Posted on 10/04/2006 8:39:11 AM PDT by Halfmanhalfamazing
WASHINGTON -- The last time the Dow Jones industrial average closed at a record high, America was living in a giddy economic era when good times and budget surpluses seemed as if they might continue indefinitely.
It was Jan. 14, 2000, the start of another year, another century and another millennium. The economy was roaring along. The jobless rate was a low 4 percent. The "new economy" of young entrepreneurs energized markets with new tech companies that didn't turn a profit. Nobody seemed to care, and excesses piled on top of excesses.
(Excerpt) Read more at chicagotribune.com ...
IBTWAMHH
Women and minorities hardest hit.
The children!
They were left behind because they weren't smart enough to invest in the stock market.
Them's the breaks.
Good Lord, some will always find a silver lining to be too dark.
Because they have little or no skills.
Dang! You beat me to it!
It is kind of funny though...in their view, everyone was rosy cheeked and happy before the draconian economic policies of the Bush Administration (which adversely affected women, children and minorities the most) completely destroyed the hard built economic foundations that everything was based on during the amazing Clinton years!
BIAS = Layoffs is missed by brain-dead journalists...
Maybe, but there are a few stunning admissions in the article:
It was Jan. 14, 2000, the start of another year, another century and another millennium. The economy was roaring along. The jobless rate was a low 4 percent. The "new economy" of young entrepreneurs energized markets with new tech companies that didn't turn a profit. Nobody seemed to care, and excesses piled on top of excesses.
And then the bubble burst...
Now, six years later, the Dow finally has surpassed its old closing high of 11,722.98, ending Tuesday at 11,727.34, thanks to an amazingly resilient economy driven by higher productivity and profits, lower tax rates...
With over 80% of America invested in the market, the 20% commie/leftist/welfare pimps must not have any money invested. Leftists such as moore and babs are making a ton of money though!
LLS
Wow, can it get more pathetic from the leftist rags.
Oh, this is COMICAL! The DOW hits a record in a Republican administration and the MSM trots out the rich are getting richer baloney. How different their tune is from the Clinton bubble in 1999! What's next a story or two about the homeless??
Golly, one of the biggest players left behind in the stock market surge is none other than the Chicago Tribune. They have lost $4 billion in market capitalization in the last two years.
Ah, yes, the Clinton years, when there were no homeless and no poor. They all magically reappeared on January 20, 2001.
This is horse hockey. Millions and millions of Americans are in the markets in one way or another - more than ever before. 401(k)s, 403(b)s through outfits like TIAA-CREF and many others have many average Americans taking part in the equity markets.
As usual, most reporters don't know squat about investing.
They, as a rule, hate people who have money, people who want to have money and each other. They are a pathetic lot.
That seems to be the business they're in.
women and minorities greatly affected
I can remember when the Tribune sang a more or less conservative tune. I guess when your master is a liberal, you become a liberal paper. Sad.
I love how according to this article there were no poor, no high health care costs, no personal debt and no high energy costs in 2000. Hate to break this to them, but all that's said above could have been said about the economy in 2000 despite all the rosy stats. they love to feed us and the Shangrala, utopia scenario of what they imagined Y2K to have been painted at the top of this article. Notice no mention of the decline of the economy all during that year ending in recession beginning in November 2000.
Gas prices had surged to record highs dollar-wise in the late 90s and 2000 as well, due in part to Clinton EPA clean fuel mandates. Health care was expensive then too. Wasn't that why healthcare was such a big issues in the 90s? And yes, we even had poverty with the wealth gap between rich and poor having reached record levels during that era.
But the media was too busy praising the "Clinton economy" and heaping all the credit on him to notice that all that they say above could have been said about the "Clinton economy" as well along with record levels of bankruptcies. But they were too smitten with Clinton to ever report on the downside of the "greatest economy ever." Certainly they would never have bothered to report good economic news in that era to include the mitigating factors about the economy as they do now in reporting on the Bush economy. Do you imagine for a moment that when the Dow hit record levels in January 2000 that it was reported with all the perceived downsides of the economy as this article does? Yeah right!
By the way, the poverty they speak of as somehow being Bush's fault, this is what you get when you tolerate single parenthood making it just another lifestyle choice. That might work okay economically in Manhattan but on the South Side of Chicago or South Central L.A., it's a guarantee of poverty, crime and multi-generational dependence on government. We can thank liberalism for the mentality that fathers are unnecessary and the poverty that comes with it.
I might also add, poverty also tends to rise when you tolerate the influx of poor peasants with little earning power from across the border. Both Republicans and Democrats are to blame for that, but I doubt this writer would think it's just we keep such people out.
And finally, high health care costs are due in large part to government expentitures on healthcare through Medicare and Medicaid, not because of George W. Bush. Again, I doubt the clearly liberal writer of this piece would be willing to address that issue.
Once again, the Clown Car Media is so predictable in how it will cover any good economic news. Report the good news, but then spend the next 25 paragraphs using Democratic boilerplate to deconstruct it all. So tired, so boring.
Thanks for the acronym...it will save lots of typing :)
FWIW... The current DJIA is not the same as the 2000 DJIA. International paper and Kodak were replaced with AIG and Pfizer. Had it not been for those switches the DJIA would be at 11853.82 -- 130.84 points higher than the 2000 record close and 103 points higher than the record intraday high. The S&P500 is 12.3% off its 1527 lifetime high and Nasdaq is 55% off its 5132.52 life-time high.
Like everything else during his regime, it was all smoke, mirrors, and lies.
And the DUmmies just don't understand that.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1708804/posts
I called it!! (see post 6)
Yes, but don't you know? The homeless were able to invest in all those dot.com IPO's in the 1990's!
Lower income people will never save as their grandparents did who were much poorer than they are because they KNOW they do not have too. The government programs will be there for them. They will spend every penny they have plus some and live in poverty their whole live living off someone elses money and will always feel THE MAN put them there. I find it very sad and ignorant.
The sob, pos was lucky enuf 2B concurrent with Grove, Gates, and Greenspan...........Nuttin much else counted re his so-called great economy.
AS REAL ESTATE SURGES, MANY ARE LEFT BEHIND.
Thank you for posting that graphic! Mind if I borrow it? I want to shove it down the throats of a few "it's Bush's fault" liberals.
The point is, someone got rich, but not everyone else in the country did. Is that fair?
It is humorous how low the media will go to disparage a Republican administration. As others have pointed out, the 'homeless' are only a problem during Republican rule, along with all the other dark linings that can be twisted to some poor minorities' advantage. I am glad for Free Republic. Helps to keep me grounded in reality.
"The jobless rate was a low 4 percent."
Liar!
President Bush INHERITED a RECESSION from Slick. We entered a recession in the first quarter of 2000--almost a year BEFORE Bush took office.
President Bush inherited a MESS from Slick--an economic recession, corporate malfeasance, and due to Slick's national security malfeasance, 9/11.
It's absolutely incredible how well the economy has performed, thanks, in large part, to Bush's tax cuts (which were critical--given the three huge problem he INHERITED)!
Please do, that's why I created it!
The pos was blessed with a republican congress who cared more about doing the right thing for the country than they cared about getting credit.
Yeah, one of the great hypocrisies in listening to liberals criticize Reagan and the 1980's is that the Clinton-90's really was the Decade of Greed...built on bubbles and corporate scandals.
Must be in the DNC press release. I remember seeing this week's cover of U.S. New & World Report saying the same stuff.
Anybody have a visual?
One more thing:
IF YOU BOUGHT STOCKS DURING THE LAST FIVE YEARS (401K, ETC.) THE AVERAGE JOE DID MUCH BETTER THAN IF THE MARKET HADN'T DIPPED.
My employees are very happy with their retirement accounts.
many are left behind in the stock market because they shoved all their money in gold and real estate since the dot com crash. While not a bad place to put money longterm, this means they aren't making much money in the stock market. DUUUUHHHHHHH!!!!!!!
The article is pure liberal sleeze trying to make the economy sound bad because elections are next month.
Too bad the poor folks couldn't have participated in the upswing by having private SS accounts.
This demands a retraction because it is an outright lie.
The libs blame republicans for the sun rising and setting too.
>President Bush inherited a MESS from Slick--an economic recession, corporate malfeasance, and due to Slick's national security malfeasance, 9/11.<
You are absolutely correct. It boggles the mind, how short are the memories of most Americans. They hear it, over and over, how bad the Bush economy is, to this day.
I agree with you. It amazes me how effective the Bush tax cuts have been to turn the economy around, in spite of an ongoing war.
The Democrats are just salivating at the chance to reverse the tax cuts, and the very Americans (the poor, and many working people) who pay NO TAXES AT ALL are cheering them on.
Sorry, for one year, it shows as that.
Thanks!
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.