PDA

View Full Version : Wouldn't have believed it...



MaxPower
07-18-2003, 11:50 AM
Pulled this graph off a site, re: the true direction of the economy.

Submitted here for your consideration. No opinion stated or implied...:D

kinda small, sorry.

zonk39
07-18-2003, 11:55 AM
For all crap Clinton did, he was still a good president And I'm a republican.

PhinPhan1227
07-18-2003, 12:04 PM
Ok...three points

1)The impact of a President on the economy is drastically over rated. If the economy went sky high tomorrow, it wouldn't be the result of Bush's efforts any more than the recession was.

2)Clinton presided over a period of peace, Bush has had to deal with a war.

3)The Internet boom was artificial. Most of the "money" generated never existed anywhere outside of some ledger sheets. It never actually existed, which is why the hit was so hard when the bubble burst. No economist worth a damn would give Clinton credit for the boom any more than he would blame Bush for the bust. Now, if you were to jump 6-7 years forward, and wanted to look at the impact of tax cuts and the Iraq war on the economy/defecit, THAT would be accurate.

XoPhinsoX
07-18-2003, 12:20 PM
Clinton is a damn puss.

A President who can't even tell the truth about getting a blow job is worthless. Worst part about it is he sat there and lied to the whole nation about it :lol: .

MaxPower
07-18-2003, 12:44 PM
Originally posted by PhinPhan1227
Now, if you were to jump 6-7 years forward, and wanted to look at the impact of tax cuts and the Iraq war on the economy/defecit, THAT would be accurate.

By then they'll be a Democrat in the White House grabbing all of the credit.

So Bush Sr.'s problems were the result of Reagan's policies, which BTW we're re-implementing now?

Agreed on all else...:D

PhinPhan1227
07-18-2003, 01:10 PM
Originally posted by MaxPower


By then they'll be a Democrat in the White House grabbing all of the credit.

So Bush Sr.'s problems were the result of Reagan's policies, which BTW we're re-implementing now?

Agreed on all else...:D

Actually, I think that giving any President credit/blame for more than 10% of the economy is unrealistic.

baccarat
07-18-2003, 02:21 PM
That chart is impossible to read but I'd like to say something a bit off topic. "Has your life improved in the last four years?" is one of the most loaded slogans in politics. Can we agree on that? I mean think of the logic, or lack of, in that question. If I developed liver cancer while Clinton was in office, does that make him the worst president ever based on that? No. If I won the lottery yesterday, does that make George W. Bush the greatest president ever? No. Why? Because there are many things that effect our lives that the President doesn't affect or doesn't have any control over. Judging a president on how your life has been going is just plain dumb. Judgement should be made on actions before and during the presidency, policy and integrity. That's just my opinion.

MaxPower
07-18-2003, 02:31 PM
Originally posted by booyeah_
That chart is impossible to read but I'd like to say something a bit off topic. "Has your life improved in the last four years?" is one of the most loaded slogans in politics. Can we agree on that? I mean think of the logic, or lack of, in that question. If I developed liver cancer while Clinton was in office, does that make him the worst president ever based on that? No. If I won the lottery yesterday, does that make George W. Bush the greatest president ever? No. Why? Because there are many things that effect our lives that the President doesn't affect or doesn't have any controlll over. Judging a president on how your life has been going is just plain dumb. Judgement should be made on actions before and during the presidency, policy and integrity. That's just my opinion.

very true. But people buy into it.

Although this time, I gotta say Bush's Administration is having quite an effect on my life. Luckily I don't look middle-eastern enough to end up in one of those concentr-er, I mean non-enemy combatent camps...

MaxPower
07-18-2003, 02:32 PM
Originally posted by PhinPhan1227


Actually, I think that giving any President credit/blame for more than 10% of the economy is unrealistic.

10% sounds about right. The rest is due to Chariman of the Fed & all of those mega-corporations they front for...

PhinPhan1227
07-18-2003, 02:42 PM
Originally posted by MaxPower


10% sounds about right. The rest is due to Chariman of the Fed & all of those mega-corporations they front for...

Try 40% of that blame/credit going to Congress which holds the purse strings. The President may draw up the budget, but Congress has complete control to rewrite the whole darned thing. I'd say that 40% of the economy is due to Congress, 10% is the PRes, and 30% is the Fed. Tack on another 20% for the Judiciary in the form of how tight regulatory measures are allowed to be. Of course that whole 100% of the governments influence on the economy makes up a whopping 20% of the OVERALL influence on the economy. The Internet Boom had NOTHING to do with the Federal Government except for the lack of regulation of the Industry.

PhinPhan1227
07-18-2003, 02:46 PM
Originally posted by MaxPower


very true. But people buy into it.

Although this time, I gotta say Bush's Administration is having quite an effect on my life. Luckily I don't look middle-eastern enough to end up in one of those concentr-er, I mean non-enemy combatent camps...

If you're a US resident it doesn't matter what you look like. Heck, if you're a LEGAL alien, it doesn't matter either. Those who are being held are here illegaly. I hate when people COMPLETELY misrepresent the facts.

TerryTate
07-19-2003, 02:02 PM
actually bush jr has a lot to do with the present economy....he chose to go to war....and if we didnt go to war, the economy may have been worse/better....and yes the war has impact on the economy RIGHT now, whether u like it or not....the aftermath of the war isnt going as smooth as originally planned, and neither is the war on terror.....and THAT has a lot to do with the economy right NOW, how could it not? Sure bush got hit with 9-11.....but the country is more than back on its feet at this point, and is exploring options such as liberia....

I am a democrat, i had faith in bush however during the war, but now, with misinformation in his state of the union, and the troops dying daily in iraq (more died after the war than during combat now i think) I am questioning this administration

t2thejz
07-19-2003, 06:47 PM
Originally posted by ultimateFINFAN
actually bush jr has a lot to do with the present economy....he chose to go to war....and if we didnt go to war, the economy may have been worse/better....and yes the war has impact on the economy RIGHT now, whether u like it or not....the aftermath of the war isnt going as smooth as originally planned, and neither is the war on terror.....and THAT has a lot to do with the economy right NOW, how could it not? Sure bush got hit with 9-11.....but the country is more than back on its feet at this point, and is exploring options such as liberia....

I am a democrat, i had faith in bush however during the war, but now, with misinformation in his state of the union, and the troops dying daily in iraq (more died after the war than during combat now i think) I am questioning this administration You will see the economy doing better when election time comes because of Bush's tax cuts

DeDolfan
07-20-2003, 12:25 PM
Originally posted by t2thejz
You will see the economy doing better when election time comes because of Bush's tax cuts

We may see the economy doing better simply because it's an election year. That's how it works, not becuase of the cuts. The poor folks who get alot back in one way or the other will use it just to keep up with their regular bills. The middle class will hardly see anything different in their checks so that won't start much. And the rich who get the bulk back will only just invest it in the market anyway. They'll not make anymore big econmy jumping purchases than they normally would have anyway. Bush really dissed the working middle class folks. Those are the folks that would jump start the economy by their sheer numbers if nothing else.

PhinPhan1227
07-24-2003, 09:57 AM
Originally posted by ultimateFINFAN
actually bush jr has a lot to do with the present economy....he chose to go to war....and if we didnt go to war, the economy may have been worse/better....and yes the war has impact on the economy RIGHT now, whether u like it or not....the aftermath of the war isnt going as smooth as originally planned, and neither is the war on terror.....and THAT has a lot to do with the economy right NOW, how could it not? Sure bush got hit with 9-11.....but the country is more than back on its feet at this point, and is exploring options such as liberia....

I am a democrat, i had faith in bush however during the war, but now, with misinformation in his state of the union, and the troops dying daily in iraq (more died after the war than during combat now i think) I am questioning this administration

Had we not been attacked, we wouldn't have gone to war. That's the bottom line.

Marino1983
07-27-2003, 07:08 AM
Originally posted by XoPhinsoX
Clinton is a damn puss.

A President who can't even tell the truth about getting a blow job is worthless. Worst part about it is he sat there and lied to the whole nation about it :lol: .



Hum, without debating the reasons for that whole (right wing) witch hunt ..... Yes Clinton was wrong to hide the facts about PERSONAL issues !!!!

But in W's case, if it is found that he had complete knowledge that those "16 words" were bogus war inflaming lies, then W has alot of blood on his hands !!!!

And that is humongously more serious than hiding the truth about PERSONAL issues .......


Marino1983

Marino1983
07-27-2003, 07:17 AM
Originally posted by t2thejz
You will see the economy doing better when election time comes because of Bush's tax cuts





:rolleyes: W can only hope so ... Funny when he was running for President he continually boasted that he didn't follow "poll numbers"...

Now as his popularity is sinking like the Iraqi regime, W is sending out all the troops to spin the media away from his state of the union stupidity !!

As the investigations begin, we will further see how much W is following the poll numbers !!!!!!!!!!!!!;)


Marino1983

PhinstiGator
07-27-2003, 01:33 PM
Originally posted by ultimateFINFAN
...i had faith in bush however during the war, but now, with misinformation in his state of the union, and the troops dying daily in iraq (more died after the war than during combat now i think) I am questioning this administration

Not true ultimateFINFAN. What Prez Bush said in his State of the Union speach was true and the Britts still stand by there intel. There is no debate that Iraq had a nuclear program. Our intelligence still suggests that Iraq had the ability to develop a nuclear weapon as soon as 1 year. The other chemical and bio weapons, and the lack of cooperation with multiple UN demands were reason enough to act. Act now or act later. We still had to act.

No, more troops have NOT died post war than during the war. How did you come up with that? And who left you with that impression? Someone misinformed you and you should question them.

The success of the War was amazing as far as loss of life. In perspective...we lost more military personel in military accidents last year than we did in the War. Any loss of life is terrible...but many on the left were predicting that over 100,000 people would die in this war. They misinformed us and should be questioned.

It's ok to question the administration but they should be congradulated by the way this war was waged in the light of the dire predictions. I hope that they can quickly reconstitute the Iraqi police force and military and provide more protection to our brave troops that are risking their lives to protect our freedoms.