Paul Krugman is "joyless." Him and his ilk are all joyless. They are the biggest bunch of pills ever.

Used to be one measure of economic growth, albeit imperfect, was the DJIA.

If that's what you use with Bush, there was no boom, at all.

If you use wages as a measure, under Bush there was no boom, at all.

Jobs created? No boom. Nothing to compare with what happened month after month under Clinton.

So what are you measuring, and what are you neglecting, to assert a boom?

Ace, I can't believe you actually passed up the chance to use the sarcastic slow clap! Ya know - "Nice. Well played, MSM. Very well played."

Clap.

Clap.

Clap.

This word boom that you keep using... I do not think it means what you think it means.
--tubino, Stupid Shit Tubino Said, vol 3

Nothing to compare with what happened month after month under Clinton.

You fucking idiot, perhaps you've heard of a little thing called 9/11? Made all the papers.

The record sustained deficit spending and tax cuts are like nitro to the economy, and they are unsustainable.

So... for the past few years, the unsustainable economic stimulators have been used full bore -- and still, with households maxed out on debt, + real wages stagnating, + real job growth stagnant, there is a limit to how much the economy can really grow.

So ... in the long run the deficit spending will be reined in, taxes will have to go up, and the economy will suffer.

And that's the good news.

---------

Maybe Madfish Willie can tell us what the boom means to him.

zetetic,

Maybe there are good reasons there was no boom. (I never said otherwise.)

That doesn't mean that there WAS a boom.

There was no boom.

Get it? You can blame it on 9-11, fine. But what is the basis for claiming there WAS a boom?

Maybe Madfish Willie can tell us what the boom means to him

It means that my local housing market (also our commercial contruction market) is going gangbusters and we can't build enough high dollar custom gunite swimming pools to satisfy the market's thirst. (I'm a pool builder by the way)

New cars flying off the lots, major shopping malls being built, several PGA golf resorts underway, new road construction everywhere, widening the interstate highways and interchanges, property values skyrocketing, etc etc

All this in a perceived "minor league" city -- that hosts the World Champion Spurs -- so I would say that our economy at least is booming!

Almost forgot... major companies relocating to our city ie Toyota manufacturing plant, Washington Mutual (?), not to mention we are the world headquaters for SBC > AT&T

How's your business doing Tubby?

How's your business doing Tubby?

I can't keep up with it!

Some of us are doing fine. But what numbers do you point to if you want to make the case for a boom? Plural of anecdote isn't data etc.

Bankruptcies are up, for example.

"Bankruptcies are up, for example"

I call BS. The reason that bankruptcies are up is because of people rushing to get their bankruptcies in under the old rules that were more favorable to those declaring bankruptcy. This is like saying that an AIDS hospice must be built on a site with massive radon infiltration....."because everyone who moves in there ends up dying".

tubby, I thought you were better than that. Come correct or don't come at all.

Far be it from me to contradict an ex-moonbat who's finally succumbed to the evil Rovian mind rays and realized that tax cuts are like nitro to the economy (whose highest purpose is to make money for people who own stock). But the Dow is up 50% since its low in October, 2002. If that's not a boom, it'll serve to tide us over until a boom comes along.

tubino,

Just out of curiosity, what is it that you believe Clinton did that led to a boom? What policy exactly? His tax increases? The dot-com boom that left so many retirees better off? Or maybe deficit reduction (for which, of course, you will give equal credit to the republican congress I'm sure)? In fact, what policy did Clinton champion and get passed that will be remembered in 1 year, let alone today? (Welfare reform? Only that was something he repeatedly vetored until the republican congress finally forced it down his throat).

You may have liked Clinton a lot. And you may be liberal and like liberal policiticians, but I don't see what exactly you think it is that Clinton actually ever did as President. (certainly, it wasn't anything to do with national security - if you even assert that you cannot be taken seriously.)

AP the Anarchist Press what a bunch of dweebs

I call BS. The reason that bankruptcies are up is because of people rushing to get their bankruptcies in under the old rules that were more favorable to those declaring bankruptcy.

That is certainly true for the last couple months before the deadline, maybe more. Unfortunately, the trend even prior to the changes in law was that bankruptcies were UP. I thought about putting in the caveats, but hey, life is short.

VT, Clinton *did* do some good things for national security. Turns out the bombing in Iraq is credited with wiping out last of WMD-making capabilities, for example, and he met with FBI & CIA heads TOGETHER to discuss threats, something Bush should have done immediately with the Aug 5 2001 PDB. I guess his vacation was more important.

But economically, Clinton put the US in very good shape with the deficit, which gave a huge boost to investor confidence. If a repub prez and Congress can't keep their snouts out of the earmark trough, it's not Bill's fault. With the escalating deficits, Bush is handing our kids' future to China et al. in the form of massive debts per person. Do the math sometime.

The polls show that the US was viewed much more favorably abroad under Clinton. The "brand" America was in great shape. The same polls show a tremendous downturn.

BTW, I never said tax cuts alone were nitro. Borrowing 400 BILLION to infuse in the economy plus tax cuts = nitro. But because of the KINDS of allocations made by the admin, that borrowing has not led to long-term growth, so you just get the shortterm push without job growth etc.

Too bad we already shot the wad. The pedal has been to the metal for years now. One terrorist attack in the next year, and the admin has used all its nitro to help recover...

And then we're fucked, buddy. Short-term borrowing can make a lot of sense. Unsustainable borrowing & tax cuts at the top as economic policy without a plan for longterm growth is great for the top percentile, lousy for the rest.

You're living the best test case you'll ever see.

Took 4.5 years for the Dow to get back to pre-9-11 levels.

Wow. That's some boom.

Encyc. Britannica aka Red Youth Communist Brigade:

Economic growth continued during Clinton's second term, eventually setting a record for the nation's longest peacetime economic expansion. After enormous budget deficits throughout the 1980s and early 1990s—including a $290 billion deficit in 1992—by 1998 the Clinton administration oversaw the first balanced budget and budget surpluses since 1969. The vibrant economy produced a tripling in the value of the stock market, historically high levels of home ownership, and the lowest unemployment rate in nearly 30 years.

Here's your f'kng BUSH BOOM.

Every recession in modern U.S. history has been preceded by a phenomenon called "bond yield inversion", in which the interest rates on short-term bonds becomes higher than that on long-term bonds. And, conversely, 94% of all bond yield inversions have been followed by either a severe economic slowdown or a recession. Bond yield inversion is considered the best early predictor of future economic troubles.

Guess what? In December, the U.S. entered a bond yield inversion.

More at link above.

Tubino's big bellowing point, then, is that the boom was preceded by a recession? I believe we all knew that already.

"Took 4.5 years for the Dow to get back to pre-9-11 levels.

Wow. That's some boom."

Of course, its real value now, not bubble adjusted.

Tob

" the Clinton administration oversaw the first balanced budget and budget surpluses since 1969."

I like that line, it seems to say something yet doesn't really tell us anything. They could just have well said that the Republican Congress oversaw the first balanced budget etc? I like to think that the Republican Congress passed the first balanced buget since 1969 even though Clinton said it couldn't be done. No lie, look it up ;-)

Tob

Take th C out of CBS and the P out of PBS and what do you think you,ll get?