Clinton Seeks Vote on Gas Tax Holiday

jr
To clarify, because you may have missed it. The recession ran frmMarch of 2001 to Novemberof 2001 where we officially came out of the recession according to ALL economic measures.

This is why I am saying the tax cuts, not the rebate, but the rate cuts in our tax brackets did not come in to effect until 2002, which is AFTER the recession had already ended....so there is no way possible that the tax cuts could be the reason we came out of the recession of 2001.

I am not saying that the tax cuts did not help keep us above water, later on in 2002 or 2003 or 2004 etc....that, I don't know one way or the other...cause I have not done any kind of analysis on it! :)

care

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_2000s_recession

The Early 2000s recession was felt in mostly Western countries, affecting the European Union mostly during 2000 and 2001 and the United States mostly in 2002 and 2003.
The market rebounded, only to crash once more in the final two quarters of 2002. In the final three quarters of 2003, the market finally rebounded permanently, agreeing with the unemployment statistics that a recession defined in this way would have lasted from 2001 through 2003.
Wikipedia seems to disagree with you...but I'm sure your right. :cool:
 
What is the question, life is short get to the point.


PS the voters spoke, exit polls determined they too thought the gas tax holiday BS, or aka, campaign rhetoric of the worst kind.

its been asked at least twice, quoted probably more, if you can't figure it out by now, then you probably never will
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_2000s_recession

The Early 2000s recession was felt in mostly Western countries, affecting the European Union mostly during 2000 and 2001 and the United States mostly in 2002 and 2003.
The market rebounded, only to crash once more in the final two quarters of 2002. In the final three quarters of 2003, the market finally rebounded permanently, agreeing with the unemployment statistics that a recession defined in this way would have lasted from 2001 through 2003.
Wikipedia seems to disagree with you...but I'm sure your right. :cool:

http://money.cnn.com/2001/11/26/economy/recession/
 
Nice article, that was written in November 2001.

here's one from 2003....
http://www.usatoday.com/money/economy/2003-07-17-recession_x.htm

It's official: 2001 recession only lasted eight months
WASHINGTON (AP) — The committee that puts official dates on U.S. economic expansions and contractions said Thursday that the economy pulled out of recession in November 2001 and since then has been in a recovery phase.
The announcement from the National Bureau of Economic Research's Business Cycle Dating Committee confirmed what many economists have believed: that the economy has resumed growing, albeit slowly.

"At its meeting, the committee determined that a trough in business activity occurred in the U.S. economy in November 2001," the committee said in a statement Thursday.

The committee, which consists of top academic economists, met in Cambridge, Mass., to discuss the issue.

The 2001 recession began in March that year, so today's announcement makes it an eight-month downturn.

The committee said the length of the downturn was "slightly less than average for recessions" in the post World War II period.

cont...
 
A gas tax holiday would be temporary and, in the grand scheme of things, probably ineffective gimmick to help people feel better. What would make a difference is to be able to roll prices back to $1.50 or so for gasoline and diesel but that won't happen without increased production and refining capacity.

But having said that, I am NEVER opposed to the government taking less of my money. I figure if the government can afford to give it back, they didn't need it in the first place.
 

Here this is up to date...this is from wikipedia.

^ http://www.nber.org/cycles/recessions.html, retrieved 8 April 2008
^ Michael J. Mandel (February 23, 2004). Inventing The "Clinton Recession". Business Week Online. Retrieved on 2008-01-09.
^ a b Henderson, Nell (January 22, 2004). Economists Say Recession Started in 2000. The Washington Post.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_2000s_recession"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_2000s_recession
 
How...um, disingenuous...

From your link:

On November 26, 2001, the committee determined that the peak of economic activity had occurred in March of that year. For a discussion of the committee's reasoning and the underlying evidence, see http://www.nber.org/cycles/november2001. The March 2001 peak marked the end of the expansion that began in March 1991, an expansion that lasted exactly 10 years and was the longest in the NBER's chronology. On July 16, 2003, the committee determined that a trough in economic activity occurred in November 2001. The committee's announcement of the trough is at http://www.nber.org/cycles/july2003. The trough marks the end of the recession that began in March 2001. The 2001 recession thus lasted eight months, which is somewhat less than the average duration of recessions since World War II. The postwar average, excluding the 2001 recession, is eleven months.

Looks like your recession started in March, 2001... you know, right after Bush's first hundred days as president, cause psssssssssssssst... Clinton was president for 8 of the 10 years of the expansion THE LONGEST IN HISTORY. So I'm not sure why you even posted that. Or did you think no one would look?

Just sayin'
 
How...um, disingenuous...

From your link:



Looks like your recession started in March, 2001... you know, right after Bush's first hundred days as president, cause psssssssssssssst... Clinton was president for 8 of the 10 years of the expansion THE LONGEST IN HISTORY. So I'm not sure why you even posted that. Or did you think no one would look?

Just sayin'

Psst....your wrong....lmao:rofl:

Using the stock market as an unofficial benchmark, a recession would have begun in March 2000 when the NASDAQ crashed following the collapse of the Dot-com bubble.

Even using your definition of when the recession begun.

Psst....two months in office is hardly enough time to screw up things or if you think he did maybe you could prove policies that he enacted in those first two months to cause the recession. Maybe you should think before you post peanut brain rationalizations.
 
Here this is up to date...this is from wikipedia.

^ http://www.nber.org/cycles/recessions.html, retrieved 8 April 2008
^ Michael J. Mandel (February 23, 2004). Inventing The "Clinton Recession". Business Week Online. Retrieved on 2008-01-09.
^ a b Henderson, Nell (January 22, 2004). Economists Say Recession Started in 2000. The Washington Post.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_2000s_recession"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Early_2000s_recession

you and others don't get to decide when the recession started, the economists in Cambridge do though....it's THEIR job.

NOTE! The Stock Market is NEVER a measure of an economic slowdown, a recession....fyi. ;)

and yes an economic slow down was occurring in the 2000's but it was not a recession because we did not have consecutive LOSSES, we were still have increases, though minor, a slow down....read up on what a recession's measures are.....

care
 
you and others don't get to decide when the recession started, the economists in Cambridge do though....it's THEIR job.

NOTE! The Stock Market is NEVER a measure of an economic slowdown, a recession....fyi. ;)

and yes an economic slow down was occurring in the 2000's but it was not a recession because we did not have consecutive LOSSES, we were still have increases, though minor, a slow down....read up on what a recession's measures are.....

care

There is many different definitions of a recession not a singular one. The traditional definition is two straight quarters of negative economic growth(GDP). Others look at the stock market, jobless claims and other factors. By the traditional definition, we're not in a recession now, but you would have to be an idiot not to believe we are indeed in a recession.
 
are you familiar with the term deficit?

Yep. And the very best way to reduce one is to provide an enviroment in which the economy can best flourish. Increased revenues from a booming economy plus reduced spending or holding at current levels works every time it is tried. It is unfortunate that our government has not tried it, in the last sixty years or so anyway.

And no the Clinton Administration/GOP Congress of the last 1990's did not accomplish this. On paper they showed a balanced budget and a surplus, but that national debt meter kept running just as before. It slowed for a bit for a couple of years, but it never stopped.
 
Yep. And the very best way to reduce one is to provide an enviroment in which the economy can best flourish. Increased revenues from a booming economy plus reduced spending or holding at current levels works every time it is tried. It is unfortunate that our government has not tried it, in the last sixty years or so anyway.

And no the Clinton Administration/GOP Congress of the last 1990's did not accomplish this. On paper they showed a balanced budget and a surplus, but that national debt meter kept running just as before. It slowed for a bit for a couple of years, but it never stopped.

sweet...and i suppose G.W.'s current plan is of course working terrifically well.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

thanks for coming out...:cool:
 
Actually it did until OPEC started dickering with the oil supply and unscrupulous lenders screwed up the housing industry, all temporary setbacks unrelated to anything in G.W.'s economic policies.

Otherwise we have all benefited from the tax relief we were afforded and the economy has boomed with unpredented revenues going into the national treasury. Had the government--your and my elected representatives--held the line on spending, there would be little or no deficit at all even with the horrendous costs of the war in Afghanistan and Iraq.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top