Bailout question...

[v-empire]

You also can't deny that Clinton left us with one of the original catalysts of the credit crisis. The burst of the technology bubble left serious implications and the Fed's lowering of interest rates (to as low as 1% iirc) turned investor's eyes towards the real estate market. Clinton left office with possibly one of the worst bursts in the stock market in decades.... So please don't over-glorify the economy during his administration's reign.

the legacy of an administration stands while the administration is in office. there is no point in speculating after, they left us with a bad position or what not.


after the term... well, its up to the new administration to figure out how grow from there, am i not right? or should we blame the new guy for not being competent enough to foresee new changes. that's their bloody job. to continue to grow and get better.

clinton took over office with a bad economy.

reagan took over a ****ty economy.

[Verik]

the legacy of an administration stands while the administration is in office. there is no point in speculating after, they left us with a bad position or what not.


after the term... well, its up to the new administration to figure out how grow from there, am i not right? or should we blame the new guy for not being competent enough to foresee new changes. that's their bloody job. to continue to grow and get better.

clinton took over office with a bad economy.

reagan took over a ****ty economy.

Your right but when things that have been building up for the entire administration's reign and finally bust in the final year of the administration (1999-2000), then please don't say it's bush's fault for not properly adapting his administration to it.... I'm not defending him, I am simply stating that Clinton has been over-glorified and no one likes to describe the ball of **** his administration turned our economy into (which we finally saw emerge the last year of his presidency and with what he left for the next president).

If you switched the positions of Bush and Clinton and had the same events happen, all you'd hear about is how Bush left this steaming pile on Clinton's desk and how the current bad economy is simply the best Clinton could have done to prevent it from being worse.

Stop thinking about names and parties for a minute and realize that the administration from 92-00 left us with one of the worst economic situations since the Great Depression (and were the catalyst for putting us into the chain of events that happened. I'm not blaming the dot com bust for how the current administration and alan greenspan handled things during the first part of this decade, but it was certainly the start of the hard fall we have taken these past 8 years). You cannot defer the blame of the Dot-Com bust and say it wasn't forseeable... Warren Buffet (Berkshire Hathaway, CEO), named the world's greatest investor, saw through the technology cloud and thus when the dot-com busted he came out ahead of everyone else. So your saying no one else realized what he was saying wasn't crazy? There were measures that could have been taken to prevent that kind of growth. As an economics major you must have learned the harder you climb, the harder you fall, that's the cyclical nature of things....