How come five years of the wonderful Bush Administration *still* hasn't
restored the economy & the stock market to what it was prior to 2000?

The economy is great. Unemployment is low, and GDP is up.

Really?
Let's see what the pros say
http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/dn/home/gdp.htm

Hmm, 3.5% which isn't bad, but it darn sure isn't "great." The previous
quarters were less though.

So why are we having layoffs, huge gov't deficits, dropping the prime
rate, increasing trade imbalance, dropping dollar, etc etc?

Oh wait, none of that is happening in Hooray-Bush-&-Cheney-World.


... The stock
market is undervalued IMHO.

That's a great excuse. First it was overvalued under Clinton... right...
now after almost 5 years of the great Bush/Cheney leadership, it's still
not as good as under Clinton...

Does anybody else buy this lame BS?



When will you start pointing to all the great accomplishments of
President Bush, instead of blaming others for stuff that he seems to
have screwed up?

Besides the short recession that he helped us recover from,

Really? When was that?

... and the
democratic elections happening in Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt, and even
Saudi Arabia (at least on a local level)?


And the fact that more countries than ever hate us, more terrorism than
ever, worst military preparedness ever, etc etc. I guess a few elections
(which seem to be mostly installing America-hating radical Muslim
theocracies) are something to crow about, all right.



... Tax revenues are a function of GDP...which was not growing at a
rate large enough to pay for the increased spending necessary to
support a war that was started in our backyard.


You mean voodoo economics still doesn't work?

Of course it works. That's why the recession was so short-lived.


Then how come you're claiming 3.5% GDP growth is "great" and sputtering
over trying to explain the HUGE deficit, the trade imbalance, the
falling dollar, the layoffs, the "undervalued" stock market, etc etc?



That's funny, I thought if we reduced taxes on those bazillionaires,
they'd all go out and order new yachts or something, and the economy
would boom again...

It is booming.


Really?


BTW noticed they're lowering interest rates again? They do that when the
economy is booming, right?

They're doing that to offset spiking energy costs.


Wait, I thought spiking oil prices helped the Top Secret Cheney Energy
Policy? It certainly seems to have boosted oil company stock.


If only the liebrals could comprehend Econ 101


NOYB wrote:
They'd have to learn math and deductive reasoning first. Ain't gonna happen
in our lifetime. Thus, they all must be assimilated...or wiped out.


Yeah, that's the answer... kill all the disbelievers...

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
...
How come five years of the wonderful Bush Administration *still* hasn't
restored the economy & the stock market to what it was prior to 2000?

The economy is great. Unemployment is low, and GDP is up.

Really?
Let's see what the pros say
http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/dn/home/gdp.htm

Hmm, 3.5% which isn't bad, but it darn sure isn't "great." The previous
quarters were less though.

So why are we having layoffs

Jobs going to countries with uneven labor playing fields.

, huge gov't deficits

Already been asked and answered.

, dropping the prime rate,

As I said...
To offset the oil spike, *and* to create a more level field with our
international competitors who receive government-subsidized loans for cheap.

increasing trade imbalance,

China won't float there currency. It's indexed to the dollar, making it
artificially depressed. Besides being cheaper due to a lowcost labor
supply, their stuff also appears much, much cheaper due to their
artificially deflated currency.

dropping dollar, etc etc?

A depressed dollar is good for helping keep jobs in the US. It makes
US-made products seem cheaper. Of course, your statement is erroneous: the
dollar has been heading back up against all currencies except for the yuan.

The economy is great. Unemployment is low, and GDP is up.

Really?
Let's see what the pros say
http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/dn/home/gdp.htm

Hmm, 3.5% which isn't bad, but it darn sure isn't "great." The previous
quarters were less though.

So why are we having layoffs


NOYB wrote:
Jobs going to countries with uneven labor playing fields.

Really? GM is moving jobs to which overseas country?



, huge gov't deficits


Already been asked and answered.


Oh right, you claimed that Bush's tax cuts are going to erase the
deficit someday... funny how that didn't work last time, and the pros
don't think it's going to work this time either...


, dropping the prime rate,


As I said...
To offset the oil spike

How do you explain increased profitability then? Can you cite *any*
economic theory without having it bite you in the butt?

... *and* to create a more level field with our
international competitors who receive government-subsidized loans for cheap.


Hmm, these darn foreign gov't can afford to buy up our debt *and* offer
cheap subsidy loans to businesses stealing our jobs? Wow, we should
elect guys who can do that well.


increasing trade imbalance,


China won't float there currency. It's indexed to the dollar, making it
artificially depressed.

But didn't you say the dollar wasn't depressed? Can you make more than
two statements without contradicting yourself?


... Besides being cheaper due to a lowcost labor
supply, their stuff also appears much, much cheaper due to their
artificially deflated currency.


dropping dollar, etc etc?


A depressed dollar is good for helping keep jobs in the US.

But how come jobs are leaving in record rates then?

... It makes
US-made products seem cheaper. Of course, your statement is erroneous: the
dollar has been heading back up against all currencies except for the yuan.


This week yes, largely due to a panic on the euro. But the long term
trend is certainly down, and the dollar is still averaging lower than
it's been in a long time.

But hey, according to you, the economy is booming! We have no troubles!
Let's all sing!

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
...
The economy is great. Unemployment is low, and GDP is up.

Really?
Let's see what the pros say
http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/dn/home/gdp.htm

Hmm, 3.5% which isn't bad, but it darn sure isn't "great." The previous
quarters were less though.

So why are we having layoffs


NOYB wrote:
Jobs going to countries with uneven labor playing fields.

Really? GM is moving jobs to which overseas country?



, huge gov't deficits


Already been asked and answered.


Oh right, you claimed that Bush's tax cuts are going to erase the deficit
someday... funny how that didn't work last time, and the pros don't think
it's going to work this time either...

Shall I use a clip and paste from the wikipedia website link that you posted
here?

" According to the "baseline" forecast of federal revenue and spending by
the Congressional Budget Office (in its January 2005 Baseline Budget
Projections), the trend of growing deficits under Bush's first term will
become shrinking deficits in his second term. In this projection the deficit
will fall to $368 billion in 2005, $261 billion in 2007, and $207 billion in
2009, WITH A SMALL SURPLUS BY 2012. "



, dropping the prime rate,


As I said...
To offset the oil spike

How do you explain increased profitability then? Can you cite *any*
economic theory without having it bite you in the butt?

... *and* to create a more level field with our international competitors
who receive government-subsidized loans for cheap.


Hmm, these darn foreign gov't can afford to buy up our debt *and* offer
cheap subsidy loans to businesses stealing our jobs? Wow, we should elect
guys who can do that well.


increasing trade imbalance,


China won't float there currency. It's indexed to the dollar, making it
artificially depressed.

But didn't you say the dollar wasn't depressed?

No.

Can you make more than two statements without contradicting yourself?

Yes. Can you follow a thread?



... Besides being cheaper due to a lowcost labor supply, their stuff
also appears much, much cheaper due to their artificially deflated
currency.


dropping dollar, etc etc?



A depressed dollar is good for helping keep jobs in the US.

But how come jobs are leaving in record rates then?


Cheap labor. Less stringent environmental standards.


... It makes US-made products seem cheaper. Of course, your statement is
erroneous: the dollar has been heading back up against all currencies
except for the yuan.

This week yes, largely due to a panic on the euro.

Why is there panic on the euro? Perhaps because the EU economy is
horrendous?


But the long term trend is certainly down, and the dollar is still
averaging lower than it's been in a long time.

The short term trend is up. These are lagging indicators. The short term
trend is more important for predicting the near-future.


But hey, according to you, the economy is booming!

Not according to just me...but according to the economic indicators that
I've posted here.

Oh right, you claimed that Bush's tax cuts are going to erase the deficit
someday... funny how that didn't work last time, and the pros don't think
it's going to work this time either...

NOYB wrote:
Shall I use a clip and paste from the wikipedia website link that you posted
here?

" According to the "baseline" forecast of federal revenue and spending by
the Congressional Budget Office (in its January 2005 Baseline Budget
Projections), the trend of growing deficits under Bush's first term will
become shrinking deficits in his second term. In this projection the deficit
will fall to $368 billion in 2005, $261 billion in 2007, and $207 billion in
2009, WITH A SMALL SURPLUS BY 2012. "

Funny how you left out the part about this being based on leaving out
the Iraq war expenditure, on letting the tax cuts expire, and that
assuming the tax cuts stay in place and the economy grows at a
less-than-record pace (BTW in case you were wondering, that 3.5% you
were crowing about ain't nowhere near "record"), then that wonderful
2012 surplus turns into a walloping huge ongoing deficit.

Maybe you thought a little editing would fool somebody? Maybe it's your
reading skills?


A depressed dollar is good for helping keep jobs in the US.

But how come jobs are leaving in record rates then?



Cheap labor. Less stringent environmental standards.

That was the case well before 1998, when manufacturing jobs peaked.

If the Clinton economy was so terrible, how come manufacturing jobs
continued to grow? How come Bush hasn't been able to reverse the
downward trend since then, with all his tremendous job growth? How come
you point with pride to a measly 3.5% GDP growth when that would be one
of the *lowest* GDP growth rates under Clinton?



... It makes US-made products seem cheaper. Of course, your statement is
erroneous: the dollar has been heading back up against all currencies
except for the yuan.

This week yes, largely due to a panic on the euro.


Why is there panic on the euro? Perhaps because the EU economy is
horrendous?


The EU economy is quite a mixed bag, including a number of those cheap
labor, no environmental standards countries you complain about. The
panic is largely due to the recent 'Non' vote in France.



But the long term trend is certainly down, and the dollar is still
averaging lower than it's been in a long time.


The short term trend is up. These are lagging indicators. The short term
trend is more important for predicting the near-future.

blah blah blah... so you think the US dependence on oil, the deficit,
the growing trade imbalance, are going to 8strengthen* the dollar in the
near future??

Short term thinking, is that what you base your strategy on? I thought
short term greed was a moral failing?



But hey, according to you, the economy is booming!


Not according to just me...but according to the economic indicators that
I've posted here.


Really? How come the economic indicators you've posted hear point to
modest growth *at best* and the rest is all hot air and
self-contradictory blather? Does the Fed drop the prime rate on an
economy that's booming? Is the deficit shrinking yet?

How come you still haven't explained why President Bush didn't say last
year, 'Yes we have lost a lot of jobs but we're gaining them back"
instead trying to twist labor statistics to show that there had not been
a job loss?

The facts speak for themselves, NOBBY.

DSK

"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
Oh right, you claimed that Bush's tax cuts are going to erase the deficit
someday... funny how that didn't work last time, and the pros don't think
it's going to work this time either...

NOYB wrote:
Shall I use a clip and paste from the wikipedia website link that you
posted here?

" According to the "baseline" forecast of federal revenue and spending by
the Congressional Budget Office (in its January 2005 Baseline Budget
Projections), the trend of growing deficits under Bush's first term will
become shrinking deficits in his second term. In this projection the
deficit will fall to $368 billion in 2005, $261 billion in 2007, and $207
billion in 2009, WITH A SMALL SURPLUS BY 2012. "

Funny how you left out the part about this being based on leaving out the
Iraq war expenditure, on letting the tax cuts expire, and that assuming
the tax cuts stay in place and the economy grows at a less-than-record
pace (BTW in case you were wondering, that 3.5% you were crowing about
ain't nowhere near "record"), then that wonderful 2012 surplus turns into
a walloping huge ongoing deficit.

Maybe you thought a little editing would fool somebody? Maybe it's your
reading skills?


A depressed dollar is good for helping keep jobs in the US.

But how come jobs are leaving in record rates then?



Cheap labor. Less stringent environmental standards.

That was the case well before 1998, when manufacturing jobs peaked.

If the Clinton economy was so terrible, how come manufacturing jobs
continued to grow?

Actually, they didn't. Manufacturing jobs peaked at 17,708,000 jobs in June
of 1998. By the time Bush took office, the number of manufacturing jobs had
fallen all the way to 16,993,000.

For the mathematically impaired folks (like yourself) that's about a 4% drop
in the number of manufacturing jobs over the last 2 1/2 years of Clinton's
presidency. That shows that a pretty clear downwards trend had already
begun at least 2 years before Bush took office. What caused the drop?
Maybe you should ask Ross Perot.



www.bls.gov




How come Bush hasn't been able to reverse the downward trend since then,
with all his tremendous job growth? How come you point with pride to a
measly 3.5% GDP growth when that would be one of the *lowest* GDP growth
rates under Clinton?

Let's look at a comparison (based on chained 2000 dollars):

Bush 1st quarter of second term: 3.5%
Clinton 1st quarter of second term: 3.1%

Bush 3rd year of 1st term: 3.0%
Clinton 3rd year of 1st term: 2.5%

Bush 4th year of 1st term: 4.4%
Clinton 4th year of 1st term: 3.7%





... It makes US-made products seem cheaper. Of course, your statement
is erroneous: the dollar has been heading back up against all currencies
except for the yuan.

This week yes, largely due to a panic on the euro.


Why is there panic on the euro? Perhaps because the EU economy is
horrendous?


The EU economy is quite a mixed bag, including a number of those cheap
labor, no environmental standards countries you complain about. The panic
is largely due to the recent 'Non' vote in France.

....and unemployment numbers.




But the long term trend is certainly down, and the dollar is still
averaging lower than it's been in a long time.


The short term trend is up. These are lagging indicators. The short
term trend is more important for predicting the near-future.

blah blah blah... so you think the US dependence on oil, the deficit, the
growing trade imbalance, are going to 8strengthen* the dollar in the near
future??

I hope not. The dollar is at a level that will bring investment (and jobs)
back to America *if* the Chinese ever begin to float their currency.



Short term thinking, is that what you base your strategy on? I thought
short term greed was a moral failing?

Short term trends are a crystal ball for the immediate future. We've
already had 42 months of GDP growth, and 23 months of net job gains. The
short term trends are very positive right now. When coupled with the recent
economic data from the last couple of years, it shows our economy is doing
pretty darn well.






But hey, according to you, the economy is booming!


Not according to just me...but according to the economic indicators that
I've posted here.


Really? How come the economic indicators you've posted hear point to
modest growth *at best*

As I showed you, the economy's numbers over the last 2 1/4 years are better
than the numbers from the last 2 years of Clinton's first term. Were you
full of so much doom and gloom in early 1997 when Clinton had poorer numbers
than Bush in the same time frame?


and the rest is all hot air and
self-contradictory blather? Does the Fed drop the prime rate on an economy
that's booming?

They'll drop the rate whenever they can get away with it...until inflation
starts to peak.


Is the deficit shrinking yet?

No.



How come you still haven't explained why President Bush didn't say last
year, 'Yes we have lost a lot of jobs but we're gaining them back"

He did say exactly that.

"NOYB" wrote in message
...

"DSK" wrote in message
. ..
Oh right, you claimed that Bush's tax cuts are going to erase the
deficit someday... funny how that didn't work last time, and the pros
don't think it's going to work this time either...

NOYB wrote:
Shall I use a clip and paste from the wikipedia website link that you
posted here?

" According to the "baseline" forecast of federal revenue and spending
by the Congressional Budget Office (in its January 2005 Baseline Budget
Projections), the trend of growing deficits under Bush's first term will
become shrinking deficits in his second term. In this projection the
deficit will fall to $368 billion in 2005, $261 billion in 2007, and
$207 billion in 2009, WITH A SMALL SURPLUS BY 2012. "

Funny how you left out the part about this being based on leaving out the
Iraq war expenditure, on letting the tax cuts expire, and that assuming
the tax cuts stay in place and the economy grows at a less-than-record
pace (BTW in case you were wondering, that 3.5% you were crowing about
ain't nowhere near "record"), then that wonderful 2012 surplus turns into
a walloping huge ongoing deficit.

Maybe you thought a little editing would fool somebody? Maybe it's your
reading skills?


A depressed dollar is good for helping keep jobs in the US.

But how come jobs are leaving in record rates then?



Cheap labor. Less stringent environmental standards.

That was the case well before 1998, when manufacturing jobs peaked.

If the Clinton economy was so terrible, how come manufacturing jobs
continued to grow?

Actually, they didn't. Manufacturing jobs peaked at 17,708,000 jobs in
June of 1998. By the time Bush took office, the number of manufacturing
jobs had fallen all the way to 16,993,000.

For the mathematically impaired folks (like yourself) that's about a 4%
drop in the number of manufacturing jobs over the last 2 1/2 years of
Clinton's presidency. That shows that a pretty clear downwards trend had
already begun at least 2 years before Bush took office. What caused the
drop? Maybe you should ask Ross Perot.



www.bls.gov




How come Bush hasn't been able to reverse the downward trend since then,
with all his tremendous job growth? How come you point with pride to a
measly 3.5% GDP growth when that would be one of the *lowest* GDP growth
rates under Clinton?

Let's look at a comparison (based on chained 2000 dollars):

Bush 1st quarter of second term: 3.5%
Clinton 1st quarter of second term: 3.1%

Bush 3rd year of 1st term: 3.0%
Clinton 3rd year of 1st term: 2.5%

Bush 4th year of 1st term: 4.4%
Clinton 4th year of 1st term: 3.7%





... It makes US-made products seem cheaper. Of course, your statement
is erroneous: the dollar has been heading back up against all
currencies except for the yuan.

This week yes, largely due to a panic on the euro.


Why is there panic on the euro? Perhaps because the EU economy is
horrendous?


The EU economy is quite a mixed bag, including a number of those cheap
labor, no environmental standards countries you complain about. The panic
is largely due to the recent 'Non' vote in France.

...and unemployment numbers.




But the long term trend is certainly down, and the dollar is still
averaging lower than it's been in a long time.


The short term trend is up. These are lagging indicators. The short
term trend is more important for predicting the near-future.

blah blah blah... so you think the US dependence on oil, the deficit, the
growing trade imbalance, are going to 8strengthen* the dollar in the near
future??

I hope not. The dollar is at a level that will bring investment (and
jobs) back to America *if* the Chinese ever begin to float their currency.



Short term thinking, is that what you base your strategy on? I thought
short term greed was a moral failing?

Short term trends are a crystal ball for the immediate future. We've
already had 42 months of GDP growth, and 23 months of net job gains. The
short term trends are very positive right now. When coupled with the
recent economic data from the last couple of years, it shows our economy
is doing pretty darn well.






But hey, according to you, the economy is booming!


Not according to just me...but according to the economic indicators that
I've posted here.


Really? How come the economic indicators you've posted hear point to
modest growth *at best*

As I showed you, the economy's numbers over the last 2 1/4 years are
better than the numbers from the last 2 years of Clinton's first term.
Were you full of so much doom and gloom in early 1997 when Clinton had
poorer numbers than Bush in the same time frame?


and the rest is all hot air and
self-contradictory blather? Does the Fed drop the prime rate on an
economy that's booming?

They'll drop the rate whenever they can get away with it...until inflation
starts to peak.


Is the deficit shrinking yet?

No.



How come you still haven't explained why President Bush didn't say last
year, 'Yes we have lost a lot of jobs but we're gaining them back"

He did say exactly that.


Now there you go again....confusing the poor guy with facts.

No comment on your attempted lying by editing that wikipedia quote,
NOBBY? It's not like you to give up so easy when when you're losing.


Cheap labor. Less stringent environmental standards.

That was the case well before 1998, when manufacturing jobs peaked.

If the Clinton economy was so terrible, how come manufacturing jobs
continued to grow?


NOYB wrote:
Actually, they didn't. Manufacturing jobs peaked at 17,708,000 jobs in June
of 1998.

Really? I seem to recall that Clinton was President from 1992 to 2000.
Isn't 1998 almost right at the end?


... By the time Bush took office, the number of manufacturing jobs had
fallen all the way to 16,993,000.

And that's still quite a lot more than when Clinton took office, isn't
it? And quite a heck of a lot more than we have now?

So what happened to your claim that Bush's Presidency has been good for
the econmy?


For the mathematically impaired folks (like yourself) that's about a 4% drop
in the number of manufacturing jobs over the last 2 1/2 years of Clinton's
presidency.

Very good, at least if the hyperbole is discounted. Did one of your kids
help you work out the math on that?

... That shows that a pretty clear downwards trend had already
begun at least 2 years before Bush took office.

Yes, by golly, a 2 percent drop in the very last part of Clinton's 2nd
term, following the largest sustained peacetime economic boom in
history. Now look at Bush's record... he took a downward trend and let
it get far worse.



How come you still haven't explained why President Bush didn't say last
year, 'Yes we have lost a lot of jobs but we're gaining them back"


He did say exactly that.


No, he didn't Nobby. If you're going to lie, at least make it *slightly*
difficult to disprove. The RNC put up a huge smokescreen campaign based
on the household survey statistics, which weren't intended to be used as
a labor indicator at all.

DSK

NOYB wrote:
"DSK" wrote in message
...
How come five years of the wonderful Bush Administration *still* hasn't
restored the economy & the stock market to what it was prior to 2000?

The economy is great. Unemployment is low, and GDP is up.

Really?
Let's see what the pros say
http://www.bea.doc.gov/bea/dn/home/gdp.htm

Hmm, 3.5% which isn't bad, but it darn sure isn't "great." The previous
quarters were less though.

So why are we having layoffs

Jobs going to countries with uneven labor playing fields.

So thats the reason for 70,000,000 layoffs during 2001-2004 and
hundreds of
thousands of H1B visa slaves imported.

JG