Tweet
Hey, before you know it, people will be blaming Bush because Americans are choosing to buy more trucks and SUVs and fewer cars. It's all Bush's fault, y'know?
-
I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891 -
Constitutionally, maybe. Since Wilson, however, our Presidents have been extremely powerful.Originally posted by DanS
The US presidency is a very weak institution.Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree...Comment
-
-
So the recession was Clinton's fault, as was the internet bubble bursting, yet today, the Presidency is too weak an institution to affect economic outcomes?Originally posted by DanS
Hey, before you know it, people will be blaming Bush because Americans are choosing to buy more trucks and SUVs and fewer cars. It's all Bush's fault, y'know?
This is whats so dangerous about Bush and his supporters. There's precisely zero accountibility.Comment
-
The value of a corporation is determined by it's stock price. There is little, if any, data to support the claim that stock prices increase with inflation. In fact, stocks didn't do well in the 70s.Originally posted by VJ
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but:
Stocks are parts of a corporation. If inflation occurs, and the absolute value of the corporation stays the same, the stock price goes up along with inflation.I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett KavanaughComment
-
Originally posted by Japher
I'm learning to ignore all the fact, DanS
Comment
-
-
You're learning to ignore anyway. That only makes you ignorant.Originally posted by Japher
I'm learning to ignore all these ignorant nay-sayers, DanS
I drank beer. I like beer. I still like beer. ... Do you like beer Senator?
- Justice Brett KavanaughComment
-
I would be prepared to accept that, but I am deeply confused by people who, ceaselessly, credit the President with all good things happening in the economy, such as GNP growth, creation of jobs, etc.Originally posted by DanS
The US presidency is a very weak institution. Many people outside the US don't realize this fact. And this doesn't even bring out the fact that economic actors (companies, individuals) make most of the economic decisions in the US. The US isn't like France.
Statistical anomaly.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.Comment
-
It wasn't Clinton's fault. I'm not Monday morning quarterbacking. He could have made it less likely to happen by lowering taxes in his second term.So the recession was Clinton's fault, as was the internet bubble bursting, yet today, the Presidency is too weak an institution to affect economic outcomes?
But ask yourself whether Clinton had much to do with the internet equities bubble. I certainly don't think he did.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
The US president is either the whipping boy or the golden boy of the country. He's praised or blamed for the state of the economy, but he has little control over it. There are lots of political ramifications, so I choose to focus on those.I would be prepared to accept that, but I am deeply confused by people who, ceaselessly, credit the President with all good things happening in the economy, such as GNP growth, creation of jobs, etc.I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891Comment
-
Remember how you were bragging about Bush not tapping the strategic Petroleum reserve? I'd say timely additions of reserved crud to the market would help smooth out spikes in oil prices and that would help lower the rate of inflation on energy prices.Originally posted by DanS
Well, maybe not precisely zero.
But almost zero. Bush's deficits may be pushing this a tenth of a percent or less. Most of the remaining is energy price increases over which Bush's role in pricing is extremely limited.Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.Comment
-
He has an aweful lot of control over the long term health of the economy. Running deficits, raising or lower taxes, regulating just about every type of economic activity imaginable, deciding on unemployment benifits, subsidies & trade barriers, etc...Originally posted by DanS
The president is either the whipping boy or the golden boy of the country. He's praised or blamed for the state of the economy, but he has little control over it.Try http://wordforge.net/index.php for discussion and debate.Comment
-
Since Al Gore invinted the internet I think he must be the reason that we had it so good during the .com era. Then when Bush came in, everything feel apart (not really, but we'll say that is when it happened because it makes us feel special).
Also, 911 occured on his watch (maybe right as he started the watch and had to deal with a poorly set up national defense system that everyone else never bothered to do anything about, but lets not mention that it makes us feel special)
Almost everytime someone attacks Bush there is a big caveat associated with it that they just care to ignore. Thus, I am doing likewise.Comment
-
I think the rule of thumb is the president can only be attributed to economic policy when he lowers taxes, or gets a lucky break. Otherwise, especially if he's republican, its out of his hands.Originally posted by DAVOUT
I would be prepared to accept that, but I am deeply confused by people who, ceaselessly, credit the President with all good things happening in the economy, such as GNP growth, creation of jobs, etc.
Comment
Comment