Re: *War is good for the economy*

As they say, if you laid all the economists in the world end to end, they
couldn't reach a conclusion


*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 10/31/2003 at 9:41 AM Thomas Juli wrote:

>The economy is growing, but the growth is not stable and founded in
>non-government spending.  You are right, the tax cuts did not have a
>stimulating effect on consumer spending.  On the other side, you will
>always find some economists who can manipulate data and show you
>otherwise. 
>
> 
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: wsn-owner@csf.colorado.edu [mailto:wsn-owner@csf.colorado.edu] On
>Behalf Of KenRichard2002@aol.com
>Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 4:50 PM
>To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu
>Subject: *War is good for the economy*
>
> 
>
>Bush's team pointed out that the nation's economy was in a recession
>before he took office.
>
>Today,  the stock market is up 75% over a year ago;   the GDP is growing
>at 7%.  During the Clinton administration,   the economy was growing at
>4% annually,  and that was during the greatest economic expansion the US
>ever saw.
>
>So the economy is booming again after a brief bust and it is a result of
>war time spending.   It's a result of the government pumping 100+
>billion into the economy after borrowing it from anemic financial
>institutions,  who would have been forever greatful except for the fact
>that the titans of the financial industry already have a say as to when
>we go to war [and that is generally when they need the government to
>borrow massive amounts of funds from them].   
>
>Oh, but they'll swear it's the tax cut having a stimulating effect on
>consumer spending.  But logic says otherwise.   And only the shallow
>thinking will swallow the mendacity.  Unfortunately,  that's a heck of a
>lot of people.