HOW IS BUSH DOING?

from JoeUser Forums


Here is some factual data comparing Dec 2000 with today:

National Debt Dec. 2000 $5.7 Trillion; Feb. 2006 $8.3 Trillion – U.S Treasury dept

Interest on Debt 2000 $230 Billion; 2006 $380 Billion - U.S Treasury

Unemployment rate Dec 2000 3.9%; February 2006 4.7% U S dept of Labor

Trade deficit $370 Billion 2000; $785 Billion 2005 U S Dept of Commerce

Illegal Aliens 8 Million in 2000; 20 million in 2005 Census Dept and Border Patrol
politics
4,821 views 15 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
hey he is doing pretty good.... all numbers increased...
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
hey he is doing pretty good.... all numbers increased...


Elemental: Reforged
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
Hrm, that isn't even a whole percent more unemployment, and Clinton saw unemployment rates much higer than 4.7% in his administration (6.6% in 1996). People blame economic weather on the President, but it is going to vary. The illegal alien thing is bullshit, no one knows how many there are, and I don't believe for a second that there is almost three times as many now as then.

The deficit thing is a matter of debate, as we have said over and over and over. This is like discussing global warming with a green freak. It's hotter, so it must be our fault; there's more illegals, so it must be Bush's fault.

I love it when people say the Nasdaq increased 300% during Clinton's reign, but don't bother to mention that the Internet was blooming at the same time totally separate from his leadership. Economic cycles are always blamed on or credited to whoever is in charge, as is the effects of 9/11, etc. The Col knows this, but he doesn't mind preying on a bit of ignorance, though.

The Col isn't interested in truth, he's interested in appearences and how much he can twist them to fit his image of the world. A sad, sad man tilting with windmills that don't even know he exists.
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
...nm, want to read up a bit before I go into the trade deficit thing. I remember people back in the 1980's being outraged that we exported so much less to Japan than we buy, never bothering to consider that Japan has like a third as many people as we do. China is a problem, but not one that can be solved by Bush or anyone else outside China.
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
whats the problem with China? besides being the most hard-working work force to ever exists on face of mankind?
Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
Show me how ANY of these changes BENEFIT our country?
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
That isn't the issue, Col. The issue is you blaming Bush for things that are a) mainly the fault of the Congress, and b) the fault of simple cycles of economics. We're suffering from a HUGE era of irresponsibility from the 1990's as far as how people invested and how businesses managed themselves. Clinton basically did NOTHING and reaped the benefits of a booming economy. It isn't Bush's fault we built ten years of our economic fortune on a big bubble.

You don't like what the Iraq war costs, fine, maybe your candidate will win next time. Those aren't permanent costs and you know it, it isn't like the money we are spending on it is a permanent addition to the budget. When Bush is out of office and your pals in Congress decide to keep right on spending the same amount WITHOUT the war, we'll see if you call them on it.
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
I simply provided the data and asked which has benefited our country. Immediately you tell me they are not because of Bush.

Since you have breached the issue of fault lets take a look. The Increase in the deficit and the interest is 100 % the result of the Bush tax and spend policies that Congress approved.

Job growth in a direct result of his economic policy If you do not believe it just listed to Bush tell us over and over again how his policies created jobs.

The increase in the trade deficit is mostly the result of China which Bush approved.

The increase in illegal aliens is because Bush is NOT ENFORCING our laws or requesting the funding to hire the border guards needed to secure the border.

Seems to me that ALL these changes are the result of the Bush policies. He was elected to SOLVE problems like these not watch them get worse.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
Unemployment rate Dec 2000 3.9%; February 2006 4.7% U S dept of Labor


Please Gene stop trying to compare the unrealistic one month in 25 year low as the bench mark. I don't expect to here you complaining of all the months Clinton had an 8% unemployment rate.

Average Unemployment rate during the eight years of Clinton: 5.2%

Average Unemployment rate during the six years of Bush: 5.3%

Link

Clinton also didn't have to deal with 9/11, Katrina, and the Tech Bubble. The Tech bubble could always be blamed for Clinton's inability to regulate Business, during his watch.

But I'm not blaming him, because the President has little to do with unemployment.

I'm just wondering if you are going to eat crow when, by the time Bush finishes his term, he has a lower average unemployment rate then Clinton.
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
Ohh, lets not forget that the month Bush was Sworn in, the rate was 4.7%.

Not the missleading cherri picked month of 3.9% you like to quote.
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
I guess it does not matter that the U.S Metro Economics report completed for the U S Conference of Mayors showed that the jobs created in 2004-2005 compared with the jobs lost from 2001 -2003 pay 21% less on the average and have far fewer benefits. Jobs have been created during the past two years but they pay far less with fewer benefits then the jobs that were lost during the first three years of the Bush administration. Please do not forget it is Bush that is telling us the job creation is the result of HIS economic and tax policies. Let’s give him credit for helping to create jobs that pay so much less.
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
Better than you, Gene. That's how.
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
Unemployment rate Dec 2000 3.9%; February 2006 4.7% U S dept of Labor Historically, it's still pretty damn good. Still, you're right that the current administration has been riddled with serious blunders--pehaps more so than other administrations, but blunders are the ways of politics.
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
No matter what information is presented, those that blindly support Bush ignore the results. If the results I presented in this Blog were the result when Clinton was president, there would be hundreds of replies blasting him and the liberals. The five areas I included are all VERY important issues that impact most Americans. These results are not blunders. They document that the approaches of Bush and the GOP that pass these into law are resulting in serious harm to this country. How the increase of 12 million illegal Aliens is is not a problem for this country? How is losing good paying jobs for jobs that par far less with no benefits good? How is the rapid increase in the Debt and the interest we must pay with our tax dollars good for anyone? This shows a failure of the policies Bush and the GOP has been following. These policies are VERY different from the policies of the 1990's. Why would anyone who cares about American want these results to continue?
Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
No matter what information is presented, those that blindly support Bush ignore the results. If the results I presented in this Blog were the result when Clinton was president, there would be hundreds of replies blasting him and the liberals. The five areas I included are all VERY important issues that impact most Americans. These results are not blunders. They document that the approaches of Bush and the GOP that pass these into law are resulting in serious harm to this country. How the increase of 12 million illegal Aliens is is not a problem for this country? How is losing good paying jobs for jobs that par far less with no benefits good? How is the rapid increase in the Debt and the interest we must pay with our tax dollars good for anyone? This shows a failure of the policies Bush and the GOP has been following. These policies are VERY different from the policies of the 1990's. Why would anyone who cares about American want these results to continue?