To: SBHX who wrote (75748 ) 10/8/2004 3:59:40 PM From: Mary Cluney Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793883 Bush's economic vision is one of the "ownership society". Despite his inarticulate shortcomings, he did say this : "...if you own something, you have a vital stake in the future of our country. The more ownership there is in America, the more vitality there is in America, and the more people have a vital stake in the future of this country." I have absolutely no bona fides to talk about the economy. What I have to say does not really matter, but I am willing to bet that a lot of people are asking the same questions. Nowadays if you were to major in economics you better be very good in mathematics. It is all about the math, calculus, regression analysis, etc .... You have to be a real rocket scientist to go on and get your Ph.d in economics. In my days, anyone who went to business school was a dummy. Kids who did not have it and who didn't want to study all that much went into business school - especially kids from rich families. But I am digressing. What I am trying to say is things are far more complex these days than just 10 or 20 years ago. It is much harder to getting into medical, law, and business school than it used to be. It is much more competitive. I am trying to expressing my concerns about George W. Bush's intellectual capabilities to manage the economy of this country. He has said himself that he did not take things seriously up until he was 40 years of age. He didn't study that much and he drink a lot. I don't see what he has done to make up for all that lost time when he didn't study or read all that much. Is there any evidence that he has done any reading since that time? Has he written anything that we can take a look at? Has he made any speech that he wrote himself? If he has not made up for lost time, then who does he get guidance from? We know and he has admitted that he does not consult with either his father or his brother Jeb Bush. We know that Paul O'Neil has written that George W. Bush does not look like he is engaged in running the country and that there is no give and take in his cabinet meetings. We know also that both Ronald Reagan and George Bush (41) relied heavily on James Baker and Donald Regan for economic advise - they met with them nearly every day. Of course, we know that Clinton had Robert Rubin. Who fulfills this/these role(s) for George W Bush?