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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (360457)	11/28/2007 12:35:25 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576660

Tim, its common knowledge among economists....at least in the real world......that the country needs to produce at least 150k jobs per month to keep up with a growing labor force. Since 2002, how many months has the economy produced 150K jobs? If job growth under Clinton was better, that only means job growth was unusually good then, not that its poor now. You look at that comparison as if it was everything. Clinton started out with an economy that had already started to turn upwards before he became president, Bush inherited the downturn that started under Clinton. Clinton was able to decrease military spending because of the end of the cold war. Bush had 9/11 and the war on terror. More generally you give to much credit or blame for what happens with the economy to the current president. (Not that Bush would deserve blame even if the economy was 100% determined by presidential policies because the economy has been doing well) But the reality is that most of the time the president and his polices are not the decisive factor.