When President Bush took office in January 2001:

DOW was at 10.578.24
It had declined almost 10% from its high during the last year of the Clinton Presidency. As of today, the Dow Industrials stands 10.8% above when Bush took office. In spite of 9-11, Enron/Tyco/etc malfeasance...

NASDAQ was at 2757.91 when Bush took office, and had lost almost half of its value from the top of the Internet bubble, and was still in rapid retreat. By the end of March 2001, less than 6 weeks after Clinton left office, the bubble finally had lost most of its air and the Nasdaq stood at about 1820. Clearly nothing Bush did in less than 6 weeks caused that continued drop.

Today, we are at a level of 2246, almost 25% above the bubble burst bottom. (There was a later 9-11 bottom as well).

Hi Mark,

You are correct about it being much more solid this time. When we were here last time, the earnings multiple was about 30 times earnings. Now it is around 15. Basically, all that means is that there is much less "fluff" in the market now. The internet was still so new back then that it fueled WAY too much speculation. Many tech stocks back then were drivin to ridiculous heights based purly off of speculation and almost zero off of actual earnings. As you may remember, two years ago, I claimed we were in a secular bear market (like 1966-1982 - long and sideways), and we would be in one for a while. (secular bears are normal), but if we can significantly break out of this range, it may be nearing an end ahead of schedule. Watch the DOW Transports for confirmation.

and yes.... it should be obvious by now that lower tax burdens increases the incentive to risk and invest capital. Wealth is NOT a zero sum game. i.e. there is not a "fixed" amount of money "out there to get." Wealth actually grows in cycles, and lower taxes absolutely help.

warrior,

Mostly its just to have ripped away the last fig leaf on Clinton's supposed great economy.

johnn,

I remember thinking that if I were an investor in 1999, then it was time to get out - when people have stocks worth billions on companies that hadn't produced their first product, I knew that something wasn't right.

So the neoconsuperfratboys really find themselves in some sh#t today. I mean they have been F#@king up for awhile but it was nothing the mainstream press could really explain (what with the constant commercial pressure, and our inability to understand complex ideas). But nothing brings out the nay Sayers like a good old fashioned sex scandal. (Something the press can really get their Teleprompters around) The "focus on the family" crowd was all over the tube today blaming it all on the tolerance crowd. Yea no more queers in the congress, that’ll fix everything. Those queers ruin everything. I have to admit as an ACLU card carrying liberal, I am sort of enjoying all this mess. But I know it is only temporary. Is there still another October surprise? I just hope that all good voters will only consider what really matters come 11-7-06, if they do it’s gonna be a rough couple of years for the neoconsuperfratboy / C-student in Chief.

Mark..there was a lot of that going on back then, too. It was crazy. I remember C. Everett Koop (the Surgeon General) and his site was worth hundreds of millions of dollars and it did absolutely NOTHING other than provide some basic home remedy information.

It was insane. Everytime I hear liberals today talk about how great the Clinton economy was I simply ask them...WHY? Name one tangible thing that was done or created by the Clinton economy that wasn't a complete smoke and mirrors / blind luck timing issue?

There isn't one thing they can name.

Right before the great crash of 1929, the DOW hit all time highs.

The real core of the economy is rotten, like a hollowed out beam in a termite infested house.

Personal debt is reaching new highs, savings rates are *negative* for the first time since the Great Depression.

So the economy is better for some of the upper class. For the majority of Americans faced with rising health care costs and other real economic pressures, the ecnomy is not good.

Oh, and who exactly is going to pay back the Chinese, French and Japanses all the money we borrowed to finance our mercenary army and tax cuts for the oil companies.

No on has yet answered that question.

Wade

Dow Jones hits record high! Woo hoo! President Bush's tax cuts are awesome!

johnnn

I bet we'll continue in this cyclical bull market within a secular bear market for much longer. Remember the S&P has still got some ways to go before it gets to it's all time high. Not until we surpass that level will we get out of this secular bear market and enter a secular bull market. But as we both know a cyclical bull market (or cyclical bear market for that matter) can last much longer than anyone predicts. I'm enjoying it for what it's worth. :)

Hey, where's the usual talking point? You know, the "real wages are stagnant, and health care keeps soaring?"

I'm disappointed...oh, never mind--Mark posted this thread after midnight. Our kookbat trolls were all tucked into their beds in mommy's basement long ago...

I still have friends that pine for the Clinton economy, and I still have to tell them that the Clinton economy was nothing but smoke and mirrors. Most of it was created on the back of the internet and speculation drove those stocks up, even when there was no product backing them. People were getting rich on nothing but air. When those who were duped, realized what was happening, the bubble burst. The Bush economy is much more solid, although, I would like to see us be able to create more manufacturing jobs, so all those were not finding their way to China and the East.

This all looks good on paper, but when is it going to trickle down to the common us citizen? I don't invest millions because I don't have millions, so I
don't see any type of return for me personally. The only thing I can see is that the price of gas has come down to be more affordable. Also, I visited
Italy the week of Sept. 11, 2001 and the exchange rate of the euro was approximately 1 US Dollar was worth 1.25 euro. Now it currently is at 1 US Dollar is worth about 78 cents. As you see, the value of the dollar has decreased significantly over the years. Its not good for any of us that want to visit a european country.
Anyway, I would be interested to know exactly how the tax cuts are helping/affecting any of you?

I'm a common US citizen and have doing better the last 3 years then at any time in my life.

I am not penalized on capital gains to the level I was before, nor on dividends which allows for further investment.

Because I have two children, I am also benefitted.

Let me ask you this Jeff, when the Democrats raise your taxes and those all across this country that are living check to check or bought a pricier house then the should have...what do you think is going to happen?

Warrior,
I am single and recently purchased a house but still
am paying for an aprtment in NYC due to the fact that I still work in NYC. Unfortunately, for me I'm not seeing any changes due to the tax cuts that benefit me. I have been paying higher taxes each year while earning about the same. It may be due to
me being single which isn't fair.
And to answer your question, I'm not so sure that the democrats will succeed with either even with the
current scandals. Until, that happens we really won't know if they will raise taxes.
To be honest with you, I could care less about which party is in office. I just want them to make the correct decisions. I'm still waiting for the government to tell us that they don't have enough money for social security when they are squandering billions each month in Iraq. The goverment has been spending OUR leftover social security money for decades when it should have been sitting in an account somewhere. Sorry for the rant, but that really ticks me off.

Warrior,
I am single and recently purchased a house but still
am paying for an aprtment in NYC due to the fact that I still work in NYC. Unfortunately, for me I'm not seeing any changes due to the tax cuts that benefit me. I have been paying higher taxes each year while earning about the same. It may be due to
me being single which isn't fair.
And to answer your question, I'm not so sure that the democrats will succeed with either even with the
current scandals. Until, that happens we really won't know if they will raise taxes.
To be honest with you, I could care less about which party is in office. I just want them to make the correct decisions. I'm still waiting for the government to tell us that they don't have enough money for social security when they are squandering billions each month in Iraq. The goverment has been spending OUR leftover social security money for decades when it should have been sitting in an account somewhere. Sorry for the rant, but that really ticks me off.

We don't have enough money for SS...Bush has been saying this time and time again and the Dems then started telling Grandma he's taking their money away.

Plenty of people have said the money isn't there, no one has the balls to do anything about it.

Wade...1929...go read your history son.

My point was that the government finds out how much SS money they need for the year out of the total amount that they take in for that year. They then
pay out X amount of dollars and spend the rest instead of placing any surplus funds in an account
for the future. I'm not blaming Bush because for this because this has been going on for a long time.
If they didn't spend the surplus, we would have a
solvent SS system for a longer time.

We should have it for a period of time, but not a long time.

Big difference. And the fact that we let the gov't invest this money for us is a sham. I'd like to know why the party of "choice" will not allow us to have a CHOICE on how to invest that money...OUR MONEY.

Jef,
The surplus from payroll taxes is "given" to the government to pay bills as an interest free loan. Sorry, but this is the way the ba-kockta system was set up. According to the Act, the surplus cannot be invested, it cannot earn interest and it cannot be saved. The laws must be changed to save the program; Bush was right about that, but the Dimo's claim there is no crises in Social Security and spineless Republicans afraid for their phony-baloney jobs also do nothing but wring their hands and whine about the impending disaster.

One more thing, I've answered Wade's insipid talking points in every thread he's brought it up.

To answer the question re: how am I really doing in this Bush economy: First of all, like most middle class people, I have a struggle. But, I've always had a struggle. I've struggled since day one of my adult life. What I have now, which have been enhanced by the past 6 years, is a solid 401K, more home equity that I ever dreamed (I lost 50% on my home during the go-go 90s), a pretty stable job, and a bright future. Sure, I wish I had more disposable income, but I can only imagine what my situation would be without the tax cuts. I just had an unexpected car repair that cost me about $1,000. Perhaps my tax savings this year will cover it.

11,850 today, 12K and beyond is around the corner, hope it continues. I don't see a problem about making a choice available for SS--private or government investment. However, private investment (like 401K or 403b) wouldn't be guaranteed, so if the market takes a 20-50% hit as you're starting your retirement you may be in for a challenge. SS isn't meant to be an investment with risk, it's meant as insurance. There is plenty of incoming $$ to make SS work if whatever government is in power would just leave it there.

Nate...that's the way it goes. If the market tanks, it tanks. There are no guarantees in life.

Or if you want to be ultra conservative, let people invest at the most 20% of their SS which means even if the market tanked it would have very little impact on their overall retirement.

uncledad, you eat wif dat mouf? You kiss you momma wif dat mouf? We already know the neorads can't make a decent argument, so we don't need some foaming-at-the mouth pottymouth reminding us of it.

So what's your problem? You did a pretty good job of stringing together some worn out old talking points spoon fed to your by your Airhead idols, but where's an idea in your rant?

The economy is doing well. If OUR C+ frat boy can figure out that tax cuts stimulate the economy, and your divinity school flunkout from 2000 still doesn't get it, where does that put all you radicals who still pine for the lost opportunities of a Gore Presidency? (And how, exactly , can you flunk out of DIVINITY SCHOOL? That has to be a new level of stupidity.)

Or John F'n Kerry, equally frat boy, slightly lower GPA, but evidently someone you could really get behind. Get real, or at least consistent. If you are really agin C+ frat boys, you must have just sat out the last two elections, right?

It kinda sounds like, though it's hard to tell given the general incoherence of your post, like you are saying Foley should have been left alone. After all, it's not only "just about sex" it's "just about gay sex", right? Of course, your fellow travelers, the Dims, are whining because no one brought the hammer down on him SOONER. Get your stories straight, Airheads.

The sex scandal, such as it is, was created by your own buddies. Yeah, Foley did the deed---or at least tried, over the Internet, to get someone to do the deed with him. But the scandal part of it is your very own concoction, and you guys are the only ones trying to get it going, keep it going, and generate some salacious heat over it. To us, it's just another sexually desperate loser trying to use his status in the government to score, and hitting on youngsters. We see it, we deal with it, and we move on. It's YOU GUYS who are trying to milk it for all it never has been worth, and to make it a big deal.

Jeff 777 is paying for an apartment in NYC, and just bought a house, which I assume is probably fairly near NYC and therefore also in one of the most expensive areas in the country/world. And he is not sure the economy is doing well.

He seems to have bought into the mantra that Iraq is a waste of time and money, yet he is probably benefitting more from the freedom from terrorist attacks than I am, as NYC has been a repeated target area and the Rocky Mountains, where I live, have been pretty much ignored.

And poor Wade is still sniveling about the drivel he has been fed, and been glad to regurgitate, without a clue as to any real facts. As Bane pointed out, his whines have all been addressed and answered and explained, but he just doesn't care about no steenking facts, he has his bizarre fantasies to keep his fevered mind abuzz. Look at this: "Oh, and who exactly is going to pay back the Chinese, French and Japanses all the money we borrowed to finance our mercenary army and tax cuts for the oil companies." Wade is just shorthand for ignorant, I guess. And shameless, since he clearly doesn't mind parading his ignorance.....