Should a U.S. president be import to U.S. economy and why

Discussion in 'Economics' started by NoMoreOptions, Jan 27, 2004.

  1. I don't get it. He is not necessarily interested in or has any interest in economy. He is the president of the United States. Even if he does not do what he wants, he listen and someone does for him automatically.
  2. wdscott



    All U.S. Presidents want to have a strong economy. If not, they get a pink slip after 4 years.

    Dave Scott
  3. pspr


    NoMore..., don't you remember what they kept telling Clinton before he got elected? They told him, "Its the economy, stupid!"
  4. cdbern


    When the economy is up or down, everyone looks to the President. That's the easiest thing to do. In reality, the state of the economy SHOULD be shouldered by Congress, especially the House.

    The President can, up to point, refuse to play ball with Congress. Unless there is something he really wants, then Congress has him over a barrel (it really gets messy). Take Reagan for example. In the 8 years he was in office, Congress looked at his budget proposal ONCE. The other 7 years, they didn't even read it. In the year we had a big tax hike, they promised they would not raise taxes if he would sign a bill (don't remember which one) that was near and dear to their hearts. He signed it, then Congress went back on their promise and raised taxes. He has said his biggest regret was signing the tax increase. He felt he should have held out since they broke a promise.

    The state of our economy rests with Congress. Entitlements and pork is killing us. Congress hasn't been able to leave the money in Social Security alone since its inception. Pork is how members of Congress get elected. They can go back to their states and say "see what I've done for you".

    One of the reasons conservatives are so angry with Bush is that he's spending to much money. Theoretically they want to spend less. Liberals on the other hand (who I might add were in control of Congress for 40 years) want more and more tax dollars to redistribute wealth. More and more pork to stay in power.

    Voters are dumb and lazy. Both parties are doing a snow job and Americans can even see it.
  5. saxon


    Oh come on. What is not to get? The president sets the tone for the US economy in so many ways.

    You think not??

    Let's start with the appointment of the Fed chairman. Some people think he is even more powerful than the president.

  6. Tax collections (as a %) have falled to about 1950 level. The simple cause tax cuts for two areas: rich and corps. Next look at expenses. The Feds tooks us into a misceled war (See Kay's comments on CIA blunders (remote, defector)) and Iraq's Prime Minister's comment on Saddam's mental state (chaotic and out of touch). Homeland security is a biggie. These two expenses are part of lousy prior foreign policies. Insurance on jobs is the next biggest growing expense (unemployment expenses paid by gov).

    Th president cut taxes and gave away jobs to foreign nations. He pushes a good guys/bad guys scenario instrad of diplomacy and the UN.

    What come of all of this. Jobs are not going to be created; they are going to be exported. Next the US is going to poop out on the Iraq mess because the majority over there are only going to work with UN. They meet with UN now (council memebers) and will not meet with US (head cleric of largest sector won't meet).
    This is a vietnam scenario where lives and capital were utterly wasted and paid for by the middle class.

    Bush will get a pink slip on this one (See Kerry's prime reason for success in NH: beat Bush).

    Things are in dissarray and they will continue to get worse. Cheney said yesterday that we found two trailors in Iraq. He bombed in Davos too. Bush is going to have to conceed to the UN because the Iraqis say so. There is no way the US is going to tolerate no improvement in tax collecting; medical costs going up and education floundering because of no financial support from the feds. The bull$shit is coming to an end.

    Watch the next wave of job losses to other nations as Bush begins to import "south of the border minimum wage jobs into the US. we are beginning to see the first wave of professional jobs going out too. India is the winner on this. It is more than telemarketing and bill collecting. It is tech and legal etc. What a mess. China is now producing 20 times the steeel that the US produces. Bush should have been a global economics leader and locked in the global economy under US leadership. Instead he isolated us with cops and robbers stuff.

    Thank God we all here (traders) can really make it on the global trading infrastructure coming up.
  7. wow, in the one post of yours that i've read, you've earned a prominent spot on my imbecile list.

    have you ignored the simple observation that republicans are in control of congress AND the white house and spending is at record levels???



    have you completely missed such key observations as the $60billion that reagan pissed away on a missle-defense system that scientists told him would never work in the first place??

    have you completely missed the fact that GWB wanted to start up this so-called "Star Wars" project again??

    have you completely missed the fact that taxpayers now have a $150bil commitment to a war that never should have happened??

    fiscal conservatives MY ASS.
  8. Mecro


    Why is this so hard to understand?

    Whatever the state of economy, it is the past president's term that is truly responsible for it.

    Jobs are being exported out of here thanks to Clinton. The bubble can be partially blamed on Clinton. Everyone thinks Bill Clinton was such a great president cause the economy was so great and jobs were everywhere. Clinton had little to do with that. In fact, he spent most of his time in office dealing with BS scandals. Of course the idiot sheeps cannot bother to think how the relationship between the administration and the economy actually works. I'm just suprised that certain members of ET actually think it is Bush's fault that jobs are being exported.

    The high dollar of late 90s and the globalization trend is why the jobs are outta here now. Bush's administration is actually doing the right thing cause there isnt much else anyone can do short of forcing US companies to keep all jobs here.

    In regards to Iraq, the huge investment will pay off. If it does not, Europe and Japan will suffer along with US. Besides the little conflicts, in the large picture it is in everyones interest that US does what it needs to do with Iraq.

    But everything aside, what in the world do you expect the Bush administration to do? Raise taxes and rates? Cut spending? Allow OPEC to switch to the Euro without securing any back ups or retaliation? Or maybe they should start forcing US companies to hire in the US so that these companies move their HQs out of US?
  9. pspr


    Mecro, you are absolutely right. And, people don't seem to realize that the 9/11/2000 tragedy not only was painful with the loss of life, it cost the U.S. about $120 Billion. And, there are much more destructive targets available and another attack could cost us much much more.

    So the deficit this year and the cost of the war on terror seems like a cheap price to pay. If we hadn't had such a strong President we probably would have already seen a second attack with more coming IMO.
  10. cdbern


    "education floundering because of no financial support from the feds."

    what a bunch of b.s.

    Pouring MILLIONS AND MILLIONS into a failed project won't make it better or even work.
    #10     Jan 28, 2004