Let's talk about replacing GWBush in 2004.

Brand X, It seems to me that these financial pundits have been predicting job increases for over a year now, but from all indications, we've not seen a steady growth in jobs. Here's a MONEY article from today's financial news.
********
"Job cut announcements drop

Planned cuts fell 34% in February but businesses still cautious about hiring.
March 2, 2004: 11:38 AM EST



NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Job cuts planned by big corporations fell 34 percent last month from January but businesses remain cautious about hiring, an outplacement firm reported Tuesday.

U.S. businesses announced 77,250 job cuts in February, down from 117,556 in January, according to Chicago-based Challenger, Gray & Christmas, which keeps track of monthly job-cut announcements.


February's announcements were about 44 percent lower than those of February 2003, when 138,177 cuts were announced.

Employers have announced 194,806 job cuts so far this year, 28 percent fewer than in the first two months of 2003, when companies said they were cutting 270,399 jobs, the firm said.
**************
What I read is that job losses dropped by 34 percent last month - not job increased by 34 percent last month.

That was Dick Cheney yesterday on how much worse things would have been if the Democrats had been in instead of Bush.

First of all, Cheney seems to be caught in some sort of weird mental denial/dysfunction since what Kerry (and Edwards) support is a repeal of the 2001 Bush tax cuts (or most of them). So if their policies had been pursued over the last three years that means that the cuts simply never would have happpened at all, not that there would have been big tax increases.

More to the point, did Dick really mean to say that without the President's policies "we would not have had the kind of job growth (i.e., negative job growth) that we've had"?

Who wants to straighten this guy out?

Your post and Cheney's comments are based on if's, and's and but's....no substance...

so, negative job growth (there's a Bushism if I ever heard it ) is no substance - I guess that's correct, if you don't have a job

The direction of his post and Cheney's comments was based on if Kerry had been in office then X would or wouldn't have happened.

And we all know that Kerry cannot save or create jobs.

Yes, yes, those of us with a few firing synapses understand Dick Cheney is either a liar or a moron, just like his marionette, Brand.

Which is it, though? Liar? Moron? Both?

I report, you decide.

Call him anything you want but put "rich and getting richer" in front of it

Or liability.

true, true, true :sad:

All these job statistics are meaningless. Especially that financial times article. It's just a bunch of cryptic, manipulated figures, and most people, including me, just go glassy-eyed after the first two paragraphs. Well, the article that C.I. posted is easily understandable, but when it comes to economic and job data, people are going to hear two completely different stories from Kerry and Bush, and there is no way in hell they are going to have the curiosity to research it, let alone the ability to figure out what these statistics mean. They are going to go by which one of the candidates comes across as more credible, and believable.

Cheney is a rich, liar, and moron - but it's only a matter of degree.

If that were true kickycan, then Bush wouldn't have a rich mans chance in heaven...........

Who's backing the $4.5 million Bush-Cheney '04 ad blitz that hits cable television in 17 states starting tomorrow?

Special interests, of course: the financial industry, real estate developers, electric utilities, oil and gas companies and mining companies. And, according to a report issued today by Public Citizen, corporations are getting billions of dollars in benefits in return from the Bush administration.


--Public Citizen President Joan Claybrook

Public Citizen's report details how Bush has given tax breaks that benefit the finance industry, made it easier for real estate developers to build on wetlands and in the Florida Everglades, reneged on a campaign pledge to regulate carbon dioxide emissions (pleasing the electric utility and mining industries), increased the amount of public land available for oil and gas exploration and coal mining, filled top Interior Department positions with executives from the mining industry, and aided the pharmaceutical industry by pushing pro-industry Medicare drug legislation.

We've got the best government money can buy.

It will be pleasing to see them retired back to the private sector in just 8 short months.

All them special interest groups already made their billions. Why'd they need more?

It's their money...................

Anyway, I think that's the way the argument goes

and Cash and Kerry's...

actually, isn't Hunt and Heinz

I thought it was Haliburton and Bechtel.

One is right the other is left One is using acquired money, the other is acquiring used money

Gotta hand it to him, he picks the best spreads...