Job growth
I often notice President Bush on the radio or on the T.V talking about how great our unemployment rate is right now.
I believe it was Pizz who also commented on this unemployment rate being “good”
Allow me to set the record straight on this conservative spin on fact, those Jobs Bush is creating, simply put, Suck.
They are jobs that are minimum wage earning, McDonalds Grade Quality at best, simply put, one cannot earn a living off of them.
As it stands, our place in the Global economy is slipping and we are loosing our importance in the world economically, as developing Asian Countries rise to glory.
Take China for example, President Bush Is trying to convince them to keep their unit of currency down so that the housing mortgage won’t skyrocket.
Our dollar used to be one of the highest valued currencies in the world, but now it’s slipping, and falling out to the Euro and the Yuan. So much for economic super power.
Also as it stands we have lost our industrial muscle to these countries, as well as our education.
In the recent Budget announcement for 2005, Bush plans to cut funding for education, so much for no child left behind. As it stands, we are rank 20 in the world for our skills in math and science, we also seem to have a deficit of ambition, kids seem to be content as long as they have a car and a job at Mc. Donald’s.
I also heard some one say that the failing economy was the fault of Clinton; I should almost start laughing at the ignorance of this statement. By the end of Clintons second term, our economy was thriving! RECORD SURPLUSES!!!!, then, enter the Bush Administration who obviously failed their economics classes. Record deficits, they use all the surplus money, and when it ran dry, they went to China And Europe for money, Charge it all to a credit card like a stupid collage kid. Record deficits of over $2 trillion, a deficit that is causing the value of the U.S Dollar to slide considerable in comparison to Europe and China’s currencies.
pizz Says: June 2nd, 2005 at 10:03 pm
The fed ed budget went from 56.6B to 56B, so you are right. What you fail to mention is that it is up from 41B in 2001. As far as scores go, you might want to look at the ed.gov web page, scores are up. Why is it when clinton was in office liberals didn’t focus on scores?
Clinton leaving the economy in good shape is an absolute joke. The health of the economy consists of allot more than what the fed has on hand. You failed to mention many facts I have stated in the comment you are reffering to. Our GDP is currently ~3.7% (w/ the trade def figured in). Our REAL GDP is ~4.6% (that’s the grouth rate of production in our country). A European leader, France, has a negative GDP and an unemployment rate of 10-11%. Maybe we can take advice from them?
If what you say is true regarding Bush and China’s currency, why are you complaining? Your complaining about the economy and your complaining because he’s trying to help the economy. Maybe if we employ slave labor we can compete with China’s production costs. Is that what you want?
As far as all these new jobs being minimume wage, I believe most of this rhetoric was employed by the dems during election time. It’s time to let that one go too. I’m a blue collar worker who is currently in the job market and I’m getting decent pay offers. Others that I know, from low skill to pro’s, are getting the same. It may be a cold fact that many of the people making min wage are getting it bacause that’s where their skill level is. As I recall, Bush also funds adult ed programs.
No matter what Bush does, liberals will always find something to complain about.
Mr. Jack Says: June 3rd, 2005 at 3:05 am
Ok Pizz, get this threw you’re head Pizz, I’m not a liberal. I’m a moderate, And I’m not complaining about Bush, why is it when I make a comment about how bad something is, and I mention his name, I’m automatically bashing him? Sure he’s an idiot, but not all his decisions are bad. I’m actually commending him for at least trying to do something about our dollar loosing value. You misunderstand me my friend, just because I criticize him for one thing, doesn’t mean I’m going to do it on every decision he makes, this is what it is to be a moderate, you approve some decisions and challenge others.
As for the whole France GDP, you misinterpret what I’m saying, I’m talking about the difference in the value of the euro to the dollar, in which it’s worth about 50% more now, there fore people are going to start buying bonds from Europe now because they’re worth more, causing our dollar to inflate enormously. I never said anything about their GDP. The one I’m comparing that to, is China, who is vastly becoming a leader in the global market. And I read about those jobs in 2002, 2 yrs before the election, from an independent news journal. It said that the new jobs being created by Bush were minimum wage earning.
And just because you’re a blue-collar worker and getting decent wages doesn’t mean that every one is.
And one more thing, where the hell did that whole slave labor thing come in? I never purposed such a thing, my proposal was to boost education in math and science to develop break through that could be sold to other countries and give us a market to sell other than becoming a nation of Wal-marts and Mc. Donald’s’
As for the health of the economy, it mainly consists of a principle known as the balance of trade, and despite popular belief, things like the stock market have little affect on the overall economy.
The fact of the matter is were on the low end of the trade balance, where we’re spending more money than we’re receiving, and we do have to pay that money back otherwise it’s grounds for other nations to Invade us, and harvest our resources in order to make up for the money they lost.
pizz Says: June 3rd, 2005 at 4:16 am
This is my last comment on this issue.
1. China’s production costs, GDP, and (especially)the market have a HUGE effect on economy. To think that it does not is to be completely ignorant to say the least.
2. Your putting down Bush and the economy and then you say “Take China for example..”. What do you think the reader is going to think? They’ll think you disagree. If you agreed in the first place why didn’t you just say it in your article? There would be no misunderstanding over the context your putting it in.
3. Ok, so your not a liberal. Your a progressive.
Mr. Jack Says: June 3rd, 2005 at 6:46 am
Pizz. 1, thank you for admitting I’m not a liberal, I must say you by far have one of the most open minds as far as conservatives I’ve met.
2,when did I say China’s GDP didn’t have an affect on the economy? I said China’s Yuan is the thing that’s going to kill the dollar, as stated in one of my previous articles ” and now for a real issue” what I stated was that the health of the American stock market has no indication on the health of the economy.
3. How does “take china for example…” Bash Bush? That subject has absolutely nothing to do with him accept that he’s trying to convince the Chinese to keep their Yuan artificially low so that our Mortgage rates don’t skyrocket, and our Dollar diminish in value.
I think you’re seriously misreading what I’m saying.
Suzanne Says: June 3rd, 2005 at 7:31 am
Mr. Jack, I do agree with you, additional facts and reasons
First of all, there is no such thing as free trade. Trade, by its very definition, requires the exchange of commerce. Therefore, in any trade exchange, there are purchasers and sellers. Someone pays the bill in each and every trade deal. The only thing free in these modern “free trade” agreements is the free ride that the internationalists receive from our federal government, which is being paid by American workers with lower wages and the loss of American jobs. NAFTA, GATT, the WTO, and now President Bush’s proposed Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) are not only blatantly unconstitutional, they are downright harmful to the security and interests of the United States.
Article 1, Section 8, of the Constitution plainly gives Congress the responsibility to “regulate commerce with foreign nations.” That Congress has willingly ceded this responsibility and that the President has wrongfully assumed this responsibility means that both Congress and the President have violated their oaths of office to support and defend the U.S. Constitution.
With the collusion of President Bill Clinton and Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole, NAFTA was passed (during the middle of the night, by the way). Now, President G.W. Bush wants to extend NAFTA with his push for FTAA. The result of FTAA would mean that instead of American jobs and industries moving to Mexico, they could move to even cheaper and more backward countries such as Bolivia and Peru. And let’s not overlook China.
America’s trade deficit with China is staggering! According to a recent Washington Times report, “The trade deficit jumped 17 percent to a record $489 billion last year, propelled by an explosion in trade with China.
“America’s $124 billion deficit with China is now twice its trade gap with Japan, three times its deficit with Mexico, and substantially above its $100 billion deficit with all of Western Europe.”
“Free trade” has all but expunged America’s manufacturing industries. Our textile plants have mostly vanished. The same is true for our electronics industry and even our steel industry. The vast majority of America’s giant corporations are now importing goods from overseas. The cost of this insanity in terms of American jobs, wages, and strain on American families is incalculable.
Most American families are working two, three, or even more jobs just to try and make ends meet. Combining meager wages with an ever increasing tax burden means that most American families are barely able to keep their heads above water, while many others are languishing in obscene debt.
While average America fights to tread water, the CEOs, CFOs, and other high level executives of the multinational corporations are raking in monstrous profits. Multinational corporations accomplish this by hiring slave or cheap labor from these third world and socialist countries and then import their goods back to America practically duty-free. All the while, these same countries require the U.S. to pay huge duties for our exports.
So-called “free trade” is not only unconstitutional, it is perverse! It makes America more and more dependent upon foreign nations, which makes us more and more vulnerable to those who seek to harm us.
Suzanne the Moderate
Paul Says: June 6th, 2005 at 3:57 am
You commented that the Bush Administration failed economic classes? Did you ever take an economics class? Basic Macro economic theories not only point out the cyclical nature of business, but also clearly show that a government should run a surplus during a boom time and a deficit during a slow time to control the supply of money and avoid the exageration of the cycle and possibly induce hyper inflation or risk a depresion. It is Keynesian economics to a tee.
Let’s take a look at the Clinton boom years. He benefited from the growth of the internet industry and a skyrocketing stock market. Oh wait, I forgot, since Al Gore invented the internet, the Clinton administration can take some credit for that. Clinton’s last year of office, the bubble burst and investors realized these companies were not turning a profit. The major sell off began, and 9/11 nearly destroyed the economy.
Bush did not inherit a perfect economy, nor did he screw it up. I disagree with some of Bush’s policies, but he has handled the economy well.
Lefty Says: June 8th, 2005 at 3:53 am
Paul,
Al Gore didn’t invent the internet. He just wrote and proposed the legislation that funded the prototype that has now evolved into the world wide web (the internet). You are correct in crediting his vision and determination in pushing through the legislation that got the internet started, but many others did play important roles once the government funding got the internet off the ground.
Lefty Says: June 8th, 2005 at 3:55 am
Many economists think that Bush has handled the economy very poorly. His extremism certainly doesn’t promote investor confidence.
Paul Says: June 9th, 2005 at 3:39 am
Hopefully you did not miss my sarcasm, especially considering Gore himself stated he invented the Internet. The Internet Society Website http://www.isoc.org, track the development of the internet back to 1961 and state by 1985 “by 1985, Internet was already well established as a technology supporting a broad community of researchers and developers, and was beginning to be used by other communities for daily computer communications.” I didn’t think Gore was elected to the Senate until 1985?
Bush’s economic policies are based on Keynesian economic theories and supported by Alan Greenspan and the Federal Reserve. Who are some of the economists who think he has handled the economy poorly. It is certainly their opinion to think that way, but Keynes is a pretty big hitter.
Lefty Says: June 9th, 2005 at 12:56 pm
Paul,
Every single living American Nobel Prize winning economist except 1 has been critical of Bush’s economic policies. I’d say that Nobel Prize winning economists are pretty heavy hitting too.
Lefty Says: June 9th, 2005 at 1:02 pm
Paul,
By the way, you are aware (I hope) that Gore never said that he invented the internet. That was just a typical example of how Republican politicos distort reality. In a March 1999 interview with Wolf Blitzer, Gore said, “During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet.” This was a true statement. According to Vincent Cerf, a senior vice president with MCI Worldcom who’s been called the Father of the Internet, “The Internet would not be where it is in the United States without the strong support given to it and related research areas by the Vice President in his current role and in his earlier role as Senator.” The steady stream of mis (and dis) information that flows from the republican direction is maddening.
Lefty Says: June 9th, 2005 at 1:07 pm
Paul,
Don’t blame me, you posed regarding what economists have been critical of Bush. Here’s a quote from one american nobel prize winning economist for you. I have literally dozens of others if you really want to get into it.
“Rather than stimulating job growth, the Bush-backed millionaire tax cuts will help stimulate a massive federal budget shortfall—a 10-year deficit of nearly $6 trillion, according to George Akerlof, a 2001 Nobel Prize winner and economist at the University of California, Berkeley. “The popular discussion is there might be some question whether Bush’s economic policies are advisable,” he said. “But that’s wrong—they’re the worst in over 200 years.”