Posted on 05/25/2006 5:50:54 AM PDT by Brilliant
The "Lou" fans around here are single issue people who like the way he talks on the border.
Don't count on them being fans of the whole 'package'
5.3% growth is not inflationary it's in the healthy ranges of growth. If and when we hit 6% or higher in the next few consecutive quarters then I would worry about over heating of the economy. Fed interest rate hikes have been keeping inflation in check and has been cooling the economy slightly as well.
Five years ago, anyone predicting that the U.S. economy could achieve a GDP in excess of 5% with oil prices around $69/bbl would have been branded delusional and ignored. The strength of the U.S. economy is astounding considering current energy prices and the geopolitical shocks it has weathered.
I guess that means in the 90s, Clintoon did what it took to make the economy grow. Or weren't folks back then saying the president doesn't affect the economy that much?
At least they waited until the fourth paragraph to toss in the "however."
B, I generally like your posts, but once I again I feel compelled to address the question of illegal immigration & the economy.
GDP growth is a function of productivity growth and real population growth. If we let in 10m workers (legal or otherwise), and all are employed, then yes, the economy will grow by a comensurate amount.
That's why proponents of illegal immigration say it's 'good' for the economy. To a certain extent that is true as is evidenced by lower inflation (primary a function of wage competition), GDP growth & unemployment (illegals create demand for goods & services that effect the overall economy).
However, and this is BIG however, these are all nominal P&L accounts; that is, they only measure the effect today, not the accrued liabilities that are being pushed into the future. It's the balance sheet accruals that are the 'under the waterline' costs. These are of course what are being incurred by the various levels of government.
So, in a nutshell, businesses profit from the short-term nominal effect, while governments (taxpayers) suffer from the long term effects. One more point - since there's more demand for gov't provided services by low-skill workers, government also grows. This, of course, is a boon to Dem politicians and union leaders.
Combine the short-term advantages and long-term costs, and who benefits? That's who supports illegal immigration.
HOOVER !~
Clinton's economy was sluggish in the early 90s and had high interest rates. It wasn't until people started throwing capital down a black hole (dot com) that the economy got a lift from a very dangerous and false bubble which broke 10 months before he left office.
Bush's economy is based on solid growth across all industries, i.e. healthy.
See my #27.
Plus there was a y2k scare..
.
There are a lot of factors that have fueled this economy, immigration being one. But then there is also the tax cut and the war.
And there is also the fact that Bush has so far resisted the Dem's demands for oil industry regulation and protectionism, and has been slow to increase the minimum wage and socialize the health care industry.
Their bias is never ending.
You could not in all honesty call the stock market bubble a good economy. It was based on media lies and gross manipulation by Rubin and his ilk.
I think most economists would agree that one of the biggest drivers has been illegal immigration. They drive up demand for goods & services (especially housing) and suppress inflation (wages & interest).
The history of economic growth of the US is a combination of tech advances (real productivity growth) and population growth. Right now, we're in brute force mode. If there's another med/bio/hi-tech leap, then we'll be on fire.
REAL STATS versus FAKE POLLS - YOU DECIDE
I don't think that Clinton really proved that tax cuts don't matter. His economy was fueled by record low oil prices. When you've got $14 a barrel oil, you can absorb a lot of other bad news.
Not to mention defense cutbacks. I guess the bottom line is that outside very broad macro components, such as a functioning legal system that protects private property, capitalism is left up to the market. Since innovative people don't like sitting around, they are left to creating new gadgets, entertainments, etc. Demand by others creates money supply growth, and viola, we're off to the races...
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.