Story Comments
Posted by: jimdoze 1 year, 5 months ago
This page is a permanent archive of the comment below and its replies.
To view this comment in the context of the full discussion for the story, use this link.
-
Neutral
jimdoze1 year, 5 months ago
-
Neutral
ybdogsct1 year, 5 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Then why don't you and NOSPINDAVE provide your DOCUMENTED EVIDENCE. Without it, your speculation means ******.
http://people.ischool.berkeley.edu/~hal/people/...
"The stock market does far better under Democrats. During those 72 years the stock market returned about 11% more a year under Democratic presidents and 2% more under Republicans - a striking difference."
DOW JONES UNDER CLINTON
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/hp?s=^DJI&a=00&b=20&...
"The DJIA rose steadily during the Clinton Presidency from 3300 in Jan 1993, to 11,500 by December 1999, before settling back at 10,600 by the time Clinton left office--a 221% increase."
DOW JONES UNDER BUSH
http://finance.yahoo.com/q/hp?s=^DJI&a=00&b=20&...
"The Dow Jones closing averages under George W. Bush has been relatively stagnant from 10,600 to 11,000--a meager 4% increase."
Reply-
Neutral
protoham1 year, 5 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If you look at who controlled congress during these times of greatness you would see that it was the Republican party. Clinton only had 2 years when the dems had control of congress, and in that two years he and them increased taxes considerably.
Keep in mind the Budget is controlled by Congress, not the President.
Reply-
Neutral
ybdogsct1 year, 5 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Actually, in the last several decades, it has been the president who sets economic policy and proposes a budget. Congress simply approves it and distributes the checks.
Here is Bush defending HIS (not Congress') economic policies.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/economy/
http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/03/10/bush....
Nice try, but it'll take more than that to overturn an academic, pee-reviewed study conducted by UCLA.
Reply -
Neutral
mesodude1 year, 5 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"If you look at who controlled congress during these times of greatness you would see that it was the Republican party."
--So which Party was in control of Congress and the White House when we were given the biggest government in history? It was Republicans, right, proto? Of course it was...
Reply -
-
Neutral
CRYMTYPHON1 year, 5 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Keep in mind the Budget is controlled by Congress, not the President."
This is false.
The president proposes how much money will be spent,
through the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) .
The president vetoes what spending he does not like.
All congress can do is overide a veto, or else negotiate what to spend the proposed amount on.
Reply
-
-
-
Neutral
ybdogsct1 year, 5 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
CLINTON'S RECORD ON JOBS
"In 1992, the American economy was barely creating jobs, wages were stagnant, and the unemployment rate was 7.5%. 22.1 million new jobs have been created since 1993, the most jobs ever created under a single Administration. The economy added an average of 248,000 jobs per month, the highest under any President. Unemployment is down from 7.5% in 1992 to 4.0% in June 2000, and in April 2000 the unemployment rate was the lowest in 30 years. The unemployment rate has fallen for 7 years in a row, and has remained below 5% for 34 months."
Reply-
Neutral
ybdogsct1 year, 5 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
BUSH'S RECORD ON JOBS
http://www.cbpp.org/4-14-04tax-sum.htm
"The early returns of Bush's tax cuts have not been good. The Bush tax cuts have contributed to revenues dropping in 2004 to the lowest level since 1950, and have been a major contributor to the dramatic shift from projected large budget surpluses to projected deficits. The tax cuts have conferred the most benefits, by far, on the highest-income households Ã;¢;; those least in need of additional resources Ã;¢;; at a time when income already is exceptionally concentrated at the top of the income spectrum. THE DESIGN OF THESE TAX CUTS WAS ILL-CONCEIVED, RESULTING IN SIGNIFICANTLY LESS ECONOMIC STIMULUS THAN COULD HAVE BEEN ACCOMPLISHED FOR THE SAME BUDGETARY COST. In part because the tax cuts were not as effective as alternative measures would have been, job creation during this recovery has been notably worse than in any other recovery since the end of World War II."
Reply
-
-
Neutral
ybdogsct1 year, 5 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://www.census.gov/prod/2007pubs/p60-233.pdf
http://www.census.gov/prod/www/abs/income.html
There was an INCREASE in Real Median Household Income under the Bill Clinton Administration from $43000 to $49500 (a 15.1% INCREASE); and a DECREASE in real median household income under George W Bush Administration from $49500 to $48201 (a 2.6% DECREASE).
Also, the poverty rating under Clinton fell from 40 million to 31 million; and rose under Bush from 31 million to 36.5 million.
http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech...
"The share of income received by households in the top fifth of the income distribution rose from 42% to 50%, while the share of income received by those in the bottom fifth declined from 7% to 5%.
Reply -
Neutral
ybdogsct1 year, 5 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
REPUBLICANS AND FISCAL IRRESPONSIBILITY
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...
"Alan Greenspan levels unusually harsh criticism at the Republican Party, arguing that Bush abandoned the conservative principle of fiscal restraint. Greenspan praises Clinton's tough anti-deficit policies as 'an act of political courage.' But he expresses deep disappointment with Bush. 'My biggest frustration remained the Bush's unwillingness to wield his veto against out-of-control spending.'
Greenspan accuses the Republicans of being too eager to tolerate excessive federal spending in exchange for political opportunity. Dealing with a budget surplus, Clinton proposed devoting the extra money to 'save Social Security first.' Greenspan writes, 'I played no role in finding the answer, but I had to admire the one Clinton's. The truth was that Reagan had borrowed from Clinton, and Clinton was having to pay it back.'"
Reply-
Neutral
ybdogsct1 year, 5 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=3184
"Supporters and critics of the administration are tripping over themselves to blame the deficit on tax cuts, the war, and a slow economy. But the real truth is that national defense is far from being responsible for all of the spending increases. According to the new numbers, defense spending will have risen by about 34% since Bush came into office. But, at the same time, non-defense discretionary spending will have skyrocketed by almost 28%. The administration has been free spending into the face of a recessionary economy from day one without making any serious attempt to reduce costs."
Reply -
Neutral
ybdogsct1 year, 5 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/1999/0202fede...
"The big question is how to use these surpluses. Clinton called on the nation to save most of the budget surpluses that loom in our nation's economic future. At the same time, his Republican critics have been calling for sizeable tax cuts, which would underwrite increased personal consumption, and some of his Democratic supporters have been calling for increased government spending on long-neglected domestic priorities."
In effect, Bush's tax cuts represented the sentiment of the Republican party on how best to spend Clinton's budget surpluses. Republicans wanted to spend the money and cut taxes. Clinton wanted to save for SS, health care, and debt reduction.
Reply
-
-
Neutral
ybdogsct1 year, 5 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
DEMOCRATS & FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...
"Dealing with a budget surplus in his second term, Clinton proposed devoting the extra money to "save Social Security first." Greenspan writes, "I played no role in finding the answer, but I had to admire the one Clinton and his policymakers came up with."
http://www.brookings.edu/opinions/1999/0202fede...
"The significance of prospective surpluses of nearly $5 trillion over the next 15 years is hard to appreciate. The big question is how to use these surpluses. Clinton called on the nation to save most of the budget surpluses that loom in our nation's economic future. The largest component is the transfer of bonds to Social Security and Medicare. These transfers would go about half way to closing the projected long-term deficit in Social Security."
Reply-
Neutral
ybdogsct1 year, 5 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...
"On its second day under Democratic management, the House yesterday overwhelmingly approved new rules aimed at reining in deficit spending."
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/...
"House Democrats, seeking to show they will be better stewards of taxpayers' money than their Republican predecessors, approved new budget rules Friday that require any new spending or tax cuts to be paid for by other spending cuts or tax increases. The so-called pay-as-you-go budget rules were passed with broad support as part of a package that also requires lawmakers to disclose which "earmarks," or spending items, they have added to bills."
Reply
-
-
Neutral
ybdogsct1 year, 5 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What's ironic is that although Republicans are perceived as good for business, the economy actually performs worse when Republicans are in power. For example, today
1) the purchasing power of the American dollar is at record lows, inflation is a real threat
2) the banks are being crushed by the sub-prime crisis
3) energy and food prices are skyrocketing
4) the stock market is declining
5) the budget surplus has been squandered
6) the national deficit is at record highs, and
7) the unemployment rating is deceivingly high.
It's going to take more than yours and NOSPINDAVE's unsubstantiated speculating to spin these FACTS.
So go ahead. Throw your support behind McCain, who BY HIS OWN ADMISSION, has confessed that he doesn't understand as much as he should about the economy. Let's see how successful he will be at reversing Bush's disastrous domestic legacy, when McCain favors continuing much of Bush's economic policies.
I'll wait for YOUR EVIDENCE.
Reply -
Neutral
Goppy1 year, 5 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Here's a suggestion dozey ... never ... NEVER question ybdoggy on the facts.
He's a walkin encyclopedia.
Unfortunately, this causes UNHOLY TROUBLE for the Righties who only want to repeat the Jingoism and Propaganda that Rush Limbaugh and the HUNDREDS of similar Right Wing Info-tainers who rule media.
I personally refer to ybdoggy as the Propaganda Killer.
Although, sometimes I refer to him as the Jingo Jouster.
Reply-
-
-
Neutral
jimdoze1 year, 5 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
No doubt he is a walking encyclopedia. Let's not forget that the restructuring of the American economy in the 80s and the end of the cold war set the stage for a booming economy in the 90s. While I am sure you and yours will deny that, it is a simple fact underlying all the others.
"non-defense discretionary spending will have skyrocketed by almost 28%. The administration has been free spending into the face of a recessionary economy from day one without making any serious attempt to reduce costs."
Where do you think the recessionary economy came from?
Furthermore, I am so very happy that the left is finding non-defense discretionary spending a problem. Let us join hands and put a stop to it!
Reply-
Neutral
ybdogsct1 year, 5 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
JIMDOZE:
"Let's not forget that the restructuring of the American economy in the 80s and the end of the cold war set the stage for a booming economy in the 90s."
http://clinton4.nara.gov/WH/New/html/20000112_1...
"In 1992, the American economy was barely creating jobs, wages were stagnant, and the unemployment rate was 7.5%. 22.1 million new jobs have been created since 1993, the most jobs ever created under a single Administration. The economy added an average of 248,000 jobs per month, the highest under any President. Unemployment is down from 7.5% in 1992 to 4.0% in June 2000, and in April 2000 the unemployment rate was the lowest in 30 years. The unemployment rate has fallen for 7 years in a row, and has remained below 5% for 34 months."
Reply -
Neutral
ybdogsct1 year, 5 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://www.forbes.com/2004/07/20/cx_da_0720pres...
"Clinton campaigned on the economy and had remarkable success. GDP growth during his eight years averaged 3.5% per year. The economy also added jobs at a faster rate under Clinton than under any postwar president except Carter. The public's confidence in the economy hit an all-time high in the summer of 2000, near the end of Clinton's second term, according to Gallup. In the summer of 1992, before he was elected, it was at an all-time low.
Of the ten postwar presidents, the first President Bush brings up the rear. He ranks dead last for both GDP growth and income growth and also ballooned the deficit at a rate faster than every president but Ford."
Reply -
Neutral
ybdogsct1 year, 5 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/ar...
"Greenspan praises Clinton's tough anti-deficit policies, calling Clinton's 1993 economic plan 'an act of political courage.'
Former Bush Treasury Secretary Paul H. O'Neill has quoted Cheney as saying, 'Reagan proved deficits don't matter.'
Greenspan says, '"Deficits don't matter," to my chagrin became part of the Republicans' rhetoric.' Greenspan argues that 'deficits must matter' and that uncontrolled government spending and borrowing can produce high inflation 'and economic devastation.'
'The hard truth was that Reagan had borrowed from Clinton, and Clinton was having to pay it back.'
Dealing with a budget surplus in his second term, Clinton proposed devoting the extra money to 'save Social Security first.' Greenspan writes, 'I played no role in finding the answer, but I had to admire the one Clinton and his policymakers came up with.'"
Reply
-
-
-
loading ...
NoSpinDave
protoham
birddog54
libsRfunny
Wolfie2007
bubba2
Goppy
baddad59
Post Reply
You are not signed in to Propeller.com. Please sign in to post a reply.