Bloodletting

We got 1.5% growth in GDP this last quarter — basically nothing. So what’s happened? Hasn’t Obama built more roads and bridges so businesses would magically spring up? But don’t worry, Obama has a big tax hike planned on the rich which will help business by taking more money out of it. It’s basically the bloodletting theory of economics — you know, you bleed a person out to make him feel better. Similarly, we’re going to tax people to economic health.

If we reelect Obama, we’re not really taking this whole “having a country” thing very seriously.

Send to Kindle
1 Star (Hated it)2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (Awesome) (5 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)

9 Comments

  1. Joe Biden said to me the other day, “Lyle, we’ve tried everything to get this economy going, but we overlooked the one thing it really needs: a monorail!” MONORAIL!

    0

    0
  2. I’m no doctor, but I think there are a few isolated cases where bloodletting actually works. Paying people to stay home never fixes a recession.

    0

    0
  3. I guess there are some folks out there enjoying their enforced inactivity but I’ve got to tell you sending out job apps everyday for a year is not what I call fun. Of course our area’s been in the dumps since 9/11 but according to the Obama Administration our state is doing A OK and we don’t need extended job benefits. You know why the unemployment numbers are 8. something because the other 8% of us don’t have any more benefits and are living on our savings or with our parents or with our children or getting foreclosed on.

    0

    0
  4. Frank, that is 1.5% annualized growth in GDP. So that means the economy “grew” 0.35% this past quarter, which is well within the margin of error for these calculations. Assuming for argument’s sake that the 1.5% statement is true, I would like to know if it was real GDP or nominal GDP that they are talking about. For example, was there a 0.35% growth in the number of widgets manufactured this quarter over last quarter (real growth), or was there a 0.35% growth in the amount paid for the same number (or fewer) widgets produced (nominal growth)? If they were talking nominal growth, there could even have been a manufacturing contraction this past quarter, which is not a good economic indicator for the immediate future. And, if there were such a contraction, would this administration even tell us about it?

    0

    0
  5. Ogrrre –

    Actually, what it means is that GDP in second quarter of calendar 2012 was 1.5% higher than GDP in second quarter of calendar 2011, and doesn’t say anything about growth from first quarter to second quarter of calendar 2012.

    If we reelect Obama, we’re not really taking this whole “having a country” thing very seriously.

    It’s an American tradition. Electing Obama the first time was sufficient evidence, as far as I’m concerned, that we weren’t taking the whole idea of having a country seriously. So was electing Lyndon Johnson and Jimmy Carter.

    0

    0
  6. Sorry, Jim, but the article in WaPo was talking about economic growth in the latest quarter, not in the last 4 quarters.
    “The Commerce Department said the economy grew at an anemic 1.5% annual rate from April through June, after a revised 2.0% in the first quarter…”
    In either case, it is a really sucky ecomomy, and inherited or not, Boy Blunder’s policies aren’t helping even a little bit.

    0

    0

Comments are closed.