blame 1%ers for the down turn then you must credit them for the upswing.
I know how and why the 90's economy was good, just trying to make a point that it's not one group of people to blame, but when you have someone come out and say I will do this and that then the opposite happens then blame can be given to them.
Credit for a lot of the good things that happened to the economy during the Clinton administration should probably be given to cabinet members like Secretary of Labor Robert Reich. Once the results of the 2000 elections were in and government policy and tax law encouraged a more unequal distribution of wealth, it was only a matter of time before the economic debacle of '07-'08 took place. Revving the engine with a faux wartime economy and bad real estate lending policies only masked the symptoms for awhile.
Yes it has nothing to do with Obama's failed policies or anything like that.
Then I guess when Clinton was in office you can give credit to the 1% right?
Yup, that's right. Obama has about as much control as Bush did. They are puppet heads.
I forgot to blame the 1%, they are always behind everything. It's not Obama's fault it's the 1%ers.
"Bad news but just another sign that the policies of Obama DO NOT WORK."
And let’s not forget The Bail Outs where our Government gave Unsupervised Loans out as if they where Beads thrown at Mardi Gras Parade.
Um, I think the blame is squarely on the ultra 1 % sending our jobs overseas, the banks throwing people out of their homes and simply put greed run amok.
Those at the top just can't get enough.
They are the ones responsible and our top politicians on both sides of the aisle are bought by them, put into office by them and beholden to them and not to the public.
While we all squabble about dems and reps, right and left,
the small ultra-elite, continue to ruin the country for profit.
And I did just take a break from CE~ lol !
If you can't make a decent, reasonable comment about the posted article just don't post.
Brice my friend... I think I will join thee.
Good luck Vance.
You're on your own for a while.
Oh my god.... I've heard everything... Time for a CE break.
"I don't know where I became the champion of our President. I've never referred to him more favorably than 'a typical Chicago politician', but I guess that's some more of that "You're either with us or against us, partisan politics stuff."
I'd suspect reading and comprehension difficulty is the reason for the misunderstanding.....or just plain not understanding. That seems to occur quite frequently.
Econ-001 : "consumer spending" refers to A, B, & C.
I see 'spin' is the new Right Wing doublespeak for 'Don't confuse me with the facts.
I don't know where I became the champion of our President. I've never referred to him more favorably than 'a typical Chicago politician', but I guess that's some more of that "You're either with us or against us, partisan politics stuff.
"Isn't consumers spending less on healthcare a good thing?"
If consumer-A pays less on healthcare, but as a result, consumer-B & consumer-C have to pay more, Econ-101 tells me that it's a BAD thing, especially when consumer-B & consumer-C used to pay FAR less for better coverage.
There's no way to spin this dude... please just admit that Obama experiment failed, and lets move on, okay? Trying desperately to spin, spin, spin only makes you look silly, as the truth is plain for all to see.
What's funny is, those with Obama-colored glasses on, can't see it, as they're blinded by the glare.
Case & point: You
"Isn't consumers spending less on healthcare a good thing? "
Yup, if it held any truth. Now there are people paying for health care that aren't using it.
From your link:
"First-quarter GDP was revised down today, largely reflecting a re-estimation of consumer spending on health care, which was substantially lower than originally reported, as well as exports, which were below the initial estimates," said Jason Furman, chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, which counsels President Obama on the economy. "The GDP data can be volatile from quarter to quarter; a range of other data show a more positive picture for the first quarter, and more up-to-date indicators from April and May suggest that the economy is on track for a rebound in the second quarter."
Eek FOXie-loxie and Chicken Little say the sky is falling. What is it that is supposedly beginning?
Isn't consumers spending less on healthcare a good thing?