DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Our Economy is Collapsing

Higher than all but one of Biden's years (other than 2021 which was still covid).

Hence the statement that what was posted is PURE and UTTER fanboy lies.

oh yeah?

prove it.

https://www.newsweek.com/economist-...elp-bidens-plan-45-times-too-big-1568694

http://news.ucr.edu/articles/2021/03/08/navigating-19-trillion-stimulus


There are additional considerations. If a large one-off fiscal stimulus to deal with an unprecedented shock, such as the COVID-19 stimulus, is terminated at some clearly determined time, it is unlikely that there will be long-term consequences for inflation expectations. But large fiscal stimuli that will not be an exception but the norm in the post-COVID era could lead to more serious concerns about surge in inflation.

Furthermore, any rise in inflation in the U.S. can have international ramifications. For instance, it may dissuade European conservative leaders from adopting the fiscal stimulus to finance Europe’s recovery from the pandemic. And a big fiscal stimulus is perhaps even more important for Europe, where the economic impact of the pandemic has been worse and the recovery weaker than in the U.S.


https://www.cato.org/commentary/democrats-have-forgotten-first-lesson-pandemic-economics

Democrats Have Forgotten the First Lesson of Pandemic Economics

https://www.aei.org/op-eds/yes-the-biden-stimulus-made-inflation-worse/
Yes, the Biden Stimulus Made Inflation Worse

https://www.wral.com/story/fact-check-did-biden-s-government-spending-cause-inflation/20247768/
Fact check: Did Biden's government spending cause inflation?

Estimating the impact of the American Rescue Plan
No magic formula can reveal precisely how much the American Rescue Plan fueled inflation, but the general consensus is that it was a contributor. Some economists estimate that it added two percentage points to the rate, some say it added up to four percentage points. Put another way, out of the 8.5% rate in March, the measure accounted for something between one quarter to one half of inflation.



https://www.brookings.edu/articles/...s-of-bidens-1-9-trillion-fiscal-package/

The macroeconomic implications of Biden’s $1.9 trillion fiscal package

By late 2021, we would likely see the economy operating above its maximum sustainable level. That positive output gap would likely put upward pressure on inflation, which the Federal Reserve has said would be welcome. A risk worth noting is that the return of GDP back to its maximum sustainable level may create a difficult economic period after 2021. While our estimates show a “soft landing,” with a temporary and shallow decline in GDP after the fourth quarter of 2021, the slowdown could be more abrupt and painful than our projections suggest.





Arguments that the Biden administration's stimulus, particularly the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan of 2021, harmed the economy later in 2024 center on fueling high inflation, increasing the national debt, and necessitating high interest rates.



Critics argue this excess demand contributed significantly to the cost-of-living crisis. Others argue the stimulus caused long-term inflationary pressure.



Inflationary Impact: The stimulus is widely seen as having contributed to a surge in demand, which, combined with supply chain issues, caused inflation to rise significantly between 2021 and 2024.
Persistent High Costs: While inflation cooled, the cumulative effect of price increases during this period left many Americans struggling with a higher cost of living in 2024.
Interest Rates: To combat the inflation partially caused by this spending, the Federal Reserve raised interest rates, leading to higher mortgage and borrowing costs for consumers in 2024.
Debt and Deficit: The high deficit spending, including the stimulus, is associated with a rising national debt, which can create long-term economic drag.

I agree with you on the Biden-era stimmies coming back to bite us now. That will be something that will be used against Dem candidates for a while.

What I'm wondering, though... is if that is such a big issue, then why is this admin goofing around on tariffs and exacerbating price/cost issues?

I'm just curious as to why people think programs that ended well before 2025 would be increasing the budget in 2025? The only program I know of that still had any financial impact on the 2025 budget was the continuing credits for Obamacare. I don't doubt that trump will still try to blame Biden for their own failures because that seems to be their go to move.

But people are so tired of hearing that excuse by now it's more like The Boy Who cried Wolf.

Policies that impact inflation aren't a light-switch. Current-day inflation is the result of policies rolled out years ago.

That's why the whole inflation argument is usually pretty dumb. The admin that has had to answer for inflation during their years is rarely the one that who enacted the policies responsible for the numbers.

Inflation rose to 8% in 2022 during the pandemic. That type of inflation was on a global scale and not limited to the U.S.

Biden did not set "global" policies. In December of 2024 the inflation rate was 2.9%. That was the last full month Biden was president.

I'm not so sure why anyone would think that after Biden lowered the inflation rate from 8% in 2022 to 2.9% in December of 2024 that's it's still his fault that trump has barely managed to move the needle.

Your statement is false. You've cited Covid - then said the impact of Biden was worse and put it over the top. That's complete hogwash.


In case you haven't ben paying attention - the deficit has gone up under every administration. Nat Debt in 2019 pre-covid was $22,719 B. In just one covid year it jumped to $26,945 B. That's the single biggest impact no matter what political lens you want to look through.

So your statement is false - no matter what conservative leaning commentary you want to post. I have no doubt Biden enacted policy that added tot he debt. So did Trump. As have most admirations. I feel certain you would defend the Trump numbers during covid (rightly so) yet you want to use numbers from Biden administration during the Ukraine war that have impacted the world globally. It undermines any argument you try to contrive.

Because some items won't be able to drop all that much. You have to remember their was a massive push to increase wages across the board. While the price of eggs has come down because chicken populations have risen, wages haven't. It's hard to reduce wages.

The reality is once prices escalate, they rarely ever revert back to a previous level except for possibly new technology that starts high then usually drop.

But let's get back to the actual premise shall we? The assertion was that this irreversible inflation was due to "policies" set by previous administrations.

Rising wages was not any policy set by any administration. Hell, the federal minimum wage has been the same since 2009. Many states have raised their minimum wage.

And secondly "inflation" has nothing to do with prices "going back down". Inflation is how much prices are increasing by. Those are two very different things.

Analysis: These two new economic numbers blew a hole in Trump’s rosy narrative
By
Daniel Dale

A vessel passes a container ship loaded with shipping containers at the Port of Los Angeles on February 20, 2026. Mario Tama/Getty Images
Two new pieces of economic data, one released Thursday and one released Friday, blew another hole in President Donald Trump’s triumphant narrative about the effects of his tariffs.

The figures released early Thursday showed Trump had wildly overstated the impact of the tariffs on the trade deficit. The figures released early Friday showed he also had wildly exaggerated economic growth in the fourth quarter of 2025.

The Supreme Court struck down many of Trump’s tariffs later on Friday. But other tariffs remain in place, and Trump quickly said he plans to replace the ones the court declared illegal with new tariffs under a different law.

The trade deficit was down 0.2% in 2025, not down ‘78%’
Trump has for years highlighted the trade deficit – the difference between the value of US imports and exports – as a supposed example of how the US is being “ripped off” by other countries. (Many economists disagree with his characterization.) On Wednesday evening, he posted a celebratory message on social media.


“THE UNITED STATES TRADE DEFICIT HAS BEEN REDUCED BY 78% BECAUSE OF THE TARIFFS BEING CHARGED TO OTHER COMPANIES AND COUNTRIES,” the all-caps post began.

The next morning, though, the Bureau of Economic Analysis revealed the actual 2025 trade deficit in goods and services. It was nearly identical to the 2024 deficit, down just 0.2% — nowhere close to Trump’s professed “78%” decline. And the trade deficit in goods, the items subject to Trump’s sweeping global tariffs, was up 2.1% compared to 2024.

Trump didn’t make up the “78%” figure out of thin air, but it was still deceptive. He was citing an out-of-date and short-term number from October 2025, when the trade deficit was 78% lower than it was in January 2025. Experts cautioned at the time that the sharp October drop would be fleeting, the result of temporary fluctuations in gold and pharmaceuticals trade, and it was.

Trump’s Wednesday post was also inaccurate in suggesting his tariffs are paid by foreign countries. Tariff payments are made by US importers, not foreign exporters, and those importers often pass on some of their costs to consumers. While foreign exporters may sometimes drop their prices to try to keep their products competitive, various  analyses have found that the overwhelming majority of the costs of the tariffs Trump has imposed this term are being covered by a combination of US businesses and US consumers.

Economic growth in fourth-quarter 2025 was 1.4%, not ‘5.6%’
The Bureau of Economic Analysis on Friday released another key set of figures — estimates on real gross domestic product (GDP) growth. These figures, too, were far from the number Trump had been touting.


Trump told the World Economic Forum in late January that “fourth-quarter growth is projected to be 5.4%, far greater than anybody other than myself and a few others had predicted.” He specified in a Cabinet meeting and a Wall Street Journal op-ed later in January that he was referring to a projection for the fourth quarter of 2025 from a model run by the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. Then, in an early-February interview with NBC, he made it sound like 5.6% growth had already been achieved, saying, “I’m very proud of it: 5.6%. You know, we have a GDP of 5.6 despite a shutdown.”

By the time of the op-ed, the Cabinet meeting and the interview, though, the Atlanta Fed’s model was down to a projection of 4.2% fourth-quarter 2025 growth. Various other forecasts were even lower than that. And contrary to Trump’s comment to NBC, forecasts aren’t reality.

The figures released Friday show just how far from reality his “5.6%” claim was. The economy actually grew at an annualized rate of just 1.4% in the fourth quarter of 2025, much slower than the 4.4% growth in the third quarter of 2025.

The fall government shutdown was a significant factor in the weak figure. Still, Trump claimed growth was 5.6% despite the shutdown, which wasn’t close to correct.

And what of Trump’s vague claim from a speech on the economy Thursday in Georgia, that “our country was dead” a year ago under former President Joe Biden, but “now we have the hottest country”? The US economy grew at just 2.2% in 2025, new full-year figures showed — lower than in every year of the Biden administration and every year of the first Trump administration other than 2020, when the Covid-19 pandemic hit.

https://www.cnn.com/2026/02/21/politics/economy-gdp-trade-deficit-trump-tariffs