Bush's Rising Stock-I'm a Democrat, but even I know the economy is doing pretty well.

Wall St Journal ^ | 1-15-04 | JAMES J. CRAMER

[michaelt]

"Other than that Mrs Lincoln, how was the play?"

The point is......ask that question in six months, or a year. That's how it works. If the answer isn't satisfactory, then the criticism has more validity.

[hedgie]

You'll also note that, ever since 'ol Ronnie came to town, the peaks have stopped getting higher and started getting lower each time...

[Texas_Dawg]

Not at all. Saying the economy is great without robust employment is akin to saying..."Other than that Mrs Lincoln, how was the play?"

Do you realize employment levels are a lagging indicator of a good economy? Do you realize that the American unemployment rate is about as low as it has ever been, and that the employed make more money, on average in real dollar value, than any society in the history of the world? And yet you are saying that is a bad economy? You have to be kidding.

[NewLand]

Thanks for that chart Dawg. It proves an interesting point...unemployment is not a factor tied to the current state of the economy...just look at the years 1977 - 1981, under the 'leadership' of Jimmy Carter.

It shows falling unemployment...yet we know for a FACT that these specific year were some of the worst economic times in our recent history (high interest rates, inflation, etc).

This chart also shows that Republicans tend to make courageous corrections or advances that show 'spikes' in unemployment but also fast recoveries in job growth, and if a parallel chart were viewed, would also show broad based economic growth, tax reductions, rising markets, etc.

The USSR had low unemployment...was that a factor in their 'economic success'?

What gets me is how little (never) you hear economists or political pundits point out the 'false' economy of the late 1990's...dot-coms that became dot-bombs, stock prices over inflated without earnings, an over taxed citizenry who were raking in all those 'false' stock market earnings and were 'happy' to pay taxes on those quick wins...and, voila...we have a budget surplus! Shazam!

The other thing that drives me nuts is when you hear comments from mainstream media types about how much the Enron collapse cost investors...TRUE, and no defending those criminals. But, you never hear the stories of all those people who sold Enron stock on the way up and earned (probably) an equal amount of billions. Same goes for other stock success stories of the 90's.

The Clinton Economy, like him, was a lie.

[/rant]

[Texas_Dawg]

You'll also note that, ever since 'ol Ronnie came to town, the peaks have stopped getting higher and started getting lower each time...

Not to mention that disposable income, in real dollar value, has consistently risen as well, meaning better paying jobs for those that are employed. After all, 0% employment means very little if 98% of the people are working at the poverty level. That is not the case in America and disposable income is rising for all income levels in America.

[Texas_Dawg]

Exactly. It is only one piece of the puzzle. But in a growing capitalist economy, falling employment should mean income growth across the board. And in ours it does. Our economy grows (corporate profits were up ~50% last year over 2002). That later translates to reinvestment in company growth (i.e. capital expenditures and more employees) as even Jim Cramer knows. This idea that the doom and gloomers like Drango have, that capitalists and CEOs are all just evil, greedy, money hoarders, is simply bogus and has much deeper psychological roots that usually affects all areas of their lives (and therefore their worldview in general) as you'll find from talking to them for a little bit. The rabid Buchanan supporters are not usually isolationist, angry, unhappy people by coincidence.

[wayoverontheright]

So, critics, keep baying against the policies. Keep calling for higher taxes or fiscal responsibility.

How could this guy still BE a Democrat? The party's policies are anti-capitalist to the core.

[lainde]

bttt

[smith288]

DId you read his article?

[.cnI redruM]

Unemployment 6 months ago 6.5%
Unemployment now 5.7%
Net change in unemployment over the last two quarters -0.8%.

That would be a nearly 1% drop in the unemployment rate.
I'd be happy to run for reelection on that.

[NewLand]

"Saying the economy is great without robust employment..."

Define robust employment. Be specific.

[OESY]

Cramer has the advantage of working with the pre-eminent economic expert of our time. LARRY KUDLOW!

If and when Greenspan retires, Kudlow would be a good replacement appointee.

Meanwhile, Jim "Red Hots" Cramer continues to be one of my favorite Democrats for his honesty, common sense and trading knowledge. Cramer has a pretty good book too: "Confessions of a Street Addict".

[OldFriend]

I'm afraid Kudlow's past has disqualified him from being the Fed Chairman. I believe he has praised Wayne Angell tho.

[OESY]

You could be right on the disqualification, but his economic analyses and fiscal/monetary prescriptions have been among the most reliable for several years now, and he lost his nervous tic -- as his confidence grew(?).