Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Economy turnaround - war or tax cuts?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
BigBigBear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-04 07:50 PM
Original message
Economy turnaround - war or tax cuts?
Does anyone find it interesting that Bush pushed tax cuts through in 2001, and the economy did nothing...and went to war (in quite a hurry) and pushed more tax cuts through in 2003 and the economy responded?

Didn't his father go to war, only to see the economy start to respond 6-9 months later (too late to win the election?)

My theory: war is better for the economy than paltry (for middle class Americans) tax cuts, but if you do both at the same time, people will THINK it's the tax cuts that improved the economy. And no one would ever believe that it's actually the war spending that stimulates the economy. Even though it worked for FDR, and Nixon.

Thoughts? Anyone seen columns on this? Too tinfoil hat?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
T Roosevelt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-04 07:51 PM
Response to Original message
1. Turnaround?
What turnaround. There are still so many problems with this economy we'll be lucky if we're not witness to another depression...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stereophonic Donating Member (3 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-04 07:57 PM
Response to Reply #1
5. In all fairness
To be fair, we have seen larger growths in the economy in the past two quarters than in the previous two years, with a reduction in jobless claims by over 3%. It's obvious that something is stimulating the economy, but if it hadn't responded to such massive tax cuts it could have been deemed as completely dead.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kathy in Cambridge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-04 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #5
8. In reality, it will take 8 additional quarters of 20% or more growth
to get to the same levels we were at in Jan. 2001
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alcuno Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-04 08:14 PM
Response to Reply #5
12. Welcome to DU, stereophonic.
I am absolutely amazed that with all the juice poured into the economy, the jobs are still not there. I really thought that late last summer we would be steaming. The US economy needs about 120,000 new jobs created each month JUST to keep up with population growth and new workers entering the job market.

I remember watching CNBC last month and that idiot Lawrence Kudlow was making fun of an analyst predicting 97,000 new jobs in November. He was predicting 375,000 and the number came out at an abysmal 57,000. Unbelievable.

The jobless claims number is terribly misleading since many people simply give up looking for work. The lowest number that I have seen is 8.5 million Americans are unemployed and that does not even count the people who are considered under-employed.

I think that the real problem with the tax cuts is that they let their greed completely take them over; they put too little into the areas that really needed it and took too much for themselves. I am just stunned that so little has been accomplished with so much.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thinkingwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-04 10:21 PM
Response to Reply #5
19. as a business owner
I'm not buying this economic growth bs. Everybody is still waaayyyy sllooooooooooooowwwwwwwww paying my accounts receivable. There was a 2-3 week period back at the end of Sept/first of Oct where money seemed to flow more easily than it had in a couple of years. But a screeching halt occured shortly after that and it's been like slogging through waist-high mud ever since.

Maybe Walmart is experiencing an upturn. Maybe Haliburton is seeing profits increase.

But midwestern small business is in serious pain. Don't believe the statistics being thrown about. They lie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bronco69 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-04 07:53 PM
Response to Original message
2. I don't see how war is stimulating the economy
and the tax cuts aren't either IMO. What makes you think war is better for the economy?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ComerPerro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-04 07:53 PM
Response to Original message
3. The stock market doesn't mean shit
Look:

If you have a shit economy where the stock market is just struggling and prices are low, and then spend three years giving the richest Americans tons of money for doing nothing, why wouldn't you expect them to buy up the market for pennies on the dollar?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Fixated Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-04 07:59 PM
Response to Reply #3
7. .....
The market is often a little ahead of the economy though. It's hard to tell at this point.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
silverlib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-04 07:56 PM
Response to Original message
4. I don't think there's a turnaround in the economy...
Edited on Mon Jan-05-04 07:58 PM by silverlib
I think the temporary upsurge in the stock market could be related to government contracts in Iraq.

I also think the temporary upbeat numbers for unemployment are screwed in many areas, but are also affected by the amount of soldiers serving overseas. When/if they come home and want to go back to work, will we count them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rfranklin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-04 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #4
9. Biggest bear rally in history....
folowing the biggest bubble in history. The pattern on the charts looks very much like what happened after 1929. Following that bear rally, the market cascaded down 80% from its high in 1929.

There is no such thing as a "jobless recovery," especially in an economy which is primarily based on consumer spending. The war effect will last for a while and then fizzle out.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lcordero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-04 07:59 PM
Response to Original message
6. War did nothing but make the economy worse
Tourism is down and with that it has killed a huge part of every major cities economy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrBB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-04 08:12 PM
Response to Original message
10. How's your job security? Even at the present rate
... Bush will have the worst job growth record since Hoover and yet it's a "turnaround"???

Let me ask everyone a question, or rather two questions. Assuming you're presently employed:

2. Sure you're not gonna get laid off this year?

3. If you did get laid off, sure you'd find a new job before your benefits ran out? With a Republican president and congress?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kathy in Cambridge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-04 08:14 PM
Response to Reply #10
11. That's Right-Greatest Job Losses Since Herbert Hoover
and more jobs lost that the previous eleven presidents combined.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftofthedial Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-04 08:15 PM
Response to Original message
13. neither. there is no turnaround
the tax cuts definitely helped the stock market, as has the sharp rise in unemployment.

Both are temporary, since there soon will be no one able to buy any products. Consumers represent 2/3 of the American economy and the middle class has already shrunk by over 20%.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hell Hath No Fury Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-04 08:25 PM
Response to Original message
14. There is no turnaround...
Not a real one. Read it and weep:


The massive tax cuts put forth by the Bush Administration as urgent economic and job stimulus have resulted in a record deficit, a "jobless" recovery, and contributed to in the most severe fiscal decline in over 20 years. OMB Watch, August 22, 2003 http://www.ombwatch.org/article/articleview/1747/1/18/

The American dollar continues to fall against the Euro, sterling and the Swiss franc due to fears about US trade and budget deficits.
Reuters courtesy of the Washington Post, December 29, 2003
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A38085-2003Dec29.html

The United States is experiencing its worst budget deficit in its history -- $374.2 billion -- under George W. Bush. Australian Financial Times, October 21, 2003
http://www.financialreview.com.au/articles/%202003/10/21/1066631380718.html

The national debt is scheduled to hit a record $7.4 trillion in 2004.
Associated Press courtesy of Truthout, June 16, 2003
http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/061703H.shtml

The United States has lost over 3 million jobs since George W. Bush took office. Bloomberg News courtesy of Rocky Mountain News, October 18, 2003
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/business/article/0,1299,DRMN_4_2357182,0%200.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
web63 Donating Member (1 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-04 08:32 PM
Response to Original message
15. More Tax Cuts?????
I say give us more tax cuts.
Government is like a fire.
A fire needs fuel.
If you take away the fuel for the fire, it goes away.
Our money is fuel for the Politician fire.
We give less money, we get less Government.
Yeaaaaaaaaaaaaaa Meeeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!
Let's do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BigBigBear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-04 08:56 PM
Response to Original message
16. Agreed
on all points of skepticism about the substance of the recovery - but growth rate did seem to move upward in the first two full quarters after Congress approved the initial $87 billion.

I am not oblivious to the deficits, nor under any illusions about how far these idiots have let the economy slide, nor how far till it returns to the point at which they inherited it, nor how paltry the tax cuts were in reality.

My simple question was, can we plausibly cite a sagging economy as a possible motive for this war and occupation? I believe we can.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hell Hath No Fury Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-04 10:16 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. Nope...
that was and has always been about the oil in the region, going back to Dickie Cheney's leaked policy paper back when he was with the Bush I administration. This has been in the works for a VERY long time. Even when Clinton was in office Richard Perle and his buds were sending papers to Clinton telling him just what our actions/policies on the ME should be. Low and behold, it is EXACTLY what we are seeing right now.

This would have happened irregardless of how the ecomomy was doing.

The PNACers would have seen to it. 9/11 just gave them the best excuse.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jpgray Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-04 10:17 PM
Response to Original message
18. War spending and an investor's bacchanal? (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
priller Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jan-05-04 10:39 PM
Response to Original message
20. CHEAP & EASY DEBT
That's what is keeping the economy kicking. That keeps consumer spending going, which is by far the biggest engine in the economy. Yes, military spending has helped the economy, but it's a small part.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 30th 2024, 05:09 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC