With the new house market dipping to the lowest point since 1995, does that mean we are returning to?

Question

the "good old days" that we had under then President Bill Clinton? The Democrats say that we had such a boom economy under Clinton, but as the Bush economy slows, the "lowest since" marks are all compared to Clintons economy.
Why won't the Democrats admit that the economy has been setting strength records these past few years (as proven by statistics), instead of trying to downplay it as not as good as the Clinton economy?

Crystal - 1995 was THREE years into his term, which is nearly four times further than 9-11 was for Bush. If Clinton was dealing with leftovers after 3/4 of a full term, then do you and the rest of the Democrats accept responsibility for the problems in the first three years of Bushes term?

Answer 1

Presidential administrations have relatively little to do with impacts on the economy. Look at the administration of Franklin Roosevelt. He had large and increasing power during the 1930s and yet he could do little about the depression. It was the impact of armament manufacturing for World War II which turned the country around economically.

The best that any administration can do for any economy is to remove the government intervention. For example, look at the farm subsidy program which defines for the farmer which crops to grow, how many to grow, and defines (to a significant degree the prices received. This totally skews agricultural production and is detrimental on family farms.

The current so called depression in housing stock pricing is for the most part both localized and founded in the speculator market. Just imagine, loans with interest only payments. These types of deals are dependent on rapid rises in property values, that is, the profit only comes from a rapid increase in the foundation (corpus) price. At some point such property values increase past the point of being able to cash-flow the project. When that happens an economic correction must occur and that is all that is happening at the present time.

Worry less about comparing one presidential administration to another and instead work to minimize government in our lives.

Answer 2

I think that the new housing market and it's slump is a natural correction. There has been a lot of overbuilding that has been going on for the past 10 years or so. With this has come easy credit, and huge markups on housing. The market cannot sustain this kind of growth without a corresponding increase in other industries.
Housing prices in some areas of the country are beyond the reach of all but the most wealthy, so there has been a push to get these houses affordable to everyone with interest only loans and increasing terms for mortgages.
Basicly, it has undermined home ownership for most people who took advantage of these banking products, and in essence, they are just renting, with an inability to perform on the terms of their mortgages, so they will be facing foreclosure at some point.
The industry which stands to sustain the most damage will be the banks, which I believe we will have to bail out, again. It is a revisitation of the savings and loans crisis, only, many more people are going to be hurt, and if we were smart, we wouldn't bail them out. If we do, we can look forward to this happening again in another 20 years. If we don't, prices will come down, banks will lose some of their overwhealming power, and we will go back to saving for a down payment and Land contracts for the purchase of family homes.
This will keep housing affordable, it will keep the money in this country, it will stop speculation,and it will make it possible for every working person to afford a home.

Answer 3

The stockmarket index grow to be 6500 whilst he took workplace. It has long previous up 4000 factors. It drops a sprint each and every time rules are introduced, unemployment will advance, and distinctive different business enterprise aspects. There are aspects that the marketplace doesnt like yet which the the remainder of the financial device desires. The lackluster domicile revenues (new or resale?) is the tip effect of the recession and stricter lending that's had to circumvent the comparable subject as we had a pair of years in the past. people offered properties they won't have the money for and then re-financed, then genuine property values dropped, their domicile values dropped, and have been underwater with their loan loans.

Answer 4

bla bla bla

Clinton had a boom economy for a few years.

Bush had a boom economy for a few years as well.

the difference

We didn't have $3.00 + gas prices
we were not spending 175 million a week in Iraq

This Bush economy has left the middle class behind and it will be the middle class that gets stuck paying for the mess that Bush made.

Answer 5

lowest point since 1995...the year Gingrich and Kasich brought a brief period of fiscal sanity to government
with the enactment of policies they were elected to submit in November of 1994??

the year 401Ks, portfolios and retirement funds bubbled with the infusion of dotcom capital..looking for returns in new technology

no wonder there was a boom

Answer 6

1995 was early in the clinton years. he inherited all the debt from bush#1 and iraq#1.

Answer 7

I see the economy as doing well for the legal and the educated. I think our government is trying to repress society. But remember, our government is "we the people" Society contradicts itself, (thanks to the media), and we're hard pressed to get a strong dedicated leader.