[themagician]

A lot of how we “got to here” has to do with being all the was left after WWII. Trying to pretend like all the things you advocate for are the reasons for prosperity is silly. Your statement is basically, “things are good now and they are good because <insert political platform>”

There are other periods of time that have been as good or better with a different political platform. In the 1950s (when America was “great”) the top tax rate was 90%.

Federal politics and the economy are linked, but not 1:1 and the net impact of changes to federal law often isn’t felt for years or decades (if at all).

[joefranklinsr]

Sure, and we could have blown the lead in the 70s, the 80s, the 90s, the 00s, the 10s, etc. But we didn't. We valued entrepreneurship, hard work, and being the best.

50s was an anomaly with a 36% growth rate, like you said, because we were all that were left. The economy currently is very stable, diversified, and fast growing still for its size, some 70 years later.

[18pfsmt]

Where on the US Bureau of Economic Analysis' site do you find 5% GDP growth?

https://www.bea.gov/newsreleases/national/gdp/gdpnewsrelease...

I keep seeing these overly optimistic GDP growth numbers, but I can't find them.

[joefranklinsr]

4.8% https://www.fxstreet.com/news/atlanta-fed-q2-gdp-estimate-ri...

4% https://www.cnbc.com/2018/06/15/goldman-sachs-model-now-poin...

[themagician]

My point is that most of where we are today can be attributed to the post war advantage and not any specific policy decision. We are increasingly losing ground to China in terms of output and GDP growth and losing out massively to Europe in terms of quality of life.