SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: SBHX who wrote (75748)10/8/2004 12:25:33 PM
From: Ilaine  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793883
 
There are some real things that real Presidents living in the real world can really do to improve the economy.

Most important - given that Congress makes the laws but the President executes them, the most important thing a President can do is make the government more efficient. Efficiency lowers costs for everyone.

Also - given that the President proposes the annual budget but Congress decides what to allocate, it's important to forecast wisely and help Congress allocate well.

Also - given that the Federal Reserve system administers monetary policy, it's important to appoint good people to the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve. The President appoints (and the Senate confirms) the members of the BOG and the Chairman of the BOG (these days Alan Greenspan). Most people don't seem to understand that the Fed is the quasi-government agency which administers monetary policy, or that it's in large part independent of day-to-day tinkering by Presidents OR Congress. Thank heavens.



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?