Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tejek who wrote (139065)	9/10/2001 6:09:50 AM
From: pgerassi	Respond to of 1578683

Dear Ted: Your interpretation leaves a lot to be desired. The economic downturn started around April of last year. First Interest rates went up, then the bubble burst during Clinton's last year. Ever since, we were slowing down. The election mess was due to Gore's fighting instead on being a class act (both his ethics and Lieberman's staying a Senator shows just how little class they had) caused a big drop during that escapade. He flung FUD all over and you have the gall to say it it was only the Republican's fault? It takes two to fight and Gore lost on election day. All the rest was uncalled for. So by the time of the election, like most downturns, the slowdown was well underway. It takes time for the economy to go into recession or near to it after a period of robust growth. Even shocks like the oil induced recession of the 70's take a while to show up as a downturn. This lag means that the policies that caused an event happen well before the actual event. This downturn started during Clinton's term. The election just hurried it up. Now the solution also has a lag. The conditions actually grow worse even though the causes of a turn up are in place. The boom was created during Bush Senior's term. It became obvious during Clinton's term. You evidently think that things have little, if any, lag. Well, you are wrong. History shows that an interest rate cut or increase takes 9 to 15 months to become effective due to both the lag in the economies response and the lag in the measurements typically used. So that is a good figure for lags calculated from events becoming obvious. Apply the same to both the boom and the bust. The boom started during Bush Sr's term (it became obvious soon after the election in 1992) and the bust started during Clinton's (it became obvious before the election in 2K (even you would agree that by Q1-01, corporate profits were shrinking which places the cause somewhere before Q3-00)). As for votes, Bush carried more states and electoral college votes and those count by the Constitution and known to both candidates as the rules for all presidential elections for centuries. Gore tried to make up the rules, after the fact, and was slapped down. He played five card poker and when his two pair were beaten by a full house, he wanted to say they were playing six card poker, then losing at six, seven and so on. After three or four tries, the arbiters said "Enough! Gore lost!" Cheaters never win! Pete

To: tejek who wrote (139065)	9/10/2001 8:30:40 AM
From: i-node	Respond to of 1578683

That's because it feels like a correct statement when you consider his speeches and performance over the past 8 mos. There is no question that Mr. Bush is less articulate than one would expect for a president. On the other hand, there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that this is indicative of a lack of intellect. Further, raw intellect is, in my view, less important than certain leadership skills which I believe Bush excels with. When you have people like Condi Rice on board, you really don't need to be able to say much. As to the economy, any honest person who recalls the events of the day will know the bust began under Clinton. However, the reality is the president has little to do with the economy, good or bad; unfortunately, the United States is comprised of mostly idiots who don't understand this so I'm sure Bush will be hammered on the issue, just as his dad was before and just as Clinton was given credit inappropriately for a good economy. The liberals have been awfully lucky over the last 10-12 years....