Uncertainty rather than War itself may =

[Guest NoCalMike]

Most of you know I am against the war on Iraq as of right now, however I feel that even bigger than a WAR is the fact that our economy is gonna keep lagging as long as the future remains as uncertain as it is right now. All these corporate business guys are about to get HUGE tax returns and with the state we are in right now, where any day we MIGHT go to war, but not sure, is creating a very UNSTABLE enviornment and economy. It may lure people to hold onto their money rather than go out and spend/invest. Which is a big selling point for Bush's tax cut. So, even though I am against the war, I feel whatever Bush decides to ultamitely do, it needs to get done SOON.

[Guest Mad Dog]

Stock market wise things will go way up if we get rid of Saddam.

[Guest Tyler McClelland]

No, it won't.

[Guest redbaron51]

So what is this war suppose to do to help Bush out? Elections?

[Guest Crazy Dan]

The last time we came out of a war, in 1991, our economy went into a recession. So I think that if we do in fact go through with a war, and especially if we do in fact do this alone, our economy will suffer. Throw in a big tax cut, and this has all the makings for a recession. Also, remember Bush Sr. had a huge approval rating after the Gulf War, but he squandered it when our economy sank. I think history could repeat itself.

 

I would rather let the inspections do their thing, and when in fact there is an UN resolution to go in into Iraq, then so be it. It would be even better if the resolutions are very successful, with Iraq being disarmed (a fella can dream, can't he). I think that there are more dangerous entities than Iraq. I think that we need to stay on Al Queda first, for they pose the biggest threat to the US, than I raq does, IMO.

[Guest Olympic Slam]

I can't possibly see the war helping the economy. This isn't like the old days when munition factories were opened up and people went to work in them. Today's economy is about consumption and spending as much money as you possibly can. And frankly, during a time of war, the last things on my mind are DVD Players, Big Macs, and vacations to Six Flags.

 

To fix the economy YOU have to go out and spend some money!

[Guest JMA]

Hopefully, Bush will only serve one term (like his father). Then maybe we can get a President who will actually focus on the economy.

[Guest Olympic Slam]

Hopefully, Bush will only serve one term (like his father). Then maybe we can get a President who will actually focus on the economy.

What do you suppose he, or any other President should do? He's not an almighty god who can change the economy with one wave of his wand. This also isn't Sweden where economic concerns are strictly controlled by a central planning board. Again, for the millionth time, the economy is in bad shape because what we're basing a lot of employment on is "out" right now and people are putting their money elsewhere. To use an analogy: MC Hammer Cds are out, money for automobiles are in. Now, move yourself out of MC Hammer and into autos. Those in car sales will reap the rewards of free-market choices and those in MC Hammer sales will most in the past and most likely unemployed.

[Guest DrTom]

Hopefully, Bush will only serve one term (like his father). Then maybe we can get a President who will actually focus on the economy.

Even if we got someone who eat, slept, and breathed the economy 24/7, it really wouldn't matter. The economy is cyclical, and the effect presidents have on it is minimal. Reagan gets a lot of credit in some circles, and scorn in others, for the huge economic growth starting around 1982. The reality is that he had very little to do with it. Signs of recovery were already there. The best thing a president can do is express confidence in the economy and their policies. Think about it: both Reagan and Clinton are given a lot of credit for economic growth. The thing they have in common is they were both great communicators (since their economic ideas are wildly divergent, comparing them is meaningless). Bush Sr. was not a great communicator, and when pressed about the economy and its effect on people, he didn't seem concerned. That doomed him right there.