Subject: The "Bush Boom"

  A lot of news lately about how well the "Bush Boom" is going and how well it compares to the
 "Reagan Recovery"!   In an article by Gregory Robb on   cbs.marketwatch.com  he quotes Ian
 Shepherdson, U.S. economist at High Frequency Economics.
"This is all about a long period of very low interest rates, which have done their job well."

Let me give another quote. This one from the Federal Reserve Board
"Changes in the federal funds rate trigger a chain of events that affect other short-term interest rates,
 foreign exchange rates, long-term interest rates, the amount of money and credit, and, ultimately, a range
 of economic variables, including employment, output, and prices of goods and services."

(Raise the rates and the economy slows. And lowering the rate has a positive effect on the economy that
 is much greater than giving millions to your rich campaign contritbutors!)

 I remember the "Reagan Recovery". As soon as "Raygun" took office the Fed Fund Rates dropped
 like a rock, just like they did after the "Dubya Coup". And they both followed Democrats, who who
 couldn't buy a break from the Fed.

 I smell a RAT(R)

 Clinton was able to forestall the inevitable for 7 years by lowering the deficit and paying down the national debt
 and even buying back the 30 year T-Bills. The economy was better than it had been in generations. However the
 Federal Reserve will win out! In spite of the fact that unemployment was at a 30 year low and inflation had fallen
 to 1.6% the Feds continued to raise the Fed Fund Rates. During the last months of Clinton's administration the
 economy finally started to buckle.

 And now the 'end game'. Install in the White House a 'Mortimer Snerd' or a 'Raygun' or a 'Dubya', steal from
 the poor and give to the rich with a tax cut and drop the Rates from 6.5% to 1%. With those interest rates the
 economy has to improve. When it does the 'Fat Cats' pay their tiths to the reelection committee, pocket the rest
 and tell the world that 'Mortimer' is the best President this country ever had and name an airport or a bridge or
 a sanitarium after him.

 For those who must see the numbers, here they are:

 Look at the "Effective Fed Fund Rates" ("EFFR")at the begining and end of Carter/Reagan and Clinton/Bush:

 When Carter took office 01/1977 the "EFFR" was 4.61%
 When Carter left office 01/1981 the "EFFR" was 19.08% (An increase of 14.47%)
 Reagan took office that same month so the "EFFR" was 19.08%
 At the end of his first term (01/1985) the "EFFR" was 8.35% (A decrease of 10.73%)

 With a bounce like that any fool could have a recovery and he did. Well if it worked once and Democrats
 are afraid to say anything they are sure to do it again.

 When Clinton took office 01/1993 the "EFFR" was 3.02%
 At the end of Clinton's second term (01/2001) the "EFFR" was 5.98% (An increase of 2.97%)
(Actually we should use the 12/2000 rate of 6.40%. Greenspan was so anxious to turn the economy around for
 Bush that on 01/03/2001 he issued a 1/2 point reduction before Bush could even get moved into the White House.)

 When Dubya took office 01/2001 the "EFFR" was 5.98% (After the 1/2 point "gift" from Greenspan.)
 The "EFFR" is currently 1.01% for a reduction of 4.97%
 and the Fed are promising to hold the rates there indefinitely. (only Eisenhower(R) had lower rates)
 With a bounce like that any fool could have a recovery and he is.

 Wait a minute. Am I saying that the Federal Reserve Board would manipulate the economy for political reasons?
 Cause millions to lose their jobs? Cause the loss of billions (if not trillions) of dollars in personal wealth just to
 make a C-Grade actor and a reconditioned cokehead look like they had a clue about economics?

 You dammed right I am!

 And to add insult to injury Bush claims "I INHERITED A RECESSION!".
 What really hurts though, is the 9 candidates failure to point out that he inherited it from Greenspan.

 Well, its not unusual for a Republican to have a recession.  Using the economist's rule of thumb that a recession
 is at least 2 consecutive quarters of decline in real GDP there have been eight recessions in the last 50 years.

Presidents with recessions:
Eisenhower(R) 1953 4Q
Eisenhower(R) 1958 1Q
Nixon(R) 1970 1Q
Ford(R) 1974 4Q
Carter(D) 1980 3Q
Reagan(R) 1982 1Q
Bush41(R) 1990 4Q
Bush42(R) 2001 2Q

 EIGHT recessions and SEVEN were during Republican Administrations.
 Every Republican since Eisenhower has had a recession!!!
 Must be a profit motive in there somewhere.

 Some folks have been deluded into thinking that Democrats get the economy so hot that inflation runs
 wild and the Fed has to raise interest rates to cool it down. Nothing could be further from the truth!
 There have been 13 full Presidential terms since 1951, look at the 6 with the highest percent of increase
 in the C.P.I. over their 4 year term and the direction that the Feds took the Fed Fund Rates during that time.

 Presidents with the highest inflation:
Carter(D)* 48.72% UP 14.47%
Nixon/Ford(R)2nd term* 37.32% DOWN 01.33%
Reagan(R)1st term* 21.26% DOWN 10.73%
Nixon(R)1st term* 19.66% DOWN 00.36%
Bush41(R)* 17.75% DOWN 06.10%
Reagan(R)2nd term 14.79% UP 00.77%

 (*)There was a recession during these terms.

 Of the 6 Presidents with the highest inflation over their term, 5 were Republicans!
 Must be a profit motive in there somewhere.

 Click  Here  for more/attribution

 Keep your hammer swinging!
 Arm Hayseed
"cynic"

  Arm Hayseed@worldnet.att.net

     


  back to  bartcop.com
 
 

Privacy Policy
. .