America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

"The Democrat administrations achieved the three fastest rates of growth and four of the top five on that ranking. Real GDP advanced at an annualized rate of 5.2% during the Kennedy years, 5.1% during the Johnson years, and 3.6% when the Clinton administration was in power. GDP rose 3.5% per annum in the Reagan years despite a severe recession in 1981-2. Growth averaged a respectable 3.2% per annum when the Carter administration governed — and yes, some people no doubt were better off in 1980 than 1976 — and the Nixon years experienced growth of 3.0% per annum. In none of these presidential periods was growth substantially less than the 3.4% average pace for the whole second half of the 20th century.

Both Bush presidential periods and the Ford years experienced growth of barely more than 2.0%. The growth rate in the first Bush presidency was 2.1%, identical to the performance of the Ford Administration. The current Bush administration has achieved marginally faster growth of 2.3% per annum. However, that pace has also been substantially less than the long-term trend. From several respects, the current administration’s performance is puzzling, worrisome, and instructive. It is puzzling because a 7.5-year period will be less sharply influenced by a recession than an administration with a shorter lifespan like Ford’s and because fiscal policy and monetary policy were loose. Also, productivity was strong during this period. It is worrisome because this is the most recent presidential observation and might reflect a stochastic downshift in what the United States can expect in long-term average growth. It is also worrisome because the banking crisis and the drag from the implementation of solutions to the current problem suggest that worse times may lie ahead. Finally, it is instructive in discrediting the theory that war is good for growth. Sometimes that has been unquestionably true. World War II helped America escape the depression, and growth was very buoyant when the Vietnam War was fought in the 1960′s. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and tightening of homeland security have not given a discernible lift to growth."

Weird huh? It's almost like most of what Republicans say is exactly the opposite of the truth.

I think I feel a 98.2% outrage coming on...


Having said that my best business years WERE under Slick Willy... and his Republican-controlled congress. (cough cough)

You think I didn't expect that response?

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_8UVGnCIfOVk/TAcUw8yHzsI/AAAAAAAAAJc/PWN-aOJ1R3A/s1600/Figure_2.bmp

As Perry would say, 'Oops'.

Sorry to disagree, Fuzz, but there's the reality which actually occurred to myself and most of my colleagues during the 90's and your blog-generated bar chart which I don't buy. Anybody can use pweeddy colors but we've got the W2s' s to prove it.

Oh please share the "website" you're getting this info from!

***holding back laughter***

I smell an avatar change a'comin'!

Well, some people's kids just feel the need to be "special" and create "Look at me...I'm an Attention Whore" threads all the time!

The rest of us try to run a neat and tidy place around here.

We need to pass legislation so we can find out what's in it!

It's a sign of what's so damn wrong with our sitting President!

A couple of things opened it up for the small business community during Slick's admin:

1. Internets invented by Al "Ozone for brains" Gore which made intros, marketing & registration of small businesses much easier;
2. Introduction of credit cards for Government purchasing (have to give Ozone legit credit for this one) with the large corporate sector following suit- this eliminated tons of paperwork & made the bidding/buying process easier & fairer;
3. Rampant open bidding on all sorts of Government AND Corporate contracts (large or small) open to EVERYONE- blanket agreements soon to follow based on performance.


NOW? Rampant cronyism (longterm awards to favored sources) & no-compete contracts awarded to large corporations and favored "victimized" classes- exacerbated by bureaucratic nepotism (note the Bush/Kennedy/Cuomo, etc dynasties).

RIP the free market. Viva Obama! Viva Amerika!
Keep the pay per views, porn, sports, & fried foods a'coming so that we remain oblivious.

If you became a member of a "victimized" class you could then be under the Obama Cone of Protection!

If you're gonna feed from the government trough, you gotta play the game.

See...glass half-full...no wait...er

LMAO! Damn, I love a good laugh.
I know, I know... I should look in the mirror more often.

Typical Fuzz - lies of omission.

First, both Truman and Clinton only has a Republican congress through PART of their administrations. The first two years of the Clinton regime had Democrats in virtual total control of Congress. it got so bad that they were thrown out of power in the midderm elections.

This coincides with Truman, whose policies were so bad - price-fixing and rationing - that the Democrats were thrown out in a electoral tidal wave. It was the Republican numerical advantage that halted Truman's enforcement of FDR's "new deal" extensions that eventuall turned around the US economy, and created the 1950s boom.

Fuzz, it is nice that you're still spewing your innane Democrat talking points. It would be really nice for one if you really knew what you were talking about...

LOL!

Waterhead

I promise not to comment on your spelling or grammar.

Ron

He's a kept man he doesn't work.

Lookie who traipses in here with all their fancy schoolin'?

Yes, Virginia, some cbidders are taking creative writing and/or marketing courses replete with fancy buzz words at night school.


Btw, Rclay, I've asked him about the "fuzz" and he said no... other than what's on his chin. (j/k)

I love long walks on the beach at dusk, poking jellyfish and bee's nests with sticks and posting here.

BB guns... you can harass them from a safe distance.

mmmmmm....BB guns. I got one when I was 6 or 7. It was so difficult to pump I had to have good aim or a really sore arm.

It's fascinating how liberals can convince people of something when facts show the complete opposite.