Petition [EN] Pétition [FR] Petición [ES] Petiţie [RO] Ψήφισμα [EL] Petice[CZ] Petition [DE] Petizione [IT] Petycja [PL] Petitie [NL] Petíció [HU] Petição [PT] Namninsamling [SV] Underskriftindsamling [DA] Petícia [SK] Achainí [GA] Peticija [LT] Петиция [RU] Eskaera [EU] Petskribo [EO] Petició [CA] Athchuinge [GD]
During the 2000 election, with Bill Clinton as president, the economy was viewed through rose-colored glasses. According to polls, voters didn't realize that the country was in a recession. Although the economy started shrinking in July 2000, most Americans through the entire year thought that the economy was fine. But over the last half-year, the media and politicians have said we were in a recession even while the economy was still growing. [A] Nexis search on news stories during the three-month period from July 2000 through September 2000 using the keywords "economy recession US" produces 1,388. By contrast, the same search over just the last month finds 3,166. Or, even more telling, take the three months from July through September last year, when the GDP was growing at a phenomenal 4.9 percent. The same type of Google search shows 2,475 news stories.
But over the last half-year, the media and politicians have said we were in a recession even while the economy was still growing.
[A] Nexis search on news stories during the three-month period from July 2000 through September 2000 using the keywords "economy recession US" produces 1,388. By contrast, the same search over just the last month finds 3,166. Or, even more telling, take the three months from July through September last year, when the GDP was growing at a phenomenal 4.9 percent. The same type of Google search shows 2,475 news stories.
Talking about fair and balanced... Phenomenal growth just before a financial collapse... yeah, yeah, like a Ponzi Scheme. Maybe recession should not determined by a couple of favourite numbers, after all.
Anyone remember 2000? Would you rather live then or now? Hey, that's a good question for a Gallup poll.
Here's what the National Bureau of Economic Research, a large private economic research organization, has to say about US Business Cycle Expansions and Contractions: March 2001 to November 2001. Previous recession was under W's Daddy's watch: July 1990 to March 1991. There was no Clinton recession.
The whole myth of a Clinton recession was Republican political strategy according to this 2004 Business Week analysis, Inventing The "Clinton Recession".
President George W. Bush's Council of Economic Advisers, chaired by Harvard economist N. Gregory Mankiw, is trying to get away with exactly such revisionist history. The CEA's Economic Report of the President, released Feb. 9, unilaterally changed the start date of the last recession to benefit Bush's reelection bid. Instead of using the accepted start date of March, 2001, the CEA announced that the recession really started in the fourth quarter of 2000 -- a shift that would make it much more credible for the Bush Administration to term it the "Clinton Recession." In a subsequent press conference, Mankiw said that the CEA had looked at the available data and "made the call." ... To be fair, even if the latest recession did begin after Bush took office in January, 2001, no one can say he caused it.
...
To be fair, even if the latest recession did begin after Bush took office in January, 2001, no one can say he caused it.
I can. Bush caused the recession. He caused a fundamental shift in the direction of the United States from the Clinton administration. The selection of Bush caused the recession. In fact, I'd argue that if Gore became president, the U.S. and the world would have missed a recession by a massive move toward a green economy. Instead the U.S. Supreme Court made the choice to disaster capitalism and the looting of the U.S. economy began in earnest. Additionally, Gore likely would have focused on counter terrorism and the attacks in the U.S. on 11 September 2001 may have been thwarted.
Bush caused two recessions. His first recession, in 2001, will be considered mild compared to the abyss he's opened up beneath the U.S. economy in his final term.
Though I still wondering how Bush ran into recession so fast. Markets apparently like his type of "dictatorship would be easier" leaders. How did Bush's election change overall economic activity so suddenly?
Clinton got far more credit for his economic stewardship than he deserves; he was the beneficiary of a bubble, and the recession which resulted is also his. Note taken also that the hard-right ideologue at the time in the fed, increasing interests throughout 2000, probably to undermine public confidence in the economy and strip Gore of a key selling point.
Bush's bubble, of course, will have far more long-lasting and severe consequences. "C'est un scandale !"
The target audience for that reputation isn't you and I, it's the pluucrats. "C'est un scandale !"
