JerseyMan wrote:
For those who are listening to the liberals propagating the fallacy that
everything is "Bush's Fault", think about this:
January 3rd, 2007 was the day the Democrats took over the Senate and the
Congress. At the time:
The DOW Jones closed at 12,621.77
The GDP for the previous quarter was 3.5%
The Unemployment rate was 4.6%
George Bush's Economic policies SET A RECORD of 52 STRAIGHT MONTHS of JOB
GROWTH
Remember the day...
January 3rd, 2007 was the day that Barney Frank took over the House
Financial Services Committee and Chris Dodd took over the Senate Banking
Committee.
The economic meltdown that happened 15 months later was in what part of
the economy?
BANKING AND FINANCIAL SERVICES!
Unemployment... to this CRISIS by (among MANY other things) dumping 5-6
TRILLION Dollars of toxic loans on the economy from YOUR Fannie Mae and
Freddie Mac FIASCOES!
Bush asked Congress 17 TIMES to stop Fannie & Freddie - starting in 2001
because it was financially risky for the US economy.
And who took the THIRD highest pay-off from Fannie Mae AND Freddie Mac? OBAMA
And who fought against reform of Fannie and Freddie?
OBAMA and the Democrat Congress
So when someone tries to blame Bush...
REMEMBER JANUARY 3rd, 2007.... THE DAY THE DEMOCRATS TOOK OVER!"
Budgets do not come from the White House. They come from Congress and the
party that controlled Congress since January 2007 is the Democrat Party.
Furthermore, the Democrats controlled the budget process for 2008 & 2009
as well as 2010 &2011.
In that first year, they had to contend with George Bush, which caused
them to compromise on spending, when Bush somewhat belatedly got tough on
spending increases.
For 2009 though, Nancy Pelosi & Harry Reid bypassed George Bush entirely,
passing continuing resolutions to keep government running until Barack
Obama could take office. At that time, they passed a massive omnibus
spending bill to complete the 2009 budgets.
And where was Barack Obama during this time? He was a member of that very
Congress that passed all of these massive spending bills, and he signed
the omnibus bill as President to complete 2009.
If the Democrats inherited any deficit, it was the 2007 deficit, the last
of the Republican budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and
the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. After that, Democrats in
Congress took control of spending, and that includes Barack Obama, who
voted for the budgets.
If Obama inherited anything, he inherited it from himself. In a nutshell,
what Obama is saying is I inherited a deficit that I voted for and then I
voted to expand that deficit four-fold since January 20th
For those who are listening to the liberals propag... (
show quote)
So much for your story:
How Robust Was the 2001-2007 Economic Expansion?
PDF of this report (6pp.)
By Aviva Aron-Dine, Richard Kogan and Chad Stone
Updated August 29, 2008
Related Areas of Research
Poverty and Income
Trends
Tax Federal
2001/2003 Tax Cuts
Individuals and Families
Taxes and the Economy
Proponents of the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts often argue that the economic and employment growth of the past several years establishes that these tax cuts worked and had strong beneficial effects. More recently, some have also argued that, with growth slowing, new tax cuts are needed and would reinvigorate the economy.
It now appears likely that the economic expansion that began in 2001 drew to a close in 2007. Whether or not it is ever formally declared a recession, the period since the third quarter of 2007 has seen sub-par growth (including a negative fourth quarter in 2007), shrinking payroll employment, and a rising unemployment rate, and so looks more like an economic slump than an economic expansion. Now is therefore a good time to take stock of the 2001-2007 economic expansion as a whole. We examine the expansion from 2001, when it began, through the third quarter of 2007, before the recent slow-down in economic growth.
The evidence on the 2001-2007 expansion provides no support for the claim that the tax cuts generated especially robust economic growth. Rather, examination of a broad range of key economic indicators indicates that the economic expansion that began in 2001 was, on balance, weaker than average. In fact, with respect to GDP, consumption, investment, wage and salary, and employment growth, the 2001-2007 expansion was either the weakest or among the weakest since World War II.
Moreover, the economys performance between 2001 and 2007 was weaker, overall, than its performance in the equivalent years of the 1990s, years following significant tax increases. GDP growth was somewhat weaker than in the 1990s, and job creation, investment, and wage and salary growth all were substantially weaker.