User 163486

Comparing Income Taxes: Clinton vs. Bush

It isn't all about taxes. I am far more interested in the buying power of the money I have after taxes. For example, the dollar index was 85.01 when Clinton took over from the first Bush in January 1991. When Clinton left office and Bush entered office in January 1999, the dollar index was 94.48. As of April 2008 after over 7 years of Bush, the dollar index is 70.06, a decline of 26%. Under Bush, the Euro has gone from $1.16 U.S. to $1.58 U.S., a decline of 36%.

A family an annual family income of $75K under Clinton had a buying of $65,574, while currently under Bush, the buying power of that same income level is not the $67,237 implied by the tax cut, but $49,755. Those of us living under the Clinton economy, whether or not we liked him, and I didn't, were better off economically.

An additional fact: Clinton took the budget from a 28% deficit relative to the GDP to a 6% surplus. Bush turned the Clinton 6% surplus into a 32% deficit after 7 years. It is difficult to spin this any other way than - and believe me, I've tried - the Clinton economy was preferable to the population at large. And we hardly need to be reminded of the increase in the price of a barrel of oil since 1999, when it was $25/barrel, to now at $117/barrel.

So giving Bush Kudos for lowering taxes doesn't fly with me. Sorry!

Taseko Mines: Copper Mega-Growth Story, Par Excellence

What I find interesting about the article is that it addresses a copper company being in an excellent position to cash in on the forced march into alternative energy sources, when the bigger story is the alternative energy sources themselves, now having become mandatory for economic survival.

The USA, with a little leadership and foresight, completely lacking in the last 7+ years, could cash in on this obvious world market, but time is getting short and the guy that could change direction on a dime still has 10 months in office. Such a move would create millions of jobs at home at the expense of our enemies in the Middle East. Borrowing money from China to buy oil is just plain madness. If that money were pumped into CIGS (Copper indium gallium serenade, also see CIS), tidal energy capture, wind, geothermal, yes even nuclear power plants, at least for the time being, we could compete in world markets. If the US doesn't take the lead in this technology soon, we will be left at the station by Germany, Japan and others. C'mon Bush, get with it, pal! Whose side are you on?

Taseko Mines: Copper Mega-Growth Story, Par Excellence

I wanted to read the comments, before making a comment, but alas they are nowhere to be found.

What I find interesting about the article is that it is about a copper company being in an excellent position to cash in on the forced march into alternative energy sources, when the bigger story is the alternative energy sources themselves, which have become mandatory for economic survival.

The USA, with a little leadership and foresight, completely lacking in the last 7+ years could cash in on this obvious world market. Such a move would create millions of jobs at home at the expense of our enemies in the Middle East. Borrowing money from China to buy oil is just plain madness. If that money were pumped into CIGS (Copper indium gallium selenide, also see CIS), tidal energy capture, wind, geothermal, yes even nuclear power plants, at least for the time being. If the US doesn't take the lead in this technology soon, we will be left at the station by Germany, Japan and others. C'mon Bush, get with it, pal! Whose side are you on?