Which president do you want to vote for on a financial stand point?

[Mustangeater8252]

KERRY!

but dont you vote on a president for all standpoints and not just one?

[MustangEater8251]

Forget foreign policy, etc...

Which one do you think will help this country form a financial standpoint?

[jc Kyle]

kerry.. unless your in the upper 2 percent

[j_downey50]

^^what the hell? TWINS!!^^

financially, i have no idea as far as the country as a whole, but i know that democrats support my dad's job. my dad always votes dem because of that.

[Jerriko]

I suppose this question is based on if you like deficits or surpluses.

[C.O.Jones]

It's not just people in the upper 2%, it's also small businesses. One of my friends owns a small S corporation - he runs his own Adult Family home and develops software. Combined he was making over 200k, and was just now able to actually afford another LEGIT (that's the major point here boys and girls) employee - meaning one that he pays health insurance/taxes/etc... for. Guess what. Next year that other person will either have to take a fairly large paycut, or leave. Whatever a person is paid, the company pays about the same (~80%) for insurance/taxes/social/etc...

[MustangEater8251]

Originally posted by Jerriko:
I suppose this question is based on if you like deficits or surpluses.

Not necessarily... 9/11, and a recession that started right at the end of clinton's term were a big part of the deficit.

After every huge climb there is a recession in the economy, we climbed for 8 years under clinton, we were gonna get a recession with whoever came through, and 9/11 almost put a few billion dollar companies belly up.

I am more looking at the plan for the future. And Bush's tax cut does help S Corporations and Partnerships.


P.S. reason why I am talking about just a financial is we have beat foreign policy to death, and if we want to talk about it lets start another thread. I am still debating abotu who I want to vote for and just want to explore this angle soem more.

[GrigoryRasputin]

Bush's tax cut was a big part of teh deficit... like all of it.

[phoenix64]

In the 2 months after Bush took office the American economy added 120,000 jobs. Then lost 2 million. Factcheck.org has some really interesting statistics, along with pointing out where each canidate lied.

BTW Kerry will be the best for the economy hands down. Yeah the economy goes in cycles, but that is no excuse for the record setting defficit spending of bush.

[MustangEater8251]

I believe the business cycle is a part of it, and alsot factors like 9/11 and Enron had a part too...

crappy graph but first one I found on teh net... notice at the end of it in clinton's period it went up and dropped in the end.
http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/mul...gifs/USLR3.GIF

Actually kinda funny how back in highschool my economics teacher was telling us how whoever was president after Clinton, woudl get blamed for a huge deficit, and not get reelected. This was before the last election. Go figure [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Jerriko]

Ok, for you fact gurus, go find how many companies Bush ran into the ground before he became governor of Texas.

[phoenix64]

Originally posted by MustangEater8251:
I believe the business cycle is a part of it, and alsot factors like 9/11 and Enron had a part too...

crappy graph but first one I found on teh net... notice at the end of it in clinton's period it went up and dropped in the end.
http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/mul...gifs/USLR3.GIF

Actually kinda funny how back in highschool my economics teacher was telling us how whoever was president after Clinton, woudl get blamed for a huge deficit, and not get reelected. This was before the last election. Go figure [img]smile.gif[/img]

Are you sure you teacher said deficit, and not recession? Clintion created a surplus by cutting spending drasticaly. Bush created the deficity by increasing spending drasticaly, while decreasing taxes.

[MustangEater8251]

Originally posted by Jerriko:
Ok, for you fact gurus, go find how many companies Bush ran into the ground before he became governor of Texas.

Its not him personally running the country you know [img]smile.gif[/img] Its the peopel he assigns to help him.

[AaronG]

Originally posted by MustangEater8251:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Jerriko:
Ok, for you fact gurus, go find how many companies Bush ran into the ground before he became governor of Texas.

Its not him personally running the country you know [img]smile.gif[/img] Its the peopel he assigns to help him. </font>[/QUOTE]thats somtin that always gets me, people blame the pres for everything that happens. we have 3 branches for a reason.

now on the topic at hand, i like bush, all of his defence spending is supporting my future job.

[Th3 RiCk]

Bush isn't to blame for the economy taking a hit. It was bound to fall on its face after the tech stock boom in the mid 90's came to a screeching hault. It's not only the US that's suffering from a bearish economy. Basically the entire world has been affected by a bad economy, with deflation playing a major role.
Anyone who plays the market knows that stocks move on patterns and news. If companies aren't making any money for any reason then people will sell. The tech stock crash coupled with 9/11 was the straw that broke the camels back. Stocks with high volumes such as !Yahoo can't sell for $400+ very long before it's brought back to the ground. Here's something to remember, "What goes up, must come down."

As far as who I think would be better for the economy, I'm leading towards Bush. Only because I still think that if the government spends a lot of money it will stimulate the economy. Something must be working because there have been 1.9 Million new jobs created since August 2003.

Kerry is just too unrealistic with things. For instance, he wants to cuts taxes for middle class families in hope of them spending more. But the only way to pay for his healthcare plan is to tax the hell out of everyone. It just doesn't add up. He's only telling people what they want to hear. Laborers hear the words "wage increase" and they jump on the bandwagon. The unions already have outrageous wages as it is.