Are you blind or simply ignoring facts to obfuscate and make a deceptive point? Don't forget, it was the DemoCraps who initiated Affirmative Action Lending in 1999... the VEHEMENTLY resisted all attempts to regulate or reign-in the program... THAT'S what started all of this housing and credit mess!! (And Bush is an asshole.. we can all agree on that.) As to your question.. depends. If it's done by confiscating the wealth of the "haves" to give to the "have-nots in exchange for their vote", HELL NO! If he's able to create an environment of growth and prosperity, attract and create jobs from growth and industy, and doesn't oppress us in Socialism and Big Brother Gummint, then yes*. *The book on this currently is like "snowball's chance"
of course blame everbody else and not be accountable...more brainswash talk radio talking points nonsense...get over it.. this meltdown happened under the auspices of gop and bush control...and dont forget phil gramms contribution to dereg derivatives market...we wouldnt be here without that blunder...
I don't remember the Mayor of Chicago being warned by CEO's in that city about MASS LAYOFFS coming in Nov/Dec. This is far worse than 2002.
There are a LOT of blunders and wrong doing.. but Affirmative Action Lending was where the little Dutch Boy pulled his finger from the dike. Bury you head in the sand and point your finger elsewhere all you want.. but it's still the truth. If there had never been Affirmative Action Lending, it's likely NONE OF THIS WOULD HAVE EVER OCCURRED!! (And yes, Bush would still be an asshole, but that's a different topic.) And Bush was not in office when this occurred.
Yada, yada on all the Great Depression talk. There are so many differences between now and then (financially, technologically, globally) it's really a moot comparison. One big difference between now and 2002 is that stock valuations are actually attractive this time. They're at the best levels since the early 1980s. Granted, they aren't as good as 1982, but better than anything we had in the 90s. In addition, the big drop in fuel costs isn't getting enough attention, either. There's been a clear inverse relation between stock/economic performance and oil prices since the OPEC mess began--but it can take awhile to reap the benefits of cheap oil. Again, think the early 1980s.
I'm very familiar with it, but it's hardly relevant right now. Maybe it will be after a multi-week rally.
I'll give you early 80s. Close comparison minus the super inflation. But like I said, I never heard the Mayor from the Second Largest City (Chicago) hold a press confrence about the Mass Layoffs coming Nov/Dec, and hear him panic about going into 09. Text of his speech is out there, google it. But right now, current moment, I give you early 80s, but we are slipping beyond that every second.
This time is so WILDLY different from the early 80s, it doesn't even beg comparison... other than the look of the charts... and that's because THIS DECLINE IS A BEST ONLY HALF-WAY DONE*. *unless through Gummint intervention, bailouts, etc. they are able to halt the decline and turn the thing around... looks doubtful at this point.
Not sure about Chicago, but NY was in horrible shape during the 70s. I don't imagine Chicago was all that great in the 70's and early 80s either. Thanks for your reply. You're definitely not in the "mindless" permabear crowd.
Oh yeah, affirmative action is to blame...next scapegoat:acorn,community organizers.BTw the gop was in charge of congress in 99...and just avoid talking about derivatives dereg., right?Talk about burying head in sand.