"Remember, as far as anyone knows, we're a nice normal family." - Homer Simpson

Street Signs





Street Traffic


Campaign Analysts

Media Sources

Multimedia Powers

Progressive Sources

Debate Forums

Blog Compilers

Search Tools



Street Regulars

Regarding Members
Of Our Team Effort


Current members are listed above. But many contributed before, some now blogging giants and some who blog no more.

Asterisks* throughout the sidebars denote the full roster of our talented team, past and present.

In the category below are those whose blogs are defunct, or blog extremely rarely, or who never had their own blog at all.

But it is a partial list, as all other past members are categorized by region, topic or both, elsewhere in these sidebars.

Previous Members

Community Blogs

NY-DC Power Corridor

Northeast Patriots

Middle Movers

Western Pioneers

Southern Progress

Election Specialists

Mass Media News And Critique

Technical & Design For Our Website

Geo Visitors Map

Side Streets




Donate via PayPal
Your support keeps us
going and we thank you
for your generosity.

******************

A Liberal Network


The Economy

Today's Bush Tax


Energy Sense

The Middle East

Global Outlook

Foe Fighters

Wits & Giggles

Legal Experts

Human Equality

Cultural Literacy

Left, Actually

Science & Health

Environmentalists

Educating Well

Belief & Philosophy




May 11, 2008

The Neoconomy: can a Democratic president really untangle this mess?

Not if the statistical measures used by our government continue to be bent to make direct comparison impossible. From the Libertarian Ayn Rand, we got Objectivism, which I prefer to call ‘Capitalism Gone Wild.’ Ronald Reagan defeated Carter by using a Misery Index Carter himself had highlighted in 1976, which measured inflation and unemployment, combined.

The table below comes from Wikipedia, showing how presidents have fared in these economic metrics, but the ratings (based on their index average) are simply, wrong.


Index = Unemployment rate + Inflation rate
Rank President Time Period Index Average Low High
5 Harry Truman 19481952 7.87 Dec 1952 = 3.45 Jan 1948 = 13.63
1 Dwight D. Eisenhower 19531960 6.26 Jul 1953 = 2.97 Apr 1958 = 10.98
3 John F. Kennedy 19611962 7.27 Jul 1962 = 6.40 Jul 1961 = 8.38
2 Lyndon B. Johnson 19631968 6.78 Nov 1965 = 5.70 Jul 1968 = 8.19
7 Richard Nixon 19691973 9.98 Jan 1968 = 7.80 Dec 1973 = 13.61
10 Gerald Ford 19741976 15.93 Dec 1976 = 12.66 Jan 1975 = 19.90
11 Jimmy Carter 19771980 16.27 Apr 1978 = 12.60 Jun 1980 = 21.98
9 Ronald Reagan 19811988 12.19 Dec 1986 = 7.70 Sep 1981 = 19.33
8 George H. W. Bush 19891992 10.68 Sep 1989 = 9.64 Nov 1990 = 12.47
4 Bill Clinton 19932000 7.80 Apr 1998 = 5.74 Jan 1993 = 10.56
6 George W. Bush 2001 - Mar 2008 8.01 Oct 2006 = 5.71 Sep 2005 = 9.79

Why are they wrong? Because, as the Wikipedia entry noted “The data for the misery index is obtained from unemployment data obtained from the U.S. Department of Labor and Inflation Rate from Financial Trend Forecaster. The exact methods used for measuring unemployment and inflation have changed over time.

More accurately, the measurements have been changed - purportedly to advance accuracy - yet in practical terms, it’s helped to hide the bad news. For example, longterm unemployed people no longer get calculated into the unemployment statistic. As a result, these changes, most of them occurring from Reagan on, can’t be compared directly to the older numbers. This is consistent with the basic Reagan philosophy of Feelgoodism. In application, it means that if we pat each other on the back and say “Everything’s great” enough times, we’ll feel better, despite the fact that things are getting economically suckier.

Don’t misunderstand: the economic advances of the 1990s were real, compared to other presidential terms from 1980 to the present. But they weren’t as great as many thought. They represent only the first period since about 1972 when wages slightly exceeded inflation, using the pre-1980 measurements.

A big part of the misery highs Ford and Carter experienced came from the impact of the recently ended Vietnam War plus the creation of OPEC. Energy costs - not labor - have been the major driver of inflation since. And the most effective control on those costs was the Carter decision to sell AWACs to Saudi Arabia. By improving their defense systems, a strengthened alliance was created and the Saudis have responded by being the major moderating influence on global oil prices since.

9-11 changed that, even more than the global demand for oil driven by the growth of the economies of China and India. Not only did the Saudis sense the alliance was fraying -for good reason because of the terrorists they spawned and funded - but once Bush decided to go after Iraq (which had no ties to 9-11 except in Bush propaganda), that’s when the oil prices spiked up considerably.

Even in the early days of that conflict, the Saudis mouthed good intentions that haven’t been delivered. They’d reassure us prices would hold or drop to $40/bbl, then $50, then $60, before they quit the pretense entirely and raked in all the profits instead. No matter how many times Bush has kissed the Saudis and held their hands, they really haven’t been Bush’s best friends at all. And is it such a wonder?

Bush helped increase Iran’s influence and brought a revival to Shia power, a chief regional competitor with most of the Middle East, which is Sunni. (And for novices, Hezbollah and Hamas are Shia terror orgs, while Al Qaeda is Sunni). Clearly, our national interests aren’t served enhancing either side of that divide. It’s better to advance secularism in Middle East governments, more than democracy or Bush’s preference of puppetocracy.

Meanwhile, back at the Misery Index, the bad economic news continues to be hidden. Kevin Phillips has a new book out, an article in the May issue of Harper’s, and provided a taste at the Huffington Post three days ago.