Skip to comments.Bye-Bye, Bush Boom
Posted on 06/03/2012 3:15:20 PM PDT by StevieRay20
Bye-Bye, Bush Boom By PAUL KRUGMAN Published: July 06, 2004
When does optimism -- the Bush campaign's favorite word these days -- become an inability to face facts? On Friday, President Bush insisted that a seriously disappointing jobs report, which fell far short of the pre-announcement hype, was good news: ''We're witnessing steady growth, steady growth. And that's important. We don't need boom-or-bust-type growth.''
But Mr. Bush has already presided over a bust. For the first time since 1932, employment is lower in the summer of a presidential election year than it was on the previous Inauguration Day. Americans badly need a boom to make up the lost ground. And we're not getting it.
When March's numbers came in much better than expected, I cautioned readers not to make too much of one good month. Similarly, we shouldn't make too much of June's disappointment. The question is whether, taking a longer perspective, the economy is performing well. And the answer is no.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Paul Krugman is a moron
Wasn’t unemployment like less than half what it is now?
But of course Bush was certainly a Hoover, but the economy today is just out of poor widdle Obama’s control!
Krugman contradicts everything he claims today in this article. Absolutely hilarious.
it should be noted that at the time this article was written by obama apologisist, hard-core democrat partisan cheerleader, bush-basher, and all-around-idiot Krugman was talking about 4% unemployment (up from 3)
In my Kingdom, Krugman cleans toilets at the Greyhound Bus Station.
And pays for the opportunity to do something useful.
Read the first two paragraphs of Page 2 of 2.
The current commie donks would kill for those numbers.
I’m being quite serious when I say, most every single time a liberal uses the word “facts” - a big lie is about to follow. What is this pathology?
to understand how much of a pissant 0failure is... compare what 0bama inherited to what Reagan inherited
after that, whenever they start to whine ... just laugh and tell them to STFU
Yes, he actually mocks Bush for only 3.9% growth. Unreal. Krugman has many articles complaining about deficits that were 3% of gdp, artificially low interest rates and debt at 6 trillion back then.
About the time Krugman was producing this nonsense, the federal deficit was $400 billion - down from $500 billion the year before, and on its way to $100 billion by 2007 - it may not have been a boom, but it was solid effective economics, the kind Krugman couldn’t recognize if it were tatooed on his forehead......
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.