into a severe recession in 2020
Comments
-
Going from $1 to $2 is 100% growth. Going from $1 Trillion to $1.1 Trillion is only a 10% growth rate.2001400ex said:
And China has growth rates that would embarrass Reagan. Again. You have no point Race.RaceBannon said:
Reagan had growth rates that Obama never got in the same area code on2001400ex said:
Reagan also got unemployment rates Obama never even got in same area code on. Your point race?RaceBannon said:Reagan has growth rates that Obama never even got in the same area code on
Race knows maff.
-
So growth matters except for China. Cause they are like .000001% the size of America. Brilliant analysis.PurpleThrobber said:
Going from $1 to $2 is 100% growth. Going from $1 Trillion to $1.1 Trillion is only a 10% growth rate.2001400ex said:
And China has growth rates that would embarrass Reagan. Again. You have no point Race.RaceBannon said:
Reagan had growth rates that Obama never got in the same area code on2001400ex said:
Reagan also got unemployment rates Obama never even got in same area code on. Your point race?RaceBannon said:Reagan has growth rates that Obama never even got in the same area code on
Race knows maff. -
That’s. The. Joke.UW_Doog_Bot said:
I see you are resorting to the HondoBro/FSBob classic "Answer the question!#!@#"TheKobeStopper said:
Stop dodging and answer the question.UW_Doog_Bot said:
It's hard hitting analysis and questions like this that make me respekt team #hondobros.TheKobeStopper said:Name the last republican president that didn’t have a recession.
And Trump hasn’t completed his first term (we all know a recession is coming) so he doesn’t count.
Shooting for the stars.
Economic cycles lag political cycles, hth. Or do we now get to blame Obama for the 2009 financial crisis?
You already do blame Obama for 2009. -
RaceBannon said:
And yet the subject is another democratic front runner who is an economic moron
But but but
I would say the people voting for the party that has, over and over again, been responsible for recessions are the economic morons.
But hey, it’s not like you’re Race Bannon and have ever cared about results. No, just make up a bunch of excuses for why the results don’t matter. That’s what doogs like you always do. -
I know. It's hard to dumb it down for you.2001400ex said:
So growth matters except for China. Cause they are like .000001% the size of America. Brilliant analysis.PurpleThrobber said:
Going from $1 to $2 is 100% growth. Going from $1 Trillion to $1.1 Trillion is only a 10% growth rate.2001400ex said:
And China has growth rates that would embarrass Reagan. Again. You have no point Race.RaceBannon said:
Reagan had growth rates that Obama never got in the same area code on2001400ex said:
Reagan also got unemployment rates Obama never even got in same area code on. Your point race?RaceBannon said:Reagan has growth rates that Obama never even got in the same area code on
Race knows maff.
-
The last recession was a result of the housing bubble and mandated lower lending standards. All supported by dems who crushed any attempts to reform the process. The rescission was then extended and the recovery weak because of barry putting a governor on the economic throttle - taxes and regulation. Who was the moron that said we can't drill our way to lower energy prices? Here is a hint, it wasn't Palin.
-
Given that China is more than half the US GDP and around 75%, I feel your maff is wrong. So you can strut around all you want but you still look dumb. Got it pookie?PurpleThrobber said:
I know. It's hard to dumb it down for you.2001400ex said:
So growth matters except for China. Cause they are like .000001% the size of America. Brilliant analysis.PurpleThrobber said:
Going from $1 to $2 is 100% growth. Going from $1 Trillion to $1.1 Trillion is only a 10% growth rate.2001400ex said:
And China has growth rates that would embarrass Reagan. Again. You have no point Race.RaceBannon said:
Reagan had growth rates that Obama never got in the same area code on2001400ex said:
Reagan also got unemployment rates Obama never even got in same area code on. Your point race?RaceBannon said:Reagan has growth rates that Obama never even got in the same area code on
Race knows maff. -
GDP per capita USA 2018: $54,5422001400ex said:
Given that China is more than half the US GDP and around 75%, I feel your maff is wrong. So you can strut around all you want but you still look dumb. Got it pookie?PurpleThrobber said:
I know. It's hard to dumb it down for you.2001400ex said:
So growth matters except for China. Cause they are like .000001% the size of America. Brilliant analysis.PurpleThrobber said:
Going from $1 to $2 is 100% growth. Going from $1 Trillion to $1.1 Trillion is only a 10% growth rate.2001400ex said:
And China has growth rates that would embarrass Reagan. Again. You have no point Race.RaceBannon said:
Reagan had growth rates that Obama never got in the same area code on2001400ex said:
Reagan also got unemployment rates Obama never even got in same area code on. Your point race?RaceBannon said:Reagan has growth rates that Obama never even got in the same area code on
Race knows maff.
GDP per capita China 2018: $7,755
GDP per capita 2010 USA $48,466
GDP per capita 2010 China $4,500
HondoFS. You are a moron. It is embarrassing. I'd recommend turning off your computer and turning on something more your level...say NickJr?
-
My maff is exactly correct. There's no 'feels' in maff.2001400ex said:
Given that China is more than half the US GDP and around 75%, I feel your maff is wrong. So you can strut around all you want but you still look dumb. Got it pookie?PurpleThrobber said:
I know. It's hard to dumb it down for you.2001400ex said:
So growth matters except for China. Cause they are like .000001% the size of America. Brilliant analysis.PurpleThrobber said:
Going from $1 to $2 is 100% growth. Going from $1 Trillion to $1.1 Trillion is only a 10% growth rate.2001400ex said:
And China has growth rates that would embarrass Reagan. Again. You have no point Race.RaceBannon said:
Reagan had growth rates that Obama never got in the same area code on2001400ex said:
Reagan also got unemployment rates Obama never even got in same area code on. Your point race?RaceBannon said:Reagan has growth rates that Obama never even got in the same area code on
Race knows maff.
1.1 Trillion/1 Trillion equals exactly a 10% increase.
So fuck thyself off.
-
Throbber point had nothing to do with GDP per capita idiot.HoustonHusky said:
GDP per capita USA 2018: $54,5422001400ex said:
Given that China is more than half the US GDP and around 75%, I feel your maff is wrong. So you can strut around all you want but you still look dumb. Got it pookie?PurpleThrobber said:
I know. It's hard to dumb it down for you.2001400ex said:
So growth matters except for China. Cause they are like .000001% the size of America. Brilliant analysis.PurpleThrobber said:
Going from $1 to $2 is 100% growth. Going from $1 Trillion to $1.1 Trillion is only a 10% growth rate.2001400ex said:
And China has growth rates that would embarrass Reagan. Again. You have no point Race.RaceBannon said:
Reagan had growth rates that Obama never got in the same area code on2001400ex said:
Reagan also got unemployment rates Obama never even got in same area code on. Your point race?RaceBannon said:Reagan has growth rates that Obama never even got in the same area code on
Race knows maff.
GDP per capita China 2018: $7,755
GDP per capita 2010 USA $48,466
GDP per capita 2010 China $4,500
HondoFS. You are a moron. It is embarrassing. I'd recommend turning off your computer and turning on something more your level...say NickJr? -
Yes, the population of a country has no impact on the size of its GDP.2001400ex said:
Throbber point had nothing to do with GDP per capita idiot.HoustonHusky said:
GDP per capita USA 2018: $54,5422001400ex said:
Given that China is more than half the US GDP and around 75%, I feel your maff is wrong. So you can strut around all you want but you still look dumb. Got it pookie?PurpleThrobber said:
I know. It's hard to dumb it down for you.2001400ex said:
So growth matters except for China. Cause they are like .000001% the size of America. Brilliant analysis.PurpleThrobber said:
Going from $1 to $2 is 100% growth. Going from $1 Trillion to $1.1 Trillion is only a 10% growth rate.2001400ex said:
And China has growth rates that would embarrass Reagan. Again. You have no point Race.RaceBannon said:
Reagan had growth rates that Obama never got in the same area code on2001400ex said:
Reagan also got unemployment rates Obama never even got in same area code on. Your point race?RaceBannon said:Reagan has growth rates that Obama never even got in the same area code on
Race knows maff.
GDP per capita China 2018: $7,755
GDP per capita 2010 USA $48,466
GDP per capita 2010 China $4,500
HondoFS. You are a moron. It is embarrassing. I'd recommend turning off your computer and turning on something more your level...say NickJr?
HondoFS.
Shoutout to GDS, insincereDawg, CirrohisoftheBrain, Thomas, and the rest of you Liberals...remember. This guy agrees with you.
-
That party has also been responsible for all the growth just like nowTheKobeStopper said:RaceBannon said:And yet the subject is another democratic front runner who is an economic moron
But but but
I would say the people voting for the party that has, over and over again, been responsible for recessions are the economic morons.
But hey, it’s not like you’re Race Bannon and have ever cared about results. No, just make up a bunch of excuses for why the results don’t matter. That’s what doogs like you always do.
Nobody made more excuses than Obama
Nobody has a worse plan than the folks you vote for
This isn't even a good effort on your part. Hondo level
Good job -
Complete fucking travesty that Hondo's vote counts just as much as yours or mine.HoustonHusky said:
Yes, the population of a country has no impact on the size of its GDP.2001400ex said:
Throbber point had nothing to do with GDP per capita idiot.HoustonHusky said:
GDP per capita USA 2018: $54,5422001400ex said:
Given that China is more than half the US GDP and around 75%, I feel your maff is wrong. So you can strut around all you want but you still look dumb. Got it pookie?PurpleThrobber said:
I know. It's hard to dumb it down for you.2001400ex said:
So growth matters except for China. Cause they are like .000001% the size of America. Brilliant analysis.PurpleThrobber said:
Going from $1 to $2 is 100% growth. Going from $1 Trillion to $1.1 Trillion is only a 10% growth rate.2001400ex said:
And China has growth rates that would embarrass Reagan. Again. You have no point Race.RaceBannon said:
Reagan had growth rates that Obama never got in the same area code on2001400ex said:
Reagan also got unemployment rates Obama never even got in same area code on. Your point race?RaceBannon said:Reagan has growth rates that Obama never even got in the same area code on
Race knows maff.
GDP per capita China 2018: $7,755
GDP per capita 2010 USA $48,466
GDP per capita 2010 China $4,500
HondoFS. You are a moron. It is embarrassing. I'd recommend turning off your computer and turning on something more your level...say NickJr?
HondoFS.
Shoutout to GDS, insincereDawg, CirrohisoftheBrain, Thomas, and the rest of you Liberals...remember. This guy agrees with you. -
Can you even read? I didn't say it didn't matter. I just said it's irrelevant to the point throbber was making. Idiot.HoustonHusky said:
Yes, the population of a country has no impact on the size of its GDP.2001400ex said:
Throbber point had nothing to do with GDP per capita idiot.HoustonHusky said:
GDP per capita USA 2018: $54,5422001400ex said:
Given that China is more than half the US GDP and around 75%, I feel your maff is wrong. So you can strut around all you want but you still look dumb. Got it pookie?PurpleThrobber said:
I know. It's hard to dumb it down for you.2001400ex said:
So growth matters except for China. Cause they are like .000001% the size of America. Brilliant analysis.PurpleThrobber said:
Going from $1 to $2 is 100% growth. Going from $1 Trillion to $1.1 Trillion is only a 10% growth rate.2001400ex said:
And China has growth rates that would embarrass Reagan. Again. You have no point Race.RaceBannon said:
Reagan had growth rates that Obama never got in the same area code on2001400ex said:
Reagan also got unemployment rates Obama never even got in same area code on. Your point race?RaceBannon said:Reagan has growth rates that Obama never even got in the same area code on
Race knows maff.
GDP per capita China 2018: $7,755
GDP per capita 2010 USA $48,466
GDP per capita 2010 China $4,500
HondoFS. You are a moron. It is embarrassing. I'd recommend turning off your computer and turning on something more your level...say NickJr?
HondoFS.
Shoutout to GDS, insincereDawg, CirrohisoftheBrain, Thomas, and the rest of you Liberals...remember. This guy agrees with you. -
Your entire replies were irrelevant2001400ex said:
Can you even read? I didn't say it didn't matter. I just said it's irrelevant to the point throbber was making. Idiot.HoustonHusky said:
Yes, the population of a country has no impact on the size of its GDP.2001400ex said:
Throbber point had nothing to do with GDP per capita idiot.HoustonHusky said:
GDP per capita USA 2018: $54,5422001400ex said:
Given that China is more than half the US GDP and around 75%, I feel your maff is wrong. So you can strut around all you want but you still look dumb. Got it pookie?PurpleThrobber said:
I know. It's hard to dumb it down for you.2001400ex said:
So growth matters except for China. Cause they are like .000001% the size of America. Brilliant analysis.PurpleThrobber said:
Going from $1 to $2 is 100% growth. Going from $1 Trillion to $1.1 Trillion is only a 10% growth rate.2001400ex said:
And China has growth rates that would embarrass Reagan. Again. You have no point Race.RaceBannon said:
Reagan had growth rates that Obama never got in the same area code on2001400ex said:
Reagan also got unemployment rates Obama never even got in same area code on. Your point race?RaceBannon said:Reagan has growth rates that Obama never even got in the same area code on
Race knows maff.
GDP per capita China 2018: $7,755
GDP per capita 2010 USA $48,466
GDP per capita 2010 China $4,500
HondoFS. You are a moron. It is embarrassing. I'd recommend turning off your computer and turning on something more your level...say NickJr?
HondoFS.
Shoutout to GDS, insincereDawg, CirrohisoftheBrain, Thomas, and the rest of you Liberals...remember. This guy agrees with you.
Reagan had growth that Obama never hit in the same area code of -
Ok old man Race.RaceBannon said:
Your entire replies were irrelevant2001400ex said:
Can you even read? I didn't say it didn't matter. I just said it's irrelevant to the point throbber was making. Idiot.HoustonHusky said:
Yes, the population of a country has no impact on the size of its GDP.2001400ex said:
Throbber point had nothing to do with GDP per capita idiot.HoustonHusky said:
GDP per capita USA 2018: $54,5422001400ex said:
Given that China is more than half the US GDP and around 75%, I feel your maff is wrong. So you can strut around all you want but you still look dumb. Got it pookie?PurpleThrobber said:
I know. It's hard to dumb it down for you.2001400ex said:
So growth matters except for China. Cause they are like .000001% the size of America. Brilliant analysis.PurpleThrobber said:
Going from $1 to $2 is 100% growth. Going from $1 Trillion to $1.1 Trillion is only a 10% growth rate.2001400ex said:
And China has growth rates that would embarrass Reagan. Again. You have no point Race.RaceBannon said:
Reagan had growth rates that Obama never got in the same area code on2001400ex said:
Reagan also got unemployment rates Obama never even got in same area code on. Your point race?RaceBannon said:Reagan has growth rates that Obama never even got in the same area code on
Race knows maff.
GDP per capita China 2018: $7,755
GDP per capita 2010 USA $48,466
GDP per capita 2010 China $4,500
HondoFS. You are a moron. It is embarrassing. I'd recommend turning off your computer and turning on something more your level...say NickJr?
HondoFS.
Shoutout to GDS, insincereDawg, CirrohisoftheBrain, Thomas, and the rest of you Liberals...remember. This guy agrees with you.
Reagan had growth that Obama never hit in the same area code of -
Its only irrelevant if you are a HondoFS moron. For people with an IQ over the speed limit it is understood at part of the discussion.2001400ex said:
Can you even read? I didn't say it didn't matter. I just said it's irrelevant to the point throbber was making. Idiot.HoustonHusky said:
Yes, the population of a country has no impact on the size of its GDP.2001400ex said:
Throbber point had nothing to do with GDP per capita idiot.HoustonHusky said:
GDP per capita USA 2018: $54,5422001400ex said:
Given that China is more than half the US GDP and around 75%, I feel your maff is wrong. So you can strut around all you want but you still look dumb. Got it pookie?PurpleThrobber said:
I know. It's hard to dumb it down for you.2001400ex said:
So growth matters except for China. Cause they are like .000001% the size of America. Brilliant analysis.PurpleThrobber said:
Going from $1 to $2 is 100% growth. Going from $1 Trillion to $1.1 Trillion is only a 10% growth rate.2001400ex said:
And China has growth rates that would embarrass Reagan. Again. You have no point Race.RaceBannon said:
Reagan had growth rates that Obama never got in the same area code on2001400ex said:
Reagan also got unemployment rates Obama never even got in same area code on. Your point race?RaceBannon said:Reagan has growth rates that Obama never even got in the same area code on
Race knows maff.
GDP per capita China 2018: $7,755
GDP per capita 2010 USA $48,466
GDP per capita 2010 China $4,500
HondoFS. You are a moron. It is embarrassing. I'd recommend turning off your computer and turning on something more your level...say NickJr?
HondoFS.
Shoutout to GDS, insincereDawg, CirrohisoftheBrain, Thomas, and the rest of you Liberals...remember. This guy agrees with you.
Shouldn't you be off in a corner stacking blocks or something? -
HondoFS finally gets something factually correct.2001400ex said:
Ok old man Race.RaceBannon said:
Your entire replies were irrelevant2001400ex said:
Can you even read? I didn't say it didn't matter. I just said it's irrelevant to the point throbber was making. Idiot.HoustonHusky said:
Yes, the population of a country has no impact on the size of its GDP.2001400ex said:
Throbber point had nothing to do with GDP per capita idiot.HoustonHusky said:
GDP per capita USA 2018: $54,5422001400ex said:
Given that China is more than half the US GDP and around 75%, I feel your maff is wrong. So you can strut around all you want but you still look dumb. Got it pookie?PurpleThrobber said:
I know. It's hard to dumb it down for you.2001400ex said:
So growth matters except for China. Cause they are like .000001% the size of America. Brilliant analysis.PurpleThrobber said:
Going from $1 to $2 is 100% growth. Going from $1 Trillion to $1.1 Trillion is only a 10% growth rate.2001400ex said:
And China has growth rates that would embarrass Reagan. Again. You have no point Race.RaceBannon said:
Reagan had growth rates that Obama never got in the same area code on2001400ex said:
Reagan also got unemployment rates Obama never even got in same area code on. Your point race?RaceBannon said:Reagan has growth rates that Obama never even got in the same area code on
Race knows maff.
GDP per capita China 2018: $7,755
GDP per capita 2010 USA $48,466
GDP per capita 2010 China $4,500
HondoFS. You are a moron. It is embarrassing. I'd recommend turning off your computer and turning on something more your level...say NickJr?
HondoFS.
Shoutout to GDS, insincereDawg, CirrohisoftheBrain, Thomas, and the rest of you Liberals...remember. This guy agrees with you.
Reagan had growth that Obama never hit in the same area code of
-
Meanwhile Trump has built 500 miles of wall with couch change
Crossings cut in half because Trump got Mexico to roam their southern border and stop the riff raff at the source
Record employment for Blacks and Hispanics
Employment, wages, and growth up for everyone
But sure, the fake fucking lying Indian is going to save us from all this by plunging us into the dark ages
All the smart kids are voting for her -
Race is a model of honesty for sure.RaceBannon said:Meanwhile Trump has built 500 miles of wall with couch change
Crossings cut in half because Trump got Mexico to roam their southern border and stop the riff raff at the source
Record employment for Blacks and Hispanics
Employment, wages, and growth up for everyone
But sure, the fake fucking lying Indian is going to save us from all this by plunging us into the dark ages
All the smart kids are voting for her -
Compared to you nearly everyone is a model of honesty Hondo.2001400ex said:
Race is a model of honesty for sure.RaceBannon said:Meanwhile Trump has built 500 miles of wall with couch change
Crossings cut in half because Trump got Mexico to roam their southern border and stop the riff raff at the source
Record employment for Blacks and Hispanics
Employment, wages, and growth up for everyone
But sure, the fake fucking lying Indian is going to save us from all this by plunging us into the dark ages
All the smart kids are voting for her -
Your inability to even find some of your bullshit graphs to dispute anything I said is noted2001400ex said:
Race is a model of honesty for sure.RaceBannon said:Meanwhile Trump has built 500 miles of wall with couch change
Crossings cut in half because Trump got Mexico to roam their southern border and stop the riff raff at the source
Record employment for Blacks and Hispanics
Employment, wages, and growth up for everyone
But sure, the fake fucking lying Indian is going to save us from all this by plunging us into the dark ages
All the smart kids are voting for her
-
C kids work for B kids. A kids teach.RaceBannon said:Meanwhile Trump has built 500 miles of wall with couch change
Crossings cut in half because Trump got Mexico to roam their southern border and stop the riff raff at the source
Record employment for Blacks and Hispanics
Employment, wages, and growth up for everyone
But sure, the fake fucking lying Indian is going to save us from all this by plunging us into the dark ages
All the smart kids are voting for her
-
LOL. I bet my buddy it would take less than 5 minutes for some meat head to come back with NO factual arguments, but make this a personal thing or some BS about people being too "PC."RaceBannon said:
Your inability to even find some of your bullshit graphs to dispute anything I said is noted2001400ex said:
Race is a model of honesty for sure.RaceBannon said:Meanwhile Trump has built 500 miles of wall with couch change
Crossings cut in half because Trump got Mexico to roam their southern border and stop the riff raff at the source
Record employment for Blacks and Hispanics
Employment, wages, and growth up for everyone
But sure, the fake fucking lying Indian is going to save us from all this by plunging us into the dark ages
All the smart kids are voting for her
I WON THE BET! THANK YOU! -
I do? Can you quote me on where I said something remotely like that? Edit: Big if true.TheKobeStopper said:
That’s. The. Joke.UW_Doog_Bot said:
I see you are resorting to the HondoBro/FSBob classic "Answer the question!#!@#"TheKobeStopper said:
Stop dodging and answer the question.UW_Doog_Bot said:
It's hard hitting analysis and questions like this that make me respekt team #hondobros.TheKobeStopper said:Name the last republican president that didn’t have a recession.
And Trump hasn’t completed his first term (we all know a recession is coming) so he doesn’t count.
Shooting for the stars.
Economic cycles lag political cycles, hth. Or do we now get to blame Obama for the 2009 financial crisis?
You already do blame Obama for 2009. -
Yeah other than GDP is an accumulation of everyone's income. Easier to have 10% per capita income on $5,000 of income than on $50,000 of income. Geezus you love the chicoms. Keep rooting for the away team.
