Re: an arteest

Clinton did great with the economy? Why do people say this like it's an
accepted fact? The changes made by those in office typically affect the
economy years down the road. The economy started heading south within
months of Bush's inauguration. In some significant ways, the Bush
administration was left to reap the seeds of the Clinton administration.
The economy greatly overextended itself during the Clinton years (ie.
Enron, all the dotcoms, etc). Sure everything seemed great, the stock
market was growing at absurd rates on the backs of prospects, who had yet
to turn a profit. It was like a gold rush, without the gold. Land prices
skyrocketed and everybody was rich on paper. The value of their land was
increasing 15% each year! But alas! no gold. Should have sold back in
1999. The bubble burst and we had to come back down to reality and its
mathematical limitations.
And now people say, "The economy was great under Clinton, now Bush has it
all f'd up." Now I don't see one as better than the other, but please
don't tell me that Clinton did great with the economy.

JPB

-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Mon Apr 21 11:37:04 2003