Rebups ALWAYS kill the economy (my comments & nyt article)

[KelleyKramer]

I really hope every Democrat reads this.

You need to remind ALL your conservative friends about the facts. Here it is, the economy grows five times faster under a Democrats direction.

It never ceases to amaze me that all my conservative friends buy into the lie that Republicans are good for the economy.

Here is another fact that you can tell your conservative friends (this should actually be shouted from the rooftops!) ...

EVERY recession in the last 75 years was started by a Republican. And every recession the last 75 years was CORRECTED by a Democrat president.

For some reason these people think Republicans know something about the economy, but nothing could be further from the truth. We have got to talk to all of them about this.

And I'll take it a step further..

How many conservative friends have told you that Democrats are for 'big government'?

FACT reminder -- George Bush and the Republicans in congress have increased the size of government by 27% in just three years. The largest increase in 'big government' in the history of the country!

Add to that, more red ink, more debt, more interest payments than your child will ever be able to pay off.

More stock market drops under Republicans, more recessions under Republicans, more massive debt under Republicans, more death and war under Republicans.

Why would any average American vote for that?

If they don’t understand that or 'get it' then its our job to inform them.

Its high time for all of us to get vocal and get out there and tell folks about the basic facts, like who has the best 75 year record of handling the economy.

Remind them every chance you get, it will do them and all of us some good,


Best!
Kelley

================ http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/20/business/20scene.html?ex=1069995600&en=e0d6f62320b9e262&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE


Which Party in the White House Means Good Times for Investors?


DOES the stock market do better when a Republican is
president or when a Democrat is?

The answer is: It's not even close. The stock market
does far better under Democrats.

This perhaps surprising finding is examined by two
finance professors at the University of California at
Los Angeles, Pedro Santa-Clara and Rossen Valkanov, in
an article titled "Political Cycles and the Stock
Market," published in the October issue of The Journal
of Finance.

Professors Santa-Clara and Valkanov look at the excess
market return - the difference between a broad index
of stock prices (similar to the Standard & Poor's
500-stock index) and the three-month Treasury bill
rate - between 1927 and 1998. The excess return
measures how attractive stock investments are compared
with completely safe investments like short-term
T-bills.

EDITED BY ADMIN: COPYRIGHT

[tritsofme]

1. Good analysis and generally right on the money,

>>EVERY recession in the last 75 years was started by a Republican. And every recession the last 75 years was CORRECTED by a Democrat president.

But if you really want to get technical there were recessions in 1948 and 1980.

[KelleyKramer]

2. Carter corrected Nixon/Ford recession

Not sure what you are talking about with a recession for Truman in 1948?

But there was no recession in 1980.

The terrible recession started by Nixon and Ford was corrected by president Carter.


.

[tritsofme]

3. Well yes,

there were recessions in 1948 and 1980.

1980 being the shortest recession in the post-war period.

And to be technical once again, the Nixon/Ford recession ended in March of 1975.

[lynndew2]

4. Seems a silly thread to start now.

The Economy is rebounding on every scale. And this last recession was started in the Clinton years by his cooking the books. The Economy is not gonna be a good selling point come election time, so its best to stop harping on it now.

Carters years had double digit unemployment and was even called the days of mailaise. Please check your facts before you post economy stuff.

The economy runs in a cycle and it is running very fast in an up cycle now. We need to forget the economy and try to run on other issues. And pure hate of Bush wont do it.

I am sorry if I upset you but I think its time we all look at the truth. Hate Bush wont win. Ideas might.

[tritsofme]

5. Yep,

the downturn started under Clinton, but the recession didnt begin until Q1 of 2001.

What I do believe in is the endurance of the business cycle. The economy will recover regardless of reckless fiscal policy.

[lynndew2]

6. Thank you. Thats all I was saying.

And it is recovering very strong right now. So it is suicide to be playing that game now for the Democrats. It will be strong come election time so we need to find other things to use. And by the same professionals, the recession ended in november 2001.

[KelleyKramer]

7. "And this last recession was started in the Clinton years "

Please tell me about this Clinton recession.

Are you talking about the 22 million new jobs Clinton created?

Maybe you are talking about the biggest economic growth in the history of the United States under Bill Clinton.

Is that what you are talking about?

[tritsofme]

8. People give presidents far too much credit and blame for economic

conditions.

The last half of 2000 was really pretty bad, and the economy barely grew at all, to no fault of Clinton.

The 90's boom had to end sometime, and the fiscal policies of Clinton extended it as long as possible, but you just cant boom forever. There eventually will be a recession, just as the economy always recovers.

Right now it seems as we are engaged in a solid recovery, no thanks to bush.

Presidents have actually very little power over the economy, and the fed is much more powerful.

[LuCifer]

11. Bull CRAP

I believe what MY OWN EYES tell me, and my eyes say NOTHING but NOW HIRING signs EVERYWHERE in 2000, yes, even the LAST HALF. Are you high? In addition to which, in the summer of 2001, NO ONE was hiring. I tried and tried and tried to get a job, and NOTHING. If presidents have as you say (or whatever rightwing loony is paying you to say this crap) "actually very little power over the economy" then please feel free to explain why it is that Clinton had a SURPLUS of approx. $5 BILLION...and our current jackass in the White house has a DEFICIT of $5 BILLION? I'm on the edge of my friggin seat waiting and hyperventilating to hear how you spin this.

[tritsofme]

17. I dont know why you are calling me a rightwing looney,

I voted for Clinton twice and for Gore as well.

Real GDP did not grow more than 1% in the second half of 2000, that is just a fact, you can ignore it if you want to.

Presidents can accelerate or slow down the business cycle, but they cannot change it. There will always be recessions, no matter who is in charge.

It is my belief that if Gore had become president, there would have been a recession, but this downturn would not have been half as severe, and the lingering effects would be gone by now. However bush's fiscal policy has been reckless, and that is why the recession ended 2 years ago and we are just now starting to feel the effects of the recovery.

Im not defending bush in the least, only the concept that the business cycle is perpetual.

[KelleyKramer]

21. suggestion

You should try actually reading the article attached to this thread.

You should also acknowledge that Republicans started, and Democrats corrected every recession in the last 75 years.

Republicans totally suck with the economy.


Admitting denial is the first step.

[tritsofme]

22. Ill be the first one to say that Republican fiscal policy is reckless,

but dont say that Democrats have not started a recession in the past 75 years, when two have happened on our watch.

[KelleyKramer]

23. Name them

If you are so interested ..

Name every recession started by a Republican in the last 75 years.

Are you smart enough, can you do it?

[tritsofme]

24. I dont know why

you assume that my pointing out a fallacy in your argument is an endorsement of republicans.

You cant ignore the recessions of 1948 and 1980 because they are inconvenient.

[KelleyKramer]

25. How did I know that?

How many Republicans started a recession?

How did I know that you would refuse to answer that question?

[tritsofme]

26. Because that has nothing to do with my argument

of the 10 post-war recession 8 of them were started with repubs in the WH.

And that proves that Republicans are fiscally reckless, it does not mean that Democrats are saints.

[lynndew2]

9. Yes I am talking about Clinton

He cooked the books 30% before he left office. But the economy wasnt his fault. He just wanted it to look good when he left. The .COM bubble broke and the economy started to go down. Dont shoot the messanger. Look on google or any other search engine. I am not praising bush but I think we need to be honest even if it might leave a bruise. Its not like leaving a dead body.

[LuCifer]

14. go read "It's STILL The Economy, STUPID" by Paul Begala

and then we'll talk!

If you will note, he cites numerous diverse sources, alot of which are from the GOVERNMENT. Not exactly a commie pinko loony leftwing group trying to paint Clinton as Mr. Good Guy and paint DUMBya as Mr. Crap-pile.

Please.

Save this mindless nonesence for a freeper board!

Lu Cifer

PS When people post this crap here, do they REALLY truely believe that they are going to convert ANY of us? Are they that out of it?

[lynndew2]

16. I wouldnt dream of trying to convert you LuCifer

I dont try to convert a soul. I just think some are way over the edge of reality. Nuff said. Sweet Dreams.

[LuCifer]

18. yeah ok

so how much does Fox or Newsmax or whatever it is pay you?

[argyl]

12. A jobless recovery,assault on Medicare,OT losses.

All in one week.Seems a very apt thread to start now.
One question:How do you know you upset KK when all you've done is make a first response to a post?You think the economy will be a strong point for Smirk?I don't think so.

[kodi]

20. your comment that clinton cooked the books is laughable.

both bush's did that, not clinton.

i dont know from what right wing garbage can you get your facts, but you are plain wrong. clinton had the most honest, respectable budgets offered to congress in decades, and his requests for greater funding of the SEC was constantly rejected by a republican congress.

the first bush purposely lied about the budget deficit in the summer/fall of 1992, and the day clinton was sworn in he found that the bush had left him with an annual deficit three times what bush had admitted on the campaign trail.

this bush has lied repeatedly about the budget thru his OMB head, and even the republican congressionally appointed CBO head has attacked the numbers coming out of the executive branch on budgetery matters.

the tax cut bill of 2001 has yet to devastate the government, but its coming, with most experts now expecting the shortfall to be not the calculated $10 trillion but $15 Trillion by 2010.

why wall street liked clinton was because they trusted his intelligence enough not to fuck it all up and investors had faith that with clinton they had a fiscally responsible president. it gave them the feeling that the future would be predicatable, and predictability would help businesses planning.

clinton also had bob rubin who worked miracle with the mexico default problem. that feat alone gave investors confidence that adults were minding the store at treasury.

and we get bush and crazy as a loon o'neill, and now this guy snow who when he ran his company cut employees by 58%, cut the company's retirement benefits, and himself walked away with $150 million dollars in bonuses for doing it.

that is a guy who is only looking out for himself, just like bush.

[leftofthedial]

29. this is not a Clinton recession

Job GROWTH under Carter was higher than any other single-term president sinice Johnson, with 10 millin-plus jobs added during his term. .

"Please check your facts before you post economy stuff."

My apolofgies if you were being sarcastic

[KelleyKramer]

10. "conditions"

Yep, you folks always have excuses and conditions.

Get this, I have one 'condition' and that is performance.

Over the last entire century my Democrats have proven, over and over, that the Dems are the best folks to handle the economy.

History shows that the Republicans totally suck with the economy.

And those Republican disasters are ALWAYS corrected with a Democrat president.

I know it hurts you, but face the FACTS.

Dems are always better handling the economy.

[lynndew2]

13. ok, i will face the facts

You need to FACE EM NOW. It will not be an issue for the Democratic Party to run on in 2004. I am a democrat but I am also one that sees the world through open eyes. The Economy is on a huge run UP. I choose to keep an open mind to facts and not believe if I build it they will come. I hope you have a nice night and sleep well. Sweet Dreams MS. Kelly.

[LuCifer]

15. ok, if that is the case

Why is it then that my local paper's job section is 1/50th smaller now, than it was between 1993 to 2000? Why is it my paper's job section is sometimes only a whopping 2 pages?!?!?!? If this supposed eCONomic upturn is in such a full swing right now, this very second, as we speak, WHERE IN THE HELL ARE THE DAMN JOBS?!??!?!!?!?! Huh? And clues here????? I guess Bill Clinton must have farted and killed them, right?

Keep trying. I know it must be hell to have to work for Newsmax or Fox or whatever, and do this for a living, but man...

Lu Cifer

PS On edit: How is it that Bush and his criminal gang find $87 BILLION for Iraq, but can't find any other answer to our eCONomic woes than MORE TAX CUTS FOR THE RICH?????

[lynndew2]

19. I live for a Clinton Fart!!!!

Please look at facts satan. Everything is going to the psitive now. Including me. I am off to bed. You can read your funky sites which I read also. But you should read from both sides. Only the farthest left site says the economy is going bad. All others point to the best growth (jobs included) since 1984. Hope you can sleep withyourself. I will dream sweet. Night.

[newyawker99]

27. Kelley Kramer

Per DU copyright rules
please post only 4
paragraphs from the
news source.

Thank you.

NYer99
DU Moderator

[dusty64]

28. True. Why is the fallacy

that rethugs are better at managing the economy so believed by so many?