In other words, the statement in question contains some elements supported by economic data but also includes exaggerations and value judgments that cannot be verified through economic statistics alone. While certain components of the economy showed positive growth in Q1 2025, the overall GDP figure was negative, contradicting the claim that "every measure" is positive.

The impact of imports on GDP calculation is significant as claimed, though the specific dynamics are more complex than suggested. The prediction about future reversals lacks supporting evidence in the current data. Finally, while government spending did decline and contributed negatively to GDP as stated, the normative assessment of this as positive represents a value judgment rather than an economic fact.

The Q1 2025 GDP report presents a mixed economic picture with areas of strength in private domestic demand alongside challenges from trade and government sectors, all against a backdrop of rising inflation indicators.

However, the characterization that "every measure" is positive overstates the case. The economy as a whole contracted as measured by real GDP, which is generally considered the broadest measure of economic activity[3]. Additionally, inflation indicators showed concerning upward movement, with the personal consumption expenditures (PCE) price index increasing 3.6%, up from 2.4% in the previous quarter[1][2].

Import Dynamics and GDP Calculation

The statement claims "GDP number was suppressed by 5% due to inventory builds on imports." This claim contains elements of truth but requires clarification.

According to the data, net exports did indeed contribute negatively to GDP growth at -4.83 percentage points[4], which is close to the "5%" figure mentioned. The BEA specifically notes that the decrease in real GDP "primarily reflected an increase in imports, which are a subtraction in the calculation of GDP"[1].

The BEA explains that within imports, "the increase primarily reflected an increase in imported goods, led by consumer goods, except food and automotive (mainly medicinal, dental, and pharmaceutical preparations, including vitamins); and by capital goods, except automotive (mainly computers, peripherals, and parts)"[2].

Regarding inventory investment, the BEA notes: "The largest contributor to the increase in investment was private inventory investment, led by an increase in wholesale trade (notably, drugs and sundries). The estimates of private inventory investment were based primarily on Census Bureau inventory book value data and a BEA adjustment in March to account for a notable increase in imports"[2].

Future Reversal Claims

The statement asserts that the negative impact on GDP "reverses in the coming months." None of the search results provide forward-looking projections or evidence to support this claim of future reversal[1][2][3][4]. Economic forecasting involves significant uncertainty, and the available data focuses on reporting past performance rather than making predictions.

Government Spending Impact

The statement correctly identifies that cuts to government spending contributed to the GDP decline. Government consumption expenditures contributed -0.25 percentage points to GDP growth[4]. The BEA specifies that "the decrease in government spending reflected a decrease in federal government spending (led by defense consumption expenditures) that was partly offset by an increase in state and local government spending"[2].

Whether this decline in government spending is "a good thing" as claimed is a normative judgment that involves economic, fiscal, and political considerations beyond what can be evaluated with purely economic data.

#5

Analysis of U.S. Economic Statement: GDP Decline in Q1 2025

The recently released U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) data provides important context for evaluating claims about the Q1 2025 economic performance. The statement in question contains several assertions about the U.S. economy that require careful examination against official economic data. This analysis will evaluate each claim using the latest GDP advance estimate and related economic indicators.

Overview of Q1 2025 GDP Performance

The advance estimate from the Bureau of Economic Analysis shows that U.S. real GDP decreased at an annual rate of 0.3% in the first quarter of 2025, following a 2.4% increase in the fourth quarter of 2024[1]. This represents the first contraction in the U.S. economy in three years[3]. The decrease primarily reflected an increase in imports (which subtract from GDP) and a decrease in government spending, partially offset by increases in investment, consumer spending, and exports[1].

The component breakdown reveals a more nuanced picture than the headline figure suggests:
- Personal consumption expenditures contributed +1.21 percentage points (though down from Q4 2024)[4]
- Gross private domestic investment contributed +3.60 percentage points (up from Q4 2024)[4]
- Net exports of goods and services contributed -4.83 percentage points (down from Q4)[4]
- Government consumption expenditures contributed -0.25 percentage points[4]

Examining the "Real Economy" Components

The statement claims that "every measure which points to the real economy is green." This assertion requires careful scrutiny against the actual data.

While the overall GDP figure was negative (-0.3%), several underlying components did show positive growth. Consumer spending increased, contributing positively to GDP growth despite a deceleration from the previous quarter[1][2]. The BEA reports that "real final sales to private domestic purchasers," which combines consumer spending and gross private fixed investment, increased by 3.0% in Q1, slightly higher than the 4th quarter's 2.9%[2].

I'll take it even a step further.

There is no direct equivalent "civil crime rate" for U.S. citizens that matches the act of unauthorized entry into the country, because most civil violations by citizens (like parking tickets or tax penalties) are not tracked in the same way as immigration violations. Entering the U.S. without authorization is a civil offense under immigration law, not a criminal one, and is unique to non-citizens.

When comparing actual criminal offenses, multiple studies and arrest data show that undocumented immigrants have significantly lower rates of criminal activity than native-born citizens across a wide range of crimes, including violent and property offenses[5][1][6]. In Texas, native-born citizens are over twice as likely to be arrested for violent crimes and over four times as likely for property crimes compared to undocumented immigrants[5].

Again, there is no meaningful "civil crime rate" for U.S. citizens equivalent to unauthorized entry, and on standard criminal metrics, undocumented immigrants offend at lower rates than native-born Americans[1][5][6].

City leaders are clearly concerned about sudden strains on local services, no fnkcin' chit sherlock, that's a real short-term issue when lots of people arrive at once. But overall, research shows undocumented immigrants contribute more to the economy and pay billions in taxes, helping fund those same services.

Regarding crime: entering without authorization is a civil, not a criminal, offense. When it comes to actual crime rates (like theft or assault), studies consistently show undocumented immigrants are less likely to commit these crimes than native-born Americans.

So, while local challenges exist, the broader evidence doesn't support the idea that undocumented immigrants are a drain or a crime risk.

Swallow as many times as needed until it settles.

also, every person who enters illegally has already broken the law, so I challenge your crime statistics based on that alone.
#128 | Posted by BellRinger

MY crime statistics? Challenge them with follow up receipts, JEFF (the admitted troll). Until you do, you've got nothing but conjecture.

#123 | Posted by ScottS

The irony in your post is absolutely rife.

Swallow it.

The statement that undocumented immigrants "suppress wages, drain social programs meant for citizens, increase crime, and destroy the public schools" is not supported by the available evidence. Here is a breakdown of each claim based on current research:

Wages
- Undocumented immigrants tend to earn lower wages than legal immigrants and native-born workers with similar skills, largely due to weaker bargaining power and limited job opportunities, not because they drive down wages for everyone else[6][9].
- There is little evidence that undocumented immigrants broadly suppress wages for native-born workers. In fact, mass deportation would shrink the U.S. economy and reduce jobs, as immigrants and natives often have different skills and are not direct substitutes in the labor market[1][2].

Social Programs
- Undocumented immigrants pay billions in federal, state, and local taxes, including contributions to Social Security and Medicare, programs from which they are generally ineligible to benefit[1][3][4].
- Multiple studies show that undocumented immigrants are net contributors to these programs and, in many states, pay more in taxes than they receive in public services[2][4].

Crime
- Research consistently finds that undocumented immigrants have lower crime rates than native-born Americans. For example, their homicide conviction rate is 14% below that of native-born Americans, and their total criminal conviction rate is 41% lower[7].
- The claim that undocumented immigrants increase crime is not supported by data from states with large undocumented populations[7].

Public Schools
- There is no evidence in the provided research that undocumented immigrants "destroy" public schools. While children of undocumented immigrants do attend public schools, the broader economic contributions of their families (including tax payments) help support public services, including education[1][4].

Economic Impact
- Undocumented immigrants are vital to several key sectors, such as agriculture, construction, and hospitality. Removing them would cause significant labor shortages and economic disruption[1][4].
- Their consumer spending and entrepreneurship also sustain local economies and support jobs for U.S. citizens[1][4].

SCOTTS's statement is inaccurate and not supported by current economic or criminological research. Undocumented immigrants are, on balance, contributors to the U.S. economy and social programs, do not increase crime, and are essential to several industries. The suggestion to "import all of Africa" is a rhetorical exaggeration and does not reflect the actual, evidence-based impacts of undocumented immigration on the United States[1][2][4][7].

#112 | Posted by ScottS

How convenient for your argument. JFC

100% factual. Look at the statistics ONLY USING ILLEGALS, not your constant conflating legal and illegal immigrants.
#98 | Posted by ScottS

Link up, buttercup. Or STFU already.

You all ar3 so infected with TDS that you will embrace the 20 on every 80/20 issue. It's been fascinating to watch unfold.
Posted by BellRinger at 2025-04-26 04:30 PM

Everyone's got TDS, every last one of us. Left, Right, it doesn't matter. Trump sprayed crazy into the air like it was Febreze, and now we're all breathing it in. You can worship him, you can despise him, you can pretend you're "above it all", but you're still stuck in the same stinking room, JEFF. Every time you bitch about how much the Left hates Trump, you're just pointing a neon sign at the real issue: Trump broke the brain of an entire country. He's not just a symptom, he's the damn virus. And we're all coughing up the consequences.

3 to 4 weeks, eh?

Sounds a lot like B. Hussein Obama's birth certificate promise.

Or infrastructure week.

Or repeal and replace.

Mere concepts of trade deals. That is all.

It's amazing to me how many Trump supporters are willing to piss all over the constitution just to express their loyalty to ------- Trump of all people.

You ------- idiots have found the line. Trump tells you to piss on the constitution and all you cultists can do is respond with "For how long, master?"

Pathetic, disgusting, and truly unhinged. Immigration hearings literally take a matter of minutes, that's all the illegals are afforded under current due process. And you cultists demand not even that should be afforded? Deplorable is a perfect description for your lot.

Swallow it.

Huh?
#2 | Posted by LampLighter

It's been a long day.

A federal judge, Brian Murphy, has issued an injunction blocking the Trump administration from deporting noncitizens to countries other than their country of origin without due process. The ruling specifically prohibits the administration from removing noncitizens to a country not named in their removal order unless the individual is first given a chance to raise concerns about their safety[1][2].

Judge Murphy criticized the administration's argument that it could send deportable noncitizens to countries where they might face torture or death without giving them an opportunity to voice their fears. He cited consensus across the Supreme Court, Congress, and basic decency against such a policy[1][2]. The ruling halts the administration's recent practice of deporting individuals"including alleged Venezuelan gang members"to countries like El Salvador, Honduras, or Panama, even when those countries were not named in their removal orders and without meaningful legal review[1][2].

The injunction requires the administration to provide written notice to noncitizens before removing them to a third country and to offer a "meaningful opportunity""including at least 15 days"to raise safety concerns and reopen their immigration cases. The order applies broadly to all noncitizens with final removal orders, not just the plaintiffs in the case[1][2].

Judge Murphy emphasized the potential for "irreparable harm," including persecution, torture, or death, if noncitizens are deported without the chance to challenge their removal. He is also considering whether the administration violated a prior restraining order by removing individuals to El Salvador without allowing them to raise safety concerns[1][2].

"stop the flow of Fentanyl"

It's Americans smuggling fentanyl into the US via border crossings.

Stop the Americans from smuggling drugs.

#12 | Posted by boaz

This ------- posts insanely and willfully ignorant drivel a day after a Republican murders two people on a college campus in the -------s own ------- state.

What a fnkcin' cultist moron.

He tried the one phone call that he promised would end the war. It didn't end the war. So Trump gives up.

Make it make sense, cultists.

#7 | Posted by ScottS

JFC you're dumb, a racist, and a cultist.

Swallow it.

And Pres Trump makes excuses for Pres Putin?
#6 | Posted by LampLighter

According to Trump, it was just a mistake. Just like so many of the deportations...simple mistakes.

Whoops!

#71 | Posted by itchyp

Now you cultists are just making ---- up. Keep bending, Trump approves of your efforts.

#44 | Posted by fortfisher

You're in a cult. And you prove it every day.

Swallow it.

The statement, "He entered this country illegally, He was denied asylum in 2019. Go back and come back the legal way," is only partially accurate and omits key context regarding Kilmar Abrego Garcia's case.

**What is accurate:**
- **Entry:** Kilmar Abrego Garcia did enter the United States illegally around 2011[3][8][6].
- **Asylum Denial:** In 2019, an immigration judge denied his application for asylum because he did not file within the required one-year period after arrival[3][8].

**What is misleading or inaccurate:**
- **Legal Status Since 2019:** Although his asylum request was denied, the same immigration judge granted Garcia "withholding of removal" status in 2019[8][6]. This is a form of legal protection that allows someone to remain in the U.S. if they would likely face persecution or harm in their home country. This status made his presence in the U.S. legal, and he was issued a work permit. He lived and worked legally in Maryland from 2019 until his mistaken deportation in 2025[8][6].
- **Deportation Error:** Garcia was not deported as a routine consequence of his denied asylum. He was mistakenly deported in March 2025 despite the judge's order protecting him from removal to El Salvador[1][6][8]. The U.S. government has acknowledged this was an "administrative error"[1][6][8].
- **"Go back and come back the legal way":** This advice ignores the fact that Garcia was already granted legal protection to remain in the U.S. due to the risk of harm if returned to El Salvador. He was not simply someone without legal status; he was a legal resident under a specific immigration protection[8][6].

**Key Context**
- Garcia was never charged with a crime in the U.S. or El Salvador, despite government claims of gang affiliation, which his attorneys and a judge found unsubstantiated[3][8].
- He was married, had U.S. citizen children, and complied with all legal requirements during his protected status[8].
- The Supreme Court ordered the U.S. government to facilitate his return after the wrongful deportation[1][3][4][5].

**Conclusion**
The statement omits the crucial fact that Garcia was legally protected from deportation and was only sent to El Salvador due to a government mistake, not because he had no legal right to remain in the U.S. after 2019[8][6][1].