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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: michael97123 who wrote (148666)	10/22/2004 4:24:03 PM
From: Michael Watkins	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I merely commented on who is most directly responsible for Tulipmania, and the answer is Alan Greenspan, not Bill Clinton. Aside from tax and trade policy, Government doesn't have a lot to do with the economy. Certain domestic policies can entice or scare away investors, that is true. But by and large, its monetary policy that makes economies shrink or expand, in conjunction with monetary policy in other major (and minor) economies the world over. Alan Greenspan and the Federal Reserve have a lot more direct control over the US economy than Bush does. Since the economy is a concern of long term strategic interest to the US, it is largely above politics. Perhaps Sec. Treas. has some political influence, but the hard core economic theorists working at the fed have more, I am sure. Your response to me suggests that you don't want me to be honest with my opinions. I did not blame Bush for the economy, that's a Kerry campaign tactic. I am not a Kerry apologist. My primary, but not my only, issue with Bush is foreign policy and abuse of power. This is a foreign policy thread, remember?