General Chat / Bush after the Iraq war

Yes, economy is a cycle, but the government CAN influence it.

Agreed, but influence is the key word. Governments cannot dictate the economic climate to the extent most people believe they do. Most economic policies are reactionary to general economic climate. From an economic standpoint, Bush came into power at a terrible moment, but I don't think it reasonable to blame Clinton for this. Politicians react as opposed to creating (Democrats and Republicans alike). 9/11 came at an opportune time for Bush as it allowed him to deflect attention away from the failing economy which he likely would have been blamed for. Through questionable foreign policy and war efforts he has managed to keep peoples attention away from the fact that he is running a $500 billion deficit. This is what politics is. It's creating the issues you want people to take notice of and hiding the ones you don't want discussed. Now Bush proposes this new space exploration plan (which likely will never get the nod of congress). If you weigh the benefits of exploring Mars vs. the benefits of providing medical care, education, or even food and clothing to your countries own citizens I wonder which most of us would find a priority? Trust me, I do not think highly of Bill Clinton either, but no one can tell me Bush is a better option.

Ok so toon if your saying that the goverment cant affect the economy, then why are you criticizing bush? And gym dont act all fucking innocent, you are just as bad with conservatives...
And no toon, i do have a position...i support bush, and usually whoever the president is at the time, although in clinton's case that kinda waned a bit..the point is i will support my president's decisions, unless i disagree with them, in the case of the Iraq war yes i did agree, on his new immigration policy and Nafta, i am right there with those criticizing him, so toon dont propose to know what i think, or to say that i dont have a position.
And in some cases i agree with you. No Bush might be just as bad as Clinton, but would your honestly want someone like Howard Dean in office?
Personally all politicians piss me off. I just wish that we could get an independent in office, this will of course never happen, as the powerholds of both parties are too strong, but i can dream. Therefore we are almost forced to pick an option.
So which would you rather have. I know that i would rather have Bush than anyone else who is out there, except maybe Leiberman.

Ok so toon if your saying that the goverment cant affect the economy, then why are you criticizing bush?

As far as I'm aware, I don't remember myself ever referring to Bush's economic policies amongst my criticisms. Which indicates how much you pay attention to the comments in this thread. Maybe you should read through the posts before commenting next time. Also I didn't say government can't affect economics, it just can't control them.

i stand corrected on the economy toon

Now Bush proposes this new space exploration plan (which likely will never get the nod of congress).  If you weigh the benefits of exploring Mars vs. the benefits of providing medical care, education, or even food and clothing to your countries own citizens I wonder which most of us would find a priority?

Actually, from what I heard on the news, this new proposed space program won't be costing America anything extra. Funding will come from natural inflation and interest (I don't know exact details though).

The economy. Whoever is president does not matter what the economy does..... for the most part. Two of our greatest presidents, FDR and Truman (both Democrats) were riding on a great economy during, and following WWII. This was mostly due to low unemployment rates since more women were working in place of the men, plus factories to make all sorts of military ammunitions, weapons, vehicles, etc. The economy just thrived.

The 60's started a decline during the start of Vietnam and with Nixon (1969 - 1974 - a Republican) in the White House. I believe Nixon is one of the worst presidents we've had. (Watergate and the fact Vietnam was very unpopular then).

Late 70's, Carter (a Democrat) was in, gave away the Panama Canal, saw the Nation suffer the gas shortage, had the hostage crisis in Teheran, Iran, and the economy was in it's worst economic slump since black Friday (the stock market crash of '29). Reagan whooped his ass easily in the 1980 election. The same day Reagan took oath, the hostages were released because they knew Reagan meant business. After that, the economy grew larger than it has ever been and the 1980's became the most successful decade in business and invention.

Bush 1 rode the economy for a while during Desert Storm, but it naturally declined and again we went into an economic slump. It eventually picked up during Clinton's years leading up to the millennium (spell?). Because of the millennium, companies upgraded, as well as most consumers, for a potential crisis in the computer world fearing the world will end! (weirdos). After 2000 came and went, of course people already upgraded by then, sales slowed down, companies scalled down again and another decline in the economy came around during Clinton's last year. Bush 2 inherited that economic slump (though this slump was no where near as bad and didn't last long).

Now, the economy is rising, fast again, but at a cost. The dollar is now very weak against other foreign currencies. (Currently at about £1 = $1.88, €1 = $1.25) This is affecting foreign trade value and military stationed overseas such as myself. (I currently pay $1400 a month toward my Pound check account, and it still can't cover the cost of my house and utilities. I'm losing money). But hopefully the dollar will rebound and I, and the rest of my co-workers, will see a profit once again!

Dont forget bombing a medicine factory to cover up monicagate mike....

I can't currently recall this right now, but the conflicts in Somalia and the Iraq invasion of 1998 were thought to have distracted the American media away from Clinton's personal problems (White Water scandal, Monica).

Completely different things Mike. And I'll kindly ask you NOT to infer that I am a liberal. Far fucking from it!!!

When have I ever said you were a liberal? All I did was quote something you typed. Don't point fingers. It's just a debate thread. I just like to get my point across, plus it's fun! Reminds me of the old debate thread at RCTS!

Reminds me of the old debate thread at RCTS!

I miss those days...we lost some good debators (like the saint), when red closed it...

Actually, from what I heard on the news, this new proposed space program won't be costing America anything extra. Funding will come from natural inflation and interest (I don't know exact details though).

In theory it may not add to the budget due to inflation, but it still costs money which could be allocated for other uses. But being a Canadian, that's really none of my business.

When did you drop the 'Towner' from your name?

And the inflation and interest would come from the current space program. That money wouldn't go toward the schools, medicine anyway.

When did you drop the 'Towner' from your name?

And the inflation and interest would come from the current space program. That money wouldn't go toward the schools, medicine anyway.

To much TT confusion, so I decided to just go with Toon...

As for the money not being spent elsewhere, you are right, but my point is it could be.

When did you drop the 'Towner' from your name?

And the inflation and interest would come from the current space program. That money wouldn't go toward the schools, medicine anyway.

To much TT confusion, so I decided to just go with Toon...

As for the money not being spent elsewhere, you are right, but my point is it could be.

fair enough, but how are we gonna get it moved, as its already part of the nasa budget.
it could be a good idea to further explore space, look at what it has already brought us, why not continue our search?

At least Bush is following up on his little claim that "NASA is and always has been a top priority" after the Columbia tragedy.