1. you are wrong on the data Average GDP growth rate 93-94 3.5% Average GDP growth rate 95-00 4.0% http://www.statista.com/statistics/188165/annual-gdp-growth-of-the-united-states-since-1990/ 2. You said the 97 cuts reduced revenue, they did nothing of the sort, revenue went up http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=200 3. You assign the clinton policies as responsible by decree, there is no proof
First, what did the Republicans do in 95 to help increase the GDP growth rate? You talked about the tax cuts but they passed in 97 and went into effect in 98. Second, I specifically pointed out that revenues because of a particular policy went down not that overall revenue went down. You are not even paying attention now. Third, I pointed out that Clinton's budget had a big impact on the GDP much more than anything Repubs did, this is not for dispute.
The exGopher is just wrong on everything. I think he is a grade schooler with all his spamming of the forum. Had to put his stupid ass on ignore for being a spammer.
1. Right, but that actually makes your argument worse. average GDP growth rate 97-00 is 4.45% 2. If you knew anything about economics, you would know that you cannot with certainity isolate the efects of any single policy like you are pretending. 3. It certainly is in dispute, the GDP numbers and the budget itself say that 97-00 were better than 92-95. Also see point #2, you are pretending the models are accurate when they make your case. The fact is one can make many other models that show the opposite of what you claim.
1. Again, you provide no evidence of the poilcy changes made by Repubs in 1995 and you are still counting 1997 when the tax cut fully went into effect only in 1998 at the peak of the internet bubble. Notice how the GDP started tanking at that period, should we credit the Republicans for that too? 2. I suggest you look up CBO data and how they calculated these numbers. Do not lecture others on economics when you don't even know such basic facts. 3. You yourself were talking about 'maturing' earlier and you want to dismiss that because it doesn't suit your talking points anymore. Nobody is talking about models, these numbers were calculated on the actual data after the policy went into effect.
You can see how the recovery under Obama is being mishandled through many things Obama is doing to hinder business, not to mention ObamaCare. Source: CBO <img src="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2012/11/cbo_recovery_chart1.jpg" height=406 width=366>
Private sector recovery is actually faster than the previous two recession, what's holding back the recovery is the public sector.