Pic of the Day: How Wide?

For Bourgeoisie:

"The single, best decision that I have made was selecting Joe Biden as my running mate. The single best decision I have made. I mean that. It’s true.”

- President Barack Obama, 15 October 2010

“Judge me by the people with whom I surround myself.”

- Democratic Presidential nominee, Senator Barack Obama, 2008

If selecting Joe Biden to be his Vice-President was the “single, best decision” that he has made. What does that say about the rest of his decisions?

'Toon of the Day: Burdens

M2RB:  Rush

There is trouble in the forest,
And the creatures all have fled,
As the maples scream "Oppression!"
And the oaks just shake their heads

So the maples formed a union
And demanded equal rights.
"The oaks are just too greedy;
We will make them give us light."
Now there's no more oak oppression,
For they passed a noble law,
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe, and saw.

“Too many folks still don’t have a sense that tomorrow will be better than today. And so, the question in this election is which way do we go?   Do we go forward towards a new vision of an America in which prosperity is shared?  Or do we go backward to the same policies that got us in the mess in the first place?”

 - President Barack Obama, 13 August 2012

Got that? Not earned. Shared. 

Capitalism is outmoded and doesn’t work, doncha know?   Collectivism is the way “Forward.”

 

The Trees - Rush

There is unrest in the forest,
There is trouble with the trees,
For the maples want more sunlight
And the oaks ignore their pleas.

The trouble with the maples,
(And they're quite convinced they're right)
They say the oaks are just too lofty
And they grab up all the light.
But the oaks can't help their feelings
If they like the way they're made.
And they wonder why the maples
Can't be happy in their shade.

There is trouble in the forest,
And the creatures all have fled,
As the maples scream "Oppression!"
And the oaks just shake their heads

So the maples formed a union
And demanded equal rights.
"The oaks are just too greedy;
We will make them give us light."
Now there's no more oak oppression,
For they passed a noble law,
And the trees are all kept equal
By hatchet, axe, and saw.

Some Progs Are Living Proof That Feotuses Can Survive "Brain-Suction Abortions"

M2RB:  Rush

All the world's indeed a stage
And we are merely players:
Performers and portrayers,
Each another's audience
Outside the gilded cage.

"This "you didn"t (sic) build that" false TV ad is a cut-and-paste Republican specialty! President Obama's "you didn't build that" commnet (sic) refers to supporting roads and infrastructure, etc... and NOT the hard work that went into someone's business!!"

HarrySaxon, Diss: Small Business Owner Rejects Biden Visit, Cites "You Didn't Build That," Townhall.com, 17 August 2012, 7:25 AM

Hey, if you think so, then why don't you guys rebut it by purchasing a HUGE ad buy and running a  commercial in every large market around the clock of Obama's ENTIRE REMARK...IN ALL OF ITS CONDESCENDING GLORY?

According to the Census Bureau's 2008 data, there were 11,875,731 small businesses (defined as any commercial entity with under 100 employees) with 42,146,664 paid employees and a combined annual payroll of $1,522,691,506.

 

I'm sure that all of those, who risked their own capital, struggled to create those businesses, hired all of those people, and, the majority of the time, are the last to get paid will love hearing their President tell them  -- in a voice dripping with sanctimony, sarcasm, mockery, snidefulness and pharisaicalness --  that, in addition to they "not building THAT" (SINGULAR, he was referring to "YOU," as in "A business owner," individually...not PLURAL, as would be the case relative to "roadS and bridgeS," they really just "aren't that smart" and "haven't worked that hard" ... all the while striking a Mussolini-pose, nose in the air and chin jutted.

 So, please run that ad...please, please, please, with sugar on top...and chocolate sprinkles...and marshmallows...and pistachios...and Oreo crumbles...and chocolate chunks...and Reese's Pieces...and walnuts...and M&Ms...and chocolate whipped cream...and Irish coffee-flavoured whipped cream...and a cherry...no, make that three cherries!

Listen, I know that you guys are totally clueless, victims of a deplorable public educational system, dupes of the "Princes and Princesses of Progressivism"* , drunk on kook-aide, warped by Progressive Propaganda, low-information consumers and voters, abjectly stupid, and nothing that becoming enmeshed in the grille on the front of a semi cab couldn't fix, but, c'mon, dahlink!  There are times when you Progs state a position that leaves me so speechless that assigning the label "Weapons. Grade. Stupid." to you is the equivalent of bringing a fly-swatter to a bazooka fight.  Simply put, there are no words.  Belief defies description.

So, I want you to run ads putting Obama's quote "in context," which, by technical definition in Realville, where I live, not "My Progressive Little Ponyland" where you reside, means the exact words of an entire passage.   Undoubtedly, you are scratching your head and one question is running in an continuous loop within your feeble, little brain:  "Why?"

"Why?"  Easy.  The context is more devastating to him than the bumper-sticker soundbite, which is why they have been frantically trying to "SQUIRREL!!!"   The fact that you guys cannot see what is so obvious to the rest of us, including many Democrats,  is just pure gravy.

As an aside and speaking of "Squirrel!!!-ball," the idea is to distract the attention of the media and the public away from you and onto something else completely unrelated to you no matter how utterly ridiculous or insignificant. 

  

"You didn't build that!" to "They're going to put y'all back in chains!" = 100% EPIC SQUIRREL!!! FAIL.

Now, getting back to that ad the Obama campaign needs to start airing in every.single.media.market.in.the.United.States.24/7.for.the.next.81.days, did I remember to say "please"? 

 * "Princes and Princesses of Progressivism":  Those in the ruling elite, who have no problem with corporations, profit, immense wealth, class, and segregation that is not necessarily race-based, as long as the unwashed masses remain docile, obedient, supportive voters, who can be purchased with a crumbs while being chained to the government plantation.  The Bismarckian Welfare State was created for this purpose and it was to which the "founding brothers and sisters" of American Progressivism looked.  Progressives loved Fascism and Mussolini.  Denial of this fact is as delusional as is the argument that there was not a "Dacha Class" in the Soviet Union.

If the "Princes and Princesses of Progressivism" truly cared about the poor, they would:

1.  Give more to charity.  No government diktat needed.

2.  Not need government to "spread the wealth around" when their chauffeurs can drive them to neighbourhoods, governmental agencies, and charities to deliver tonnes of their own wealth directly to "The Cause."

3.  Support government reforms to lift the poor out of poverty rather than keeping them in slums while they, themselves, live in huge mansions in gated communities with their own personal security guards, alarm systems, and panic rooms.  When Los Angeles erupted following the Rodney King trial, did the uber wealthy, liberal elite rush down to South Central to hand out money, food,  and call for peace?  No.  Their spending on security and guns SKYROCKETED.  Does anyone really believe that people like Nancy Pelosi want the citizens of downtown Detroit or Compton living in their neighbourhoods or next to their wineries where they employ non-union workers? 

C'mon.  

Does the sun rise in the west?  

Is the sky green?  

Is the grass blue?  

Did Teddy Kennedy mind his ocean vista being "marred" with the slightest shadow of a windmill  or did he fight the proposal even though he would have voted to authorise the Federal government to implant a giant windmill on top of your head in a bloody heartbeat, if Fat Al Bore, James Hansen, and Lurch had claimed it would lower global temperatures by 0.0000000000000000000000000001%?   

Are Hank Johnson, Barbara Boxer, Sheila Jackson-Lee, Cynthia McKinney, among others, geniuses?

4.  Finally, are you kidding?  Of cooouuurrrrssse, the "Princes and Princesses of Progressivism" are also the "Princes and Princesses of Profit, Perfidy, Paternalism, Patronage, and Pretension" and they love corporations, great wealth, and having control of the levers of government power so as to rule over the little people and small businessman. They especially love when all three are combined to micromanage the lives of the sub-species of humans...er, like you and everyone you have ever met.  You see, “modern life is just too complex for the average individual to make the correct decisions.”  As a result, what we need is less democracy and more technocracy...according to the ruling class, who, of course, believe that they are just the people to be those technocrats.   “Uber-educated, elitist, unelected experts” will make the decisions.  You know, like they do in China, which is the source of:

Tom "It's why I have fantasised...what if we could just be China for a day? I mean, just, just, just one day. You know, I mean, where we could actually, you know, authorise the right solutions" Friedman's nocturnal emissions and Ray "The Chinese are more successful because in their country, only three people make the decision. In our country, 3,000 people do, 3 million...Two years ago, between 50 to 60 Republicans were elected to the House of Representatives to come to Washington to do nothing, (Heaven forfend that elected officials go to Washington and do what their constituents mandated that they do when they voted the pols into office!  Quelle horreur!  What an outrageous and quaint idea!  The peasants actually think that they should not only be able to rule themselves, but also play a role in how we live ours???  Surely, you shirley jest!!!) and that’s what they’ve done and they’ve stopped any progress. Those people don’t have any vision about what the government can do. That’s been a real inhibitor in our ability to think outside the box and think big" LaHood's penis envy.

And, the ruling elite obviously know better than us.  Democracy is a messy thing.  Republicanism is downright impossible.  The people cannot be entrusted with either.  Sometimes, there is just "too much" democracy and freedom.

(Hey!  That reminds me.  Ain't it just great that an unelected, unaccountable 15-member board created by Obamacare will, unilaterally, decide which treatments, surgical procedures, and drugs Medicare will cover based on QALY years?

"Every year on September 1, IPAB must submit a draft proposal to the Secretary of Health and Human Services. On January 15 of the next year IPAB must submit a proposal to Congress. If IPAB fails to meet this deadline, the HHS must create its own proposal. Congress must consider this proposal under special rules. Congress cannot consider any amendment to the proposal that does not achieve similar cost reductions unless both houses of Congress, including a three-fifths super majority in the Senate, vote to waive this requirement. If Congress fails to adopt a substitute provision by August 15, HHS must implement the proposal as originally submitted to Congress."  Democracy is so antiquated.  

Why waste money on elections when we can set up a Super-IPAB to run the entire country?  Actually, why waste money on 15 people when one will do?  Hmph, miss me yet?")

Hillary "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good" Clinton.

Barack “I do think at a certain point you've made enough money” Obama.

"Let's end universal Suffrage! Some people are so poor and stupid that they will vote for anything for $5. They aren't ready for democracy. They need people like us to be making decisions for them."

- Aspen Ideas Festival, 28 June 2012

Progressives showed their loved of corporatism during the Wilson Administration with the War Industries Board, chaired by Bernard Baruch, the financier, stock-market speculator, political consultant, a member of the Ku Klux Klan per the biography written by his son in 1957, and of whom it was said "Before World War I, it was said that "Barney" Baruch was worth a million dollars or more. After World War I was over, it was alleged that he was worth about two hundred million dollars..."  

The WIB served as a precursor to the corporatist policies of Mussolini and Hitler. Grosvenor Clarkson, a member and later historian of the WIB, would characterise the WIB as follows: 

“It was an industrial dictatorship without parallel–a dictatorship by force of necessity and common consent which step by step at least encompassed the Nation and united it into a coordinated and mobile whole.” He would also later say that the war was “a story of the conversion of a hundred million combatively individualistic people into a vast cooperative effort in which the good of the unit was sacrificed to the good of the whole.”

They demonstrated it, again, during the Great Depression with the New Deal.   In May of 1933, two months after President Franklin Delano Roosevelt's first inauguration, Pulitzer Prize winning journalist, Anne O'Hare McCormick, the first woman to be on the editorial staff of The New York Times and the first woman to serve as a regular contributor to its editorial page, wrote that the climate in Washington was:

 “...strangely reminiscent of Rome in the first weeks after the march of the Blackshirts, of Moscow at the beginning of the Five-Year Plan.…America today literally asks for orders...[The Roosevelt administration] envisages a federation of industry, labor and government after the fashion of the corporative State as it exists in Italy.”

  

Mrs McCormick was no "I see a Fascist everywhere I look!" either.  She had served as The Times' foreign correspondent in Rome and was the first foreign journalist to recognise the coming power of Benito Mussolini, writing "Italy is hearing the master's voice."  Her contemporaries in Europe scoffed, but not for long, as the world soon recognised her prescience.

  

"The Fascist principles are very similar to those which have been evolving in America and are of particular interest at this time." 

-FDR's National Recovery Act Study

President Roosevelt asked for and received from Congress the near-blanket authority to do anything necessary to "save the economy and the country."  He saw his task as the moral equivalent of war.  If civil liberties or private property rights had to be trampled for a few in order to save the collective, so be it, he believed.  After all, it wasn't like those ideas were foreign to him:

 

“[The Prussian Germans] passed beyond the liberty of the individual to do as he pleased with his own property and found it necessary to check this liberty for the benefit of the freedom of the whole people.” 

- Franklin Delano Roosevelt, People’s Forum of Troy, New York, 1912

If he had to "put some muscle" out on the street in order to get people to cooperate, so be that, too.  One of the most fascistic programmes of his entire Presidency was the National Industry Recovery Act a/k/a National Recovery Act (NRA), whose forerunner had been the WIB.

The NRA’s Blue Eagle campaign, in which businesses that complied with the agency’s code were allowed to display a “Blue Eagle” symbol, was a way to rally the masses and call on everyone to display a visible symbol of support. NRA head Hugh Johnson made its purpose clear:  

“Those who are not with us are against us.”

 A TEN-HOUR parade in New York City promoting the NRA's "Blue Eagle" programme with propaganda condemning anyone, who refuses to obey, a "traitor."  NRA was later declared unconstitutional in toto by the United States Supreme Court.

As it is today, government and Big Business colluded in writing the legislation passed and the rules and regulations promulgated during the New Deal.  Again, just as today, Big Business could absorb the costs much easier than small businesses and sole proprietorships, like farms.  The corporatism of the New Deal undercut "The Forgotten Man."

Take a look at these:

The Left's Lie About Fascism Will Outlive Cockroaches In A Nuclear Winter

Three New Deals: Reflections on Roosevelt's America, Mussolini's Italy, and Hitler's Germany

Wilson: America's First Fascist President  

I'm reminded of an old John Huston movie from the 1930s on which, allegedly, FDR acted as an "unofficial adviser and screenwriter," Gabriel Over The White House.  It tells the story about a basically corrupt man, who becomes President and, then, after being critically injured in an automobile accident, wakes up and becomes a "benevolent dictator."  He fires his entire Cabinet, employs armies of "brown-shirted storm troopers," strong arms countries that owe the US money, imposes a Socialist/National Socialist/Fascist system, and assassinates political rivals.   All of this eventually leads to impeachment proceedings during which, President Judson Hammond enters into the House chambers, assumes the dais, and formally dissolves Congress.    The country is, thankfully, saved when President Hammond dies and, hopefully, is escorted to Hell by the Archangel Gabriel, in whose name he wielded his tyrannical fist.

Unsurprisingly, Progressives loved the film...and still do.  For them, by revoking the Constitution, etc., President Hammond does not become a villain, but a hero who "solves all of the nation's problems," "bringing peace to the country and the world," and is universally acclaimed “one of the greatest presidents who ever lived.” The Library of Congress comments:

"The good news: he reduces unemployment, lifts the country out of the Depression, battles gangsters and Congress, and brings about world peace. The bad news: he's Mussolini."

“I want to send you this line to tell you how pleased I am with the changes you made in ‘Gabriel Over the White House.’ I think it is an intensely interesting picture and should do much to help.”

- President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, per Jonathan Alter

"If a million unemployed marched on Washington... I'd do what the President does in the picture!"

- First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt, Empty Without You:  The Intimate Letters Of Eleanor Roosevelt And Lorena Hickok

"That the Rooseveltian hero of the popular film was a dictator must have seemed an advantage to the real-life president. It would help pave the way for precipitous action, if the role required it." 

- Jonathan Alter,  FDR's Hundred Days and the Triumph of Hope

It should come as no surprise to anyone that Gabriel over the White House enjoyed a brief renaissance in the Fall of 2008 and after Barack Obama's election amongst certain Progressives, elites, and intellectuals.  Following the election of Obama, People magazine film critic Leah Rozen included Gabriel over the White House as one of "five films you should absolutely see before inauguration day." Asked "Why is this a film we have to see before Obama comes into the White House?" Rozen said:

  

 "It couldn't be more timely... it's at a time of economic panic, huge financial disaster... You kind of go, 'Gee, did they just write this now?'"

Finally, look at the Obama Department of Justice.  It is loaded with attorneys that worked at firms that represented Goldman-Sachs, JP Morgan, FM Global, etc.  What happened last week?  The "Progressive" Holder DOJ announced that it would not prosecute Goldman-Sachs for anything that it did leading to the 2008 financial crisis.  What did the "Progressive" Holder DOJ announce yesterday?  It advised that it will not prosecute former Senator, Governor of New Jersey, one-time prospective replacement for tax cheat, Timmy Geithner, Obama bundler, Biden "economic adviser," and former CEO and Chairman of the Board of MF Global, Jon Corzine, or anyone else for the illegal use of client account funds that resulted in the theft of more than $1 billion from farmers, small business owners, and other not-politically-connected-Democrats.

As Jean-Claude Groulx writes:

“For all the bluster of Obama, pre- and post-2008, as well as that of Attorney General Eric Holder concerning the alleged criminal activities on Wall Street, there have been zero Wall Street prosecutions under Obama/Holder.  Compare that with his predecessors Bush and Clinton:

GAI [Government Accountability Institute] details how the George W. Bush and Bill Clinton administrations both actually took down financial criminals - unlike the Obama administration.  Between 2002 and 2008, for instance, GAI points out how a Bush administration task force "obtained over 1,300 corporate fraud convictions, including those of over 130 corporate vice presidents and over 200 CEOs and corporate presidents."

"Clinton's DOJ prosecuted over 1,800 S&L (savings and loans) executives, senior officials, and directors, and over 1,000 of them were sent to jail," GAI adds.

But, despite having "promised more of the same," especially in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis, the Obama administration's DOJ has not brought criminal charges against a single major Wall Street executive.

The Bush and Clinton administrations' track records on prosecuting white-collar crime, and the Obama administration's failure to do so, Schweizer said, is "evidence that this has less to do with some sort of partisan or philosophical issue."

Bush - 1,300 convictions;

Clinton - 1,000 convictions;

Obama - Zero attempts.

And why the difference in prosecuting the law?  The GAI report reveals that the Department of Justice upper echelon is stacked with attorneys, including Eric Holder, from law firms representing the very same companies involved in the financial meltdown of 2008, as well as financial corporations with questionable actions during the Obama administration...AIG, Goldman Sachs, Wells Fargo, J.P. Morgan Chase, Bank of America, CitiBank, Deutsche Bank, ING, Morgan Stanley, UBS, Wilmington Trust, and John Corzine's MF Global.

These very same Department of Justice attorneys also happen to be some of Obama's biggest bundlers for Obama's 2008 bid for president.

"When we think of cronyism and the problems of cronyism and crony capitalism, we think in terms of economic loss and gain," Schweizer said in a phone interview. "What we're showing here is that cronyism is now permeating our justice system. So, it's not just a question of dollars and cents, it's a question of whether you're going to face legal jeopardy or not on what you're doing."

There is no more corrupt and capricious "unchaining" of Wall Street that President Romney could possibly effect.  Under Obama and Holder, "the chains" are dependent on not the Rule of Law, but rather the Law(lessness) of Men.”

You have been led to believe that Progressive elites really care about you.  They don't.  I'm surrounded by them.  They talk about people like you, African-Americans, illegals, etc., just as Obama spoke of white conservatives in western Pennsylvanians at a San Francisco fundraiser when he thought no one was taping.   Just last year, when I was down at our place in Palm Beach, I was having dinner with friends one night.  At the next table were three very wealthy couples, who are mostly half-year residents and were apparently celebrating a little too much that evening because their voices carried...

Oh, yes, they weren't the "selfish, greedy, cruel, harsh, hateful, indifferent, mean, merciless, Randian dregs of society" that I evidently am since I oppose all forms of welfare and governmental subsidation, but don't be fooled by the "compassion" of those kinds of people.  They would never dream of ending welfare, Medicaid, or food stamps, etc., "as we know it."  On the contrary, they want to maintain it with just enough funds to keep the "animals in the jungle" satisfied enough to stay away from their neighbourhoods, parks, kids' schools, dining establishments, etc.  They WANT a class system...one in which upward mobility is rarely permitted.

So, you might call that "empathy" and "compassion."  I call it a kind of "methadone maintenance" to keep the "human weeds" (h/t Margaret Sanger) "medicated/satiated" and away from their spreads in the Hamptons or Malibu.  They hate you and you'll never be admitted to their club.

   

Limelight by Rush

Living on a lighted stage
Approaches the unreal
For those who think and feel
In touch with some reality
Beyond the gilded cage.

Cast in this unlikely role
Ill-equipped to act
With insufficient tact
One must put up barriers
To keep oneself intact.

Living in the limelight
The universal dream
For those who wish to seem.
Those who wish to be
Must put aside the alienation,
Get on with the fascination,
The real relation,
The underlying theme.

Living in a fisheye lens,
Caught in the camera eye.
I have no heart to lie
I can't pretend a stranger
Is a long-awaited friend.

All the world's indeed a stage
And we are merely players:
Performers and portrayers,
Each another's audience
Outside the gilded cage.

"D" Doesn't Stand For "Democrat"...It Stands For "D'Oh!" - II

"Wrong.  Highest GDP growth rates occurred in the 1930's under FDR"

-  AllYouPeopleNeedToKnow, Ducking WH Press, Obama Fields Tough Questions on Food, Music, Super Hero Powers, Townhall.com, 17 August 2012, 5:40 PM

What Was the U.S. GDP Then: 1920-1929?

Year	Nominal GDP (million of Dollars)	Real GDP (millions of 2005 dollars)	GDP Deflator (index 2005=100)	Population (in thousands)	Nominal GDP per capita (current dollars)	Real GDP per capita (year 2005 dollars)
	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series
1920	88,393	687,704	12.85	106,461	830.29	6,459.68
1921	73,603	671,938	10.95	108,538	678.13	6,190.81
1922	73,432	709,250	10.35	110,049	667.26	6,444.86
1923	85,414	802,640	10.64	111,947	762.98	7,169.82
1924	86,947	827,355	10.51	114,109	761.96	7,250.57
1925	90,575	846,789	10.70	115,829	781.97	7,310.68
1926	96,949	902,122	10.75	117,397	825.82	7,684.37
1927	95,544	910,834	10.49	119,035	802.66	7,651.82
1928	97,365	921,273	10.57	120,509	807.95	7,644.85
1929	103,600	977,000	10.61	121,878	850.03	8,016.21

Citation:  http://www.measuringworth.com/datasets/usgdp/result.php

What Was the U.S. GDP Then:  1930-1939?

Year	Nominal GDP (million of Dollars)	Real GDP (millions of 2005 dollars)	GDP Deflator (index 2005=100)	Population (in thousands)	Nominal GDP per capita (current dollars)	Real GDP per capita (year 2005 dollars)
	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series
1930	91,200	892,800	10.22	123,188	740.33	7,247.46
1931	76,500	834,900	9.16	124,149	616.20	6,724.98
1932	58,700	725,800	8.09	124,949	469.79	5,808.77
1933	56,400	716,400	7.87	125,690	448.72	5,699.74
1934	66,000	794,400	8.31	126,485	521.80	6,280.59
1935	73,300	865,000	8.48	127,362	575.53	6,791.67
1936	83,800	977,900	8.57	128,181	653.76	7,629.06
1937	91,900	1,028,000	8.94	128,961	712.62	7,971.40
1938	86,100	992,600	8.68	129,969	662.47	7,637.21
1939	92,200	1,072,800	8.59	131,028	703.67	8,187.56

Citation: http://www.measuringworth.com/datasets/usgdp/result.php

What Was the U.S. GDP Then:  1940-1949?

Year	Nominal GDP (million of Dollars)	Real GDP (millions of 2005 dollars)	GDP Deflator (index 2005=100)	Population (in thousands)	Nominal GDP per capita (current dollars)	Real GDP per capita (year 2005 dollars)
	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series
1940	101,400	1,166,900	8.69	132,122	767.47	8,831.99
1941	126,700	1,366,100	9.28	133,402	949.76	10,240.48
1942	161,900	1,618,200	10.01	134,860	1,200.50	11,999.11
1943	198,600	1,883,100	10.55	136,739	1,452.40	13,771.49
1944	219,800	2,035,200	10.80	138,397	1,588.19	14,705.52
1945	223,000	2,012,400	11.08	139,928	1,593.68	14,381.68
1946	222,200	1,792,200	12.40	141,389	1,571.55	12,675.67
1947	244,100	1,776,100	13.74	144,126	1,693.66	12,323.25
1948	269,100	1,854,200	14.51	146,631	1,835.22	12,645.35
1949	267,200	1,844,700	14.49	149,188	1,791.03	12,364.94

 

Citation:  http://www.measuringworth.com/datasets/usgdp/result.php

What Was the U.S. GDP Then:  1950-1959?

Year	Nominal GDP (million of Dollars)	Real GDP (millions of 2005 dollars)	GDP Deflator (index 2005=100)	Population (in thousands)	Nominal GDP per capita (current dollars)	Real GDP per capita (year 2005 dollars)
	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series
1950	293,700	2,006,000	14.64	151,684	1,936.26	13,224.86
1951	339,300	2,161,100	15.70	154,287	2,199.15	14,007.01
1952	358,300	2,243,900	15.97	156,954	2,282.83	14,296.55
1953	379,300	2,347,200	16.16	159,565	2,377.09	14,709.99
1954	380,400	2,332,400	16.31	162,391	2,342.49	14,362.87
1955	414,700	2,500,300	16.59	165,275	2,509.15	15,128.12
1956	437,400	2,549,700	17.16	168,221	2,600.15	15,156.85
1957	461,100	2,601,100	17.73	171,274	2,692.18	15,186.78
1958	467,200	2,577,600	18.12	174,141	2,682.88	14,801.80
1959	506,600	2,762,500	18.34	177,130	2,860.05	15,595.89

 

Citation:  http://www.measuringworth.com/datasets/usgdp/result.php

 

 

What Was the U.S. GDP Then:  1960-1969?

Year	Nominal GDP (million of Dollars)	Real GDP (millions of 2005 dollars)	GDP Deflator (index 2005=100)	Population (in thousands)	Nominal GDP per capita (current dollars)	Real GDP per capita (year 2005 dollars)
	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series
1960	526,400	2,830,900	18.60	180,760	2,912.15	15,661.10
1961	544,800	2,896,900	18.81	183,742	2,965.03	15,766.13
1962	585,700	3,072,400	19.06	186,590	3,138.97	16,466.05
1963	617,800	3,206,700	19.27	189,300	3,263.60	16,939.78
1964	663,600	3,392,300	19.56	191,927	3,457.57	17,674.95
1965	719,100	3,610,100	19.92	194,347	3,700.08	18,575.54
1966	787,700	3,845,300	20.48	196,599	4,006.63	19,559.10
1967	832,400	3,942,500	21.12	198,752	4,188.13	19,836.28
1968	909,800	4,133,400	22.01	200,745	4,532.12	20,590.30
1969	984,400	4,261,800	23.10	202,736	4,855.58	21,021.43

 

Citation: http://www.measuringworth.com/datasets/usgdp/result.php

 

 

What Was the U.S. GDP Then:  1970-1979?

Year	Nominal GDP (million of Dollars)	Real GDP (millions of 2005 dollars)	GDP Deflator (index 2005=100)	Population (in thousands)	Nominal GDP per capita (current dollars)	Real GDP per capita (year 2005 dollars)
	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series
1970	1,038,300	4,269,900	24.32	205,089	5,062.68	20,819.74
1971	1,126,800	4,413,300	25.53	207,692	5,425.34	21,249.25
1972	1,237,900	4,647,700	26.63	209,924	5,896.90	22,139.92
1973	1,382,300	4,917,000	28.11	211,939	6,522.16	23,200.07
1974	1,499,500	4,889,900	30.66	213,898	7,010.35	22,860.90
1975	1,637,700	4,879,500	33.56	215,981	7,582.61	22,592.27
1976	1,824,600	5,141,300	35.49	218,086	8,366.42	23,574.65
1977	2,030,100	5,377,700	37.75	220,289	9,215.62	24,412.02
1978	2,293,800	5,677,600	40.40	222,629	10,303.24	25,502.52
1979	2,562,200	5,855,000	43.76	225,106	11,382.19	26,009.97

 

Citation:  http://www.measuringworth.com/datasets/usgdp/result.php

 

 

What Was the U.S. GDP Then:  1980-1989?

Year	Nominal GDP (million of Dollars)	Real GDP (millions of 2005 dollars)	GDP Deflator (index 2005=100)	Population (in thousands)	Nominal GDP per capita (current dollars)	Real GDP per capita (year 2005 dollars)
	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series
1980	2,788,100	5,839,000	47.75	227,726	12,243.22	25,640.46
1981	3,126,800	5,987,200	52.23	230,008	13,594.31	26,030.40
1982	3,253,200	5,870,900	55.41	232,218	14,009.25	25,281.85
1983	3,534,600	6,136,200	57.60	234,333	15,083.66	26,185.81
1984	3,930,900	6,577,100	59.77	236,394	16,628.60	27,822.62
1985	4,217,500	6,849,300	61.58	238,506	17,682.99	28,717.52
1986	4,460,100	7,086,500	62.94	240,683	18,531.01	29,443.29
1987	4,736,400	7,313,300	64.76	242,843	19,503.96	30,115.34
1988	5,100,400	7,613,900	66.99	245,061	20,812.78	31,069.41
1989	5,482,100	7,885,900	69.52	247,387	22,160.02	31,876.78

 

Citation:  http://www.measuringworth.com/datasets/usgdp/result.php

What Was the U.S. GDP Then:  1990-1999?

Year	Nominal GDP (million of Dollars)	Real GDP (millions of 2005 dollars)	GDP Deflator (index 2005=100)	Population (in thousands)	Nominal GDP per capita (current dollars)	Real GDP per capita (year 2005 dollars)
	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series
1990	5,800,500	8,033,900	72.20	250,181	23,185.21	32,112.35
1991	5,992,100	8,015,100	74.76	253,530	23,634.68	31,614.01
1992	6,342,300	8,287,100	76.53	256,922	24,685.70	32,255.32
1993	6,667,400	8,523,400	78.22	260,282	25,616.06	32,746.79
1994	7,085,200	8,870,700	79.87	263,455	26,893.40	33,670.65
1995	7,414,700	9,093,700	81.54	266,588	27,813.33	34,111.44
1996	7,838,500	9,433,900	83.09	269,714	29,062.27	34,977.42
1997	8,332,400	9,854,300	84.56	272,958	30,526.31	36,101.89
1998	8,793,500	10,283,500	85.51	276,154	31,842.74	37,238.28
1999	9,353,500	10,779,800	86.77	279,328	33,485.72	38,591.91

Citation:  http://www.measuringworth.com/datasets/usgdp/result.php

What Was the U.S. GDP Then?

Year	Nominal GDP (million of Dollars)	Real GDP (millions of 2005 dollars)	GDP Deflator (index 2005=100)	Population (in thousands)	Nominal GDP per capita (current dollars)	Real GDP per capita (year 2005 dollars)
	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series
2000	9,951,500	11,226,000	88.65	282,418	35,236.78	39,749.59
2001	10,286,200	11,347,200	90.65	285,335	36,049.56	39,767.99
2002	10,642,300	11,543,100	92.19	288,133	36,935.37	40,061.71
2003	11,142,200	11,836,400	94.13	290,845	38,309.75	40,696.59
2004	11,853,300	12,246,900	96.78	293,502	40,385.76	41,726.80
2005	12,623,000	12,623,000	100.00	296,229	42,612.30	42,612.30
2006	13,377,200	12,958,500	103.24	299,052	44,732.02	43,331.93
2007	14,028,700	13,206,400	106.23	302,025	46,448.80	43,726.18
2008	14,369,100	13,161,900	108.57	304,831	46,883.36	43,177.70
2009	13,939,000	12,703,100	109.73	307,483	45,332.59	41,313.18

 

Citation:  http://www.measuringworth.com/datasets/usgdp/result.php

 

 

What Was the U.S. GDP Then:  2010-11?

Year	Nominal GDP (million of Dollars)	Real GDP (millions of 2005 dollars)	GDP Deflator (index 2005=100)	Population (in thousands)	Nominal GDP per capita (current dollars)	Real GDP per capita (year 2005 dollars)
	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series	Plot Series Plot Log of Series
2010	14,526,500	13,088,000	111.00	310,106	46,843.66	42,204.92
2011	15,094,000	13,315,100	113.34	312,041	48,372.00	42,671.00

 

Citation: http://www.measuringworth.com/datasets/usgdp/result.php