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: combjelly who wrote (365759)	1/7/2008 11:53:21 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576823

"Not by almost any metric......." That isn't true, Ted. The average unemployment rate has been better. Now, there are a variety of reasons why that doesn't really tell you anything, but... That's why I said "by almost any metric" as opposed to all. However, the unemployment rate is a special case. Since WW II, I don't think there is any recession when it started where the unemployment rate was as low as it was when Bush took office....remember it was less than 4% at its best under Clinton. In fact, the Clinton expansion broke new ground for economists when it came to unemployment. Before Clinton, most economists believed the country was a full employment when the unemployment rate was at 5%, meaning the rate would not be able to get below 5%. So the fact that the ave. unemployment rate for the Bush years has been better than the ave. under Clinton doesn't really mean much in the broader context.