"David Hall" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@posting.google.com...
news: SNIP
I essentially agree with you. Something noone in the news has stated or recognized is that thus far the Bush policies have been precisely what was needed at the time and fully meet most economists expectations for what should have been done during a recession. Deficit spending IS a good thing in this situations and it is having exactly the effect that it should. Increases in productivity are entirely ignored by the press, yet they keep harping on the lack of job creation. I admit this is relevant, but it is taken out of context in terms of overall economic growth. Anyway, I want the debt to be eliminated as well, but I think it has to be addressed in terms of the economy as a whole. Simply saying "no deficit spending" is naive and not good economic policy. Protectionist trade policies are also BAD for our economy as a whole. Sure, some people will lose jobs in the US, but if you look at the overall benefits to our consumers (i.e. lower prices, etc.) and the entire economic picture, free trade is a very good thing for us. I have a 6-month old son, so the concerns you state are mine, too. Anyway, my main point is you shouldn't detest Bush for his deficit spending policies - they are appropriate and a good thing. His PROJECTIONS, however, ARE scary. The weak dollar and dependence on foreign capital to prop up our bond market is very troubling. If the Asian bond-holders cash out, we could be heading for the worst recession since the early 80's with mortgage rates in the teens, etc. Getting the debt down in these terms becomes a big priority, one that it seems Bush needs to focus on a bit more very soon. The thing about Bush is that he seems to do what his advisors suggest, and I'm sure his economic team is aware of these factors and will make the appropriate suggestions. But, you never know. But, as you said, there's no way I'm voting for a two-faced "patriot" that has flames coming out of his drawers.
Mike