Just wait till the dems raise taxes and the reverse happens. Who will get credit for that? Typical BS from the biased MSM.

8.4 trillion in debt.

Promissiory notes (stock) on paper beig purchased with fiat money.

Treasuries being bought by Caribbean countries?

MP3 report quashed by "executive order".

80% of the economic sector is now services.

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha .....you guys are a riot!

Did I read that correctly?

"...in almost 52 years as investors welcomed strong earnings, lower oil prices..."

WTF?

The real lesson should be Stop Driving, Start Investing.

Yep, we're on the verge of $4/gallon gas and the Dow is over 13K. Want to guess what percent of the American population is deriving vast amounts of wealth from the Bush/Dow all time record boom? I imagine that yesterday Net Jet flights and all 1st class seats to Europe for summer vacations have been completely sold out to the Middle Class of America, wallowing in their new found Dow wealth.

More than likely it is someone in the top 10% of wealth holders who hold about 70% of all the accumulated wealth in the US.

One thing for sure, the 270,000,000 Americans who are not part of the top 10% are not rolling in this newly created Dow wealth.

Get real.

The MSM is biased toward bad new whether it's economic, military or what have you. The better the economy the harder the MSM works to find the alternate "news" story. I have observed this phenomena regardless of who the President is or what their party affiliation is. I'll concede that the MSM seem to work a bit harder at finding bad news when there's a Republican in the White House.

The MSM defends there actions with the argument that the usual and expected are not news. The problem is that the economy is based to a large degree on "confidence". An unbalanced focuses on bad economic news undermines that confidence, which in turn causes companies and individuals to slow down spending. The result of unbalance negative economic reporting is a downturn in the economy. The MSM is not just reporting the news they are making the news.

The fix is not to muzzle the MSM, but to report their bias and give people easy access to readily understandable economic data so they can put negative news in proper perspective. The web has gone a long way in doing that, but there's much more that could be done.

Mac Lorry -

The worse the news, the more eyeballs on the news stations, therefore the better the ratings get. Nice little feedback loop there, with a bias towards the bad...

Weider snarked, "... the Middle Class of America, wallowing in their new found Dow wealth."

One could make EXACTLY the same observation about the 90's Internet stock bubble, which saw the Dow jump from 4000 to 11,000 (nearly 150% gain) in under five years.

But the MSM and the chattering classes DID NOT lament the fact that Internet bubble largely made only the rich into the mega-rich.

That's the point that Paul is making in his post.

I'm happy. I slapped my 401k into the index fund back in February. I gained $3000 this month.

"The Economy" and "The Stock Market" are two separate topics, Paul. You'll note that the media doesn't report on the economy in the same story in which they report on the Super Bowl either.

I see stories reporting on the strong economy every day. The fact that the economy isn't mentioned in this story about the stock market means nothing. This story, all four paragraphs, is just a statistical report on the indexes and their changes.

>"The Economy" and "The Stock Market" are two separate topics, Paul.

Then how come Clinton got so much praise in the 1990s???? For both!

EVERY bit of good news during the 1990s was credited to Clinton personally. Now every bit of good news is either (as you yourself noted) limited to 4 bland paragraphs OR they give 3 paragraphs on the good news and 5 on why it might turn south.

If you don't see the double standard, I'm afraid you're self deluded.

Despite the underlying message in many news stories, the U.S. economy is not the stock market and the stock market is not the U.S. economy. The stock market is based to a large degree on confidence in the U.S. economy, and this confidence is among traders, rather than average folks. Yes, most working Americans are invested in the stock market to some degree through their retirement plans, but the don't panic on a daily basis as many traders do.

When large numbers of traders panicked in the early 90's and started selling out their positions the U.S. economy stayed on course. Then as working people kept putting billions of dollars into the stock market every payday as part of their retirement plans the traders' greed overcame their fear and the stock market was brought back to normal in quick order.

The IRA and 401K plans were one of the best things Congress has ever done to stabilize the U.S. economy. It made the majority of investors truly long term investors rather than flittery traders trying to make a quick buck on any ripple in the market; ripples often caused by unbalanced reporting of the MSM. I've come to believe that anything that reduces the influence of the MSM is good news.

Um try thats because Bush is basically almost distroyed are economy with The Iraq War? (Like 500 billions and counting I heard). If stock's are doing good or wahtever thats IN SPITE Of Bush not on account of him. Plus who does that help the fat cats or the little guy who needs heathcare. Or do you guy's not even care.

Great news for those of us with lots of money in blue chip stocks! (that's the only economic indicator that matters anyway.)

The post brought out the fact that all of the liberal posters on here are in fact sucking the tit of welfare or too stupid to have a retirement account and count on welfare when they get old.

I know a lot of people that have worked all of their lives at manual labor jobs and have their retirment accounts in the stock market. As a fact all of them have their accounts in the stock market. Some relatives that work 'manual' labor jobs have had their retirement accounts in the stock market for over 20 years and are now worth millions when they retire. They can and will retire without the benefit of tax payer provided welfare.
I also know a few suckers (democrats) that listened to Algore-abge in the mid 90's and bought WorldCom. They had to start over on they're retirement accounts in 2001 and/or get ready to go on welfare when they retire.
Stick a couple hundred a month in the market (tax free as 401's etc) for 25 years, even in mutual funds, and a working person can end up without worry in their 'old' age. The medicare prescription plan removed the one remaining thing that we had to worry about taking all of our retirement money, prescription drug prices. Plan people, like it or not even the dumb a** democrats will get old, that is if they don't get themselves and us all killed by surrendering to the Islamic religion of murder.

Paul

I am afraid it is you whom is deluded. Administrations are partly responsible for the handling of the economy, through economic and fiscal policy.

Sure enough, the Dow is heading towards the stars, but that is not the be all and end all! The dollar is weak, the housing market is getting weaker and economic data is pointing towards meltdown anytime soon! Continue to castigate the MSM as you call it, but mainstream media calls it as it is unlike the blogs who "report and comment" and I use these terms loosely on what they want to report. For instance when commenting on Iraq, blogs question the media's reportage on the atrocities and killings and neglect to report or show footage of so called "progress" that is for example, the opening of a new school in a Baghdad suburb!

The mainstream media concentrates on the big picture, sure they make mistakes, who doesn't? But blogs concentrate on the minutae and in doing so, loose sight of the big picture.

Enjoy the Dow's move for now, but dont come crying and start blaming the media and democrats when it all goes pear shaped!

Paul, apparently the lefties, AGAIN, did not get the point of your post. Pathetic. ww

Dear Iraqwarwrong,
Intelligence and wealth are not correlated but an intelligent man of modest means has the privilege of investing some of his money in a mutual fund and can experience some accumulation of returns he would not realize spending it needlessly or keeping his principle in a bank account. It doesn't take much effort at all to do this. He too may become a fat cat one day with enough intelligence, initiative and, yes, luck. But luck favors those looking for it. I am one of those of modest means and I am so tired of folks like yourself reflexively demonizing someone because he/she is wealthy.

DaveD & Paul, your wasting your breath. The only way these trolls see the economy as being "good" is if Uncle Sugar or their evil coroporate employers gives them more dough. How many take advantage of 401ks or IRAs??? Quit smoking and use the $ to dollar cost average in the market. Don't buy that new car every two years, make it last another 5, put that $ into the market. Want a bigger piece of the pie???? Retrain/go to college and enter a career with greater opportunity.

In the end, no where in the world is the opportunity greater than here, just get off your ass and make it happen. Millions of us have.

>>economic data is pointing towards meltdown anytime soon!

Stronger than expected manufacturing numbers came out yesterday. Housing has cooled, but that's after several years of booming growth. Prices, at least in my area, have dropped only marginally. Also, the middle class is heavily invested in the market through 401Ks and individual investing. The market is not a blue-blood phenomenon the way it was 40 years ago.

Paul: "EVERY bit of good news during the 1990s was credited to Clinton personally. Now every bit of good news is either (as you yourself noted) limited to 4 bland paragraphs OR they give 3 paragraphs on the good news and 5 on why it might turn south."

Giving us a link to a past story about stock market statistics that credits Bill Clinton -- which should be easy since you say "EVERY bit of good news..." -- would go along ways towards bolstering your argument -- but you haven't provided a single link that supports your basis for this slam -- ignoring for the moment that the slam is not justified in this instance anyway because the news report is just statistical news about the stock indexes.

Doesn't everyone remember that this is a 'jobless recovery', the Democrats said so!

The worst economy since Hoobert Heever....

We suck as a nation! We are the bad guys! Our economy is the pits! Doom and Gloom! Pestilance! More socialized medicine! Higher taxes!!!!Surrender to the Islamo-Nazis!!!!

Sincerely,

American Letist
(WE are becomming harder and harder to parody these days)

>>nikkolai

Giant waves crushing New York! Cats and Dogs sleeping together!

nikkolai and John,

Bwhahahahahahahahahahah.......that was hilarious.

I'm just going to skip right over the leftists that actually think economic indicators are pointing for a fall, just one small example: employers are expecting to be hiring more college grads this year as they try to staff up enough to handle their workload - something you don't do when you expect your workload to crash in 6 months. How delusional do you have to be to look at this economy, surging around blue chip industrials and small caps, and see a disaster ready to happen, but were surely glassy-eyed with mystified blissful awe at Clinton's prowess for an economy built on tech startups with business plans thought up by computer programmers that stayed up all night IRC'ing and coding?

What I will do is comment on the thrust of Paul's post: What surprises me isn't that they're not giving Bush credit, but that they're not giving Nancy Pelosi and team credit.

Read newsbusters.org on a daily basis and you will see how all the networks portray the economy. When they have no choice but to relay some of the good news, it's always done with a big "BUT".....every single time!

As Rush says, the democrats just cannot have the american people think anything is going well when they are not in charge.

Yeah Falze,

I was thinking that too. At some point soon I expect that they will stop trying to ignore the fantastic economic recovery and start reporting on how it's all due to the leftist control of congress.

Here was Paul's assertion, Lee, since you seem incapable of reading comphrension:
Every scrap of good news was considered "another sign" Bill Clinton's economy was "robust."

Compare and contrast the tone:
NY Times article date May 3, 1997:

U.S. JOBLESS RATE HITS 23-YEAR LOW
US unemployment rate dropped to 4.9 percent in April, lowest level since December 1973; startling three-tenths of a point decline comes as factories record new peak in overtime hours and economy continues to advance at healthy pace; Pres Clinton hails strongest economy in generation

The current jobless rate is 4.4% - a full half point lower (that means better - for the witless trolls) than the wondrous time at which this piece was written.

Compare the above tone to the following piece:

U.S. Gains 108,000 More Jobs, but Pace of Growth Slows
[snip]
But while economic growth and job creation were robust last year, despite the mammoth destruction of Hurricane Katrina and soaring energy prices, analysts say Mr. Bush's policies played a relatively small role.

www.nytimes.com/2006/01/06/business/06cnd-econ.html?ei=5088&en=c4ba955110ebed94&ex=1294203600&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&pagewanted=print

So, while Clinton 'hailed' the strongest economy in a generation, unnamed 'experts' give unprovided reasons and conclude that Bush has little to do with any current economic success.

KA CHING!!!!!!!

Mike that was awesome. Liberals live in complete and total denial. They have to, or otherwise they would know how completely WRONG they are about everything.

Also, note the more subtle slight from above...

It's President Clinton and Mr. Bush.

Great job, President Bush! I love the tax cuts.

Now if Bush would just say FU to the IRS and enact the FairTax into law...

Oh, wait. That'd throw the bureaucrats at the IRS and all the tax apreparation services and tax accountants out of work. (Up goes unemployment by a full 1%.)

Never mind...

This is teh worst ekkkonomy evah; that's why millions are trying to emigrate here every year from all over the world. We're all dooomed!!

So, while Clinton 'hailed' the strongest economy in a generation, unnamed 'experts' give unprovided reasons and conclude that Bush has little to do with any current economic success.

Nice comparison of incongruent things. Clinton "hailing" the economy simply means he was commenting positively on it. That wasn't the NYT giving him credit for it. Bush has "hailed" many things in Iraq that weren't his doing (and avoided comment on many things that were). All presidents do it.

Poor little Sock Puppet Jo. Sitting there waiting for someone to make a point, then jumping to latch onto it. Only to be left stranded with no original thought of her own when that point is torpedoed.

Who is bitching about the price of gasoline?

When your last super-hero Dem President-[besides Clinton]-Carter was in office we were waiting in line for it.

Your heroes the Europeans-the one's you always want to emulate-what do you think THEY pay for a gallon of gas-? [make that-litre]

You know why you might be paying more?

Would there be environmental impact taxes added?

Would there be a curb on refineries-because of the NIMBY crowd?

How about drilling? Alaska, the Gulf.

On top of complaining about the price of gas you have the audacity to do the no blood for oil chant.

You selfish -liberals. Then you bitch because the President hasn't asked YOU to make any sacrifices for the war effort.

Why not be a self starter in that department and simply STOP BITCHING? Would that be too much to ask?

Finally-what the hell do you think will happen to gas prices and the stability of that market when we pull out of Iraq-according to your schedule or "plan"? Handle that "inheritance" let your new heir apparent Hillary or Obama reap that wind. It's not like you'll give a damn about the loss of life-never bothers you when a Democrat is in charge of The Executive.