Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto
I don't think you are trying to knock me down. I was simply responding to some valid criticism of the first graph with one that shows considerably more data. It took me some time to find this analysis that addresses several economic indicators. Not everyone on this board would do the same.
I challenge you to find one that explains how well Bush has handled the economy.  Simply knocking it because Clinton's term was successful is not really refuting it.
Finally, whilst a three page article with extensive references and end-notes does not give a complete assessment of the economy, neither does a six paragraph response with absolutely no references or end-notes. 
Either way, I think it's a fair bet that Bush will be re-elected at this stage. I'm just surprised at how so many people continue to support his handling of the economy.
Mr Mephisto |
I agree that not many on the board would do the same. I have posted economic analyses at great length on this board and found very few people willing to do any work at all to understand and/or illustrate what's going on in the economy. I applaud your persistence.
I don't pretend that what I've posted is an accurate portrayal of the economy as a whole, just an accurate response to what you've posted. I guess I'm still a little tired of spending hours researching, writing, and posting economic facts only to have the posts ignored or responses consisting entirely of article postings that have little to no relevance to the discussion.
As far as your surprise over the defense of how Bush has handled the economy, I wish I could say that I am surprised by the criticism he has received but I cannot. The President has virtually no control over the economy. The US economy is over $10 Trillion dollars. It's made up of hundreds of million workers, companies by the hundreds of thousands, and interacts with almost every other economy on earth. The belief that the President does anything but ride the tide of economic forces in 99.9% of cases is wishful thinking.
Perhaps one day soon I will venture to describe the current US economy in detail but not today. It's unlikely that you will find any articles that do anywhere near a comprehensive (or even significant) job of analyzing the economy because most articles need to appeal to the reader. There are very few readers who want an economics article that isn't trying to prove a relatively simple point that they can understand.
You'll find plenty of articles with themes like "Clinton did better than Bush" or "Unemployment is skyrocketing" or even "Homeownership at all time high" but it's rare to find any article that focuses on the current state of the economy. Even in academic or business publications there is almost always a certain tilt that an author will take to make his analysis unique and focused to his/her audience.