Austerity bites!

  1. This post has been removed.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from FortySixAndTwo. Show FortySixAndTwo's posts

    Re: Austerity bites!

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

     

    What a surprise, the 462 is off reporting posts again.

    Can't argue the facts so he has to run to big brother.

     

    The guy just can't hold is own in any meaningful debate.

    Sad.

     

     



    What's a 462?

     

     



    Me. He thinks, just like he did when he was Airborne, that I'm responsible for getting his posts removed.

     

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from ComingLiberalCrackup. Show ComingLiberalCrackup's posts

    Re: Austerity bites!

    "The tax rates  for the highest brackets in the 60's was 65-90% and yet that was the longest period of sustained economic growth in the country."

    There is stupid, and there is moonbat stupid.

    NO ONE PAID A TAX RATE of 65 to 90%. No one.

    Got it?

     

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Austerity bites!

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

     

     

    Typically there is a drop in economic activity after austerity measures are put into place followed later by an expansion of the economy. That's how it works.

     

     

     




    Still no actual examples.

     

    You're really good at making wildly inaccurate statements, you just have a problem actually proving them.

     




    It works . It is called expansionary fiscal contraction.  Look it up.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from jedwardnicky. Show jedwardnicky's posts

    Re: Austerity bites!

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

     

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

     

     

    Typically there is a drop in economic activity after austerity measures are put into place followed later by an expansion of the economy. That's how it works.

     

     

     




    Still no actual examples.

     

    You're really good at making wildly inaccurate statements, you just have a problem actually proving them.

     

     




     

    It works . It is called expansionary fiscal contraction.  Look it up.



    I like turtles.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from ImYourDaddy. Show ImYourDaddy's posts

    Re: Austerity bites!

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

    In response to ImYourDaddy's comment:

     

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

     

    In response to ImYourDaddy's comment:

     

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

     

    More evidence of the failed neo-con ideology.

    First quarter GDP revised slightly lower; austerity bites.

    (Reuters) - A drop in government spending dragged more on the U.S. economy than initially thought in the first three months of the year, although consumer spending looked relatively resilient to Washington's austerity drive.

    Other reports on Thursday showed the number of new jobless claims rose modestly last week while contracts on previously owned homes climbed to a three-year high in April.

    Together, the reports pointed to an economy that has held up reasonably well despite government constraints, but nevertheless faced headwinds severe enough to dissuade the U.S. Federal Reserve from trimming its monetary stimulus in the immediate future.

    "(The reports) paint the picture of an economy with strengthening fundamentals that is facing significant fiscal drag," said Ellen Zentner, an economist at Nomura in New York.

     

    Government spending tumbled at a 4.9 percent annual rate, which was faster than the 4.1 percent rate initially estimated. Also holding back growth during the quarter, businesses outside the farm sector stocked their shelves at a slower pace.

    Washington has been tightening its belt for several years but ramped up austerity measures in 2013, hiking taxes in January and slashing the federal budget in March.

    "We are dramatically under-spending in Washington," said Michael Strauss, a market strategist at Commonfund in Wilton, Connecticut.

    U.S. stocks rose and the dollar weakened as some investors bet the data could dissuade the Fed from rushing to taper a bond buying program that has acted as a bulwark against government belt tightening. Prices for U.S. government debt pared losses.

     




    hahahaha .... what was 4th quarter 2012  GDP ,  3rd quarter (2012) GDP ..

     

     

    how about this ...  stock market rose to all time high ... investors point to government willing to cut spernding to keep deficit under control

    Spins in fun ......

     




     

    Are you high on crack or something?

    The last three Qtrs the BEA has said the exact same thing, retraction in gov't spending hampered growth.

    Hey Einstein, if your hilariously inane theory is true, why is the Euro markets and economies in a triple dip recession?

    They cut spending way more than the US, according to you they should be sky high.

     

    Echo chamber regurgitation only makes you look uninformed.

     

     



    Q4 gdp  +.4% , first quarter +2.4%  ... government spending big drag on the economy?

     

    The forecast for 1st quarter gdp (2.5%), it came in at 2.4% ... so government spending cost gdp growth to slow  (1 tenth of 1 %  Brawwahhhh)

    Is lesson time

    As a reminder, GDP is made up of:  where Y=GDP, C=Consumption, I=Investment, G=Government Spending, (X-M)=Net Exports, X=Exports, M=Imports*.

    Comparison of Q1 2013 and Q4 2012 GDP Components
    Component
    Q1 2013
    Q4 2012
    Spread

             1q        4th q   spread

    GDP  +2.38   +0.37  +2.01

    C       +2.40   +1.28  +1.12

    I        +1.16   +0.17 +0.99

    G       –0.97   –1.41  +0.44

    X       +0.11  –0.40  +0.51

    M–0.32 +0.73 -1.05

     

    Private growth is better than government growth, Government growth mean higher deficit,debt,interest on the debt  ... you dig

    government spending 2013  3.5 trillion , sequester cut  85 bio ...2.5% cut of total spending is going to cause the econpmy to go into the toilet?? stop bogarting that crack pipe

     




    You really are an idiot.

     

    Hey maroon, here's a question for you....

    What difference does the "spread" in gov't spending matter from one quarter to the next if they are both negative....AS IN A DECREASE IN GOV"T SPENDING!!!!

    Both the 4th and 1st quarters were negative meaning gov't spending dropped in both qtrs hence the point of the thread...AUSTERITY!!!

    Man are you people dumb.



    Is third grade math really that hard for you ?

    let look at this sloooowwwly ... lets assume government spends  100$

    4 quarter they spent  -1.41 meaning  100-1.41 =  98.59

    1st quarter they spent -.97 meaning 100-.97    =  99.03

    so that mean first quarter we spent more than the 4th quarter and by how much (spread)

    99.03 -98.59 =+ .44  ... the spread tell us how much or less the government spent from quarter to quarter ...(Not hard to understand)

     

    Now back to point of the thread, with government spending less , GDP Grew!!!!!

    That must pissed u off, I guess we have to wait till q2 gdp to come out and if it come in less than 2.4 then you can jump and rejoice and shout austerity,austerity

    In the meantime sit down!

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from ImYourDaddy. Show ImYourDaddy's posts

    Re: Austerity bites!

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

    In response to ImYourDaddy's comment:

     

    More evidence of the failed neo-con ideology.

    First quarter GDP revised slightly lower; austerity bites.

    (Reuters) - A drop in government spending dragged more on the U.S. economy than initially thought in the first three months of the year, although consumer spending looked relatively resilient to Washington's austerity drive.

    Other reports on Thursday showed the number of new jobless claims rose modestly last week while contracts on previously owned homes climbed to a three-year high in April.

    Together, the reports pointed to an economy that has held up reasonably well despite government constraints, but nevertheless faced headwinds severe enough to dissuade the U.S. Federal Reserve from trimming its monetary stimulus in the immediate future.

    "(The reports) paint the picture of an economy with strengthening fundamentals that is facing significant fiscal drag," said Ellen Zentner, an economist at Nomura in New York.

     

    Government spending tumbled at a 4.9 percent annual rate, which was faster than the 4.1 percent rate initially estimated. Also holding back growth during the quarter, businesses outside the farm sector stocked their shelves at a slower pace.

    Washington has been tightening its belt for several years but ramped up austerity measures in 2013, hiking taxes in January and slashing the federal budget in March.

    "We are dramatically under-spending in Washington," said Michael Strauss, a market strategist at Commonfund in Wilton, Connecticut.

    U.S. stocks rose and the dollar weakened as some investors bet the data could dissuade the Fed from rushing to taper a bond buying program that has acted as a bulwark against government belt tightening. Prices for U.S. government debt pared losses.

     

     The forecast for 1st quarter gdp (2.5%), it came in at 2.4% ... so government spending cost gdp growth to slow  (1 tenth of 1 %  Brawwahhhh)

    Is lesson time

    As a reminder, GDP is made up of:  where Y=GDP, C=Consumption, I=Investment, G=Government Spending, (X-M)=Net Exports, X=Exports, M=Imports*.

    Comparison of Q1 2013 and Q4 2012 GDP Components
    Component
    Q1 2013
    Q4 2012
    Spread

             1q        4th q   spread

    GDP  +2.38   +0.37  +2.01

    C       +2.40   +1.28  +1.12

    I        +1.16   +0.17 +0.99

    G       –0.97   –1.41  +0.44

    X       +0.11  –0.40  +0.51

    M–0.32 +0.73 -1.05

     

    Private growth is better than government growth, Government growth mean higher deficit,debt,interest on the debt  ... you dig

    government spending 2013  3.5 trillion , sequester cut  85 bio ...2.5% cut of total spending is going to cause the econpmy to go into the toilet?? stop bogarting that crack pipe

     




    You really are an idiot.

     

    Hey maroon, here's a question for you....

    What difference does the "spread" in gov't spending matter from one quarter to the next if they are both negative....AS IN A DECREASE IN GOV"T SPENDING!!!!

    Both the 4th and 1st quarters were negative meaning gov't spending dropped in both qtrs hence the point of the thread...AUSTERITY!!!

    Man are you people dumb.

     



    Is third grade math really that hard for you ?

     

    let look at this sloooowwwly ... lets assume government spends  100$

    4 quarter they spent  -1.41 meaning  100-1.41 =  98.59

    1st quarter they spent -.97 meaning 100-.97    =  99.03

    so that mean first quarter we spent more than the 4th quarter and by how much (spread)

    99.03 -98.59 =+ .44  ... the spread tell us how much or less the government spent from quarter to quarter ...(Not hard to understand)

     

    Now back to point of the thread, with government spending less , GDP Grew!!!!!

    That must pissed u off, I guess we have to wait till q2 gdp to come out and if it come in less than 2.4 then you can jump and rejoice and shout austerity,austerity

    In the meantime sit down!

     

     




    No, ya freaking dunce, those numbers are qtr to qtr and they are CUMULATIVE.

     

    So they go from q3-2012 @100 -1.41 =  98.59 That is the q4-2012 amount

    You take THAT amount 98.59 and then you see what happens in the next qtr.

    So it is 98.59 - .97 = 97.62 That is the amount of gov't spending in q1 2013 ADDED to the quarter immediately preceeding it.

     

    Here's the point of the thread moron.

    If gov't spending hadn't decreased and just stayed the same, that would've added +2.38 % to the US GDP, or roughly $300 billion MORE economic activity.

    Even a simpleton like you knows you GROW your way out of a recession.

    As the BEA states:

    A drop in government spending dragged more on the U.S. economy than initially thought in the first three months of the year

    Together, the reports pointed to an economy that has held up reasonably well despite government constraints, but nevertheless faced headwinds severe enough to dissuade the U.S. Federal Reserve from trimming its monetary stimulus in the immediate future.


    Government spending tumbled at a 4.9 percent annual rate, which was faster than the 4.1 percent rate initially estimated.


    Not only are you an idiot, you have reading comprehension problems as well.

     

     

    And you still haven't shown were austerity works in the real world.

    While there are numerous examples it doesn't.

     

    Just shut up already, idiots annoy everyone especially ones so sure in their ignorance as you are.



    Are you really this stupid???? (think i know the answer)

    GDP is express in % term OKKKKKK    100% represent  total government spending from 2012 3rd quarter

    That 98.59  go back to 100% as the baseline

    Is like shopping ... sales is  10% off that shoe, also u get another 10% off on your total purchase... 

     

    Ok I guess math is too hard ... let go to your source th BEA

    http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdpnewsrelease.htm

    The increase in real GDP in the first quarter primarily reflected positive contributions from
    personal consumption expenditures (PCE), private inventory investment, residential fixed investment,
    nonresidential fixed investment, and exports that were partly offset by negative contributions from
    federal government spending and state and local government spending.  Imports, which are a subtraction
    in the calculation of GDP, increased.

          The acceleration in real GDP in the first quarter primarily reflected an upturn in private
    inventory investment, an acceleration in PCE, a smaller decrease in federal government spending, and
    an upturn in exports that were partly offset by an upturn in imports and a deceleration in nonresidential
    fixed investment.

     

    So according to you if spending is normal we would have added 2.38% on top of the 2.4% giving us a total of 4.78% 1 quarter gdp growth???   hahahahahha

    thanks for the laugh

     

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Austerity bites!

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

    Still no actual real-world examples?.

     

    You're really good at making wildly inaccurate statements, you just have a problem actually proving them.

     



    No inaccuracy here, just your wild ideological adherence to the policies that don't work, proveably.  you can't point to any examples where borrowing huge amounts of money led to a stable, growing economy, either.  unless you want to use, say, the U.S.S.R., or maybe Argentina. 

    So, here are your real world examples:  Chile and Latvia.

    I cna't wait for the snarky comments. 

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Austerity bites!

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to StalkingButler's comment:

     

     

    So say those who pushed for austerity programs. It'd be interesting to see evidence of whether it happened, and if so, what particular austerity measures were in place.

     

    It's probably useful to note here that the sequester is not exactly an austerity plan.

     




     

    Sequester? You made a claim about austerity in general.




    The sequester is an austerity program like passing on a second bag of potato chips is a diet.

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from ImYourDaddy. Show ImYourDaddy's posts

    Re: Austerity bites!

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

    In response to ImYourDaddy's comment:



    Is third grade math really that hard for you ?

     

     

    let look at this sloooowwwly ... lets assume government spends  100$

    4 quarter they spent  -1.41 meaning  100-1.41 =  98.59

    1st quarter they spent -.97 meaning 100-.97    =  99.03

    so that mean first quarter we spent more than the 4th quarter and by how much (spread)

    99.03 -98.59 =+ .44  ... the spread tell us how much or less the government spent from quarter to quarter ...(Not hard to understand)

     

    Now back to point of the thread, with government spending less , GDP Grew!!!!!

    That must pissed u off, I guess we have to wait till q2 gdp to come out and if it come in less than 2.4 then you can jump and rejoice and shout austerity,austerity

    In the meantime sit down!

     

     

     

    The gov't component is a NET NEGATIVE!!!!

    It's a cumulative SUBTRACTION from overall GDP!!!!

     

    Government spending, G was –0.97 percentage points of Q1's GDP.   For the second quarter in a row, there were national defense spending declines, with another –12.1% drop for Q1, a –0.63 percentage point contribution.  State and local governments subtracted –0.29 percentage points from Q1 GDP.  Below is the percentage quarterly change of government spending, adjusted for prices, annualized.

    http://www.economicpopulist.org/content/gdp-revised-down-slightly-24-q1-2013

     

    Take a look at the last two quarters, do you see a net-positive gov't spending like you say there should be?

    Of course you don't because you're a foolish echo-chamber rugrat.



    Thanks for the material

    guess you like to contradict yourself

    Government spending, G was –0.97 percentage points of Q1's GDP

    yet on the post above you said it cause 2.38% off the GDP ??? what gives

     

    See the point here.... government spending was negative  and quarter 1 GDP  POSITIVE 2.4%,cuts in government spending impact on GDP (not so much)

    You have to be patient... wait until we have a drop in GDP then jump out of your chair and scream Austerity, it will help your case

     

     

     

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. This post has been removed.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from ImYourDaddy. Show ImYourDaddy's posts

    Re: Austerity bites!

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

    In response to ImYourDaddy's comment:

     

    More evidence of the failed neo-con ideology.

    First quarter GDP revised slightly lower; austerity bites.

    (Reuters) - A drop in government spending dragged more on the U.S. economy than initially thought in the first three months of the year, although consumer spending looked relatively resilient to Washington's austerity drive.

    Other reports on Thursday showed the number of new jobless claims rose modestly last week while contracts on previously owned homes climbed to a three-year high in April.

    Together, the reports pointed to an economy that has held up reasonably well despite government constraints, but nevertheless faced headwinds severe enough to dissuade the U.S. Federal Reserve from trimming its monetary stimulus in the immediate future.

    "(The reports) paint the picture of an economy with strengthening fundamentals that is facing significant fiscal drag," said Ellen Zentner, an economist at Nomura in New York.

     

    Government spending tumbled at a 4.9 percent annual rate, which was faster than the 4.1 percent rate initially estimated. Also holding back growth during the quarter, businesses outside the farm sector stocked their shelves at a slower pace.

    Washington has been tightening its belt for several years but ramped up austerity measures in 2013, hiking taxes in January and slashing the federal budget in March.

    "We are dramatically under-spending in Washington," said Michael Strauss, a market strategist at Commonfund in Wilton, Connecticut.

    U.S. stocks rose and the dollar weakened as some investors bet the data could dissuade the Fed from rushing to taper a bond buying program that has acted as a bulwark against government belt tightening. Prices for U.S. government debt pared losses.

     

     The forecast for 1st quarter gdp (2.5%), it came in at 2.4% ... so government spending cost gdp growth to slow  (1 tenth of 1 %  Brawwahhhh)

    Is lesson time

    As a reminder, GDP is made up of:  where Y=GDP, C=Consumption, I=Investment, G=Government Spending, (X-M)=Net Exports, X=Exports, M=Imports*.

    Comparison of Q1 2013 and Q4 2012 GDP Components
    Component
    Q1 2013
    Q4 2012
    Spread

             1q        4th q   spread

    GDP  +2.38   +0.37  +2.01

    C       +2.40   +1.28  +1.12

    I        +1.16   +0.17 +0.99

    G       –0.97   –1.41  +0.44

    X       +0.11  –0.40  +0.51

    M–0.32 +0.73 -1.05

     

    Private growth is better than government growth, Government growth mean higher deficit,debt,interest on the debt  ... you dig

    government spending 2013  3.5 trillion , sequester cut  85 bio ...2.5% cut of total spending is going to cause the econpmy to go into the toilet?? stop bogarting that crack pipe

     




    You really are an idiot.

     

    Hey maroon, here's a question for you....

    What difference does the "spread" in gov't spending matter from one quarter to the next if they are both negative....AS IN A DECREASE IN GOV"T SPENDING!!!!

    Both the 4th and 1st quarters were negative meaning gov't spending dropped in both qtrs hence the point of the thread...AUSTERITY!!!

    Man are you people dumb.

     



    Is third grade math really that hard for you ?

     

    let look at this sloooowwwly ... lets assume government spends  100$

    4 quarter they spent  -1.41 meaning  100-1.41 =  98.59

    1st quarter they spent -.97 meaning 100-.97    =  99.03

    so that mean first quarter we spent more than the 4th quarter and by how much (spread)

    99.03 -98.59 =+ .44  ... the spread tell us how much or less the government spent from quarter to quarter ...(Not hard to understand)

     

    Now back to point of the thread, with government spending less , GDP Grew!!!!!

    That must pissed u off, I guess we have to wait till q2 gdp to come out and if it come in less than 2.4 then you can jump and rejoice and shout austerity,austerity

    In the meantime sit down!

     

     




    No, ya freaking dunce, those numbers are qtr to qtr and they are CUMULATIVE.

     

    So they go from q3-2012 @100 -1.41 =  98.59 That is the q4-2012 amount

    You take THAT amount 98.59 and then you see what happens in the next qtr.

    So it is 98.59 - .97 = 97.62 That is the amount of gov't spending in q1 2013 ADDED to the quarter immediately preceeding it.

     

    Here's the point of the thread moron.

    If gov't spending hadn't decreased and just stayed the same, that would've added +2.38 % to the US GDP, or roughly $300 billion MORE economic activity.

    Even a simpleton like you knows you GROW your way out of a recession.

    As the BEA states:

    A drop in government spending dragged more on the U.S. economy than initially thought in the first three months of the year

    Together, the reports pointed to an economy that has held up reasonably well despite government constraints, but nevertheless faced headwinds severe enough to dissuade the U.S. Federal Reserve from trimming its monetary stimulus in the immediate future.


    Government spending tumbled at a 4.9 percent annual rate, which was faster than the 4.1 percent rate initially estimated.


    Not only are you an idiot, you have reading comprehension problems as well.

     

     

    And you still haven't shown were austerity works in the real world.

    While there are numerous examples it doesn't.

     

    Just shut up already, idiots annoy everyone especially ones so sure in their ignorance as you are.

     



    Are you really this stupid???? (think i know the answer)

     

    GDP is express in % term OKKKKKK    100% represent  total government spending from 2012 3rd quarter

    That 98.59  go back to 100% as the baseline

    Is like shopping ... sales is  10% off that shoe, also u get another 10% off on your total purchase... 

     

    Ok I guess math is too hard ... let go to your source th BEA

    http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdpnewsrelease.htm

    The increase in real GDP in the first quarter primarily reflected positive contributions from
    personal consumption expenditures (PCE), private inventory investment, residential fixed investment,
    nonresidential fixed investment, and exports that were partly offset by negative contributions from
    federal government spending and state and local government spending.  Imports, which are a subtraction
    in the calculation of GDP, increased.

          The acceleration in real GDP in the first quarter primarily reflected an upturn in private
    inventory investment, an acceleration in PCE, a smaller decrease in federal government spending, and
    an upturn in exports that were partly offset by an upturn in imports and a deceleration in nonresidential
    fixed investment.

     

    So according to you if spending is normal we would have added 2.38% on top of the 2.4% giving us a total of 4.78% 1 quarter gdp growth???   hahahahahha

    thanks for the laugh

     

     

     




    You must really test the patience of your special ed teachers.

     

    What difference does the "spread" in gov't spending matter from one quarter to the next if they are both negative....AS IN A DECREASE IN GOV"T SPENDING!!!!

    Both the 4th and 1st quarters were negative meaning gov't spending dropped in both qtrs hence the point of the thread...AUSTERITY!!!

     

     

    I guess I assumed you could do basic math.

    (-1.47) q4 + (-.97) q1 = -2.44  It's a cummulative effect on GDP in 2 qtrs, dipshiite.

    Quarter over quarter GDP numbers represents change from preceeding period.

    Your post:

    99.03 -98.59 =+ .44 ... the spread tell us how much or less the government spent from quarter to quarter


    That is soo ignorant as to be laughable. You are trying to calculate spending totals, hard numbers, using percentages. Math don't work that way idiot.

    The correct math is:

    100 - 1.47 = 98.59 : 98.59 - .97 = 97.62

     


    a smaller decrease in federal government spending 

    Is still a decrease ya loon!

     

     

    BEA: Government spending tumbled at a 4.9 percent annual rate, which was faster than the 4.1 percent rate initially estimated.


    That says that gov't spending has declined in the latest qtrs and if that continues it will CUMMULATIVELY be over 4% for the year.

    That is $600 billion in lost productivity.

     

    Seriously shut up.

    I'm done giving free math lessons to idiots who still need diapers.

     



    Stupid is what stupid writes ....

     

    let go over the this again , since someone forgot his homework assignment again

    if you go shopping and u get a discount of 10% on top of a discount of 10%

    and if the item cost 100$

    ok class what will be the ending price be

    get back to me if you figure it out and apply to the above post

    LOL ...  

     

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Austerity bites!

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

    In response to ImYourDaddy's comment:

     

    More evidence of the failed neo-con ideology.

    First quarter GDP revised slightly lower; austerity bites.

    (Reuters) - A drop in government spending dragged more on the U.S. economy than initially thought in the first three months of the year, although consumer spending looked relatively resilient to Washington's austerity drive.

    Other reports on Thursday showed the number of new jobless claims rose modestly last week while contracts on previously owned homes climbed to a three-year high in April.

    Together, the reports pointed to an economy that has held up reasonably well despite government constraints, but nevertheless faced headwinds severe enough to dissuade the U.S. Federal Reserve from trimming its monetary stimulus in the immediate future.

    "(The reports) paint the picture of an economy with strengthening fundamentals that is facing significant fiscal drag," said Ellen Zentner, an economist at Nomura in New York.

     

    Government spending tumbled at a 4.9 percent annual rate, which was faster than the 4.1 percent rate initially estimated. Also holding back growth during the quarter, businesses outside the farm sector stocked their shelves at a slower pace.

    Washington has been tightening its belt for several years but ramped up austerity measures in 2013, hiking taxes in January and slashing the federal budget in March.

    "We are dramatically under-spending in Washington," said Michael Strauss, a market strategist at Commonfund in Wilton, Connecticut.

    U.S. stocks rose and the dollar weakened as some investors bet the data could dissuade the Fed from rushing to taper a bond buying program that has acted as a bulwark against government belt tightening. Prices for U.S. government debt pared losses.

     

     The forecast for 1st quarter gdp (2.5%), it came in at 2.4% ... so government spending cost gdp growth to slow  (1 tenth of 1 %  Brawwahhhh)

    Is lesson time

    As a reminder, GDP is made up of:  where Y=GDP, C=Consumption, I=Investment, G=Government Spending, (X-M)=Net Exports, X=Exports, M=Imports*.

    Comparison of Q1 2013 and Q4 2012 GDP Components
    Component
    Q1 2013
    Q4 2012
    Spread

             1q        4th q   spread

    GDP  +2.38   +0.37  +2.01

    C       +2.40   +1.28  +1.12

    I        +1.16   +0.17 +0.99

    G       –0.97   –1.41  +0.44

    X       +0.11  –0.40  +0.51

    M–0.32 +0.73 -1.05

     

    Private growth is better than government growth, Government growth mean higher deficit,debt,interest on the debt  ... you dig

    government spending 2013  3.5 trillion , sequester cut  85 bio ...2.5% cut of total spending is going to cause the econpmy to go into the toilet?? stop bogarting that crack pipe

     




    You really are an idiot.

     

    Hey maroon, here's a question for you....

    What difference does the "spread" in gov't spending matter from one quarter to the next if they are both negative....AS IN A DECREASE IN GOV"T SPENDING!!!!

    Both the 4th and 1st quarters were negative meaning gov't spending dropped in both qtrs hence the point of the thread...AUSTERITY!!!

    Man are you people dumb.

     



    Is third grade math really that hard for you ?

     

    let look at this sloooowwwly ... lets assume government spends  100$

    4 quarter they spent  -1.41 meaning  100-1.41 =  98.59

    1st quarter they spent -.97 meaning 100-.97    =  99.03

    so that mean first quarter we spent more than the 4th quarter and by how much (spread)

    99.03 -98.59 =+ .44  ... the spread tell us how much or less the government spent from quarter to quarter ...(Not hard to understand)

     

    Now back to point of the thread, with government spending less , GDP Grew!!!!!

    That must pissed u off, I guess we have to wait till q2 gdp to come out and if it come in less than 2.4 then you can jump and rejoice and shout austerity,austerity

    In the meantime sit down!

     

     




    No, ya freaking dunce, those numbers are qtr to qtr and they are CUMULATIVE.

     

    So they go from q3-2012 @100 -1.41 =  98.59 That is the q4-2012 amount

    You take THAT amount 98.59 and then you see what happens in the next qtr.

    So it is 98.59 - .97 = 97.62 That is the amount of gov't spending in q1 2013 ADDED to the quarter immediately preceeding it.

     

    Here's the point of the thread moron.

    If gov't spending hadn't decreased and just stayed the same, that would've added +2.38 % to the US GDP, or roughly $300 billion MORE economic activity.

    Even a simpleton like you knows you GROW your way out of a recession.

    As the BEA states:

    A drop in government spending dragged more on the U.S. economy than initially thought in the first three months of the year

    Together, the reports pointed to an economy that has held up reasonably well despite government constraints, but nevertheless faced headwinds severe enough to dissuade the U.S. Federal Reserve from trimming its monetary stimulus in the immediate future.


    Government spending tumbled at a 4.9 percent annual rate, which was faster than the 4.1 percent rate initially estimated.


    Not only are you an idiot, you have reading comprehension problems as well.

     

     

    And you still haven't shown were austerity works in the real world.

    While there are numerous examples it doesn't.

     

    Just shut up already, idiots annoy everyone especially ones so sure in their ignorance as you are.

     



    Are you really this stupid???? (think i know the answer)

     

    GDP is express in % term OKKKKKK    100% represent  total government spending from 2012 3rd quarter

    That 98.59  go back to 100% as the baseline

    Is like shopping ... sales is  10% off that shoe, also u get another 10% off on your total purchase... 

     

    Ok I guess math is too hard ... let go to your source th BEA

    http://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdpnewsrelease.htm

    The increase in real GDP in the first quarter primarily reflected positive contributions from
    personal consumption expenditures (PCE), private inventory investment, residential fixed investment,
    nonresidential fixed investment, and exports that were partly offset by negative contributions from
    federal government spending and state and local government spending.  Imports, which are a subtraction
    in the calculation of GDP, increased.

          The acceleration in real GDP in the first quarter primarily reflected an upturn in private
    inventory investment, an acceleration in PCE, a smaller decrease in federal government spending, and
    an upturn in exports that were partly offset by an upturn in imports and a deceleration in nonresidential
    fixed investment.

     

    So according to you if spending is normal we would have added 2.38% on top of the 2.4% giving us a total of 4.78% 1 quarter gdp growth???   hahahahahha

    thanks for the laugh

     

     

     




    You must really test the patience of your special ed teachers.

     

    What difference does the "spread" in gov't spending matter from one quarter to the next if they are both negative....AS IN A DECREASE IN GOV"T SPENDING!!!!

    Both the 4th and 1st quarters were negative meaning gov't spending dropped in both qtrs hence the point of the thread...AUSTERITY!!!

     

     

    I guess I assumed you could do basic math.

    (-1.47) q4 + (-.97) q1 = -2.44  It's a cummulative effect on GDP in 2 qtrs, dipshiite.

    Quarter over quarter GDP numbers represents change from preceeding period.

    Your post:

    99.03 -98.59 =+ .44 ... the spread tell us how much or less the government spent from quarter to quarter


    That is soo ignorant as to be laughable. You are trying to calculate spending totals, hard numbers, using percentages. Math don't work that way idiot.

    The correct math is:

    100 - 1.47 = 98.59 : 98.59 - .97 = 97.62

     


    a smaller decrease in federal government spending 

    Is still a decrease ya loon!

     

     

    BEA: Government spending tumbled at a 4.9 percent annual rate, which was faster than the 4.1 percent rate initially estimated.


    That says that gov't spending has declined in the latest qtrs and if that continues it will CUMMULATIVELY be over 4% for the year.

    That is $600 billion in lost productivity.

     

    Seriously shut up.

    I'm done giving free math lessons to idiots who still need diapers.

     



    Your entire argument is a moot point becasue the borrowing is long term borrowing.  Net effect is negative.  Has to be.  It's like gravity.  When you use long term borrowing to finance government spending, you are passing the obligation to that debt into the future. 

    So, you can sit here all you want and claim it has a positive effect on the eoconomy, simply becauseyou won't admit the obvious.  It isn't real growth.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from skeeter20. Show skeeter20's posts

    Re: Austerity bites!

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

     

    In response to skeeter20's comment:

     

    In response to A_Concerned_Citizen's comment:

     

    Still no actual real-world examples?.

     

    You're really good at making wildly inaccurate statements, you just have a problem actually proving them.

     

     



    No inaccuracy here, just your wild ideological adherence to the policies that don't work, proveably.  you can't point to any examples where borrowing huge amounts of money led to a stable, growing economy, either.  unless you want to use, say, the U.S.S.R., or maybe Argentina. 

     

    So, here are your real world examples:  Chile and Latvia.

    I cna't wait for the snarky comments. 

     

     




    I don't need snark when your inability to post a shred of evidence shows how inept you are at this debate thing.

    For the person who lives in his alternate reality like you do:

    Some inconvenient truths.

    The tax rates  for the highest brackets in the 60's was 65-90% and yet that was the longest period of sustained economic growth in the country

    The second longest period of economic growth immediately followed the Bush Sr tax increase and the Clinton tax increase.

    Even St Ronnie raised taxes 11 times during his turn at the helm.

     




    I've posted two countries that did this successfully.  That's evidinece.  Here are two more:

     

     

    Ireland (in the 90's)

    Turkey

    Of course, you will claim that neither of these are evidence either, because you are ideologically wed to the big ideolgical economic lie.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     

Share