US Economy grows only 0.6% may be adjusted to negative growth

[Thorgrim]

U.S. economic growth skidded to a five-year low of 0.6% in the fourth quarter, reflecting the toll a slumping housing sector has taken on the national economy.

Gross domestic product, which measures total goods and services output within U.S. borders, edged up at a weaker-than-expected 0.6 percent annual rate in the fourth quarter and for the full year advanced only 2.2 percent - the slowest growth in annual GDP since 1.6 percent in 2002.

Analysts surveyed by Reuters had forecast that fourth-quarter GDP would grow at a 1.2 percent rate. The lackluster fourth quarter performance followed a booming third quarter when GDP surged at a 4.9 percent rate and is likely to fuel fears the economy is at risk of tumbling into recession in 2008.

U.S. Economic Growth Skids To Five-Year Low of 0.6% - Economy * US * News * Story - MSNBC.com

They adjust these numbers so we may actually be looking at the first quarter of a full fledged recession

I wonder, if the number stays and next quarter our growth is -0.8...could we average it out to two quarters of negative growth?

Can you believe during this shit we have $92 a barrel oil? Fucking A...

[WickedLou9]

Atleast I can take advantage and refinance my mortgage. I'm going to save like 200 bucks a month, mabe more if the fed cuts rates. All of these rate cuts might actually do more good than any stimulus package. The rate cuts mean that people with adjustable rate mortgages will actually see thier payments go DOWN instead of up. That could stave off some of the foreclosures that we have been seeing, and that's good news for everyone. it frees up capital for people to spend in other areas as well.

[northhunter]

I don't know whether to feel bad that the economy isn't growing much or feel great that we are refinancing our mortgage and paying much less (not as much less as WickedLou9) each month..................hmmmmm..........ok, I go with feeling better about the savings for us.

[hsmith]

Negative growth isn't necessarily bad. Recessions and booms come and go. We must have both in order to move forward. Staving off recessions only makes things worses and prolongs the problem.

[Publius]

good thing that Democrat controlled Congress is here to save the day.

[7960]

Originally Posted by Publius

good thing that Democrat controlled Congress is here to save the day.

pelosi's got 'em working every day!!


;ohwait;

[hsmith]

Originally Posted by 7960

pelosi's got 'em working every day!!


;ohwait;

Tax rebates for every working family!!*



*for those that don't work but not for those that work too much

[bheld]

Sorry guys, but I don't think the "Impede, Deflect, Ridicule" strategy is going to work out too well for the Republicans this year. Most people are starting to see right through it. One drawback to stonewalling everything your opponent does is that when a gigantic shit sandwich comes down the line you don't have anybody to split it with. Bon appétit!

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by Publius

good thing that Democrat controlled Congress is here to save the day.

Good thing we impeached bush and cheney and got rid of the filibusters rules...after installing President Pelosi, then we were able to fix the problem without requiring 60 senate votes and/or 2/3s of congress

[Publius]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Good thing we impeached bush and cheney and got rid of the filibusters rules...after installing President Pelosi, then we were able to fix the problem without requiring 60 senate votes and/or 2/3s of congress

Give all the excuses you want. But what happens if a Democrat wins the Presidency and you still don't "fix" the economy?

It amuses me that you think your own party is so inept that they're being lead around by the minority party in Congress yet couldn't impact anything when THEY were the minority party.

[Publius]

Originally Posted by bheld

Sorry guys, but I don't think the "Impede, Deflect, Ridicule" strategy is going to work out too well for the Republicans this year. Most people are starting to see right through it. One drawback to stonewalling everything your opponent does is that when a gigantic shit sandwich comes down the line you don't have anybody to split it with. Bon appétit!

Who are you calling a Republican, exactly?

[bheld]

Originally Posted by Publius

Give all the excuses you want. But what happens if a Democrat wins the Presidency and you still don't "fix" the economy?

It amuses me that you think your own party is so inept that they're being lead around by the minority party in Congress yet couldn't impact anything when THEY were the minority party.

What's your party doing, exactly?

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by Publius

Give all the excuses you want. But what happens if a Democrat wins the Presidency and you still don't "fix" the economy?

It amuses me that you think your own party is so inept that they're being lead around by the minority party in Congress yet couldn't impact anything when THEY were the minority party.

It's simple math

You get 41 Republicans in the Senate, they can stop anything

You get 1/3+1 of Congress Republicans in Congress, you can stop anything with a presidential veto

I even got out my graphing calculator and worked it out a few times

[Publius]

Originally Posted by bheld

What's your party doing, exactly?

Fielding record numbers of candidates and growing by the day. But what does that have to do with anything in this thread?

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by bheld

What's your party doing, exactly?

Same "doings" as the American Communist Party

[Publius]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

It's simple math

You get 41 Republicans in the Senate, they can stop anything

You get 1/3+1 of Congress Republicans in Congress, you can stop anything with a presidential veto

I even got out my graphing calculator and worked it out a few times

I'm fairly certain that the Republicans didn't have 60 Senators or a 2/3rds +1 majority at any time over the decade plus they controlled Congress. Yet they were able to pass tons of legislation. So the Democrats should have been able to stop anything, why didn't they?

[Thorgrim]

Originally Posted by Publius

I'm fairly certain that the Republicans didn't have 60 Senators or a 2/3rds +1 majority at any time over the decade plus they controlled Congress. Yet they were able to pass tons of legislation. So the Democrats should have been able to stop anything, why didn't they?

Democrats went behind Republican legislation because under Clinton the GOP worked with them...under Bush they used 9/11 to scare moderates into voting with them...either way the Democrats were willing to work with the Republicans for 12 years...the Republicans are pure obstructionists...the Democrats blocked 2% of judges...no comparison

[hsmith]

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

Democrats went behind Republican legislation because under Clinton the GOP worked with them...under Bush they used 9/11 to scare moderates into voting with them...either way the Democrats were willing to work with the Republicans for 12 years...the Republicans are pure obstructionists...the Democrats blocked 2% of judges...no comparison

Scared of Bush, oh noes

They didn't do anything, end of story.

[David Octavius]

Originally Posted by Publius

Fielding record numbers of candidates and growing by the day. But what does that have to do with anything in this thread?

"Fielding record number of candidates and growing..." that has been said for the last decade, wow what inroads they made!

I don't see anywhere in OP where the republicans or democrats were mentioned, you injected political parties into this

[7960]

Originally Posted by David Octavius

"Fielding record number of candidates and growing..." that has been said for the last decade, wow what inroads they made!

Hey jackass, the registrar of deeds and the a cemetery trustee are listed on the official libertarian website as "libertarian elected officials." They're making inroads pal so stfu.