APP - The Bush Recession... Much worse than the Carter Recession was!

[belme1201]

I believe you are wrong on the unemployment rate. It was a faux economy in the Clinton era and then the bubble burst, just in time to hand it over to Bush. 500,000 jobs were outsourced before Clinton left office.

I stand corrected, from memory I used a number Clinton had achieved earlier in the year the number at the time of the bush transition was 4%, still an unemployment number bush was never able to achieve in the next 8 years, and an increase of not quite double(4%-7.6%) at the end of his 8 years. If you compare job growth under the 2 men, the difference is even greater.
More evidence Supply Side is rubbish.

The ultimate economy for a working man is a regular check to cash to provide for his family, that is not a "faux economy". Looking for a job and not getting as much as you made before, if you are lucky, is the reality of the bush economy. I believe bush and Clinton had the same 8 years in office to achieve their goals. I also believe that bush did achieve his goals and few benefitted by plan.

 

[Topspin]

I stand corrected, from memory I used a number Clinton had achieved earlier in the year the number at the time of the bush transition was 4%, still an unemployment number bush was never able to achieve in the next 8 years, and an increase of not quite double(4%-7.6%) at the end of his 8 years. If you compare job growth under the 2 men, the difference is even greater.
More evidence Supply Side is rubbish.

The ultimate economy for a working man is a regular check to cash to provide for his family, that is not a "faux economy". Looking for a job and not getting as much as you made before, if you are lucky, is the reality of the bush economy. I believe bush and Clinton had the same 8 years in office to achieve their goals. I also believe that bush did achieve his goals and few benefitted by plan.

I'm going out on a limb and say you weren't a business school graduate?

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

I stand corrected, from memory I used a number Clinton had achieved earlier in the year the number at the time of the bush transition was 4%, still an unemployment number bush was never able to achieve in the next 8 years, and an increase of not quite double(4%-7.6%) at the end of his 8 years. If you compare job growth under the 2 men, the difference is even greater.
More evidence Supply Side is rubbish.

The ultimate economy for a working man is a regular check to cash to provide for his family, that is not a "faux economy". Looking for a job and not getting as much as you made before, if you are lucky, is the reality of the bush economy. I believe bush and Clinton had the same 8 years in office to achieve their goals. I also believe that bush did achieve his goals and few benefitted by plan.

Again, you are comparing a time of economic BOOM to a period that included TWO recessions. Part of the reason for the second recession is the fact that Clinton eliminated Glass Steagall. As for the first recession, that began while Clinton was still in office. The fact that Bush inherited that (just as Obama inherited the current one) seems to escape you.

You are also incorrect in stating that Bush didn't get the unemployment back down. AGAIN, if you would actually look at the data you would most likely stop making incorrect statements from memory.

 

[belme1201]

I'm going out on a limb and say you weren't a business school graduate?

......and I'm going out on a limb to say you've never graduated anything, save
perhaps, kindergarten? Now, if you've got anything worth saying in response to the post, do so if you're capable.

 

[Jarod]

Again, you are comparing a time of economic BOOM to a period that included TWO recessions. Part of the reason for the second recession is the fact that Clinton eliminated Glass Steagall. As for the first recession, that began while Clinton was still in office. The fact that Bush inherited that (just as Obama inherited the current one) seems to escape you.

You are also incorrect in stating that Bush didn't get the unemployment back down. AGAIN, if you would actually look at the data you would most likely stop making incorrect statements from memory.

I congradulate you on being one of the few conservatives to admit that President Obama inherited this recession.

 

[belme1201]

Again, you are comparing a time of economic BOOM to a period that included TWO recessions. Part of the reason for the second recession is the fact that Clinton eliminated Glass Steagall. As for the first recession, that began while Clinton was still in office. The fact that Bush inherited that (just as Obama inherited the current one) seems to escape you.

You are also incorrect in stating that Bush didn't get the unemployment back down. AGAIN, if you would actually look at the data you would most likely stop making incorrect statements from memory.

Let me ask again, what was the number on the day bush took office and what was the lowest point he was able to reach thereafter? A simple question. Use your own BLS link.
Are my figures, day 1-4%, end of term-7.6% correct? What % of increase is that? All the excuses and winnowing can't change the numbers.
Perhaps you would like to show with historical numbers, the magic of Supply Side Ecomomics.
Would you like to compare, also, the depth of the recession bush inherited as compared to the recession he passed off to Obama? A bit like comparing a burp to an appendectomy, no?

 

[belme1201]

Again, you are comparing a time of economic BOOM to a period that included TWO recessions. Part of the reason for the second recession is the fact that Clinton eliminated Glass Steagall. As for the first recession, that began while Clinton was still in office. The fact that Bush inherited that (just as Obama inherited the current one) seems to escape you.

You are also incorrect in stating that Bush didn't get the unemployment back down. AGAIN, if you would actually look at the data you would most likely stop making incorrect statements from memory.

Clinton "eliminated" Glass-Steagall? Let me point out that the authors of the bill repealing it, passed by the GOP Congress, were three GOP bank lobby lackeys headed by the financial guru, Sen. Phil Gramm(R-TX). I agree, Clinton shouldn't have signed it, but I thought I'd clarify your accidental omission.
I should add, not surprising, that former Senator Gramm is now a million dollar executive with UBS, the much loved Swiss bank subject to the relaxation of rules Gramm authored.

 

[uscitizen]

Clinton "eliminated" Glass-Steagall? Let me point out that the authors of the bill repealing it, passed by the GOP Congress, were three GOP bank lobby lackys headed by the financial guru, Sen. Phil Gramm(R-TX). I agree, Clinton shouldn't have signed it, but I thought I'd clarify your accidental omission.
I should add, not surprising, that former Senator Graham is now a million dollar executive with UBS, the much loved Swiss bank subject to the relaxation of rules Gramm authored.

Of course thate can be no relationship to the deregulation and Grahm's current job.

 

[evince]

Maybe Clinton got convinced of glass steagals need to be eliminated.

He was wrong and the Bush team and the gop congress was wrong to ignore for years the adverse impact of its removal.

They stood and appluaded while the country sank.

Its one thing to think something is a good idea and another not to do anything when the idea is proved wrong by the facts on the ground

 

[uscitizen]

Maybe Clinton got convinced of glass steagals need to be eliminated.

He was wrong and the Bush team and the gop congress was wrong to ignore for years the adverse impact of its removal.

They stood and appluaded while the country sank.

Its one thing to think something is a good idea and another not to do anything when the idea is proved wrong by the facts on the ground

they applauded just as long as it was only biting the little guys butt. When it started biting theirs Bush got up and yelled armegeddon if we do not bail out the finiancial institutions. We need a few trillion of your tax dollars.

 

[cawacko]

Maybe Clinton got convinced of glass steagals need to be eliminated.

He was wrong and the Bush team and the gop congress was wrong to ignore for years the adverse impact of its removal.

They stood and appluaded while the country sank.

Its one thing to think something is a good idea and another not to do anything when the idea is proved wrong by the facts on the ground

The bill was signed in 1999. The Dems took control of Congress in 2007. They have had three years now to repeal including the past year with Obama as President. Why have they done nothing to repeal it?

 

[uscitizen]

The bill was signed in 1999. The Dems took control of Congress in 2007. They have had three years now to repeal including the past year with Obama as President. Why have they done nothing to repeal it?

corporate influence in our government.

 

[Cancel5]

Geebus... Let's not make me move the thread.

Geebus! I love it! I am stealing it.

 

[evince]

Because the economy has to be stablized first.

Any attemp while Bush was in office was doomed to failure.

 

[cawacko]

Because the economy has to be stablized first.

Any attemp while Bush was in office was doomed to failure.

So even though the 'facts' on the ground show this act is the cause of our economic problems we don't want to remove it until the economy stablilizes? Doesn't that sound like reverse logic?

 

[uscitizen]

So even though the 'facts' on the ground show this act is the cause of our economic problems we don't want to remove it until the economy stablilizes? Doesn't that sound like reverse logic?

I lean for immediate replacement of regulations on the finiancial industry that worked so well for so long.
However Desh might have a point, what kind of turmoil would happen in our current situation if this was done? Would things fall apart worse?

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Let me ask again, what was the number on the day bush took office and what was the lowest point he was able to reach thereafter? A simple question. Use your own BLS link.
Are my figures, day 1-4%, end of term-7.6% correct? What % of increase is that? All the excuses and winnowing can't change the numbers.
Perhaps you would like to show with historical numbers, the magic of Supply Side Ecomomics.
Would you like to compare, also, the depth of the recession bush inherited as compared to the recession he passed off to Obama? A bit like comparing a burp to an appendectomy, no?

Again, you are talking about 4.2% vs. 4.4%... virtually identical. Again, you are comparing an economic boom period to one of a recession. Again, you are ignoring the fact that Clinton played a part in the CURRENT recession by eliminating Glass Steagall.

If you want to take a look at the damage done, look at the Nasdaq... it lost 80% of its value from peak to trough in the 2000-2002 downturn. It never recovered. The highest it got was about 2900 in Oct 2007. Then subsequently has dropped back to the current level of 2000. Bush was horrid when it comes to fiscal responsibility, no question. But he also did not have the benefit of a booming new technology like Clinton did.

Again, by your standards, then Obama is worse than Bush. Because unemployment has gone up over 16% in just a few months in office. OMG!!!

If you don't understand economics, just say so and quit pretending that you do. All you are doing is cherry picking one economic indicator (a lagging one at that) and trying to make a case out of it.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Clinton "eliminated" Glass-Steagall? Let me point out that the authors of the bill repealing it, passed by the GOP Congress, were three GOP bank lobby lackeys headed by the financial guru, Sen. Phil Gramm(R-TX). I agree, Clinton shouldn't have signed it, but I thought I'd clarify your accidental omission.
I should add, not surprising, that former Senator Gramm is now a million dollar executive with UBS, the much loved Swiss bank subject to the relaxation of rules Gramm authored.

Unbelievable. Yes, I have stated many times that it was both parties that were responsible, but in your little scenario you are pretending that everything that occured during their time in office was the result of who was President. If you are going bring Congress into it, then yes, the Rep led Congress put forth Glass Steagall that Clinton signed. The REP led Congress also put forth all of the balanced budgets. You want to blame them for the bad that happened under Clinton, while giving no credit to them for the good. Why is that? Because you are a partisan hack?

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Maybe Clinton got convinced of glass steagals need to be eliminated.

He was wrong and the Bush team and the gop congress was wrong to ignore for years the adverse impact of its removal.

They stood and appluaded while the country sank.

Its one thing to think something is a good idea and another not to do anything when the idea is proved wrong by the facts on the ground

Tell us Desh... what were the Dems doing from 1999-2007? Oh yeah... NOTHING.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Because the economy has to be stablized first.

Any attemp while Bush was in office was doomed to failure.

LMAO... that is complete bullshit. The economy doesn't have to be stabilized to put Glass Steagall back into place. Your partisan hackery is showing again.