Skip to comments.Bush Did Inherit a Bad Economy(FR FLASHBACK POST circa 2000)
Posted on 10/09/2004 1:32:56 PM PDT by paltz
WASHINGTON -- President Clinton may be taking more with him than his suitcase when he leaves the White House on Jan. 20. His amazing run of luck with the economy seems to be disappearing as well, right on cue with the end of his second term.
That means that his predecessor, either George W. Bush or Al Gore, will have to navigate stormier seas. Some forecasters are even worried about a recession next year a problem Clinton never had to confront as he presided over most of a record stretch, now in its 10th year, of uninterrupted economic growth.
"However one looks at it, the economic data recently have been quite negative and the possibility of a serious hard landing is rising," says Allen Sinai, chief economist at Decision Economics in New York.
While Sinai said he believed the chances of an outright recession where economic growth actually contracts are still small, he was concerned about a prolonged period of weak growth that would translate into a rising unemployment rate.
David Levy, an economist at Bard College, was even more pessimistic, putting the odds of a full-fledged recession next year at 70%. "When you put all the problems facing the economy together, it is not a pretty picture," Levy said.
Things were not supposed to turn out this way. The overwhelming view among economists had been that the United States was headed for a soft landing in which a series of interest rate increases by the Federal Reserve would slow economic growth enough to keep inflation in check without tipping the country into a recession.
But since the Nov. 7 election, while the country has been transfixed by the ballot battle in Florida, the economic ship of state has been springing leaks.
A series of government reports has shown unexpected weakness in areas ranging from consumer spending to U.S. factory orders.
The weaker economic data have added to pessimism on Wall Street, which has been on a stomach-churning ride for most of the fall. The technology-heavy Nasdaq index has lost almost half of its value since reaching record highs in March.
The concern is that the sharp fall in stock values will lead to a cutback in business investment and consumer spending, two of the major driving forces behind the current expansion.
Clinton had the good fortune of taking office as the country was pulling out of the 1990-91 recession.
"The economy was a good friend to the Clinton administration, and it is just not going to be as friendly to the next administration," said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Economy.com, a West Chester, Pa., forecasting firm.
Jerry Jasinowski, the head of the National Association of Manufacturers, said business executives are also concerned that the rising level of bitterness over the undecided presidential election will stalemate Republicans and Democrats, preventing the government from acting to bolster a faltering economy.
"It's still 'the economy, stupid,' and politicians seem to be forgetting that just when the economy is headed south," Jasinowski said.
It is a reality check. Sometimes things get fuzzy.
Bush will win!
Ignore the Kerry stacked polls. Let it be a HUGE shock to Demoncrats when Bush creams em.
January 2001, Bush had already lost 56,000 jobs before he was even sworn in.
The internet bubble began to burst in August, 1999!! The market fell that month but made up some ground for the rest of 1999. By mid-2000, it was clear we were in trouble. A colleague is proud to brag that he moved his 401(k) to cash on the last business day of 1999 and didn't lose a cent over the next three years. It was Willie's depression, not Bush's!!
Bookmarked and bumped.
January 2002, Bush had already lost HOW MANY jobs before his budget even kicked in.
Jim Lehrer August 31, 1998
"JAMES GLASSMAN: And about half of Americans now own stocks, and I think that the majority of them have not gone through anything like this. And they're certainly frightened, although they've been taught year after year by the mutual fund companies and by commentators on television and in newspapers, people like me, to hang on, maybe to buy on dips. And we'll see what they do. Certainly up to this point they have held on. Whether they're going to continue to do that or not, I just don't know. And really a lot depends on what happens in the real economy. You know, the stock market is often a harbinger, very frequently a harbinger of what's gong to happen in the real economy. When the market goes down 19 percent, that is sometimes a pretty strong indicator that we could be headed toward a slowdown or a recession. We also have an inverted yield curve. In other words, interest rates are higher on the short-term than they are on the long-term. That's also a bad sign. So we could be headed for bad economic times--
Don't you remember the '98 downturn was GW's fault too...</eyes rolling>
Hey you!...you said this on the original post 4 years ago...and that's EXACTLY what happened...kudos!
I read the complete article and once again wonder if the president's "handlers" and "advisers" will get this information, study it and the article in the New York Daily News.
If they would just give him the facts and turn him loose.