The Bush Economy Still Sucks
How about that economy?
The U.S. economy grew at an annual rate of 2.6% in the second quarter, below the preliminary estimate of 2.9% and down from 5.6% in the first quarter, the Commerce Department reported Thursday.
A lagging housing market, indicative of a sluggish economy, suggests the economy will continue to slow the rest of the year. This probably means the Federal Reserve will hold interest rates steady at 5.25%.
The Commerce Department cited downturns in personal consumption expenditures, in equipment and software and in federal government spending, among others, for the deceleration in GDP growth.
Federal spending has increased by a massive 9 percent. The consumer price index for living expensives is up.. Housing sales are also lagging. The only good news is gas prices are taking a dip.
When Bill Clinton left office, the unemployment rate was 4.0 percent. That is a sharp contrast to President Bush's unemployment rate.
2001 4.7
2002 5.8
2003 6.0
2004 5.5
2005 5.1
Here is a chart to show Bush's first-term record on private sector job creation. Compare that to other presidents.
posted by Michael Hussey @ 8:20 PM
8 Comments
8 Comments:
Thank heaven for misleading graphs.
Why is it limited to Bush's first term in office, when he inherited a sagging economy from Clinton and had the economically disastrous twin tower attacks less than a year later?
I guess it's time to recycle the old news after Bush's policies have been implemented and the economy has recovered to the point where the Dow is set to reach an all-time high and the days of full employment have returned.
Clinton's unemployment percentage at election time was almost identical to Bush's, BTW.
I'll bet you complained about high unemployment back then, didn't you Michael?
Yeah, right.
Misery Index Comparison: Clinton v Bush
The 5.5 percent unemployment rate in July is identical to what Clinton faced in July 1996 when he went on to win re-election. It is much lower than the 7.7 percent rate that Bush's father saw in July 1992.
The problem for Bush is that unemployment was only 4 percent in July 2000, setting a new standard for good times.
"If you went back and you asked people in the 1980s what full employment was, they would have told you 6 percent," said Martin Regalia, chief economist of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. "We're at 5.5 percent now, and everybody says it's a jobs problem."
Let that sink in. We're at a level of employment that is traditionally marked as "full employment" but Michael Hussey is recycling statistics from four years ago in order to suggest that Bush's record on jobs sucks.
Yet another in the string of evidences that indicate that Hussey doesn't know what he's talking about, and he's willing to use that ignorance for the sake of his political cause.
Better late than never with the URL.
Did I touch a nerve? ;)
Yeah.
I don't like graphs that lie.
I don't like bloggers who lie using graphs.
As I pointed out, (if we credit Presidents with having significant effects on the economy) Bush's policies resulted in a return to full employment and restoration of the Dow plunge the occurred after the 9-11 attacks.
Apparently that touches a nerve with mindless Democrat partisans--so much so that they try to cover up the success with misleading news from four years ago.
I imagine that I could find a lie that would touch a nerve with you, Michael, if I were inclined to lie.
Bryan, you just don't know how to quit me.
Yeah, remind me of that in three weeks.
I stay so long as I enjoy making my point (or until I get banned, which is rare but it has happened). You seem satisfied to blurt out lousy arguments and then roll over in the commentary section.
Maybe you're just biding your time until I leave so you can go back and slip in the last word several weeks too late.
You'll probably have to do some editing on the part where you got impatient to see a reply that I had given you a month before.
You don't know what you're talking about, Michael. It might as well be the theme of your blog.
You might be able to cover up the evidence fromt they eyes of others, but it will live on in your memory.
Even if you're so self-deluded that you don't realize that you don't know what you're talking about, you'll remember not being able to come up with answers to justify the positions you cling to by blind faith.
I stay so long as I enjoy making my point (or until I get banned, which is rare but it has happened).
You, Bryan? No. I'm shocked! You're such a champion of civil discourse and have such a charming personality. I can't believe anyone would ban you from their blog.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home