Economy slowing as imports take over. Obama KILLING the middle class.

With Obama and Dimocraps in Congress putting MORE people out of work, American consumers cannot afford to purchase higher priced American made products of inferior quality just so some UAW Hack can continue to get Viagra for free.


Aug 27, 8:48 AM EDT
Economy slows to 1.6 percent as trade gap widens

AP Economics Writer

"WASHINGTON (AP) -- The economy grew at a much slower pace this spring than previously estimated, mostly due to the largest surge in imports in 26 years and a slower buildup in inventories.

The nation's gross domestic product - the broadest measure of the economy's output - grew at a 1.6 percent annual rate in the April-to-June period, the Commerce Department said Friday. That's down from an initial estimate of 2.4 percent last month and much slower than the first quarter's 3.7 percent pace. Many economists had expected a sharper drop.

The widening trade deficit subtracted nearly 3.4 percentage points from second quarter growth, the largest hit from a trade imbalance since 1947, the government said.

The report confirms the economy has lost significant momentum in recent months. Most analysts expect the nation's GDP will continue to grow at a similarly weak pace in the current July-to-September quarter and for the rest of this year.

The economy has grown for four straight quarters, but that growth has averaged only 2.9 percent, a weak pace after such a steep recession. The economy needs to expand at about 3 percent just to keep the unemployment rate, currently 9.5 percent, from rising.

Business investment in new machinery, computers and software drove much of the growth last quarter, increasing nearly 25 percent.

But much of that spending involved the purchase of imported goods. Imports surged 32.4 percent, the most since 1984. That overwhelmed a 9.1 percent increase in exports."

No votes yet

I know the Democrats who check this site will be howling mad when they read this post, but Obama looks at all of us in the USA as useful idiots. That includes his union buddies and their members who voted for him, the 20-somethings who think he is a rock star, and everyone else who marked their X next to his name on the ballot, or indicated an X next to his name electronically. He used all of us to get elected president, and now he is systematically destroying our economy to make us as weak as Zimbabwe. To him, we are all useful idiots. He's not killing just the middle class, he's killing all of us.


Have some Lobster--Not!
Take a free $20,000 4 day vacation to millionaires getaway on the Spanish Riveria with 40 of your closest friends. Don’t forget your$ 3000 off shoulder black and white top and$ 500 tennies you wore to the soup kitchen. Guess we Supporters of you get to eat a few vegetables from our garden.

We are all born ignorant, but one must work hard to remain stupid.-Ben Franklin

the "off the shoulder black and white top" looked good on the First Lady. She wore it with style and class. Could it be the green eyed monster rearing it's ugly head? The "40 of your closest friends" is something that you made up and just because you say it does not make it so.

When did you become a supporter of First Lady Michelle Obama? I missed that! I am a true supporter and I love eating out of our community garden. Some of the best tomatoes!

It would have been much worse without the stimulus. Can you imagine if McCain/Sarah Quitter would have been elected and froze all spending in the middle of a recession? Now that would have been stupid

Pink Slip

That's not too different from what Germany did when faced with the same crisis.

Currently they have pre-recession unemployment numbers and their economy is growing.


Pinkie, you cannot possibly fix a problem caused by too much spending, by spending even more money. Even worse, that spending was supported by a much bigger problem of too much borrowing, and we expanded the borrowing to a staggering degree.

The federal deficit is now the size of the entire 2002 budget. Just think about that one. Where's the money going to come from to pay for all that borrowing? Just think of how much trouble that you'd be in, if you borrowed as much money in 2009 and then again in 2010, that you had made in all of 2002. You'd be bankrupt by 2012. And that's where we're going.

I'm going to tell you straight up, here, out of respect: Keynes was wrong. More precisely, Keynes didn't say to run the federal government in a condition of permanent deficits and ever-growing debts. The hard fact of the matter is that once a serious downturn occurs, the government has no economic power to actually combat it. That's 100% of what's happening, today. And Obama and Bush ran up $3 trillion in direct borrowing to try to overturn economic law, and they failed since you were too ideologically in love with the so-called philosophy behind it all. They literally ran up bill of $20000 on average for each taxpayer, just in a 2-year period, just for the purposes of propaganda. Pinkie, you have to come up with that $20K out of your pocket. It's already allocated in your name, so you'd better get to work on collecting that amount for the government in addition to all your other bills.

Sheesh. The stimulus did nothing but make our fiscal foolishness even worse.

GZ, you continue to make the error of the "fallacy of composition".

Also, no one is suggesting running permanent deficits. But we're in a liquidity trap. When times are good, that is the time to cut spending. Not when unemployment is high, demand is low, and deflationary pressures are high. The feds can't cut interest rates any further. Fiscal austerity during a recession does not lead to growth---can you think of a real life example where this happened?

Pink Slip

Pink Slip, I'm making no error whatsoever when I observe that the government is growing far faster than the tax base can support without itself being bankrupted.

Nobody is "suggesting" that they run another huge deficit next year, either, yet that's exactly what will happen. These things aren't "suggested". They will continue to happen with a government that is totally out of control ... until you stop "voting stupid" and start voting smart, by bringing in hard-nosed fiscal conservatives like the Libertarians.

If you won't cut excessive spending during good times and bad times, then the only possible outcome is bankruptcy. Your government is bankrupt. Bankrupt entities are unable to function. They sure as hell can't act as creditors.

You're trying (unsuccessfully) to talk around the need for austerity after an extraordinary period of fiscal foolishness. You can't just keep spending money when you're broke. The U.S. government is broke. But it can tax you excessively for the money, and that's exactly what's going to happen, while you sit there in deep-seated fear over putting a stop to the madness of it all.

Pink slip says "It would have been much worse without the stimulus", why because O bama and Binden said so. Think for yourself and go research what the stimulus didn't do and how it will affect us short term and long term. You are an Obama zombie, wake up and figure things out for your self.... Oh by the way freezing spending is the answer, along with letting people keep more of their own money, money that they will spend and stimulate the economy with. Get it yet! One more thing on your stimulus, everyone in Amercia could have gotten 1 million each with 457 million still left over. Now don't you think having a million dollars for 330 million people would have fostered a booming economy??????

"DTOM" {1776} " We The People" {1791}

If every adult in America got 1,000,000, and there are, say, 230,000,000 adults in America right now approximately, that would mean it would cost:
- 230,000,000,000,000
- That's, like, 230 trillion dollars.

Is that what the stimulus package(s) were worth? And where would that have come from?

You say freezing spending is the answer, yet then state that people who have kept more of their own money (which might be just a few hundred bucks) will keep the economy flowing. During rough economic times, most people lock down and freeze their own spending habits, waiting for things to normalize before spending more freely again. And the increase in jobless from freezing shorter-term government stimulus spending (hopefully, shorter-term, I know that's a dangerous thought, continued spending) would mean a heckuva lot of people would have nothing to spend with. People are fixating on the current high unemployment rate, but hell, it was expected to be much worse without government intervention.

Germany actually paid employers to keep from firing people. Should we do that?

Besides, let's look at Germany's recovery:

Pink Slip

Germany did not "pay" business to keep employees, Merkel CUT TAXES on business and personal income. allowing the people, all people to keep more of their own money.

It's a shame that Germany is more Democratic than America under Obama.

Merkel Wins Majority for Tax-Cut Coalition in Germany
By Tony Czuczka and Brian Parkin - September 28, 2009 02:03 EDT

Angela Merkel acknowledges supporters
Sept. 28 (Bloomberg) -- German Chancellor Angela Merkel said she’ll press ahead with tax cuts and labor-market deregulation after winning re-election with enough support to govern with the pro-business Free Democrats.

With Germany struggling to recover from the deepest economic slump since World War II, voters spurned plans by Merkel’s Social Democratic challenger to raise taxes on top earners. Frank-Walter Steinmeier’s SPD had its worst postwar result in what he called a “bitter day” after sharing power with Merkel for four years and governing for the previous seven.

“There’s a clear sentiment in favor of economic changes, especially on income taxes,” Tilman Mayer, head of the Bonn- based Institute for Political Science, said in an interview. “Voters have turned their back on grand coalition-style compromise politics.”

Don't blame me,
I didn't vote for a

Maybe you should read this, chief:

"Germany's labor market—aided by government subsidies aimed at keeping workers on payrolls at reduced hours—is a contrast with the U.S. where, despite a much more rapid recovery in output so far, unemployment remains stuck near its recessionary peak."

Pink Slip

Yet those subsidies and the total price of all the stimulus they did spend was approx. 1/6th of what we did.

Their subsidies were for short-term relief. The spending cuts were for long-term relief.

As a result their citizens have jobs, their markets are doing well, and their productivity is still high.

No matter how you try to spin it Pink the simple fact is the out-of-control spending of the Dem President and the Dem Congress has not made the gains that were promised and it doubtful they ever will. Currently we are in a double-dip recession and the recovery will take probably a decade to fully recover.


A salute to you on behalf of your service and restoring honor back to America...

Thank You

"DTOM" {1776} " We The People" {1791}

Mikey, we're a much bigger country with a much bigger economy. You can get a better comparison of US spending vs Germany here:

The chart below shows the OECD's estimates of real government expenditures for Germany and the United States since the third quarter of 2008.

Pink Slip

Germanys unemployment rate, as a percentage, did not change because they handle their unemployment insurance and unemployment tracking differently.

Quick explanation.
Under Germanys system, a worker before the downturn makes $100 a week for working 40 hours for a total of $100 income per week. Take out $30 per week for taxes and the worker has $70 disposable income. The workers weekly expenses (for the sake of explanation) remains the same.

A worker after the downturn makes $60 a week for working 30 hours and the German government gives that worker a supplimental check for $40 for a total of $100 income per week. Take out $30 per week for taxes and the worker has $70 disposable income. The workers weekly expenses (for the sake of explanation) remains the same.

If what you say is true, then Germany should never have had a downturn. After all, workers income has not changed, Germanys unemployment has not changed. The workers disposable income has not changed, The workers expenses have not changed.

Now add in the tax cuts that Germany enacted.
No matter where the workers income came from, either from working 40 hours or working part time and receiving supplimental payments from the government, their disposable income goes up. Now, instead of taking home $70 per week for expenses, the worker takes home $80 a week because the income is not taxed as much as before.

Their expenses (for the sake of this explanation) have not changed. Therefore that worker now has an extra $10 a week to spend. With that extra income, NOW that same worker can purchase more bread, The increase in bread consumption means the bakery now has to hire another baker full time to keep up with increased demand. That full time baker no longer needs supplimentary income from the Government.

The "unemployment" rate in Germany has not changed. It is still around 7½% but now the German government is no longer supplimenting that part-time worker. That part-time worker is now a full time worker being paid 100% by the bakery.


Therefore, the way Germany handles their unemployment payments to displaced workers has no bearing on recovery.

Don't blame me,
I didn't vote for a

With your kind of recognition of the economy and the success of Obama's attempt to fix it defines your name, we will all have( pink slips) if this keeps up....

"DTOM" {1776} " We The People" {1791}

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.