Originally posted by Beestie
The economy is BACK with a vengence! Highest growth rate since 1984!
And it appears to be a broad-based recovery as opposed to a spike from a single sector (e.g., defense spending). The trade deficit even narrowed (a sure sign of productivity growth). And once we max out on productivity, the Help Wanted posters start going up! WooooHoooo!!
Here's one take from a conservative rag. :)
I'm still curious about the effects of the Iraq reconstruction on the economy. If we are pumping billions of dollars into goods and services for Iraq, from mostly American companies, would that appear in the economic outlook? It would probably not be categorized as defense spending.
I wonder the same thing about job growth. Say a reservist is in Iraq for 12 months. His company may be unwilling to wait for him and is probably not legally required to do so, so they hire a replacement. Until his deployment is finished this counts as job growth.
It no secret that wars effect the economy, and a war coupled witha reconstruction will probably have a noticeable impact. Of course these are short term gains. At some point tens of thousands of reservists return looking for their civilian jobs back. Even regular military who don't reenlist will be seeking jobs.
I'm sure the White House wants us to believe that the 100-400 dollars each family received (assuming they weren't super-rich) is responsible for this growth. I'll believe that when Alan Greenspan says its so. At this point he's probably the smartest man in our government, who is never going to run for office and who does not appear to have any partisan views.
BTW, I do not consider thinking that the Bush White House has the economic responsibility of a teenager on crack as a partisan belief, merely the result of observation. So any comments he may have made critical of Bush's economic policies are not politically motivated. Unlike, Powell, who has to grin and take it, Greenspan is independant enough that he can publicly disagree with the president.