To: geode00 who wrote (211963 ) 1/7/2007 1:39:29 AM From: Bilow Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500 Hi geode00; Re: "Not true. Clinton didn't start wars for private profiteering, Bush did. That's a presidential decision. Clinton brought in wall streeters and policy wonks to give people confidence in the economy. Bush brought in party loyalists regardless of their competence (not). That's a presidential decision. " Even if all this were true, (none of it is), the simple fact is that the President doesn't have the ability to make the economy work. If he did, every country on the planet would be led by leaders who did that, and everyone on the planet would be middle class. No, the wealth of the planet does not "trickle down" from the fingers of the leaders. It trickles up from the hard working backs of the people, the leaders make use of it largely for their own ends. Hey, if it were possible to cure the economic problems of a country by elections that would be wonderful. And if only one political party were possessed of that magic, then guess what, that's right, there would only be one political party. But the fact is that even if the Iraqis elected Hillary as president their economy would still suck. It's very easy and convenient to blame bad economies on the leader, especially when the leader is from the other team. But, taking the example of the great depression, the economies of every country on the planet simultaneously collapsed, this despite the fact that no two countries were led by the same leader. Booms and busts are the natural result of the decisions of millions of people, there is nothing that wall street or the government can do to stop them. They've been going on for over 500 years now, if it were possible to produce permanent growth it would have already been produced. -- Carl