The Economist weighs in on our current economy

[Doomstone]

And it doesn't like what it sees. This is a great read, and keep in mind, this is a publication that backed Bush in 2000 and would generally be described as "fiscally conservative".

Link Here (http://www.economist.com/world/na/displayStory.cfm?story_id=2189237)

I think the last line sums up the article pretty well:


Long after Dubya is back on his ranch, Americans will be trying to recover from the mess he created.

[Recyclerz]

Perhaps some will dismiss this analysis, as it was published in a nation, UK (aka England), which is widely known to be "a fag country." (Archie Bunker, All in The Family, 1970 something).

Alas for our hero, the very people he's giving those tax breaks to now seem to be turning on him.
Business Week gives W a Report Card (http://biz.yahoo.com/bizwk/031105/nf20031151870_db041_1.html)




[b]Sig-less in Gaza[b]

[Heavy]

Stienbrener turned on Bush?

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=JohneeWadd">
A proportionate amount of props are equally distributed to my nigga's Fluff, Alexxis, CanOfSoup15, WWFallon and Katylina
HORDE KING FOREVER!!!
ORACLE NEVER!!!

[Se7en]

I find it ironic you post this after the news today that unemployment has fallen yet again as payrolls have increased yet again for the third straight month.

But hey, far be it for me to take away from your constant campaign of disinformation about all things conservative.

<center><img border="0" src="http://se7enrfnet.homestead.com/files/KyoSe7en.jpg" width="300" height="125">
<br>
<br>
Resistance is <b>FLAMMABLE.</b></center>

[Se7en]

Dean Condemns Bush for 'Leisureless Recovery'
(2003-11-07) -- Democrat presidential candidate Howard Dean today blasted President George Bush for fostering an economic recovery that deprives thousands of Americans of their leisure time. The attack comes on the day the Labor Department reported that payrolls grew by 126,000 last month, more than twice the number economists had predicted.

"Work, work, work," said Mr. Dean, shaking his head in evident disgust. "Is that the American you want to leave for your children? Do you want to live in a nation where GDP and productivity and the stock market continue to rise? Where's the balance?"

Mr. Dean accused Mr. Bush of stealing eight-hours per day of leisure from these newly-employed Americans, and of ruining the future for countless children.

"Kids will grow up without knowing the comfort of government assistance programs," he said. "And think about all the young Democrats who dream of being President. Because of Mr. Bush, they may never get that chance."


<center><img border="0" src="http://se7enrfnet.homestead.com/files/KyoSe7en.jpg" width="300" height="125">
<br>
<br>
Resistance is <b>FLAMMABLE.</b></center>

[HBox]

Not to be a negative nelly, but 150,000 people enter the workforce every month, so we are almost at the point where we can say that the job market is no longer shrinking.

Let's not let low expectations sink in.

http://members.aol.com/joepersico/myhomepage/sig1.jpg?mtbrand=AOL_US

[Doomstone]

I find it ironic you post this after the news today that unemployment has fallen yet again as payrolls have increased yet again for the third straight month.


Unemployment is down 0.1%. Everybody rejoice! Our country is saved! Hail Bush!

Please, read the article. The cut-taxes-and-increase-spending policies of this administration are a serious threat to our country's economic health, long-term. Some have speculated that this is being done intentionally, so that some time down the road when the economic situation REALLY gets bad, programs like welfare and social security can be cut out of "necessity". I personally don't buy into that - sure I dislike our current president, but I can't bring myself to believe he's THAT evil - but when such theories begin to sound more and more plausible, something definitely stinks.


But hey, far be it for me to take away from your constant campaign of disinformation about all things conservative.

What disinformation? The Economist is now disinformation?

And I am not against all things conservative. What I do have a major beef with is bad policy. Invasion of Iraq? Bad policy. Tax cuts combined with massive spending increases? Bad policy. Not even pretending to have a post-war plan? Bad policy. Alienating the rest of the world? Bad policy.

Sorry, your boy don't walk on water.

[El Mudo]

I'm praying the Dems choose to run this guy Dean, cause then we're looking at another Reagan/Mon-Dull or a Nixon/McGovern election time pummeling

And how is the economy supposed to grow through goverment programs? We already tried that once, it was called The New Deal, and it didn't do DICK to get us out of the Depression, WWII got us out of that mess



http://www.csa-dixie.com/cflagt.jpg
Representin' for the Maryland District of RAIDER NATION

This message was edited by El Mudo on 11-7-03 @ 11:53 PM

[HBox]

http://www.just4yucks.com/images/5x/59214.gif

http://members.aol.com/joepersico/myhomepage/sig1.jpg?mtbrand=AOL_US

[El Mudo]

So i'm "Stupid" because I don't subscribe to the same Ideas as you and your boys?


Take that post and shove it...asshole....

http://www.gocontinental.com/photos2/paycheck.jpg

http://www.csa-dixie.com/cflagt.jpg
Representin' for the Maryland District of RAIDER NATION

[HBox]

1. Learn how to take a joke.
2. I don't have any "boys."
3. Saying the The New Deal didn't do dick to take us out of the depression is a stupid statement.
4. Federal spending can create jobs. Investing in infrastructure (building roads, schools, etc.) DIRECTLY creates jobs.

http://members.aol.com/joepersico/myhomepage/sig1.jpg?mtbrand=AOL_US

[Snoogans]

Long after Dubya is back on his ranch, Americans will be trying to recover from the mess he created.

yet some people still think he is a better president than clinton was


http://home.comcast.net/~jamesgpatton/image004.jpg
TallJames is the man

EAT THAT FUCKIN SQUIRREL BABY!!!!!
That song rips off Cut the Mullet
Snoogans 1, Monitor 0

[El Mudo]

3. Saying the The New Deal didn't do dick to take us out of the depression is a stupid statement.


Saying it Did is stupid. Ever heard of World War 2? The massive increase in jobs from the War industry and the Army got the economy back on track, not hack government programs, WHICH WERE ONLY MEANT TO BE TEMPORARY by the way, like Social Security. The economy got a little bit of a boost during the 30's but not really a significant bump to say it ended. And there was also another slide in '36 I believe, combined with FDR's hackneyed Court Packing scheme, that almost doomed his presidency...

And besides, after the "100 Days" the New Deal was essentially over....

And about taking jokes, im not really in the mood to be messed with....

http://www.csa-dixie.com/cflagt.jpg
Representin' for the Maryland District of RAIDER NATION

[HBox]

Saying it Did is stupid. Ever heard of World War 2?

Well then its good that I didn't say that. But it had a positive effect, and if you are suggesting that Social Security is a bad thing, then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

And about taking jokes, im not really in the mood to be messed with....

Then I am sorry. I was searching for a picture, and although that may have not been the most appropriate, I thought it was too funny to pass up.

http://members.aol.com/joepersico/myhomepage/sig1.jpg?mtbrand=AOL_US

[TheMojoPin]

But hey, far be it for me to take away from your constant campaign of disinformation about all things conservative.

What disinformation? The Economist is now disinformation?

Se7en, he's got a good point. This isn't some fringe element or story here. This IS one of the most respected and widely accalimed sources of economic analysis around the WORLD. Sure, it's not always 100%, but to dismiss it because you might not like what it's saying seems a bit premature.

And at the same time, while it's not HUGE, more people ARE getting jobs. That's what's most important, and if it continues to trend upward, kudos for Bush, flat-out.

<img src="http://members.hostedscripts.com/randomimage.cgi?user=TheMojoPin">
2% << December boys got it BAD >> "You might tell some lies about the good times we've had/But I've kissed your mother twice...and now I'm working on your dad..."

[Se7en]

I'm talking about his constant stream of disinformation on this board, Mojo.

EVERY thread he posts. EVERY single one. I can count on at least a couple "OMG REPUBS EVIL / BUSH=BAD SATAN GUY!" threads from every week.

Fact is, any Democrat that's counting on the economy to be Bush's downfall come 2004 will be sadly mistaken. By then things will likely even out enough so that it won't be near as major an issue as Doomstone here wishes it to be.

<center><img border="0" src="http://se7enrfnet.homestead.com/files/KyoSe7en.jpg" width="300" height="125">
<br>
<br>
Resistance is <b>FLAMMABLE.</b></center>

[Yerdaddy]

I'm talking about his constant stream of disinformation on this board, Mojo.

EVERY thread he posts. EVERY single one. I can count on at least a couple "OMG REPUBS EVIL / BUSH=BAD SATAN GUY!" threads from every week.

Fact is, any Democrat that's counting on the economy to be Bush's downfall come 2004 will be sadly mistaken. By then things will likely even out enough so that it won't be near as major an issue as Doomstone here wishes it to be.

It's called a fucking discussion. Maybe if you brought something to it besides blind ideology, worn out cliches, and complaints that the evil liberals are mean to your idols, then you'd have an easier time with it. How about you make a choice between pro wrestling and politics, because you seem to get them confused. In all seriousness, we've had three years of Bush, so we can make the decision that we hate the guy and what he's done. If it were the first year, maybe you got a case that people are just being mean-spirited, but you don't have that leg to stand on anymore. Do some fucking thinking or stick to Wrestlemanias

<img src="http://scripts.cgispy.com/image.cgi?u=bonedaddy5">
TEAR THE BITCH APART!

[Doomstone]

I'm talking about his constant stream of disinformation on this board, Mojo.

EVERY thread he posts. EVERY single one. I can count on at least a couple "OMG REPUBS EVIL / BUSH=BAD SATAN GUY!" threads from every week


Name ONE THING I've posted on this board that can be accurately called "disinformation".

Seriously. Name one.

What have I posted that isn't true?

The study documenting Fox News viewers as being a misinformed lot? TRUE

Abuses of the "only meant for terrorists and nobody else" PATRIOT ACT? TRUE

Retired Air Force Colonel Sam Gardiner's report on government propaganda? TRUE

Please, please, point out where I am taking a cue from Fox News and spreading disinformation to the masses. I so want to hear about it.

Maybe you can show me the thread I started that proclaimed the US found Iraq's WMD's. Oh wait, that wasn't me that started that thread. Nope, I never would have said anything as stupid and untrue as that.

You have nothing. Admit it, then walk away with a sad expression on your face

[gypsy]

A large # of economist agree that Bush was handed a "dead" economy, and that the recession began around September of '99. Actually, the president has very little effect on the economy. Who's ever in office gets the credit, or is given the blame.

"I Whupped Batman's Ass" Wesley Willis R.I.P

[high fly]

WRONG WRONG WRONG.

The recession began in March, after Bush took office. He said so himself.

As for the economy, his program to stimulate the economy and add jobs has not done as advertised.

Things are getting better now because Bush drove us to rock bottom and it couldn't get much worse.

We still need 3 m-m-m-million more jobs just to get us to where we were when Bush took office.

Still waiting for the fiscal conservatives to explain how they'll pay for all the new debt.

Or are Republicans now wildly liberal when it comes to spending?

" and they ask me why I drink"

[furie]

Last time I checked, This guys was THE expert (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7936-2003Nov6.html) on US economy. And things don't look bad.


<img src="http://tseery.homestead.com/files/surfer.jpg" height=100 width=300>

[Recyclerz]

Greenspan is good but I'll take this guy in a Celebrity (Economist) Deathmatch

Rubinomics (http://www.msnbc.com/news/991181.asp?0dm=C31BN)

http://www.eisenhowerinstitute.org/photographs/rubin1.gif

And they're both worried about the ballooning national debt, much like our own High Fly.

Geez, what nerds for worrying or even knowing about this stuff.

Oh wait, nevermind. ;)





[b]Sig-less in Gaza[b]

[HBox]

I don't care. The day that debt becomes due I'll be DEAD!!!! The rest of you lucky bastards will get to pay it off! HAH HAH!

http://members.aol.com/joepersico/myhomepage/sig1.jpg?mtbrand=AOL_US

[furie]

the problem with that link is that it says little on the current economy, which is what we're discussing. Instead it's selling Rubin.


<img src="http://tseery.homestead.com/files/surfer.jpg" height=100 width=300>

[high fly]

Sure, it's tough following the man that gave us
THE GREATEST ECONOMIC BOOM OF ALL TIMES!

But on the other hand, since we have the Clinton Model for economic success, the obvious solution is to just copy what's worked best.

After all, Clinton came in under worse economic conditions.
Rather than alienate Congress, he worked closely with them to reduce the size of the government, and got the budget back in balance with surpluses projected out well into the future so we'd be able to afford a 9-11 type disaster, should one occur in tough economic times.
He wisely negotiated trade agreements like GATT and NAFTA.
Clinton took away some of the welfare-for-the-wealthy tax cuts that Reagan doled out, and put that money into paying off the massive Reagan Debt, interest on which threatened to take up as much as 80% of the budget by 2010, by some projections.
Rather than alienate us from the rest of the world, he was wildly popular abroad, making America more popular, so people wanted more to do business with us.
He got more people off welfare and into jobs, which built confidence in an area of the workforce that had previously been in despair.
During the Reagan/Bush years, incomes of the rich skyrocketed while wages of the middle class and below rose much more slowly. Clinton's policies served to correct that imbalance.
At the time, Clinton's economic program was clubbed by conservatives following the same supply side theories favored by the current president.
They said it would bring economic disaster.
They were wrong during the Reagan/Bush administrations, they were wrong during the Clinton administration, and they are wrong now.

" and they ask me why I drink"

[furie]

i do have to hand it to clinton, he did a great job with the economy. better than bush. Then only economic plan i have to fault him for is placing our rocket technology under the dep of commerce rather than nasa and defense. Odd that 10 years after, the chinese have made hugh strides in their space program...

clinton and the chinese, a winning team.


<img src="http://tseery.homestead.com/files/bod6.gif" height=100 width=300>

[A.J.]

The recession began in March, after Bush took office. He said so himself.

Then why was the faltering economy an issue during the 2000 election?

Rather than alienate Congress, he worked closely with them to reduce the size of the government,

That's true. He had to -- especially since his policies caused his party to lose control of both Houses of Congress for the first time in 40 years.

<IMG SRC="http://www.silentspic.com/images/sighost/ajdcsig.jpg">
A Skidmark production.

Red Sox Nation

[high fly]

Recession began in March after Bush took office. He said so himself


Then why was the faltering economy an issue during the 2000 election?

It wasn't a big issue in the campaign. It wasn't until Bush was elected that the GOP hit us with a blizzard of badmouthing of the economy. The comment heard often then was that they were trying to talk us into a recession.
Yes, at the time, some indicators were down some, but others were up and it was more like the economy was reaching a plateau.
Bush argued that his tax cuts would improve things.
He was wrong.
Bush argued that his next round of tax cuts would fix things.
He was wrong again.

WHY Bush would say that the recession started in March after he took office is something his supporters fail to address.



" and they ask me why I drink"

[furie]

I don't know, it still looks pretty good. (http://money.cnn.com/2003/11/25/news/economy/gdp/index.htm?cnn=yes)


<img src="http://tseery.homestead.com/files/grendel.jpg" height=100 width=300>

[CaptClown]

I don't know, it still looks pretty good. (http://money.cnn.com/2003/11/25/news/economy/gdp/index.htm?cnn=yes)


Stop it!! You will ruin it. Don't say the economy is good until the Dow hits 15K. I got money riding on it.

Director of the C.Y.A. Society.
Field Marshal of the K.I.S.S. Army
Poison Clan rocks the world

[high fly]

It's good to see things picking up.

We must keep it all in perspective and remember that what we are doing is making up for lost ground.
I heard a big time economic expert interviewed by Colmes last night saying that the economy would have to improve by over 30% to cover for the losses of the last 3 years.

Supply siders have said all along that the economic growth stimulated by the tax cuts would be greater than the hit on the deficit, and would pay it off.
(That this has never happened before in history doesn't faze them)
So let's watch and see what pays off the deficit.

" and they ask me why I drink"

[furie]

2 years. we've been experiencing loses for 2 years, after 9-11-01. Although the economy begain to slow down in mid 2000, there was still gain.


<img src="http://tseery.homestead.com/files/stormshadow.jpg" height=100 width=300>

[high fly]

The Bush Recession (THIS Bush Recession, not the OTHER Bush Recession) began in March, 2001.
Before that, economic indicators were mixed, some up, some down. You'll recall how the Republicans went on a campaign to diminish expectations of the Presiden't tax cut program and were greeted with accusations of "trying to talk us into a recession".
It was in all the papers.

" and they ask me why I drink"