Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

were we in a recession when Bush was elected?

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 (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
w8liftinglady Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 11:20 AM
Original message
were we in a recession when Bush was elected?
he said he inherited a recession...is that true?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
PDJane Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 11:21 AM
Response to Original message
1. No.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mountainman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 11:22 AM
Response to Original message
2. The end of the dot com bubble happened then and was the start of a recession I think.
Edited on Fri Mar-14-08 11:26 AM by Mountainman
Did recession begin in 2000?
The Early 2000s recession was felt in mostly Western countries, affecting the European Union mostly during 2000 and 2001 and the United States mostly in 2002 and 2003.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_2000s_recession



Group that dates economic cycles considers extending most recent downturn; possible boon for Bush.
January 22, 2004: 3:01 PM EST
By Mark Gongloff, CNN/Money Staff Writer



NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - The committee of economists that sets the dates of U.S. recessions and expansions is considering moving the starting point of the latest recession to as early as November 2000 -- which could provide some political cover for President Bush.

The business cycle dating committee of the National Bureau of Economic Research, a private research group, will soon decide whether or not to change the starting date of the latest recession from March 2001, its current estimated starting month, NBER spokeswoman Donna Zerwitz told CNN/Money.


http://money.cnn.com/2004/01/22/news/economy/nber/index.htm

It looks like it is debatable, most likely along political lines
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Winterblues Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 11:24 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. The recession began after March 2001 and last until after 9-11
They were then able to blame it all on 9-11 but that was another LIE.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fascisthunter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 11:22 AM
Response to Original message
3. nope.... more manufactured BS from the right wing
he created the recession.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stray cat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 11:25 AM
Response to Original message
5. in 2000 - he has got to be kidding....he inherited one of the best economies!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gasperc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 11:33 AM
Response to Reply #5
15. and a massive surplus that we don't have right now to help us out
and ease the destructiveness of this current downturn, that's angle where we can sharply attack Bush and the GOP. Squandering the surplus and the US Treasury on bad desicion after bad desicion ergo the Iraq war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mrcheerful Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 11:26 AM
Response to Original message
6. It depends on how you define recession
do you mean the current one or the one thats been going on since Nixons term in office? It seems the people forget that this recession has been on going for that long, all anyone has done to stop it has been print more money and Jiggle the numbers around to make it seem everything was fine.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oleladylib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 11:31 AM
Response to Reply #6
14. We had 0 deficit in 2000
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alfredo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 11:26 AM
Response to Original message
7. No. Tech was in a funk, but the rest of the economy was OK. It was the
phony energy crisis in the spring and summer that tipped us into a recession. That crisis ended when Jeffords left the GOP giving the Dems control of the Senate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnnyLib2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 11:26 AM
Response to Original message
8. One of the more bizarre Bushisms, IMO.

Waiting for some public backlash....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oleladylib Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 11:30 AM
Response to Original message
9. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PATRICK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 11:30 AM
Response to Original message
10. Flashback
Even the press, finally, started wondering why Cheney was trying trash talk the economy even before they assumed office and then for frantic months after. The tech bubbles were popping and things faltering, but as we have seen there were new bubbles to keep the thing reviving beyond any hard recession to be sure.

The needed lie, then as now, was to blame Clinton for making a bad economy that Bush inherited and then switch the bubbles to his friends with nothing but praise for him and blame for Clinton. Simple, bald-faced and a sorry piece of propaganda now as it was then. The only thing that made it easy for Bush to get away with his costly shift away from the Clinton patterns of prosperity was the crash after 9/11.
For which Bush and Cheney were 100% visibly grateful and pleased.

Back then the press timidly and in amazement wondered that Cheney would be trying to crash the stock market as few in prominence have ever dared to do. Yet the economy sailed on nicely as if on remote even if slowed and waiting for positive leadership. Which positive leadership came in tax cuts for the rich to destroy our national surpluses and "revive" the economy from the Clinton "woes".

The same rule of thumb. Bush speaks. Bush lies. Those who take his propositions seriously put sh*t in brains. It is about as true as Bush waxing nostalgic for his warlike days of youth and wishing he could serve on the front lines in Afghanistan. It fact all of our current MSM informational garbage is about as true as that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 11:30 AM
Response to Original message
11. He and Cheney talked about a recession months before the election..
The unemplyment rate was lower when he took office than at any time during his presidency. He had a huge surplus. If there was a downturn, most economists would say it was one of the lightest recesssions we ever experienced. He says it was his tax-cuts that prevented it from being worse.

What he doesn't say is that he spent us into $3 trillion dollars more debt, drove the oil prices sky high with his invasion of Iraq, destroyed the value of the dollar, had the largest deficits in the history of our country, violated the rights of all Americans, permitted our country to be attacked because of his arrogance and incompetence on 9/11, brought our country into deep divisions, and also, proved himself to be the sorriest and dumbest mofo that ever stepped foot into our White House.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gasperc Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 11:30 AM
Response to Original message
12. No
they talked us into one, and he went on vacation all summer, ignored his memos and America was attacked a couple of days after he got back. But even then, he wasn't back, he was reading a kid's book in Florida.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lame54 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 11:30 AM
Response to Original message
13. Bush was never elected
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
peace13 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 11:34 AM
Response to Reply #13
16. Too funny! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
El Pinko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 11:37 AM
Response to Original message
17. The slump technically began late in Clinton's term.
It could be argued that the recessions beginnings were in 2000 when the tech bubble began to unravel, but technically the recession didn't start until POS Bush took office.

I don't really mind him saying he inherited a recession. He basically did, but it was nothing compared to what we are facing now because of him, and his response to it was to do ALL the wrong things, and it was his actions then that are coming to roost now in the shape of a total collapse of the financial system.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Maggie_May Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 11:40 AM
Response to Original message
18. No Bush has not taken blame for anything
He took no blame for 911 no blame for a false war in Iraq he took no blame for Katrina and he will take no blame for the United States going broke. He is the guy you hate the guy who says it wasn't my fault it was someone else. He will go down and is the worst president we ever had.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
zbdent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 11:44 AM
Response to Original message
19. no ... Repukes were scaring the populace into thinking that one was coming
and their talk made it happen ...

Funny, because Bush used the great economy of the nineties to push the EXACT SAME TAX CUTS that he pushed using the recession ...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
pansypoo53219 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 12:12 PM
Response to Original message
20. georgie's yapping thew horrible clinton economy
AND greenspan's deliberate slowdown of the economy made it look worse than it was.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Xithras Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 12:28 PM
Response to Original message
21. Not a recession. There were problems, but the recession hadn't started.
Basically, he took power as the dotcom bubble was bursting and the stock market was tanking. While that was terrible economic news and hit some teach-heavy areas hard, the economy as a whole was doing well nationwide. Investors were losing money and programmers were losing their jobs, but the vast majority of Americans didn't have a problem.

The economic downturn that followed was due primarily to Bush inaction. Rather than acting to re-invigorate that sector, they let it collapse and stagnate. That cut consumer confidence, which cut spending, which led to recession.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robcon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 12:37 PM
Response to Original message
22. Actual timing of recession: March 2001-November 2001.
So the recession started two months after * was inaugurated.

From the National Bureau of Economic Research, the official source of the timings of the business cycle:

"The March 2001 peak marked the end of the expansion that began in March 1991, an expansion that lasted exactly 10 years and was the longest in the NBER's chronology. On July 16, 2003, the committee determined that a trough in economic activity occurred in November 2001. The committee's announcement of the trough is at http://www.nber.org/cycles/july2003. The trough marks the end of the recession that began in March 2001. The 2001 recession thus lasted eight months, which is somewhat less than the average duration of recessions since World War II. The postwar average, excluding the 2001 recession, is eleven months."
http://www.nber.org/cycles/recessions.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nadinbrzezinski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 12:39 PM
Response to Original message
23. Not according to the NEBR
who actually keep the numbers. It started after he took over.

And it was mild compared to what we're seeing right now
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadinMo Donating Member (519 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Mar-14-08 01:06 PM
Response to Original message
24. In his second term,
Maybe he inherited it from himself in his second term.
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 May 07th 2024, 10:43 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) 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