Jonathan over at GOP Bloggers has the details - one small thing I'll note here is that the deficit is 2% of GDP, well below the 40 year average of 2.7% of GDP.
We here at Blogs for Bush continue to blame the tax cuts.
Posted by Mark Noonan at October 7, 2006 02:34 AM
Comments
My vote in November is to keep the fiscal policies going that help this economy. If spending is cut (unlikely ..... how about slowed) imagine what would happen. Antithetical to Nancy Pelosi, "It doesn't get much BETTER than this".
Does ANYONE believe the Democrats would keep this economy on its existing track?
Anyone that does NOT should get off their arse and vote and quit bitching about the coulda, shoulda, woulda.
Remember stagflation? How about the misery index? Then there was the mystery of how Jimmy's economy created both raging inflation AND raging unemployment.
I remember. I vote!
Posted by: LaMano at October 7, 2006 03:52 AM
That is some really good news. Also, the unemployment rate dipping to 4.6% is great news. Now if we could just get beyond Foleygate to spread this great news to the American people, then we really might get our re-election numbers moving in the right direction. I am afraid that Dennis Hastert is standing in the way of that.
Posted by:
Denny at October 7, 2006 05:02 AM
That is some really good news. Also, the unemployment rate dipping to 4.6% is great news. Now if we could just get beyond Foleygate to spread this great news to the American people, then we really might get our re-election numbers moving in the right direction. I am afraid that Dennis Hastert is standing in the way of that.
Posted by:
777denny at October 7, 2006 05:06 AM
Hey "Denny" I think YOU'RE standing in the way. No matter how many names you use to post the same message.
Posted by: Kahn at October 7, 2006 12:37 PM
President Bush needs to announce this great economic news loud and clear! Tax cuts, oh yah!
:)
Heh. Here's a funny atomic cartoon.
Posted by: Freedom1 at October 7, 2006 03:33 PM
Mark: "one small thing I'll note here is that the deficit is 2% of GDP"
Oh Lord, as if that mattered. Bane, do you want to address this issue? You have better credentials than I. Besides, I have a very busy time coming up. I hope you are honest.
Posted by: Ricorun at October 7, 2006 03:43 PM
Looking at real historical data, it's obvious that deficit and debt are much higher during Republican administrations than during Democrat rule.
http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=40&Itemid=110``
This data complied by the federal government.
See 1980-1992. See 2000-present. Heckuva job, Republicans!
Posted by: jonas at October 7, 2006 10:28 PM
The measurement of debt to GDP is an indicator of the country’s ability to service the debt; it is probably the best judge of the re-payment of the debt. When the ratio becomes too high, those investors that loan money via the Federal instruments demand higher interest rates to front the money, (didn’t I just say in another thread to get into Bond funds?) because the ability to repay is in doubt. A rise in the ratio is almost always cause for concern.
But, Rico, don’t forget there are other pressures on this ratio; inflation can cause the ratio to go down as the dollar is worth less in the GDP calculation, or it can effect the future re-payments by offsetting the inflationary pressures. In other words, look at the inflation to GDP first, then the GDP to debt; inflation is well under control, so the ratio isn't being influenced by inflation as it was during the last inflationary period.
Once the Fed stopped raising rates in an attempt to forestall inflation I expected the GDP to Debt ratio to go up; I also expect it to recede next year when the Fed begins lowering the rate.
Currently, the debt to GDP ratio, while higher than it has been, is not in the scary zone yet. We’re still about 40% lower than the high mark from 1992 through 1996. and significantly lower than the historic highs of the 1940’s and 1950’s.
It’s not time to sell your condo at the beach yet, Rico. Don’t move to Canada just yet, and don’t unload your stock portfolio.
Posted by: Bane of Liberals' Existence at October 9, 2006 11:27 AM
Nothing convinces like charts and graphs; consumers buy nasal spray based on a chart that shows airflow or pain relief. But, jonas, before you bet the farm on your source, you should look at the statistics they used.
The first indicator that you have a problem is that 2005 numbers were “estimated.” This means you’re looking at historic data that’s more hysteric then historic. After the recession in 2000-2001 the economy had to take three years to become fully recovered and move in the right direction, during 2004 many economists were just plain wrong about the direction; many predicted gloom and doom in 2005 and complete collapse in 2006. Not only are these ideas quaint, they’re dangerous as simpletons believed them and took money out of the markets. Fortunately most of the real investors saw opportunities and the market and economy grew. Not only is a market based on substance it is a market that hasn’t reached its peak.
So, jonas, as long as you wish, you can watch the rest of us make our fortunes in a robust market, or you can join in; but that means you have to educate yourself and stop buying into economic data presented by people with an agenda.
Posted by: Bane of Liberals' Existence at October 9, 2006 11:48 AM
I just checked the Debt to GDP ratio as of today; 65.095% and dropping. GDP is rising @ $13.123.
Break out the California Champagne!
And, Rico, when have I been dishonest?
Posted by: Bane of Liberals' Existence at October 9, 2006 12:08 PM
Please report any inappropriate comments to abuse (at) blogsforbush (dot) com. Be sure to include the title of the blog entry, the name of the commenter, and the text of the offending comment.
Post a comment
My vote in November is to keep the fiscal policies going that help this economy. If spending is cut (unlikely ..... how about slowed) imagine what would happen. Antithetical to Nancy Pelosi, "It doesn't get much BETTER than this".
Does ANYONE believe the Democrats would keep this economy on its existing track?
Anyone that does NOT should get off their arse and vote and quit bitching about the coulda, shoulda, woulda.
Remember stagflation? How about the misery index? Then there was the mystery of how Jimmy's economy created both raging inflation AND raging unemployment.
I remember. I vote!
That is some really good news. Also, the unemployment rate dipping to 4.6% is great news. Now if we could just get beyond Foleygate to spread this great news to the American people, then we really might get our re-election numbers moving in the right direction. I am afraid that Dennis Hastert is standing in the way of that.
That is some really good news. Also, the unemployment rate dipping to 4.6% is great news. Now if we could just get beyond Foleygate to spread this great news to the American people, then we really might get our re-election numbers moving in the right direction. I am afraid that Dennis Hastert is standing in the way of that.
Hey "Denny" I think YOU'RE standing in the way. No matter how many names you use to post the same message.
President Bush needs to announce this great economic news loud and clear! Tax cuts, oh yah!
:)
Heh. Here's a funny atomic cartoon.
Mark: "one small thing I'll note here is that the deficit is 2% of GDP"
Oh Lord, as if that mattered. Bane, do you want to address this issue? You have better credentials than I. Besides, I have a very busy time coming up. I hope you are honest.
Looking at real historical data, it's obvious that deficit and debt are much higher during Republican administrations than during Democrat rule.
http://nationalpriorities.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=40&Itemid=110``
This data complied by the federal government.
See 1980-1992. See 2000-present. Heckuva job, Republicans!
The measurement of debt to GDP is an indicator of the country’s ability to service the debt; it is probably the best judge of the re-payment of the debt. When the ratio becomes too high, those investors that loan money via the Federal instruments demand higher interest rates to front the money, (didn’t I just say in another thread to get into Bond funds?) because the ability to repay is in doubt. A rise in the ratio is almost always cause for concern.
But, Rico, don’t forget there are other pressures on this ratio; inflation can cause the ratio to go down as the dollar is worth less in the GDP calculation, or it can effect the future re-payments by offsetting the inflationary pressures. In other words, look at the inflation to GDP first, then the GDP to debt; inflation is well under control, so the ratio isn't being influenced by inflation as it was during the last inflationary period.
Once the Fed stopped raising rates in an attempt to forestall inflation I expected the GDP to Debt ratio to go up; I also expect it to recede next year when the Fed begins lowering the rate.
Currently, the debt to GDP ratio, while higher than it has been, is not in the scary zone yet. We’re still about 40% lower than the high mark from 1992 through 1996. and significantly lower than the historic highs of the 1940’s and 1950’s.
It’s not time to sell your condo at the beach yet, Rico. Don’t move to Canada just yet, and don’t unload your stock portfolio.
Nothing convinces like charts and graphs; consumers buy nasal spray based on a chart that shows airflow or pain relief. But, jonas, before you bet the farm on your source, you should look at the statistics they used.
The first indicator that you have a problem is that 2005 numbers were “estimated.” This means you’re looking at historic data that’s more hysteric then historic. After the recession in 2000-2001 the economy had to take three years to become fully recovered and move in the right direction, during 2004 many economists were just plain wrong about the direction; many predicted gloom and doom in 2005 and complete collapse in 2006. Not only are these ideas quaint, they’re dangerous as simpletons believed them and took money out of the markets. Fortunately most of the real investors saw opportunities and the market and economy grew. Not only is a market based on substance it is a market that hasn’t reached its peak.
So, jonas, as long as you wish, you can watch the rest of us make our fortunes in a robust market, or you can join in; but that means you have to educate yourself and stop buying into economic data presented by people with an agenda.
I just checked the Debt to GDP ratio as of today; 65.095% and dropping. GDP is rising @ $13.123.
Break out the California Champagne!
And, Rico, when have I been dishonest?