I need help convincing a Repug that Bush didn't inherit a recession!

[phattyt]

My friend (a Repug) wrote the following to me and presented me with this graph:

You know as well as I do that Bush doesn't take office till 2001. As you can see in 2000, there is a big drop off that Bush inherited and bottomed out around 9/11. Bush's policies are not going to be implemented in time to cause that drop off. By definition of a recession, it occured during Clinton's last term.




I need help to disprove him that the shrub inherited an economy going into recession from Clinton

[Yupster]

1. Was definitely slowing down in 00

Heading into a recession? How can you prove that one way or the other?

The stock market was a disaster in 2000 though. The S+P lost 9 % in 2000 which was its worst year in 20 years. The tech bubble had burst.

That worst record in 20 years didn't last long though as the S+P shed 12 % more in 2001 and then 22 % more in 2003 for three down years in a row. That was the first time that happened since Pearl Harbor.

[T Roosevelt]

2. Here's a start

and good background:

http://www.rense.com/general52/backdatingtherecession.htm

Bottom line is the NBER determines the start of recessions, and they said March 2001. That's all you should need.

[sandnsea]

3. Mar 2001 - Nov 2001

It was short and not that bad and has been over for 3 years. How long does this bungler get to blame Clinton for his problems? This is the worst job recovery after any recession since the Depression. Bush is a failure. His tax cuts are failures. The CBO released a report today that shows that the tax burden has shifted to the middle class under Bush. What more do these people need to know they're being screwed? I'll give them a kiss if that's what it takes.

http://www.nber.org/cycles/july2003.html

[alcuno]

4. Wrong-By definition, a recession is 3 consecutive quarters of falling GDP.

"The National Bureau of Economic Research, which measures recessions and expansions in ways other than GDP, said this week that the economy sank into recession in March after 10 years of growth, the longest expansion on record."

The GDP going down for one quarter does not a recession make. Therefore, the 3 consecutive falls were into 1Q 2001, 2Q 2001, and 3Q 2001. The GDP then picked up which is why economists say that the recession ended in December 2001.

The recession of 9 MONTHS ended 2 and a half years ago. So what's Bush's excuse now?????

[WMliberal]

5. i think the repuke just can't read a damn graph

he's confusing declining, but still positive growth, with negative growth.

[welshTerrier2]

6. don't waste your time

even top economists won't reach a consensus on this issue ... you end up playing games with semantics and statistics ...

but here are a couple of points your friend will have a tough time with:

1. over an 8 year period, more than 22 million jobs were created ... we were changing the laws to allow foreign labor to come to this country because the labor force could not support the level of economic activity ... does your friend think the labor market in the U.S. was better under Clinton or under bush ? bush has the worst record on jobs since Herbert Hoover ...

2. Clinton left office with a budget surplus ... bush, and his republican controlled house and his republican controlled senate, have managed to run up the largest budget deficits in history ... now your friends might want to point out the high cost of the war in Iraq ... tell your friends that almost none of the monies allocated to rebuild Iraq have been spent ...

3. the cost of healthcare has continued to skyrocket ... bush and his friends passed (after breaking the rules in the house of representatives by bribing and bullying after losing the vote) a medicare bill that is the ultimate giveaway to the pharmaceutical industry ... one of the pillars of this new law prohibits the federal government from trying to obtain the best possible price for drugs ... is this the kind of "conservative" economic policy your friend supports ...

tell him to wake up and understand that democrats want a balanced budget because all that's left in the budget after most of the social programs were gutted are massive corporate welfare programs that lead to things like no-bid contracts, wasteful weapons systems, windfall profits for the energy industry, and giveaways to the bloated pharmaceutical industry ... tell your friend there are no more "welfare queens" ... the democratic party of today is more, not less, economically conservative than the republicans ... the party with "conservative" economic values that values a balanced budget is the democratic party ... the pro-corporate party that is bankrupting the U.S. treasury is the republican party ...

[Moderator]

7. Duplicate

Locking. The original was started by the thread author.