IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New So the numbers used....
BB* and AB** don't fit your definition. The Republicans used the term surplus. The Dems used it, the media used it. You don't like it. Fine.


The numbers used still gave differing outlooks BB and AB. Call it what you will, the economy under Bush is a train wreck. Under Clinton? I defy you to characterize it as anything but "booming".


*Before Bush
**After Bush
...rare is the dollar of corporate profits that bears a tax burden heavier than the burden on an employee's wages.
[link|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/opinion/columns/kinsleymichael/|Michael Kinsley]
New On your quote
Call it what you will, the economy under Bush is a train wreck. Under Clinton? I defy you to characterize it as anything but "booming".
the statement is absolutly correct, to attribute that to Clinton is as valid as atributing 9/11 to him because "HIS" INS people let the bombers in the country for flight training. Presidents do not affect the economy directly unless microfeeding spending (New Deal) or Cutting Taxes (Kennedy, Reagan) and even then it is a crapshoot(carter). Economic engines exist outside of politics for the most part.
thanx,
bill
will work for cash and other incentives [link|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html|skill set]

"The Mafia was preferable to the state, because it survived by providing services people actually wanted"
Murray Rothbard
New OK
Let's try looking at this in a different way.

Clinton campaigned on "It's the Economy, Stupid" from day one. They focused on the economy throughout both terms in a way that has been described as "laser like". The economy, just by coincidence[/sign], happened to improve under Clinton and went into the crapper as soon as the anything-but-Clinton, tax cuts for the rich, cut services for the poor crowd got in office.

Presidents do not affect the economy directly
Yeah, right. How about indirectly? How about "at all"?
...rare is the dollar of corporate profits that bears a tax burden heavier than the burden on an employee's wages.
[link|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/opinion/columns/kinsleymichael/|Michael Kinsley]
New Revisioning...
...the economy was "in the crapper" for 10 months prior to Bush taking office.

It would have remained "in the crapper" regardless of the outcome of the FL "hanging chads" debate.

Unless...of course...you think that the market would have magically regained its historic pace once the "Creator of the Internet" re-established that "laser like" focus on the economy...

The bursting of the market bubble (started in 3/2000) was the primary driver...and Greenspan cranking up rates to slow growth that wasn't there was a strong back seat driver...and the "water in the gas" was oil prices spiking at the same time.

The only people that said that the US wasn't going into a recession worked for Clinton ;-) Most of them predicted "surpluses"...and they did this by pegging economic growth at 5% per year...too bad the economy grew at .5% instead. And it did this while under the "laser like" focus of the Clinton administration.

The Pres is along for the ride. If its good, they get the credit...bad they get the blame...in neither case are they really in control.
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson

[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
New Nice dig.
I like the way you subtly inject a disparagement of Gore.

[/sign]


Your spin,
No President has ever had any effect whatsoever on the economy.

My answer to your spin (just as intellectually honest),
Bullshit.
...rare is the dollar of corporate profits that bears a tax burden heavier than the burden on an employee's wages.
[link|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/opinion/columns/kinsleymichael/|Michael Kinsley]
New So...
...you disagree. Great.

You are entitled to your opinion.

I'm not saying that the President doesn't have "any effect whatsoever"...just that their impact is relegated to very few aspects of the overall economy. Tax policy and spending are the major areas...and both of these things have an effect.

HOWEVER, neither of these things, alone or combined, will throw the cycle. Might lengthen an up, or slow a down...but it will not make an upcycle a downcycle.

And EVEN IF IT DID, then you are blaming the wrong guy...still...because the economy hit the skids under Clinton's last year in office. The only thing you can say about Bush's policies are that they are continuing Clinton's final legacy of killing the economy (which is not the point I think you are trying to make ;-) )
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson

[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
New See response to box below
[link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=77515|This one]
...rare is the dollar of corporate profits that bears a tax burden heavier than the burden on an employee's wages.
[link|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/opinion/columns/kinsleymichael/|Michael Kinsley]
New Of course he campaigned on the economy
it was the vunerability of the time. Bush campaigned on the character issue. So what? These freaks will tell any lie to get elected.
hey focused on the economy throughout both terms in a way that has been described as "laser like"
I wouldnt put that laser in your mouth if I was you. Any spending that helped the economy(like adding police on the streets)is almost gone. Ask your local police how many positions are going away because the money ran out. He helped the economy by privatising the whitehouse travel office by firing all the employees and giving the contract to his arkansaw supporters. He supported travel agents by taking 1000 people to South Africa for a conference on energy. Cant think of much else at the moment. Maybe your laser like memory could give me some real examples. We could agree to disagree on the effect any president has on the economy but what fun is that? :-)
thanx,
bill
will work for cash and other incentives [link|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html|skill set]

"The Mafia was preferable to the state, because it survived by providing services people actually wanted"
Murray Rothbard
New "can't think of much else".
Allow me to assist in your efforts at mentation.

From a reader contribution to [link|http://www.bartcop.com/clintonmiracle-larry.htm|Bartcop]. I've cleaned it up a little, fixed a few spelling and grammar errors.
1. The Clinton Administration forged a bipartisan coalition to pass NAFTA after concluding tough negotiations on side agreements covering workers' rights, the environment, and import surges.

Exports to Mexico rose 23 percent in the first 11 months of 1994.

2. President Clinton led the fight to pass GATT, which lowered tariffs worldwide by $744 billion over a ten year period -- the largest international tax cut in history. GATT cut tariffs on manufactured goods by more than one-third overall and eliminated tariffs in major markets in a number of sectors in which the U.S. is particularly competitive.

DUHbya has only raised tariffs/taxes; so much for his promise not to raise taxes.
And why hasn ANYBODY mentioned this?

3. As part of the 1993 Economic Plan, President Clinton cut taxes on 15 million low-income families and made tax cuts available to 90 percent of small businesses, while raising taxes on just 1.2 percent of the wealthiest taxpayers.

Passed without one Republican vote, which helped start the Clinton Miracle and was reversed by Bush II.

4. President Clinton signed into law the largest deficit reduction plan in history, resulting in over $600 billion in deficit reduction. The deficit went down for 3 years in a row for the first time since Harry Truman was president.

Passed without one Republican vote, which also helped to start the Clinton Miracle and was reversed by the Bush II administration.

5. President Clinton expanded the Earned Income Tax Credit to cut the taxes of 15 million working families with incomes of $27,000 or less.

These tax cuts are often forgotten and never mentioned by the radical right.

6. From a news article: "President Clinton yesterday abandoned his proposed $40 billion loan guarantee package for Mexico in the face of unrelenting congressional opposition, and announced he would instead act on his own authority to offer Mexico $20 billion in U.S. government short-term loans and loan guarantees to stabilize the peso. The U.S. initiative, a major policy shift, included large new pledges of support for Mexico from international financial institutions that will raise the total global commitment to Mexico to more than $49 billion."

We loaned Mexico this money, and they paid it back early with interest, and we made about $500 million.

Again action taken without one republican vote and in fact they condemned this action claiming it was throwing away the money. But Clinton's action in preventing an economic collapse of one of our biggest trading partners and the ripple effect it would have on our economy, proved once again that he was the greatest president of our lifetime.
...rare is the dollar of corporate profits that bears a tax burden heavier than the burden on an employee's wages.
[link|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/opinion/columns/kinsleymichael/|Michael Kinsley]
New WTF?
1. The Clinton Administration forged a bipartisan coalition to pass NAFTA after concluding tough negotiations on side agreements covering workers' rights, the environment, and import surges.
Exports to Mexico rose 23 percent in the first 11 months of 1994.

well although sponsored by repos Clinton signed on so what did we get?
[link|http://www.flash.net/~bob001/naftaopic.htm|http://www.flash.net...001/naftaopic.htm]
During the debate on passage of NAFTA, U.S. citizens were promised 200,000 new jobs each year because of NAFTA as well as a growing U.S. trade surplus. However, after five years the results have not lived up to the promises.
Though the promise was made that there would be mutual job creation in both the United States and Mexico, most new jobs are found in Mexico. As of late 1997, the estimate of net U.S. job losses due to NAFTA was 400,000. Some measures of job losses and gains place the losses at 800,000 and the gains at 400,000. A disproportionately high 24,000 jobs were lost in Michigan alone.
so Clinton was responsible for 400,000 US tax payers losing their jobs.
next fact I disagree with presented by you
2. President Clinton led the fight to pass GATT, which lowered tariffs worldwide by $744 billion over a ten year period -- the largest international tax cut in history. GATT cut tariffs on manufactured goods by more than one-third overall and eliminated tariffs in major markets in a number of sectors in which the U.S. is particularly competitive.

the people of Ohio praise his name, NOT
[link|http://www.state.oh.us/gov/MajorSpeeches/091701steeltestimony.htm|http://www.state.oh....teeltestimony.htm]
In 1990 Ohio was the proud home of 96 steel companies. Our latest count finds only 76 steel companies remaining. Within the past 12 months, five of our leading steel producers have declared bankruptcy or closed.
Company
Status
Jobs lost or threatened

LTV Chapter 11
1,600 lost
5,000 threatened

Republic Technologies
Chapter 11
1,000 lost
4,700 threatened*

Wheeling-Pitt
Chapter 11
1,000 lost
2,300 threatened

CSC
Closed
1,100 lost

American Steel & Wire
Closed
200 lost

The importance of these companies extends beyond their current sales and employees. Ohio's steel industry funds the pensions and health insurance for thousands of employees and their families. Ohio's steel companies contribute $861 million in taxes to the state and local government in Ohio, and $1.34 billion in federal taxes. Further reductions in workforce and losses of solid corporate citizens cannot be tolerated in Ohio or in this nation.

Let me be clear, this crisis is not about losing one or two companies, it is about losing an industry and a way of life for generations of Ohio families.

Next, hey lucy ya got some splainin to do
3. As part of the 1993 Economic Plan, President Clinton cut taxes on 15 million low-income families and made tax cuts available to 90 percent of small businesses, while raising taxes on just 1.2 percent of the wealthiest taxpayers.
Passed without one Republican vote, which helped start the Clinton Miracle and was reversed by Bush II.
So the largest tax increase in History helped? Beg to differ
[link|http://www.townhall.com/columnists/jackkemp/jk2000823.shtml|http://www.townhall....p/jk2000823.shtml]
In fact, as former Treasury Department economist Aldona Robbins points out, the economic recovery from the 1990-91 recession that occurred under Clinton's watch was "less robust than earlier ones." During President George Bush's last year in office, the economy grew by more than 3 percent after inflation. During Clinton's first year in office, the year of the tax increase, economic growth slid to 2.6 percent. Under the burden of Clinton's "new economic strategy," the economy slogged along at the slowest pace ever following a recession until after the Republicans assumed control of the Congress in 1995.

Fortunately, the Fed reversed itself after initially accommodating the Clinton tax hike with inflationary monetary policy, and inflation was squelched. As ing-Barings economist Larry Kudlow puts it, "This inflation decline amounted to an economy-wide tax cut that in effect overwhelmed Clinton's 1993 tax hike."

Then, in 1997, over objections by the Clinton administration, Congress enacted and convinced the president to sign a real capital gains tax cut to accompany the "inflation tax cut," and the economy took off, growing in excess of 4 percent annually ever since. As a result, between the start of the economic recovery and the beginning of this year, real economic output increased a total of 36 percent.
His tax increase slowed recovery from the recession
I will agree with the following, Clinton did work for deficit reduction and the EIC increases, both good things. So 4 and 5 are fine.6 was a crap shoot but he made good on it. As for aiding the economic boon? He had to get oil prices up to allow the Mexicans a way to repay it as well as for domestic oil producing states to recover. That is one of the few plus things I will attribute to him. So I would say from your examples a net loss to the economy.
thanx,
Bill




will work for cash and other incentives [link|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html|skill set]

"The Mafia was preferable to the state, because it survived by providing services people actually wanted"
Murray Rothbard
New Jobs?
You really want to go there?

Unemployment by year by President. [link|http://www.buzzflash.com/perspectives/2002/01/011002_Unemployment.html|Graph].
...rare is the dollar of corporate profits that bears a tax burden heavier than the burden on an employee's wages.
[link|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/opinion/columns/kinsleymichael/|Michael Kinsley]
New Proves my point NAFTA and GATT are still costing jobs
will work for cash and other incentives [link|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html|skill set]

"The Mafia was preferable to the state, because it survived by providing services people actually wanted"
Murray Rothbard
New *Shakes head*
Unemployment went to it's lowest rate in years under Clinton.

And this proves that NAFTA and GATT cost jobs.

*still shaking head in bewilderment*

If the Clinton economic record was due in *any* respect to Clinton's initiatives, then I say:

Bush needs an intern.
...rare is the dollar of corporate profits that bears a tax burden heavier than the burden on an employee's wages.
[link|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/opinion/columns/kinsleymichael/|Michael Kinsley]
New If I thought it would help I would get him one :-)
ya ever think things were good because he spent all of his time thinking with his dick instead of thinking how to dick us? maybe that IS whats wrong with the country.
thanx,
bill
will work for cash and other incentives [link|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html|skill set]

"The Mafia was preferable to the state, because it survived by providing services people actually wanted"
Murray Rothbard
     The big dog rips Bush tax cuts - (Silverlock) - (41)
         He'd 8 years to do that fsck him and the gore he rode in on -NT - (boxley) - (20)
             8 years to do what? - (Silverlock) - (19)
                 Oh taking credit for stuff that wasnt his to claim? - (boxley) - (18)
                     Not him *taking* credit. I am assigning it. - (Silverlock) - (17)
                         well I am glad you are not in charge of economic policy :) - (boxley) - (16)
                             You disagree with the OMB. - (Silverlock) - (15)
                                 This source here will be fine from the OMB - (boxley) - (14)
                                     So the numbers used.... - (Silverlock) - (13)
                                         On your quote - (boxley) - (12)
                                             OK - (Silverlock) - (11)
                                                 Revisioning... - (bepatient) - (3)
                                                     Nice dig. - (Silverlock) - (2)
                                                         So... - (bepatient) - (1)
                                                             See response to box below - (Silverlock)
                                                 Of course he campaigned on the economy - (boxley) - (6)
                                                     "can't think of much else". - (Silverlock) - (5)
                                                         WTF? - (boxley) - (4)
                                                             Jobs? - (Silverlock) - (3)
                                                                 Proves my point NAFTA and GATT are still costing jobs -NT - (boxley) - (2)
                                                                     *Shakes head* - (Silverlock) - (1)
                                                                         If I thought it would help I would get him one :-) - (boxley)
         Big dog? - (hnick) - (19)
             Opinion, entitled, etc. - (Silverlock) - (2)
                 Yup. Agree to disagree. :) -NT - (hnick) - (1)
                     See everyone? - (Silverlock)
             ROFL! Clinton is a coward? - (mmoffitt) - (11)
                 What does W. have to do with Clinton's cowardice? -NT - (hnick) - (10)
                     Pot. Kettle. Black. - (jb4) - (9)
                         I prefer "People in glass houses throwing stones..." -NT - (inthane-chan) - (1)
                             OT: And the point of your sig is...?!? - (jb4)
                         Pot? Kettle? - (hnick) - (6)
                             Others made my point. However, I'm curious. - (mmoffitt) - (5)
                                 Did they? I must have missed it... - (hnick) - (4)
                                     I can't help it. - (mmoffitt) - (3)
                                         can you imagine how much tail he gets? - (deSitter) - (2)
                                             Surreal self-cancelling mixture there, DeS. -NT - (Ashton)
                                             We All do. -NT - (mmoffitt)
             Common ground? (or at least grind) - (Ashton) - (3)
                 Yes, I agree with you ! - (bepatient) - (1)
                     *Shock*___and while we're shaking hands atop the barricades - (Ashton)
                 choice not endowment -NT - (boxley)

I can see it now. New posts in IWETHEY Forum Guidelines requiring that bunches of wourds must nouw countain supueurufuluuuouuus u's scattered abuout.
93 ms