Will Tony take one for the team?

[Frank]

The economy *had* rebounded, and we were out of recession a year and a half before Clinton took office - the economic boom of the 90's began in '91. *Jobs* however, are always a lagging factor after the bounce back from recession. But the boom had already started. We'd won the Cold War - we were getting to spend the 'peace dividend'. The Republicans balanced the budget - yeah, Republicans - it didn't happen until they took Congress. It took a few years, because Clinton didn't WANT to balance the budget - remember the govt shutdown? I do - I was one of the ones sent home. You remember what it was over? The major plank was an agreement to balance the budget within 7 years. So I think it's safe to say - Republicans balanced the budget.

I do think consumer spending will rebound, after the war. I think there's just a lot of tension right now. There'll be a bounce right after the first week.

 

[Frank]

Originally posted by SmallTown

We had so much world support. Now look at us. The laughing stock of the world. People think all we care about is war and will do anything to have it that way. From super power to super chumps. Way to go Bush.

We DO have world support - more of the world is on our side than you think. Russia and France are against it. Hey - amazing - Iraq's number one and number two trading partners are against the idea of regime change in Iraq. Iraq's top suppliers of weapons are against the idea. It's only a laughing stock depending on what news you read or watch.

(Personally - I think if France is against something - I'm damned glad we're FOR it - they have a lousy record historically).

 

[MGKrebs]

Now if one of them grows a pair and goes heavy for removing these damn dictators, I'd vote for them regardless of party. The lib-freaks keep screaming that Bush is a warmonger and a bloodthirsty hawk - sorry, folks...I'm not seeing it. Which tells me you all are insane and I'm not voting for your candidate.

Please clarify: Who are "lib-freaks"? The way left wackos, or all libs, or all Dems?
Who is "you are all" insane? Same as above?
Who is "your candidate"? Dem? Green? Socialist?

I’m not sure if I should feel insulted here or not. Please be more specific.

Doesn't it seem strange to you that the second Bush takes office, the "economy" goes "in the toilet"? If he is THAT powerful that all he has to do is take the oath of office to ruin our country, then MAN! I'm glad he's with us and not against us

I remember thinking during the Bush campaign, in August or September I believe, when he and Cheney started saying that we were on the cusp of a recession. It was the first I had heard of that, and I try to pay attention to that kind of news (being in business for myself and all). Me and the spouse were stunned because we know that comments from high profile people like that can have an effect. The stock market in particular is sensitive to comments like that. And business people use information like that to decide whether to invest, or expand, and other decisions. Most leaders, and even potential leaders, are very careful about their statements about the economy to avoid creating artificial ups and downs.

So you can say that the recession started right away when he took office, but I say that he helped create it by his typical ignorance and carelessness.

on edit: Oh yeah, and he doesn't seem to have done much to manage it since then. Before you start screaming about dems messing his plan up- being a politician means convincing, arm-twisting, compromising, to get most of your way. If he can't do that, he has to take responsibility for not being able to do that. He has arrived at a moment when all the stars are aligned in his favor- he should have no trouble getting his way on almost anything he wants. But he's even screwing that up by pushing too hard and alienating his own party.

 

[Heretic]

I remember the summer of 2000 watching TheStreet.com on fox news (before Kramer got in a fight and left Fox) and they were predicting rough times ahead. It was this time that people started realizing that their stocks were way over priced and many were based entirely on speculation and stocks went from $100 a share to $2 a share.....billions were lost that was the start of a recession.

Remember when Yahoo was $400 a share?

 

[vraiblonde]

Originally posted by MGKrebs
Please clarify: Who are "lib-freaks"? The way left wackos, or all libs, or all Dems?
Who is "you are all" insane? Same as above?
Who is "your candidate"? Dem? Green? Socialist?

I’m not sure if I should feel insulted here or not. Please be more specific.

Be insulted if'n you want to - this is America and you have a right.

Lib-freaks - anyone who's saying that Bush is a warmonger and a hawk. If the shoe fits...

Insane people - see above

Your candidate - whoever they are endorsing for Prez in 2004

So you can say that the recession started right away when he took office, but I say that he helped create it by his typical ignorance and carelessness.

Then he was working on it while he was still running for office. I don't think a recession starts in just one day - sorry.

 

[Frank]

Technically we never entered a recession since it is defined as two consecutive quarters of negative growth. But there was and is no doubt the economy was tanking already.

If Bush has the power to start a recession in a campaign, just by *saying* it, then I'm a monkey's uncle. Recessions are part of the normal business cycle, and a candidate doesn't have any such power. He couldn't do that any more than he could change phases of the moon. Besides, my stocks started to tank at the end of '99. What, do people now think Bush started it with an offhand remark made in August? Sorry, no way. The economy is not that fragile.

 

[MGKrebs]

You guys know as well as I do that it's famous that whenever greenspan says ANYTHING, the markets react to the slightest perceived slant...and he's a pro at this, knows he has to be very careful. Treasury secretaries, Presidents, VP's, Warren Buffett, they all can have an impact. So don't be dim and oversimplify the point- Bush could have and did have an effect. It may have already been fragile, but he made some stupid comments that did NOT help and he has to live with it.

 

[vraiblonde]

Gosh, Maynard, looks like you've been right all along!

Hans Blix says:

To me the question of the environment is more ominous than that of peace and war. We will have regional conflicts and use of force, but world conflicts I do not believe will happen any longer. But the environment, that is a creeping danger. I'm more worried about global warming than I am of any major military conflict.

http://www.mtv.com/bands/i/iraq/news_feature_031203/index5.jhtml