IMPEACH BUSH
IMPEACH CHENEY
GOP AND RECESSION TAG TEAM
I have argued for some time that GOP administrations and bad economies go together. It's no coincidence that every time the GOP is in power the economy takes a major hit. From the time of Herbert Hoover the pattern is clear. You can count on inequality rising, on more poverty, on declining wages, and recessions when Republican policies are in place This article by John Dean is at www.smirkingchimp.com:
As the stock market gyrated wildly this week, given the precarious state of the American economy, the New York Times published a table relating to anti-recession efforts in times past
Here are the recessions and their Republican presidents: August 1957 to April 1958 (Eisenhower), April 1960 to February 1961 (Eisenhower), December 1969 to November 1970 (Nixon), November 1973 to March 1975 (Nixon and Ford), July 1981 to November 1982 (Reagan), July 1990 to March 1991 (Reagan), and March 2001 to November 2001 (Bush II).
As we all have watched the stock market this week, thoughts of past major crashes have no doubt popped into the minds of many. Republican presidents oversaw them. Herbert Hoover, of course, was president when the great crash of 1929 occurred, and Ronald Reagan was president with the most recent serious crash - Black Monday in 1987.
The Republican Party has long been the favorite of the business world. But when one steps back to look at the facts objectively - as business leaders who want to remain in business must do, and now seem to be doing - the question must be asked: Is a Republican bias actually good business?
SHORT TERM STIMULUS VS. PERMANENT CURE
The news is abuzz about a forthcoming stimulus package to spark the sagging U. S. economy. But we need more than a brief injection of money into the system. The current system is seriously flawed and there are some basic things we can do to fix it. One of the first is to have a universal health care system. Our current system is a disgrace. Millions of Americans have no insurance at all. Millions more of us have inadequate insurance. A health care crisis means financial ruin. We need a minimum wage that adjusts with inflation. It's astonishing that the federal minimum wage remained at a miserly $5.15 an hour for years while CEO salaries went into the millions of dollars. If education is an answer, as we've been told, it should be easier and more affordable to get an education. College is becoming the province of the rich. We need to end predatory lending practices. Credit card companies and banks are getting away with financial murder. This article by Nomi Prins is at www.alternet.org:
The rhetoric surrounding George W. Bush's economic stimulus package, as boastfully "bi-partisan" as it is (we are, after all, in an election year), indicates a complete lack of comprehension of the difference between this 'national' economy and the 'people's' economy, and the extent of the gap between the two.
The unveiling of his plan was classic Bush: state something ambiguous about a $140 billion adrenaline shot, then have your cronies act as wingmen. Hence, at last Friday's press conference, Treasury Secretary and former Goldman Sachs CEO, Hank Paulson was left fending off uncomfortable questions like: would the plan help "elderly people on fixed incomes?" His answer: "The Christmas season has come and gone."
The national economy, as measured by large scale figures simply does not represent individual citizens' economic circumstances. That's why debate over whether we are in a recession or not misses the point of everyday financial realities for most of the population. According to the standard definition of recession (two quarters or more of a decline in GDP), we're not there. In which case, Bush and Paulson are technically right in saying the economy is simply 'slow'.
