English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

The stock market is making record gains almost on a daily basis, unemployment rates are at 4.5%, wages and hours worked are rising, overall the US economy seems to be doing quite well, however I have not heard much mention or credit given to the Bush administration for this. But when someone predicts the economy may be turning the other way, it seems that Bush is to blame for this. Why is this? I am not a big Bush supporter on alot of his policies, but I think he is doing a great job on the economy, but not getting any credit for it.

2007-07-18 17:00:18 · 15 answers · asked by kris76 4 in Politics & Government Politics

15 answers

For some reason he is not doing as a Democrat would and claim full credit for a booming economy. You would have to ask him why, Of course the media could report on this the way they did in the 90s. For some reason that has not been done, media bias perhaps.

2007-07-18 17:07:38 · answer #1 · answered by smsmith500 7 · 2 0

OK OK; I'm a rep but Bush has blown it. Free Trade is why the stock market is doing well. All of the companies that have moved overseas are raking in the dough but guess what? Unless you're a major stock holder you're getting screwed big time. These corps are sucking the working man dry and as soon as real estate finally bottoms out most of the people in this country will get a rude awakening. It wouldn't have mattered though, Carter started it and every President has supported it since then. I wish he would build the wall and kick the illegals out though.

Oh, and as for unemployement. You're listening to CNN and CBS News too much. 14% of the people are without meaningful employment and another 22% are under employed [making less than 50% of their pre 2000 wage]. The numbers are hard to keep up with but it used to be 28% so maybe GWB is doing alright! LOL

Nice talking to ya!

2007-07-18 17:08:26 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3 0

well many people simply aren't seeing a "better economy"... that's why...

over the past 7 years inflation has risen about as much as most people's income (the wealthy have seen HUGE increases that skew the average)... and the majority of the U.S. doesn't invest in the stock market to any degree...

debt is at an all time high

foreclosures at an all time high

bankruptcies at an all time high

you shouldn't see ANY of that in a good economy... under no circumstances...

I can tell you the sky is purple where I live... but if it's blue where you live... you won't believe me...

2007-07-18 17:11:45 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It is foolish to blame the president when the economy goes South, and equally foolish to praise the president when the economy is going good. The stock market has its correction and shifts, and probably always will. Not real excited about the present up swing, it could take a terrible plunge if a terrorist attack occurs.

2007-07-18 17:10:04 · answer #4 · answered by longroad 5 · 0 0

this entire credit disaster -- got here approximately because of the fact the banks stopped lending money to a minimum of one yet another. while the information pronounces that they are reducing the "fed money" cost -- this suggests that the Federal Reserve is reducing the interest cost that banks fee one yet another while they lend one yet another money. while the banks lend one yet another money-- that helps them to non-public loan your cash (to purchase autos, homes and so on). So- a substantial area of the credit disaster is the freezing of money. in case you pass returned into your historic previous-- you will discover that FDR instituted regulations that positioned money into the financial device. The TVA did not artwork for loose. with the help of putting money into the device - the rustic got here out of the super melancholy. Freezing spending is without doubt one in each and every of the worst issues the government can do. that's going to in straightforward terms make the financial device lock up greater and make the credit disaster worse. it somewhat is why you have not considered a gaggle of economist bounce on the McCain's freezing concept. it somewhat is why McCain has backed far flung from his place on Freezing spending in prefer a three hundred Billion greenback application to purchase undesirable subprime loans. yet even then-- that plan is getting very detrimental comments. So- no- Obama isn't something like "W" and, in my humble opinion, Obama's plan is greater sound. Your motor vehicle's engine will lock up if it runs out of oil. The financial device will lock up if it runs out of money. money is the "oil" that retains the gears in the financial device turning. it somewhat is why the plans to get the financial device going returned all contain an infusion of money.

2016-09-30 07:20:15 · answer #5 · answered by kottwitz 4 · 0 0

Wages are still behind inflation caused by the tax cuts, California home sales are the worst in 14 years, the fed says the housing sector problems will soften the economy, and the top 20% of americans own 90% of the stock. You were saying?

2007-07-18 17:06:01 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4 4

Oh i know i know!!! because he didnt do anything to help the economy, all he did was sit there drool and validate the killings of thousands of innocent iraquis

2007-07-18 17:42:50 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Liberals hate anyone that works hard, earns what they have, and works harder to have more. The liberal mantra is that we should all be equal, and those"evil" rich folks should give up their earning to those who will not work. To a liberal, we should all be equal(equally poor that is)

2007-07-18 19:36:48 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

their is an epidemic of "bush derangement syndrome "
currently sweeping the country , due to alot of peoples inability to think for themselves , believing whatever they hear at the water cooler

2007-07-18 17:19:46 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

He does. It sucks for the blue collar worker and the middle class. Bush does get credit for CEOs making $50 million while 7000 of their laid off workers get to say "Hi. Welcome to Wal-Mart".

Bush gets credit for his deficit spending and trade deficit growth.

Weird how neo-cons NEVER give Clinton credit for anything yet sit in awe at the amazing Bush. Isn't it?

2007-07-18 17:07:15 · answer #10 · answered by Chi Guy 5 · 3 3

fedest.com, questions and answers