Bush's Economy

So, you think things are bad? The Washington Post can tell you just how bad, in glorious, sickening detail:

President Bush has presided over the weakest eight-year span for the U.S. economy in decades, according to an analysis of key data, and economists across the ideological spectrum increasingly view his two terms as a time of little progress on the nation's thorniest fiscal challenges.

Read more 'Economy Made Few Gains in Bush Years' at washingtonpost.com

To paraphrase: for the roughly 70 years or so for which we have data, the "Bush years" are the worst eight years in several categories. Sure, some blame can be placed on factors outside any president's control, but it remains that this president did remarkably little good.

I'd add a prediction, or two:

Four (or eight?) years from now, when we're getting all retrospective on Obama's term(s), if things are good, we'll all say, "And to think, he inherited a recession."

If things go badly, though, or, at least, fail to improve substantially, I don't think anyone will say, "Well, he inherited such a terrible economy to begin with…" Should it turn out badly for President Obama's economy, I suspect it will be blamed on what he did or failed to do, not the preconditions.

Permalink • Posted in: econ, news, politics