Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.
Republican on Trump's budget
Comments
-
Someone that doesn't like Trump is your source?2001400ex said: -
Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama?
-
What happened to Trump's 6%?HoustonHusky said:Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama?
https://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2015/09/28/donald-trump-says-tax-plan-could-lift-gdp-growth-to-6/ -
Link?HoustonHusky said:Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama?
-
So suddenly you've become some sort of fiscal keeper lol
-
Are you going to cry like a bitch daily about a fake budget that no one cares about?
Yes
Saved you the trouble of answering -
Why do you hate the Trump administration?RaceBannon said:Are you going to cry like a bitch daily about a fake budget that no one cares about?
Yes
Saved you the trouble of answering -
All budgets are fakeTierbsHsotBoobs said:
Why do you hate the Trump administration?RaceBannon said:Are you going to cry like a bitch daily about a fake budget that no one cares about?
Yes
Saved you the trouble of answering
Do you know how many Obama sent up that were DOA are you just going to keep being a cliche? -
I don't even know why Presidents bother to play the fake budget game.RaceBannon said:
All budgets are fakeTierbsHsotBoobs said:
Why do you hate the Trump administration?RaceBannon said:Are you going to cry like a bitch daily about a fake budget that no one cares about?
Yes
Saved you the trouble of answering
Do you know how many Obama sent up that were DOA are you just going to keep being a cliche? -
I don't either. We? just pretend the gubmint is going to shut down and then print more money. It's a simple process
-
Bull Moose must be Trump's budget advisor.
-
Sorry...4.5% was on the low end. He assumed GDP growths as high as 6% in his budgets.2001400ex said:
Link?HoustonHusky said:Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama?
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/03/by-its-own-criteria-the-obama-administration-is-an-economic-failure.php
I remember all your threads you started calling him crazy for it... -
Most blogs are full of shit, and I noticed that blog didn't link to the actual budget assumptions, so I decided to take a look myself.HoustonHusky said:
Sorry...4.5% was on the low end. He assumed GDP growths as high as 6% in his budgets.2001400ex said:
Link?HoustonHusky said:Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama?
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/03/by-its-own-criteria-the-obama-administration-is-an-economic-failure.php
I remember all your threads you started calling him crazy for it...
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY/pdf/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY.pdf
Go to Page 30.
Where is he getting 6%? -
Do you believe everything you read on the internet?HoustonHusky said:
Sorry...4.5% was on the low end. He assumed GDP growths as high as 6% in his budgets.2001400ex said:
Link?HoustonHusky said:Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama?
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/03/by-its-own-criteria-the-obama-administration-is-an-economic-failure.php
I remember all your threads you started calling him crazy for it... -
You (along with the Powerline guy) confusing nominal and real GDP rates? Nominal get even higher with all that inflation...UWhuskytskeet said:
Most blogs are full of shit, and I noticed that blog didn't link to the actual budget assumptions, so I decided to take a look myself.HoustonHusky said:
Sorry...4.5% was on the low end. He assumed GDP growths as high as 6% in his budgets.2001400ex said:
Link?HoustonHusky said:Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama?
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/03/by-its-own-criteria-the-obama-administration-is-an-economic-failure.php
I remember all your threads you started calling him crazy for it...
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY/pdf/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY.pdf
Go to Page 30.
Where is he getting 6%?
As I originally posted Obama conveniently assumed ~4.5% (err...4.6% according to your table) real GDP growth rates regularly in his budgets and the HondoFSs of the world didn't scream and there is literally zero mention of it in any of the media's description of his budgets. Trump proposes a 3% real GDP growth that doesn't even occur for several years and the same people scream bloody murder.
Makes sense... -
I'm not confusing it, almost everyone that reports on growth rates uses real, unless you are trying to obfuscate a point.HoustonHusky said:
You (along with the Powerline guy) confusing nominal and real GDP rates? Nominal get even higher with all that inflation...UWhuskytskeet said:
Most blogs are full of shit, and I noticed that blog didn't link to the actual budget assumptions, so I decided to take a look myself.HoustonHusky said:
Sorry...4.5% was on the low end. He assumed GDP growths as high as 6% in his budgets.2001400ex said:
Link?HoustonHusky said:Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama?
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/03/by-its-own-criteria-the-obama-administration-is-an-economic-failure.php
I remember all your threads you started calling him crazy for it...
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY/pdf/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY.pdf
Go to Page 30.
Where is he getting 6%?
As I originally posted Obama conveniently assumed ~4.5% (err...4.6% according to your table) real GDP growth rates regularly in his budgets and the HondoFSs of the world didn't scream and there is literally zero mention of it in any of the media's description of his budgets. Trump proposes a 3% real GDP growth that doesn't even occur for several years and the same people scream bloody murder.
Makes sense...
The reason no one objected to Obama's assumptions is that they were directly in line with the CBO projections. Trump's are 50% higher. -
More proof the CBO is as useless as Ty on the sidelinesUWhuskytskeet said:
I'm not confusing it, almost everyone that reports on growth rates uses real, unless you are trying to obfuscate a point.HoustonHusky said:
You (along with the Powerline guy) confusing nominal and real GDP rates? Nominal get even higher with all that inflation...UWhuskytskeet said:
Most blogs are full of shit, and I noticed that blog didn't link to the actual budget assumptions, so I decided to take a look myself.HoustonHusky said:
Sorry...4.5% was on the low end. He assumed GDP growths as high as 6% in his budgets.2001400ex said:
Link?HoustonHusky said:Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama?
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/03/by-its-own-criteria-the-obama-administration-is-an-economic-failure.php
I remember all your threads you started calling him crazy for it...
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY/pdf/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY.pdf
Go to Page 30.
Where is he getting 6%?
As I originally posted Obama conveniently assumed ~4.5% (err...4.6% according to your table) real GDP growth rates regularly in his budgets and the HondoFSs of the world didn't scream and there is literally zero mention of it in any of the media's description of his budgets. Trump proposes a 3% real GDP growth that doesn't even occur for several years and the same people scream bloody murder.
Makes sense...
The reason no one objected to Obama's assumptions is that they were directly in line with the CBO projections. Trump's are 50% higher. -
Agree. They're too optimistic.RaceBannon said:
More proof the CBO is as useless as Ty on the sidelinesUWhuskytskeet said:
I'm not confusing it, almost everyone that reports on growth rates uses real, unless you are trying to obfuscate a point.HoustonHusky said:
You (along with the Powerline guy) confusing nominal and real GDP rates? Nominal get even higher with all that inflation...UWhuskytskeet said:
Most blogs are full of shit, and I noticed that blog didn't link to the actual budget assumptions, so I decided to take a look myself.HoustonHusky said:
Sorry...4.5% was on the low end. He assumed GDP growths as high as 6% in his budgets.2001400ex said:
Link?HoustonHusky said:Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama?
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/03/by-its-own-criteria-the-obama-administration-is-an-economic-failure.php
I remember all your threads you started calling him crazy for it...
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY/pdf/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY.pdf
Go to Page 30.
Where is he getting 6%?
As I originally posted Obama conveniently assumed ~4.5% (err...4.6% according to your table) real GDP growth rates regularly in his budgets and the HondoFSs of the world didn't scream and there is literally zero mention of it in any of the media's description of his budgets. Trump proposes a 3% real GDP growth that doesn't even occur for several years and the same people scream bloody murder.
Makes sense...
The reason no one objected to Obama's assumptions is that they were directly in line with the CBO projections. Trump's are 50% higher. -
TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Agree. They're too optimistic for a democrat president.RaceBannon said:
More proof the CBO is as useless as Ty on the sidelinesUWhuskytskeet said:
I'm not confusing it, almost everyone that reports on growth rates uses real, unless you are trying to obfuscate a point.HoustonHusky said:
You (along with the Powerline guy) confusing nominal and real GDP rates? Nominal get even higher with all that inflation...UWhuskytskeet said:
Most blogs are full of shit, and I noticed that blog didn't link to the actual budget assumptions, so I decided to take a look myself.HoustonHusky said:
Sorry...4.5% was on the low end. He assumed GDP growths as high as 6% in his budgets.2001400ex said:
Link?HoustonHusky said:Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama?
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/03/by-its-own-criteria-the-obama-administration-is-an-economic-failure.php
I remember all your threads you started calling him crazy for it...
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY/pdf/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY.pdf
Go to Page 30.
Where is he getting 6%?
As I originally posted Obama conveniently assumed ~4.5% (err...4.6% according to your table) real GDP growth rates regularly in his budgets and the HondoFSs of the world didn't scream and there is literally zero mention of it in any of the media's description of his budgets. Trump proposes a 3% real GDP growth that doesn't even occur for several years and the same people scream bloody murder.
Makes sense...
The reason no one objected to Obama's assumptions is that they were directly in line with the CBO projections. Trump's are 50% higher. -
We are due for a recession, didn't matter if Trump or Hillary would have won. That's why the projections are too high. You've lived through them all, you should know that.RaceBannon said:TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Agree. They're too optimistic for a democrat president.RaceBannon said:
More proof the CBO is as useless as Ty on the sidelinesUWhuskytskeet said:
I'm not confusing it, almost everyone that reports on growth rates uses real, unless you are trying to obfuscate a point.HoustonHusky said:
You (along with the Powerline guy) confusing nominal and real GDP rates? Nominal get even higher with all that inflation...UWhuskytskeet said:
Most blogs are full of shit, and I noticed that blog didn't link to the actual budget assumptions, so I decided to take a look myself.HoustonHusky said:
Sorry...4.5% was on the low end. He assumed GDP growths as high as 6% in his budgets.2001400ex said:
Link?HoustonHusky said:Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama?
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/03/by-its-own-criteria-the-obama-administration-is-an-economic-failure.php
I remember all your threads you started calling him crazy for it...
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY/pdf/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY.pdf
Go to Page 30.
Where is he getting 6%?
As I originally posted Obama conveniently assumed ~4.5% (err...4.6% according to your table) real GDP growth rates regularly in his budgets and the HondoFSs of the world didn't scream and there is literally zero mention of it in any of the media's description of his budgets. Trump proposes a 3% real GDP growth that doesn't even occur for several years and the same people scream bloody murder.
Makes sense...
The reason no one objected to Obama's assumptions is that they were directly in line with the CBO projections. Trump's are 50% higher. -
CHRIST.
-
We've basically been in a recession for the last 10 years. Obama set the standard for failure on growth for a two term president. Interest rates are at 0-1% because the house of cards collapse if they go up.UWhuskytskeet said:
We are due for a recession, didn't matter if Trump or Hillary would have won. That's why the projections are too high. You've lived through them all, you should know that.RaceBannon said:TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Agree. They're too optimistic for a democrat president.RaceBannon said:
More proof the CBO is as useless as Ty on the sidelinesUWhuskytskeet said:
I'm not confusing it, almost everyone that reports on growth rates uses real, unless you are trying to obfuscate a point.HoustonHusky said:
You (along with the Powerline guy) confusing nominal and real GDP rates? Nominal get even higher with all that inflation...UWhuskytskeet said:
Most blogs are full of shit, and I noticed that blog didn't link to the actual budget assumptions, so I decided to take a look myself.HoustonHusky said:
Sorry...4.5% was on the low end. He assumed GDP growths as high as 6% in his budgets.2001400ex said:
Link?HoustonHusky said:Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama?
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/03/by-its-own-criteria-the-obama-administration-is-an-economic-failure.php
I remember all your threads you started calling him crazy for it...
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY/pdf/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY.pdf
Go to Page 30.
Where is he getting 6%?
As I originally posted Obama conveniently assumed ~4.5% (err...4.6% according to your table) real GDP growth rates regularly in his budgets and the HondoFSs of the world didn't scream and there is literally zero mention of it in any of the media's description of his budgets. Trump proposes a 3% real GDP growth that doesn't even occur for several years and the same people scream bloody murder.
Makes sense...
The reason no one objected to Obama's assumptions is that they were directly in line with the CBO projections. Trump's are 50% higher.
I have been there.
So the CBO that over rated Obama for 8 years is to be believed now when they shit on Trump.
Trump's policies and deregulation and starving of women and children should pay off -
They are far from prefect, but I'll take their opinion over the opinion of a guy trying to justify massive tax cuts and increased spending. That's the only reason why Trump is calling for growth 50% higher than the CBO.RaceBannon said:
We've basically been in a recession for the last 10 years. Obama set the standard for failure on growth for a two term president. Interest rates are at 0-1% because the house of cards collapse if they go up.UWhuskytskeet said:
We are due for a recession, didn't matter if Trump or Hillary would have won. That's why the projections are too high. You've lived through them all, you should know that.RaceBannon said:TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Agree. They're too optimistic for a democrat president.RaceBannon said:
More proof the CBO is as useless as Ty on the sidelinesUWhuskytskeet said:
I'm not confusing it, almost everyone that reports on growth rates uses real, unless you are trying to obfuscate a point.HoustonHusky said:
You (along with the Powerline guy) confusing nominal and real GDP rates? Nominal get even higher with all that inflation...UWhuskytskeet said:
Most blogs are full of shit, and I noticed that blog didn't link to the actual budget assumptions, so I decided to take a look myself.HoustonHusky said:
Sorry...4.5% was on the low end. He assumed GDP growths as high as 6% in his budgets.2001400ex said:
Link?HoustonHusky said:Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama?
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/03/by-its-own-criteria-the-obama-administration-is-an-economic-failure.php
I remember all your threads you started calling him crazy for it...
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY/pdf/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY.pdf
Go to Page 30.
Where is he getting 6%?
As I originally posted Obama conveniently assumed ~4.5% (err...4.6% according to your table) real GDP growth rates regularly in his budgets and the HondoFSs of the world didn't scream and there is literally zero mention of it in any of the media's description of his budgets. Trump proposes a 3% real GDP growth that doesn't even occur for several years and the same people scream bloody murder.
Makes sense...
The reason no one objected to Obama's assumptions is that they were directly in line with the CBO projections. Trump's are 50% higher.
I have been there.
So the CBO that over rated Obama for 8 years is to be believed now when they shit on Trump.
Trump's policies and deregulation and starving of women and children should pay off
Btw, if were bashing the CBO, I'm out.
-
I still have no clue what the cbo is and I'm okay with that.
-
You sound poorRaceBannon said:
We've basically been in a recession for the last 10 years. Obama set the standard for failure on growth for a two term president. Interest rates are at 0-1% because the house of cards collapse if they go up.UWhuskytskeet said:
We are due for a recession, didn't matter if Trump or Hillary would have won. That's why the projections are too high. You've lived through them all, you should know that.RaceBannon said:TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Agree. They're too optimistic for a democrat president.RaceBannon said:
More proof the CBO is as useless as Ty on the sidelinesUWhuskytskeet said:
I'm not confusing it, almost everyone that reports on growth rates uses real, unless you are trying to obfuscate a point.HoustonHusky said:
You (along with the Powerline guy) confusing nominal and real GDP rates? Nominal get even higher with all that inflation...UWhuskytskeet said:
Most blogs are full of shit, and I noticed that blog didn't link to the actual budget assumptions, so I decided to take a look myself.HoustonHusky said:
Sorry...4.5% was on the low end. He assumed GDP growths as high as 6% in his budgets.2001400ex said:
Link?HoustonHusky said:Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama?
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/03/by-its-own-criteria-the-obama-administration-is-an-economic-failure.php
I remember all your threads you started calling him crazy for it...
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY/pdf/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY.pdf
Go to Page 30.
Where is he getting 6%?
As I originally posted Obama conveniently assumed ~4.5% (err...4.6% according to your table) real GDP growth rates regularly in his budgets and the HondoFSs of the world didn't scream and there is literally zero mention of it in any of the media's description of his budgets. Trump proposes a 3% real GDP growth that doesn't even occur for several years and the same people scream bloody murder.
Makes sense...
The reason no one objected to Obama's assumptions is that they were directly in line with the CBO projections. Trump's are 50% higher.
I have been there.
So the CBO that over rated Obama for 8 years is to be believed now when they shit on Trump.
Trump's policies and deregulation and starving of women and children should pay off -
TierbsHsotBoobs said:
You sound old as fuckRaceBannon said:
We've basically been in a recession for the last 10 years. Obama set the standard for failure on growth for a two term president. Interest rates are at 0-1% because the house of cards collapse if they go up.UWhuskytskeet said:
We are due for a recession, didn't matter if Trump or Hillary would have won. That's why the projections are too high. You've lived through them all, you should know that.RaceBannon said:TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Agree. They're too optimistic for a democrat president.RaceBannon said:
More proof the CBO is as useless as Ty on the sidelinesUWhuskytskeet said:
I'm not confusing it, almost everyone that reports on growth rates uses real, unless you are trying to obfuscate a point.HoustonHusky said:
You (along with the Powerline guy) confusing nominal and real GDP rates? Nominal get even higher with all that inflation...UWhuskytskeet said:
Most blogs are full of shit, and I noticed that blog didn't link to the actual budget assumptions, so I decided to take a look myself.HoustonHusky said:
Sorry...4.5% was on the low end. He assumed GDP growths as high as 6% in his budgets.2001400ex said:
Link?HoustonHusky said:Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama?
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/03/by-its-own-criteria-the-obama-administration-is-an-economic-failure.php
I remember all your threads you started calling him crazy for it...
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY/pdf/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY.pdf
Go to Page 30.
Where is he getting 6%?
As I originally posted Obama conveniently assumed ~4.5% (err...4.6% according to your table) real GDP growth rates regularly in his budgets and the HondoFSs of the world didn't scream and there is literally zero mention of it in any of the media's description of his budgets. Trump proposes a 3% real GDP growth that doesn't even occur for several years and the same people scream bloody murder.
Makes sense...
The reason no one objected to Obama's assumptions is that they were directly in line with the CBO projections. Trump's are 50% higher.
I have been there.
So the CBO that over rated Obama for 8 years is to be believed now when they shit on Trump.
Trump's policies and deregulation and starving of women and children should pay off -
You sound stupidTierbsHsotBoobs said:
You sound poorRaceBannon said:
We've basically been in a recession for the last 10 years. Obama set the standard for failure on growth for a two term president. Interest rates are at 0-1% because the house of cards collapse if they go up.UWhuskytskeet said:
We are due for a recession, didn't matter if Trump or Hillary would have won. That's why the projections are too high. You've lived through them all, you should know that.RaceBannon said:TierbsHsotBoobs said:
Agree. They're too optimistic for a democrat president.RaceBannon said:
More proof the CBO is as useless as Ty on the sidelinesUWhuskytskeet said:
I'm not confusing it, almost everyone that reports on growth rates uses real, unless you are trying to obfuscate a point.HoustonHusky said:
You (along with the Powerline guy) confusing nominal and real GDP rates? Nominal get even higher with all that inflation...UWhuskytskeet said:
Most blogs are full of shit, and I noticed that blog didn't link to the actual budget assumptions, so I decided to take a look myself.HoustonHusky said:
Sorry...4.5% was on the low end. He assumed GDP growths as high as 6% in his budgets.2001400ex said:
Link?HoustonHusky said:Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama?
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/03/by-its-own-criteria-the-obama-administration-is-an-economic-failure.php
I remember all your threads you started calling him crazy for it...
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY/pdf/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY.pdf
Go to Page 30.
Where is he getting 6%?
As I originally posted Obama conveniently assumed ~4.5% (err...4.6% according to your table) real GDP growth rates regularly in his budgets and the HondoFSs of the world didn't scream and there is literally zero mention of it in any of the media's description of his budgets. Trump proposes a 3% real GDP growth that doesn't even occur for several years and the same people scream bloody murder.
Makes sense...
The reason no one objected to Obama's assumptions is that they were directly in line with the CBO projections. Trump's are 50% higher.
I have been there.
So the CBO that over rated Obama for 8 years is to be believed now when they shit on Trump.
Trump's policies and deregulation and starving of women and children should pay off -
TRUMP is absolutely getting shredded in this thread.
But NMTE.....
Helps Trump IMO.
