WhatFinger


Dismal doesn't begin to describe it: CNBC: GDP is so bad we thought it was a misprint

Without the forced spending of ObamaCare, GDP would have been in negative territory



Dan already did a nice job of breaking down this morning's terrible GDP report, so I'll only add this quote from Business Insider:

Support Canada Free Press


Personal consumption grew by 3.0%, about half of which was due to the growth in health-care spending, said Ian Shepherdson, chief economist for Pantheon Macroeconomics. "If health-care spending had been unchanged, the headline GDP growth number would have been -1.0%," Shepherdson said.
Basically, the government forced people - at the point of the IRS gun - to spend their money on insurance, resulting in a federally-mandated spending surge in the healthcare arena. Everything else is essentially stagnant or shrinking. This may be (at least partially) due to the fact that, when you're forced to drop cash on your new, improved, and far more expensive policy, you have less discretionary cash to spend elsewhere. That's particularly true in lower and middle class families - the very people the ACA was supposed to help the most. Bottom line? Democrat strategists who've warned campaigning politicians not to use the word "recovery" are right to do so. No recovery exists. The ACA is - just barely - propping up growth at the expense of everything else. So, just how bad is the 0.1% number that the glorious institution of ObamaCare has given us? Well, it's so bad that the folks at CNBC thought it was a misprint.


View Comments

Robert Laurie -- Bio and Archives

Robert Laurie’s column is distributed by HermanCain.com, which can be found at HermanCain.com

Be sure to “like” Robert Laurie over on Facebook and follow him on Twitter. You’ll be glad you did.


Sponsored