I always believed that it was the general consensus. A recovering economy definately is a feather in his cap. Hopefully we can sustain the recovery.Originally posted by: maluckey
Just as it says. CNN reported that Bush and Co. may have inherited the recession from the previous administration. Surprised as I was that CNN (Clinton News Network) would state this, I had to admire their candor.
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
It's just revised GDP numbers. However I don't think they'll adjust the recession start/end dates. But what it does show is that the economy was faultering long before Bush took office.
CkG
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
It's just revised GDP numbers. However I don't think they'll adjust the recession start/end dates. But what it does show is that the economy was faultering long before Bush took office.
CkG
If by "long before" you mean a few months, I'd agree with you there.
During the last recession, U.S. output fell by 0.5 percent, slightly less than the 0.6 percent previously estimated, still making the 2001 recession one of the mildest on record in terms of lost output.
"There is no major rewriting of economic history," said Steven Landefeld, head of the Commerce Department's Bureau of Economic Analysis. "There are no significant changes to trend growth and the last recession is still mild relative to past recessions."
Originally posted by: SuperTool
He certainly didn't inherit a 500B deficit.![]()
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: SuperTool
He certainly didn't inherit a 500B deficit.![]()
He did inherit falling tax revenue from a faultering economy....
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: SuperTool
He certainly didn't inherit a 500B deficit.![]()
He did inherit falling tax revenue from a faultering economy....
So he made it fall even more with his taxcuts while jacking up spending. Surprise surprise, we have a deficit.
And the Fed has been squandering our funds like nobodies businessOriginally posted by: charrison
More cash is staying safely in my wallet and not being squandered by the fed.
Most of the current defecit is related to falling tax revenues because of the economy. ANd yes there should be more fiscal restraint in DC.
"Everyone has the potential to be "great"...it's just that they need to find what their "greatness" is. To continue to blame other's for your situation only deepens one's rut. Seek help, seek change, seek anything that will pull you from the "rut", so you can set yourself back on the road to greatness." - CkG
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: SuperTool
He certainly didn't inherit a 500B deficit.![]()
He did inherit falling tax revenue from a faultering economy....
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: SuperTool
He certainly didn't inherit a 500B deficit.![]()
He did inherit falling tax revenue from a faultering economy....
So he made it fall even more with his taxcuts while jacking up spending. Surprise surprise, we have a deficit.
More cash is staying safely in my wallet and not being squandered by the fed.
Most of the current defecit is related to falling tax revenues because of the economy. ANd yes there should be more fiscal restraint in DC.
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: SuperTool
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: SuperTool
He certainly didn't inherit a 500B deficit.![]()
He did inherit falling tax revenue from a faultering economy....
So he made it fall even more with his taxcuts while jacking up spending. Surprise surprise, we have a deficit.
More cash is staying safely in my wallet and not being squandered by the fed.
Most of the current defecit is related to falling tax revenues because of the economy. ANd yes there should be more fiscal restraint in DC.
Not really. The Fed gave you money by borowing it in your name. Kinda like a family member giving you a pile of money, except they did it by getting a mortgage on your Home.
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: SuperTool
He certainly didn't inherit a 500B deficit.![]()
He did inherit falling tax revenue from a faultering economy....
Then proceed to cut taxes until a $500b deficit appeared...
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: SuperTool
He certainly didn't inherit a 500B deficit.![]()
He did inherit falling tax revenue from a faultering economy....
Then proceed to cut taxes until a $500b deficit appeared...
Take the tax cuts back and it would have been about a $400B defecit....Most of the deficit was from reduced tax receipts and uncontrolled spending.
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: SuperTool
He certainly didn't inherit a 500B deficit.![]()
He did inherit falling tax revenue from a faultering economy....
Then proceed to cut taxes until a $500b deficit appeared...
Take the tax cuts back and it would have been about a $400B defecit....Most of the deficit was from reduced tax receipts and uncontrolled spending.
Nope. The Deficit would be near $0.
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Yes - I'm talking about the July-September quarter of 2000. Which is before Bush took office to "ruin the economy".
Yep, I think we are all in agreement then. Just about the time the country realized Bill Clinton wouldn't be president forever and that the prosperity we were all enjoying was coming to an end, the economy started going to crap. Yep, July-September of 2000 as more and more it looked like Bush would win the election... investors started getting the hell out of the market while the getting was good, these kinds of moves pretty much sealed the fate of the wonderful and prosperous IT boom most of us were enjoying, thousands of us lost our jobs WELL before 9/11 played out, etc, etc, etc...
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: SuperTool
He certainly didn't inherit a 500B deficit.![]()
He did inherit falling tax revenue from a faultering economy....
Then proceed to cut taxes until a $500b deficit appeared...
Take the tax cuts back and it would have been about a $400B defecit....Most of the deficit was from reduced tax receipts and uncontrolled spending.
Nope. The Deficit would be near $0.
The 2003 tax cut was worth 550billion and spread over 8-10 years. Please explain how your math works.
Edit:
it was only 350B that got passed.
linkage
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: sandorski
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: SuperTool
He certainly didn't inherit a 500B deficit.![]()
He did inherit falling tax revenue from a faultering economy....
Then proceed to cut taxes until a $500b deficit appeared...
Take the tax cuts back and it would have been about a $400B defecit....Most of the deficit was from reduced tax receipts and uncontrolled spending.
Good link. I have not seen the numbers for both tax cuts. I was just dividing the total tax and dividing it by 10 years.
Nope. The Deficit would be near $0.
The 2003 tax cut was worth 550billion and spread over 8-10 years. Please explain how your math works.
Edit:
it was only 350B that got passed.
linkage
Ok, my math is off, looks like only approx half($266 billion) was due to Tax cuts. Link