>> |
Anonymous
>>71947 Nah, I live in Michigan and I get most of my information from the BLS and various newspapers. I don't claim that Bush is doing better than Clinton on the economy, but under him, we have more jobs and home ownership, even if the growth is comparatively slow. The second and fourth sites you list are both creeping up on two years old, and neither takes into consideration that Bush came into office with a major economic bubble on his hands. Because the Trade Center attacks coincided pretty closely with the time that the bubble burst, the economy went to hell in latter 2001. I think that Bush did pretty well in pulling us back out of that slump, all things considered, especially when he's spending money so uncontrollably at the same time. Even the site from Academy Computer Services (the most recent and most tilted against Bush out of those listed) shows that the trends for unemployment, stock market, and national debt are ALL headed in the right direction now.
Now I would be a bigger fan of Bush's economic policies if he combined his tax cuts with decreased spending. I agree with his statement that the government has no income problem but instead a spending problem. I think that there should never be any great amount of national surplus, because the government should only take from us what it needs and no more. Unfortunately, Bush has yet to cut spending so it's a moot point.
I'm not a particular fan of Bush, but the facts are going his way by now, the way I see them. If you've gotta hate him, hate him for the right reasons.
|