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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (501471)	12/1/2003 11:59:45 AM
From: JakeStraw	Respond to of 769667

Kenneth, I find it hilarious that you have been reduced to agreeing with American Spirit! LOL!

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (501471)	12/1/2003 12:47:52 PM
From: American Spirit	Respond to of 769667

The Clinton economy was great because EVERYONE won, not just the corporate special interests, and the Treasury was not being looted in the process. The oil-war-privatization economy of Bush is a disaster in the making. The debt it's loaing us with is astounding and someday we are going to have to pay it off. Bushies should remember that the costs of Vietnam have STILL not been paid off. This war and the tax cuts for the richest Americans together account for almost trillion bucks in red ink for the government. What do we do about it? Fire Bush for one thing. The very same arguments the GOP used against Grey Davis apply to Bush, but in a much greater way.

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (501471)	12/1/2003 1:03:14 PM
From: DavesM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

Kenneth, Given the magnitude of the market crash that began in early 2000, and the recession the Bush Administration inherited; it is not surprising that jobs were lost so far, in during the Bush Administration. quote.bloomberg.com "...The Institute for Supply Management's factory index increased to 62.8 last month, the highest since December 1983. November was the fifth straight month of readings higher than 50, indicating expansion. Economists on average had expected a reading of 58.4, based on a Bloomberg News survey. Factories added employees in November for the first time since September 2000, the report showed..."

To: Kenneth E. Phillipps who wrote (501471)	12/1/2003 2:13:40 PM
From: Oeconomicus	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769667

the worst record on jobs for any president since Herbert Hoover led at the beginning of the Great Depression Baseless claim and you know it. The facts are that: * the numbers of unemployed in this cycle haven't even reached the numbers in the '91 recession, much less the early '80s or the Great Depression, and * the unemployment rate is right at its average since 1960 and .4% below its average of the last 30 years; it peaked this summer at 6.4%, the 30-year average, well below its 1992 high and not even remotely close to the levels of 1975 and 1982-83. And if you're basing your claim on the "2.6 million" job loss number, you're still wrong - even ignoring the fact that you're misleadingly using an absolute number while the labor force has grown by 35 million (31%) over the last 20 years and has quadrupled since the Great Depression. The fact is, based on non-farm payrolls (which many economists suspect has overstated job losses in this cycle due to the exclusion of small businesses and self-employed), the economy lost more jobs (in absolute numbers) in 1981-1982 than in this cycle. It also lost 2.2 million or more jobs on three other occasions since the Great Depression, in 1975, 1958 and 1949 - again, from a much smaller labor force. And that's not even counting the end of WWII, when the economy lost 4.3 million jobs. Setting the record straight (and using a meaningful measure as opposed to your misleading one), job losses as a percentage of each cycle peak in non-farm payrolls (i.e. peak to trough percentage of jobs lost) since the end of the Great Depression are as follows: Peak Trough % Lost 1943 1945 10.1% 1948 1949 5.2% 1953 1954 3.4% 1957 1958 4.4% 1960 1961 2.3% 1974 1975 2.8% 1981 1982 3.1% 1990 1991 1.5% 2001 2003 2.0% Seven other downturns since the depression worse than this one in terms of job losses. Source of all data: bls.gov Any way you cut it, consider your lie exposed.