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 : Liberalism: Do You Agree We've Had Enough of It? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: joseffy who wrote (113705)	9/23/2011 3:25:49 PM
From: Jorj X Mckie	3 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 224744

Where I think it is ok to question the causes of economic downturns and sling arrows at either side to place blame, blatantly re-writing history just seems foolish. Most of us here were alive and quite aware in 2000. Most of us had significant portions of our wealth destroyed in 2000. Many of us had increased debt due to feeling comfortable with our financial situation. When that comfort level went away along with a big store of our net worth, the debt didn't disappear with it. This was the start of our current economic woes. Of course, our federal government responded to the economic conditions in the only way that they know. The RE bubble ensued and people here on SI identified the potential for the real estate crash back in 2001. The government involvement in making RE mortgages were akin to the stimulus packages that Obama currently supports. And Obama's attempts to stimulate the economy will have the same end result This isn't a defense of Bush or an attack on Clinton. It's a simple statement of fact. Bush did not get handed a clean economy. Call it luck or call it skill, but Clinton was the beneficiary of a booming economy during his tenure. That filled the government coffers. That boom ended nearly a year before Bush took office. One could logically assume that the tax base went with it. Obama certainly didn't have a booming economy waiting for him. To say otherwise would be a lie. I personally believe that both parties had their part in that. I don't know if the right word for re-writing history in this manner is simply disingenuous or flat out dishonest.