Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Brilliant

It wasn’t the dot com boom.


The spectacular boom ran from about 1995 to 2000. Look at NASDAQ chart. That was no coincidence.


17 posted on 07/14/2010 3:49:06 PM PDT by Starboard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: Starboard

I think the stimulus was an attempt to generate another boom. It didn’t, but we still have to pay back the money we borrowed to pay for the boom we didn’t get.


20 posted on 07/14/2010 4:00:06 PM PDT by TwelveOfTwenty (Compassionate Conservatism? Promoting self reliance is compassionate. Promoting dependency is not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: Starboard
From 1995?

That would be a year after the Repubs took Congress, right?

25 posted on 07/14/2010 4:16:11 PM PDT by Siena Dreaming
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

To: Starboard

Yeah, but look at the price of oil. Oil was at historic lows from about 1992 to 1999, and began to skyrocket in 2001. 1999 was when the stock market began to show wear. 2000 was when it peaked and began to fall. I would argue that the stock market boom resulted from the low oil prices, and the dot coms went along for the ride. The dot coms were not enough in themselves to cause an economic boom. They were too small a piece of the economy. But oil fuels the entire economy.


27 posted on 07/14/2010 4:38:30 PM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson