Recalling the 1998 tumble

Washington Times ^ | Sunday, September 12, 2004 | Alan Reynolds

[JohnHuang2]

The Washington Times
www.washingtontimes.com

---

Recalling the 1998 tumble

By Alan Reynolds
Published September 12, 2004

---

What was so terrible about 1998? It seemed a pretty good year to me. It was, after all, the sixth year after recession, so you would expect it to be better than 2003, merely the third year after a recession.
    As it happens, 1998 was also the fifth year of the Clinton administration. Yet I don't recall any rabid Republicans claiming 1998 was the worst economy in 50 years or the worst since Herbert Hoover. Yet partisan Democrats do say such strange things about the present.
    If judged by two standards now widely used to accuse President Bush of economic malfeasance, the economy of 1998 would have to be judged as worse than last year, 2003, and certainly much worse than this year.
    The percentage of Americans living in poverty was 12½ percent last year, 12.7 percent in 1998. The percentage without health insurance was 15.6 percent last year, 16.3 percent in 1998.
    "Letting 45 million Americans go without health care makes you unfit to lead this nation," opined Sen. John Kerry after the president's convention speech. But anyone who aspires to be president should at least understand that going without health insurance is not the same as going without health care.

[malia]

I remember July/August of '98 - I had just joined FreeRepublic in June. The market took a big tumble and buying of gold was being encouraged. By Dec the market had settled down or whatever the term is, but gold was still being encouraged. I started keeping track of jobs going offshore in Nov. '98. Don't understand why President Bush is being blamed for for that.

[meenie]

I don't understand why any President is treated as a Messiah. His job description is executive of the government. He is directed to carry out the wishes of the legislature. Along the way, he can exercise his veto to object to legislative action he feels a problem to enforce, but can be overridden by the legislature. The elevation of the Presidency to a king-like stature has been accomplished by many false promises believed by many gullible voters. The king has very little influence over the economy. As he becomes more socialist, he has even less. The king's principal duties consist of perpetuating government and extracting more money from the voter. End of story.