Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama? Link? Sorry...4.5% was on the low end. He assumed GDP growths as high as 6% in his budgets.http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/03/by-its-own-criteria-the-obama-administration-is-an-economic-failure.phpI 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.https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY/pdf/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY.pdfGo to Page 30.Where is he getting 6%? You (along with the Powerline guy) confusing nominal and real GDP rates? Nominal get even higher with all that inflation...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.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 sidelines Agree. They're too optimistic for a democrat president.
Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama? Link? Sorry...4.5% was on the low end. He assumed GDP growths as high as 6% in his budgets.http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/03/by-its-own-criteria-the-obama-administration-is-an-economic-failure.phpI 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.https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY/pdf/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY.pdfGo to Page 30.Where is he getting 6%? You (along with the Powerline guy) confusing nominal and real GDP rates? Nominal get even higher with all that inflation...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.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 sidelines
Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama? Link? Sorry...4.5% was on the low end. He assumed GDP growths as high as 6% in his budgets.http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/03/by-its-own-criteria-the-obama-administration-is-an-economic-failure.phpI 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.https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY/pdf/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY.pdfGo to Page 30.Where is he getting 6%? You (along with the Powerline guy) confusing nominal and real GDP rates? Nominal get even higher with all that inflation...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.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.
Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama? Link? Sorry...4.5% was on the low end. He assumed GDP growths as high as 6% in his budgets.http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/03/by-its-own-criteria-the-obama-administration-is-an-economic-failure.phpI 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.https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY/pdf/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY.pdfGo to Page 30.Where is he getting 6%? You (along with the Powerline guy) confusing nominal and real GDP rates? Nominal get even higher with all that inflation...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...
Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama? Link? Sorry...4.5% was on the low end. He assumed GDP growths as high as 6% in his budgets.http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/03/by-its-own-criteria-the-obama-administration-is-an-economic-failure.phpI 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.https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY/pdf/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY.pdfGo to Page 30.Where is he getting 6%?
Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama? Link? Sorry...4.5% was on the low end. He assumed GDP growths as high as 6% in his budgets.http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/03/by-its-own-criteria-the-obama-administration-is-an-economic-failure.phpI remember all your threads you started calling him crazy for it...
Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama? Link?
Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama?
Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama? Link? Sorry...4.5% was on the low end. He assumed GDP growths as high as 6% in his budgets.http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/03/by-its-own-criteria-the-obama-administration-is-an-economic-failure.phpI 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.https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY/pdf/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY.pdfGo to Page 30.Where is he getting 6%? You (along with the Powerline guy) confusing nominal and real GDP rates? Nominal get even higher with all that inflation...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.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 sidelines Agree. They're too optimistic for a democrat president. 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.
Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama? Link? Sorry...4.5% was on the low end. He assumed GDP growths as high as 6% in his budgets.http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/03/by-its-own-criteria-the-obama-administration-is-an-economic-failure.phpI 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.https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY/pdf/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY.pdfGo to Page 30.Where is he getting 6%? You (along with the Powerline guy) confusing nominal and real GDP rates? Nominal get even higher with all that inflation...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.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 sidelines Agree. They're too optimistic for a democrat president. 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. 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.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
Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama? Link? Sorry...4.5% was on the low end. He assumed GDP growths as high as 6% in his budgets.http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/03/by-its-own-criteria-the-obama-administration-is-an-economic-failure.phpI 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.https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY/pdf/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY.pdfGo to Page 30.Where is he getting 6%? You (along with the Powerline guy) confusing nominal and real GDP rates? Nominal get even higher with all that inflation...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.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 sidelines Agree. They're too optimistic for a democrat president. 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. 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.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 old as fuck
Should have assumed 4.5% a year like Obama? Link? Sorry...4.5% was on the low end. He assumed GDP growths as high as 6% in his budgets.http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/03/by-its-own-criteria-the-obama-administration-is-an-economic-failure.phpI 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.https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY/pdf/BUDGET-2010-SUMMARY.pdfGo to Page 30.Where is he getting 6%? You (along with the Powerline guy) confusing nominal and real GDP rates? Nominal get even higher with all that inflation...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.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 sidelines Agree. They're too optimistic for a democrat president. 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. 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.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 poor
