Putting lipstick on Bush 43 economic performance.

[Lasher]

Right wingers have always tried to portray Bush 43 economic performance in an unrealistically positive light, but I've started to detect an increase in this kind of propaganda and it's getting more frantic.

For example, Stephen Moore wrote that fears of future tax increases should Democrats win the nation's highest office are now driving the economy into recession. I've got to give him points for creativity on that one. Saint Ronnie blamed Carter for everything, almost to the end of his 8 years in office. But this breaks new ground in the art of duplicity, blaming a future Democratic president for the current administration’s miserable results.

IMO McCain is not going to distance himself from Junior this year as many have supposed. It is more likely that the GOP noise machine will be operating at full tilt in an attempt to convince voters that night is day and black is white - in other words, that The Decider's results don't suck.

Predictably, Bill Clinton's excellent economic results are being questioned in hopes that Republicans won't have to endure a comparison between him and Bush 43. Here is a rebuttal I just threw together to counter such an attack:

As of January 2007, Real (inflation-adjusted) average hourly earnings had grown 21 percent slower under President Bush than they did under President Clinton. Moreover, real wages are barely higher than they were in 2003. Real median household income has fallen by $1,273 during the Bush Administration, whereas it grew by $5,825 under Clinton.

Consumer confidence has fallen 6% under Bush 43 and it rose 51% during Clinton's tenure.

Bush 43 has the worst job creation record of any President in over 70 years, with just 3.7 million net new jobs added to nonfarm payrolls. To put that in context, about 2.1 million jobs were added to the economy annually during the two decades prior to 2001.

In contrast, payrolls expanded by 22.7 million jobs under President Clinton. Job creation averaged 237,000 jobs per month under President Clinton, compared with 53,000 jobs per month under Bush.

The lowest monthly US unemployment rate since January 1970 was during April 2000 when it was 3.8% When Clinton left office, the unemployment rate was 4.2 percent—3.1 percentage points lower than when he took office. The jobless rate has never been that low since.

The poverty rate fell by 3.5 percentage points under President Clinton and the number of people in poverty declined by 6.4 million. Under President Bush, the poverty rate has risen by 1.3 percentage points and 5.4 million more people are poor. The number of people without health insurance fell during the last two
years of the Clinton Administration but has grown by 6.8 million under President Bush.

Clinton started with a record $190.3 billion deficit during Bush 41's last year in office and reduced it every single year, resulting in surpluses during his last 3 years in office. Bush 43 started 2001 with a surplus he inherited from Clinton to set historic deficit records in 2003 and 2004. Public debt as a percentage of GDP has increased by 5.5 percentage points under Bush 43, compared with a reduction of 16.4 percentage points under
President Clinton.

The S&P 500 was up 207% during Clinton's 8 years. It closed at 1,342.90 on January 22, 2001 and is 1,281.57 right now - a net loss in nonadjusted dollars over the course of a little over 7 years. This is by far the worst it has performed under any president since inception of the index.

http://www.unlawflcombatnt.proboards84.com/index.cgi?action=display&board=general&thread=1199189698&page=1

[Steerpike]

1. Nice Article!

I would like to see more articles debunking the right wing meme of the "Horrible Clinton Years"

[ThoughtCriminal]

2. The latest propaganda trick

Compare Bush's "Average" to Clinton's "Average" for indexes like inflation and unemployment. The trick is that Clinton inherited a high unemployment rate (over 7%) from Bush I and left with a rate under 4%. Bush II inherited that low rate and it's been mostly rising ever since. Who knows what it will be next January, but it's bound to be higher.

[Karl_Bonner_1982]

3. It's the income distribution, stupid!

Who is actually benefiting from the Bush expansion? What does the story look like from Main Street as opposed to Wall Street?

Keep in mind that there is one economic attribute that is doing better under Bush Jr. than at any other time in recent American history. Betcha can't guess what it is. :evilgrin:












Okay since this post hasn't had any replies in an eternity, I'll just say it. Corporate profit rates have been in double digits for the average of 2001-2007, higher than any time since the 1960s.