yeah. the reason that the bubble -- the one that was fueled in no small way by bad judgment and fraud -- that went on for 8 years peaked in March of 2000 was the election that took place 8 months later. Depression? Where do you live, Zimbabwe?
well, let's see: ..over 1.5 million jobs lost nationally ..Silicon Valley finally fell into the chasm, and is Sillicon Falicy ..PhD's, MBA's and BS/BBA's beating bums off the bread line ..a rediculous "consumer lead recovery" causing rising bankruptcy and indenture ..a looming housing market bubble burst, as telegraphed over all the major business magazine articles (Business Week, etc.) perhaps, it might as well be Zimbabwe, Russia, Romania, Brazil, or any of these other countries so were you trying to suggest that the US is rosy and fine?, or that perhaps those comments were out of phase?
no need to argue I just think chas was just using the sort of economists view of depression. You know 25% unemployment, the need for government jobs programs, world trade at a standstill or close to it, food on farms but no way to get it to the cities because there was no way to pay for it. Goods on the shelves going unpurchased because no one could afford it. When I think of depression that is what I think of, so I thought chas' question was legit. That is not to say our economy is fine. And I certainly do not think George Bush caused it. That would be like saying Bill Clinton was responsible for Ronald Reagans'foresight to lower taxes and cause an economic expansion. Which actually brought more dollars into the Federal coffers. Unfortunately, you cant spend on defense without spending on Pork for senators like Byrd. It is spending that causes deficits not tax breaks that encourage growth. If taxes were the answer Europe would be the model.
I have updated my blog. Trying to get my siggy to work. http://members.shaw.ca/marketwatcher/default.html