All hail Bush the economic wonder!

[yesthattom]

Change, real median household income (2003 adjusted dollars):

Bush II:	-$1,535
Clinton:	+$5,489
Bush I:	-$1,314

Change, number in poverty:

Bush II:	+4,280,000
Clinton:	-6,433,000
Bush I:	+6,269,000

Source and Andrew Tobias’s has an interesting blog today.

Comments

Major Factor your forgetting...

[havocbmx.livejournal.com]

See but here in lies the problem. The Clinton period was during the .COM bubble. It grew and exploaded. It wasn't real money or real growth it was the industrial revolution and now things are settling back into a normal pattern.

If you look back on the industrial revolution you will see the same thing took place. The fact is back in the clinton time frame everyone was making huge companies out of nowhere these companies just took and took from investors and when they exploaded as evidenced by the drop in the economy people lost jobs and vast sums of money.

Your also not counting into the fact of 9/11 and it's affect on the stock market. That single even almost plunges us into a finacial collapse. There are many more factors than evidenced by looking at the tiny chart you have right there.

Re: Major Factor your forgetting...

[yesthattom.livejournal.com]

WRONG. Check your dates. The economy was in the tank before 9/11. The bubble burst during Clinton and he still ended with 8 years with a better economy under his belt. You are reading from the Republican play book of confusing dates to hide the fact that Clinton's economy, spurred by low taxes on the middle class and a tiny-tiny-tiny 2% increase to the richest 1%, beat the Bush economy.

Re: Major Factor your forgetting...

[yesthattom.livejournal.com]

Andrew Tobias' column today says:

But while the Internet bubble made for a lot of stock market wealth, skewing the numbers among the best off, can it account for as much of the reduction in poverty as, say, raising the minimum wage?  Or raising the Earned Income Tax Credit?  Or hiking taxes for the top few in order to assure the world financial markets that we were headed for fiscal responsibility – thus touching off a virtuous economic cycle? 
Those broad policies – affecting many millions of people – were supported by the Democrats and opposed by the Republicans.  Policies matter.  
And listen: Internet or no, under most presidents throughout our nation’s history, median income has gone up.  Why not under the Bushes?  Could it be that the plight of ordinary Americans just does not much interest them?
I think we try so hard to be fair (as we should), that we sometimes go too far and wind up being unfair to ourselves.  It's okay to think Clinton/Gore did a way better job on economic policy than Bush 41 or Bush 43 (or Herbert Hoover).  Because they did.  And Kerry/Edwards will, too.

Re: Major Factor your forgetting...

[havocbmx.livejournal.com]

Please tell me this isn't your serious arguement. Do you have any concept of how the finacial market functions? If you have ever looked at the signal of the stock market you will notice that it doesn't instantly drop like a rock. It happens occasionally but it goes in waves like a sine wave. It takes time for the bubble bursting to take effect. If you have a wave that has been inflated on the concept of free money eg .com it eventually hits it's maximum and then falls this takes time.

Re: Major Factor your forgetting...

[havocbmx.livejournal.com]

Absolutely, did you forget about the crazyness of the stock options and going public. The ludcriously high salaries and jumping ship every other month. The whole time frame was a giant party. Right now, business is switching back into what it does business. The .com era as good as it was for IT people was a horrible thing for the division of wealth and business. It created empires that crumbled overnight. Instant millionares and then Instant Paupers.

I'm afraid that the whole democrat methodology for business is flawed. This is my personal opinion and you are entitled to yours. However, the one thing that is still fundamentaly true about the republican platform is that it believes in business first. Which is the correct method of thought. Democrats for simplicity sake believe in helping the employee which is good as well. However, the problem with Clinton and Democrats in general is that they fail to stop at a rational level. Crippling business and in turn hurting the people they are trying to protect.

Re: Major Factor your forgetting...

[yesthattom.livejournal.com]

Again, you're wronger than wrong. My reply is here in a different comment.

Re: Major Factor your forgetting...

[havocbmx.livejournal.com]

I see your point however, your also missing the bigger picture. Your parties methods are also based on the slow destruction of business. Take for example the effect your party is having on my own home state of NJ.

However, let's go back to the point at hand. Your raising of taxes for the certain specific few is unethical. Quite, simply because you are basically penalizing a group of people for doing well. The reason the richer groups have a lower percentage of tax is because they can't write off the same level of things. A 1k write off for driving would be a big deal for someone like me who makes about 30k a year however a 1k write off to someone who make 100k a year is nothing.

Hence the reason for the lower tax rates for the higher your income. It's all a basic attempt to make income tax fair.

Your party has very backwards concepts when it comes to business. I'm going to put that right out there in the open. There is no denying the fact that your party enjoys massive government and ludcrious fines, fees, and taxes put on the common person and businesses in general.

However, arguing these points with you are just as moot as you attempting to argue your points with me. Let's both walk away from this current discussion with the knowledge that neither one of us will change the others opinion.

In my opinion your party is generally pretty ass backwards with business. However, the republican platform is also pretty ass backwards as well. The thing is that Republicans besides it's obession with relgious and moral garbage still has it's basis in Business. Business is what powers our nation and gives you and I a job. Business is king and it should remain that way.

Re: Major Factor your forgetting...

[yesthattom.livejournal.com]

"Your raising of taxes for the certain specific few is unethical." -- No, actually it is *more* ethical. Rich people use more government services than poor people, they use more resources than poor people; therefore they should pay more taxes to cover their fair share. For example, a poor person on welfare uses $300/month in government resources. A business owner making a million dollars a year depends on highways for trucks to deliver his goods, not to mention hundreds of employees who would be worthless without having been educated by the public school system. If it costs $10 million to educate a student k-12 plus government grants, loans and other programs AND a person works 1/10th of their work life at this man's company, then the company is using $1 million dollars of government resources per employee. Now even if they only have 10 employees to make that $1 million/year salary for the business man, that's still a much bigger chunk of change than $300 used by the poor person.

So maybe you don't believe my math. I'll give another example.

The government pays $400 per airline ticket to maintain the airports, FAA, and other facilities. That is, if 100% of those costs were passed on to the consumer a $69 flight from NY to Florida would cost $469. Let's assume that a business takes 5 round-trip routes (5 x 2 x $400) per year. That's more of a burden than a person on welfare getting $300/month.

That's why "rich" people should pay more in taxes. They use more resources, and leverage them to make more money. They should pay their fair share.


"Business is what powers our nation and gives you and I a job." -- You've got that part right. What you get wrong is that business should be our top priority. Our top priority should be jobs. Keeping businesses strong is a necessary condition, not the other way around. Should we support business when they try to offshore everything? Should we support businesses that pollute our environment to the point that it's impossible for citizens to live?

The Republican party USED TO be the party of business men. Now it's the party of religious and moral garbage. The Democrats put the economy first.

Maybe you should vote for Kerry until the Republicans return to the ideas that you ascribe to them.