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 : Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Kerry -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: American Spirit who wrote (5994)	3/9/2004 4:57:39 PM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

Its the Clinton/Gore recession.....and it existed big time....but thanks to GWB it is slowly being erased....

To: American Spirit who wrote (5994)	3/9/2004 5:09:30 PM
From: tonto	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

No, who rigged oil prices, and how did they do so? We know who rigged that.

To: American Spirit who wrote (5994)	3/9/2004 5:10:36 PM
From: Original Mad Dog	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 81568

Just stating the "Clinton recession" never existed. Bushies keep using that term. It never happened. March 2001 was the beginning Then how do you explain the government's GDP figures showing declining GDP in the third quarter of 2000? It did happen. You can close your eyes and not read the evidence, you can repeat the mantra over and over that it didn't happen, but it did: Message 19895611 Message 19875278 To:American Spirit who wrote (1176) From: Original Mad Dog Wednesday, Mar 3, 2004 7:40 PM Respond to of 1248 In December 2003, the government revised its figures based on improved data for a number of time periods and concluded based on more detailed statistics that is has gathered that the decline in GDP first began in the third quarter of 2000: bea.gov (see Tab 1, Cell G5 of Spreadsheet, showing GDP declined 0.5 percent in the third quarter of 2000, then declined again 0.2 percent in the 1st quarter of 2001, 0.6 percent in the second quarter of 2001, and 1.3 percent in the third quarter of 2001 (the last three weeks of which were 9/11 and its aftermath). Any rational observor can see that Bush inherited a declining economy reeling from the effects of the stock market bubble's deflation and the post Y2K decline in technology investment. Those things may or may not be Clinton's "fault", but they happened while he was President (as did the majority of the stock market's decline). This news release also includes the same chart showing the decline in the third quarter of 2000: bea.gov The revision of the data was part of a comprehensive long term project to improve the reliability of the data from 1929-2003, as described in this report: bea.gov Since then, coincidentally (?) at around the time the tax cuts began to be implemented, the GDP has gone up nine consecutive quarters, by an average of 3.4 percent. Here are the numbers: 2.0 4.7 1.9 3.4 1.3 2.0 3.1 8.2 4.1 Since President Bush's economic policies were implemented, GDP has grown at an impressive pace. Before those policies were implemented, including while Clinton was still President, GDP was stagnating or declining. I have good reason not to take you as gospel. This is one of those times you have made a mistake