17 million private sector jobs were created in the first 6 years of Clinton's administration
4 million new jobs have been created during Bush's presidency so far or
the Dow is now at a record high of $13,000
2007-04-27
08:28:18
·
13 answers
·
asked by
Strawman Detector
2
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
WELL EXCUSE ME FOR THE DOLLAR SIGN -- It's a technicality, the Dow represents the average selling price for about 30 stocks, IN U.S. DOLLARS but usually the $ sign is not expressed.
2007-04-27
08:48:41 ·
update #1
less than 4 million PRIVATE sector jobs under Bush.
2007-04-27
08:51:23 ·
update #2
Uh, Clinton won his presidency because the economy was so lousy during the Bush Sr. years. The slogan "It's the economy, stupid" was going on then and many people, including alot of Republicans voted for Clinton during this time. Alan Greenspan recently said that Clinton was the best president who has presided in modern times who actually understands how the economy works. He's also been praised by many many economists. Bush has been criticized by many many economists and Greespan and Bernake are constantly warning him on the deficits and National debt he has accumulated. I think these facts are what most informed US citizens will remember and rightly so.
And, most Americans know that the economy isn't doing as well as Bushbots would like to think.
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/070427/economy.html?.v=22
The fact that the dollar is half of a British Pound and is at an all time low with the EURO is cause for alarm.
The war is sucking up the U.S treasury and breaking the country. And our schools, bridges, roads and healthcare systems are falling apart. That is more important than the dow. The dow is manipulated by very few large players. And, it doesn't indicate anything but what a few large hedge fund and large investors want to play.
2007-04-27 08:37:03
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
1⤋
The 17 million jobs created by Clinton.
The Dow doesn't mean crap. I'm certainly not reaping any of it's benefits; I slave for 30k a year, and my wages won't catch up to the rising cost of living anytime soon.
My generation is the first in history that will wind up WORSE off than their parents. My parents had a house, a small one, but still it was theirs. I'll never attain that dream, even if I worked 2 jobs.
2007-04-27 08:38:44
·
answer #2
·
answered by tiny Valkyrie 7
·
5⤊
0⤋
Jobs (the number of good obtainable by an average person) are more important than the DOW level to most Americans. The DOW is denominated in "points" and not dollars ($).
2007-04-27 08:36:29
·
answer #3
·
answered by rhino9joe 5
·
3⤊
0⤋
I think you need to pick up a paper and go read the Economics section for a change. Anybody who thinks the Dow index is represented in dollars and does not bother to read job growth or keep himself informed desperately needs to finish high school, at least.
2007-04-27 08:33:28
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
I think the tech bubble had a whole hell of a lot more to do with job creation in the mid 90's, and the loss of jobs this century, than did the guy getting or not getting blown in the oval office at the corresponding time.
2007-04-27 08:33:18
·
answer #5
·
answered by B.Kevorkian 7
·
4⤊
1⤋
10 million new jobs got you facts wrong. All this while cutting taxes, 9/11 fighting a war. and just the lowest unemployment since before Clinton. 95.5 % employed 4.5 unemployed. Why do you think their coming across the boarder by the Semi truck loads. Just go www.usa.gov and check the Us economy @ a glance.
2007-04-27 08:43:35
·
answer #6
·
answered by hazard to your heath 3
·
2⤊
2⤋
Presidents have little to do with how many jobs are created and how the Dow behaves.
2007-04-27 08:42:31
·
answer #7
·
answered by Pfo 7
·
1⤊
2⤋
Not $13000, but 13000.
The share of the pie got smaller. Education and health care are out of sight and working families can't afford to buy homes.
Those are the facts most important to me.
2007-04-27 08:37:56
·
answer #8
·
answered by DAR 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
you're saying on your question: "Conservatives look to ignore that maximum wealthy all of us is wealthy from the spending & intake of the midsection classification." So giving a midsection classification tax cut back makes the wealthy richer. Giving a excellent a million% tax hike would not damage the wealthy. in the adventure that they be conscious of all their competition is dealing with a similar enhance they could enhance their expenditures through a penny. they don't loose funds. the midsection and decrease classification nevertheless pay that tax. in case you enhance the tax too severe, imports compete with American products. in case you nevertheless enhance the tax, the wealthy gained't sit down there and loose funds. they are going to close the doors on their production facility and lay off the undesirable. they don't look to be creating wealth then notwithstanding the quantity they loose is way a lot less. Trickle-down is a actuality. you want it wasn't notwithstanding the basically way the wealthy loose funds is through being idiots. or perhaps then look on the Kardashians.
2016-11-28 03:06:41
·
answer #9
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The first.
The Dow only indicates so much. Plus the dollar is at an all time low.
2007-04-27 08:31:19
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
3⤋