Just when I thought I was out-they pull me back in
virus: Bush's Economic Recovery---NOT!!!
« on: 2004-06-14 17:43:42 »
This was a quick and dirty scan of 2 locally written (Tulsa) newspaper articles (front-side only).
It's short and sweet and sums up Bush's moronic economic recovery he's claiming: (esp. see chart at top -- 30 year span) ----------------------------------------------------- http://www.walterwatts.com/images/inflation.jpg ----------------------------------------------------- Cherie McNaul lost her love of pancakes years ago — after eating the breakfast food several days each week because it was all she could afford and still have money to buy diapers for her infant son. “You can make pancakes with water, and it’s easier and cheaper than a lot of food,” McNaul said. She said she ate a steady diet of cheap food, including bologna sandwiches, as a young single mother to cut expenses and be able to afford necessities such as infant formula and baby food. “I did that until he got old enough to eat regular food, then I had to learn how to save money in other ways,” McNaul said. Until recently, she was one of millions of Americans on a fixed income. “Living on disability gave us just enough to get by,” she said. In her late 20s, McNaul was di- agnosed with a form of degenera- tive arthritis, and her medical con- dition forced her to leave her job and seek govermnent assistance. Although local and national eco- nomic indicators point toward an improving economy, 34.6 million people — one in eight Americans — live in poverty, and many more are living in near-poverty. Each year, the federal govern- ment calculates the minimum amount of money required by fam- ilies to meet basic needs. Accord- ing to the Census Bureau, a family of four with an annual income of less than $18,850 is living in pov- erty. Many experts, however, say fam- ilies making much more than that are not earning enough money to pay all their bills. Families do not have to be on a fixed income such as disability to feel the need to cut expenses. A family ‘of four living in Tulsa needs to earn at least $40,343 per year to meet all of its needs, said David Blatt, director of public poli- cy for the Community Action Pro- ject This means that each of the two working adults in the family must earn a minimum of $9.55 per hour, says the organization’s 2002 Oklahoma Self-Sufficiency Report According to the Tulsa Metro Chamber, companies have added more than 6,600 jobs since Janu- ary, and since December firms The poor financial health of many Tulsa families is tied to national trends of low-paying jobs, rising medical costs and other increased expenses. During the past 30 years, the cost of some goods has outpaced inflation. For example, the cost of butter increased 43 percent more than the rate of infla- tion, and the rising prices of some cars topped the inflation rate by more than 40 percent The pay workers receive, however, has not increased with the price of goods and services. Today, workers earn a federally mandated minimum wage of $5.15 per hour, Up from $2 in 1974. This means base wages rose 32 percent less than inflation. The minimum wage, last increased in 1997, “has lost much of its purchasing power” during the past 30 years, said Mark Rank, author of “One Nation, Un- derprivileged — Why American Poverty Affects Us All.” “If you are working full time, you should really be able get your family at or above the poverty line,” said Rank, a professor of social welfare at Washing- ton University in St Louis. Although the prices of many goods have not risen as fast as inflation, the increase in other costs such as hous
--
Walter Watts Tulsa Network Solutions, Inc.
"Pursue the small utopias... nature, music, friendship, love" --Kupferberg--
Is it fair to blame the current Administration for US macroeconomic troubles shaped mostly by Clinton era policies and extremely complex global factors?
-----Original Message----- From: owner-virus@lucifer.com [mailto:owner-virus@lucifer.com] On Behalf Of Walter Watts Sent: 14 June 2004 22:44 Subject: virus: Bush's Economic Recovery---NOT!!!
This was a quick and dirty scan of 2 locally written (Tulsa) newspaper articles (front-side only).
It's short and sweet and sums up Bush's moronic economic recovery he's claiming: (esp. see chart at top -- 30 year span) ----------------------------------------------------- http://www.walterwatts.com/images/inflation.jpg
[Jonathan Davis] Is it fair to blame the current Administration for US macroeconomic troubles shaped mostly by Clinton era policies and extremely complex global factors?
[rhinoceros] Your question, as stated, sounds hypothetical. Even so, yes, the current administration should be blamed. There is no other way. Where is the money?
The current administration increased federal spending by 500 billion dollars. --- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
You're right, Jonathan. It might, or it might not be fair. I really don't know. Too many variables.
However, all I can remember about the Clinton administration was an economic bubble. If it burst on someone else's watch, well fuck them and the horse they rode in on.
And besides, momma and daddy used to tell me all the time life ain't fair.
Walter
rhinoceros wrote:
> [Jonathan Davis] Is it fair to blame the current Administration for US > macroeconomic troubles shaped mostly by Clinton era policies and > extremely complex global factors? > > [rhinoceros] Your question, as stated, sounds hypothetical. Even so, > yes, the current administration should be blamed. There is no other way. > Where is the money? > > ____________________________________________________________________ > http://www.freemail.gr - δωρεάν υπηρεσία ηλεκτρονικού ταχυδρομείου. > http://www.freemail.gr - free email service for the Greek-speaking. > --- > To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
--
Walter Watts Tulsa Network Solutions, Inc.
"Pursue the small utopias... nature, music, friendship, love" --Kupferberg--
> [rhinoceros] Your question, as stated, sounds hypothetical. Even so, > yes, the current administration should be blamed. There is no other way. > Where is the money? > [Blunderov] I'm wondering if the spike in the US economy is not due more to the huge influx of military spending than sound fundamentals. What happens when the bills hit? I'm guessing that much depends on whether the military can be cut back in time to absorb the punch.
Meanwhile I hear Iran is massing troops on the border, things are going a bit pear shaped in Saudi Arabia and China is not at all pleased with the situation in Taiwan...
I heard that about Iran, too. I also heard that Syria is preparing to revoke their prohibition against recognizing Israel.=0D =0D -------Original Message-------=0D =0D From: virus@lucifer.com=0D Date: 06/15/04 16:56:47=0D To: virus@lucifer.com=0D Subject: RE: virus: Bush's Economic Recovery---NOT!!!=0D =0D > [rhinoceros] Your question, as stated, sounds hypothetical. Even so,=0D > yes, the current administration should be blamed. There is no other way= =2E=0D > Where is the money?=0D >=0D [Blunderov] I'm wondering if the spike in the US economy is not due more = to=0D the huge influx of military spending than sound fundamentals. What happen= s=0D when the bills hit? I'm guessing that much depends on whether the militar= y=0D can be cut back in time to absorb the punch.=0D =0D Meanwhile I hear Iran is massing troops on the border, things are going a= =0D bit pear shaped in Saudi Arabia and China is not at all pleased with the=0D situation in Taiwan...=0D =0D Best Regards=0D =0D =0D ---=0D To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/= virus-l>
[Jonathan Davis] Is it fair to blame the current Administration for US macroeconomic troubles shaped mostly by Clinton era policies and extremely complex global factors?
[rhinoceros] Your question, as stated, sounds hypothetical. Even so, yes, the current administration should be blamed. There is no other way. Where is the money?
[Jonathan 2] The idea that Presidents have a major impact on the economy in the short term is mythological. It suits them to claim this. We can judge Bush in 10 years. Until then , direct your fire about the current economic situation at the former Clinton Administration.
Author
Logged
