[Sparrow_temp]

The economy as a whole had little if anything to do with the Clinton administration during the period of 92-2000. This was totally technological driven. Huge amounts of money were being put into the computer industry and huge amounts were being made on the Internet. There was also the year 2000 problem which forced companies to rewrite millions of lines of code and to purchase all new hardware to be 2000 compliant. Then the internet bubble began to burst after Y2K had passed and the beginning of a recession developed. The economy was no longer booming in 2000.

Clinton was also the beneficiary of the so-called peace dividend so billions of dollars were cut from the military and the Republican congress was curtailing major spending increases so between massive revenue increases due to the booming economy and a reduction of the rate of spending -- the Clinton years were pretty nice but it had little to do with the Clinton agenda such as Hillary Care.

I'm not simply a Republican fan boy -- I think they sold out this country with NAFTA, the immigration policy, and the devaluing of the dollar to help exports. The current economy isn't totally Bush's fault either just like Clinton was responsible for his economy. The 9/11 hit in 2001 took a poor economy and made it 10 times worse. We as a nation had to retaliate by invading Afghanistan. We also had every right to hit Iraq due to the concerns of WMD's, the assassination attempt on Bush's father, the violation of the gulf-war surrender terms, etc. The Iraq sanctions were having no affect due to the corruption of the UN countries and the oil-for-food program. I think the regime in Iraq also had to be changed via a military invasion but everything we've done after that as policy leaves a lot to be desired. The country probably should have just been split up and let a civil war ensue while we just got the hell out. The only thing we really needed was a military base available on both sides of Iran to dissuade them from aiding terrorists in the region and to prevent them from going nuclear.

Originally Posted by simonbs

I totaly agree with you sparrow, that things are going to get worse for the whole country and bring michigan from her knees to face down on the gorund. but as for the dems bringing down the country I do not agree, Michigan had a boom time like never before under the 90s with bill clinton as pres. the whole country did the best it has done since the end of ww2 and that boom.
Bush took us to war and has not once second guessed himself. He in his pea brain knows that he is richard the lion harted and he is taking back the holy land with the help of god. the crusaids revisited.
Now cheney is trying his level best to talk us into a war with iran.
All this when we are getting our lunch handed to us in two other countrys.
Bush could not find his butt with both hands tied behind his back. I only hope we can survive another year of this idiot.

[stock66]

I can't speak to all of Michigan but at least as far as Detroit goes I think the problems run much deeper than whoever is in office at the moment.

[malamute]

Originally Posted by Sparrow_temp

The problem right now is that MI is doing poorly when most of the country is doing well. When the rest of the country begins to do worse -- which will probably be very soon -- 2009 latest -- MI will be in the same condition as it was in the 80's. If the Democrats take control of the Executive branch in 2008 and retain control of Congress -- I predict an outright Depression in MI. Granholm policies or worse applied to the US as a whole is just frightening.

I don't live in Michigan any more -- but how many shops are in a position to re-open and start hiring or calling back the laid-off? When I was there in the 80's, it seemed that the economy was bad but more in suspension, so that it was able to get kick-started again. I wonder if that's the case now.

[joedekock]

Originally Posted by stock66

For those interested here are the gov't employment stats for current and historic highs and lows.
Current Unemployment Rates for States and Historical Highs/Lows
So MI was at a high of 16.9% at a time when the country at large was at 10.8%.
Now MI is at 7.5% while the country is 4.7%.
Those numbers still indicate things were worse then than now.
I just remember at the time the only people I knew with jobs were the ones that had joined the military. I am talking a broad spectrum of people in a variety of professions most of them with college educations.
When I talk to my friends and family back home now they tell me how bad it is but all are still working.
I am not saying it isn't bad, just trying to gain some perspective.

Great point! We must keep things in perspective. If in the good years (even in Bill Clintons economy), unemployment is in the 4% range, we do not hear a peep about unemployment. And that number never seems to dip below 4%. So I figure that 4% are wellfare families and dead beats who do not want to work and play the assistence system. With that said, if you figure we are now at 7.3%, you can realyl figure that only 3% of those who "want" to work are unemployed.

[Reissman]

I lived in WI in the early 80's and I remember it being real bad over there. My mom got laid off and we lost our house. I live in central MI now and have work and am doing well, but for how long? Most people I know that are unemployed are those with no skills. I do HVAC work and have never had a problem getting a job. But I do see a slow down for the other trades.

It seems many people here are looking for the government to do something for them rather than going out and doing something for themselves. I plan on leaving if my house sells mostly because we are sick of winter and some of the attitudes we encounter here.

[TaxBait]

In the 80s you lost your house to high interest rates. Buyers couldn't afford the mortgage. Now you lose it to depreciation. You can't sell it for what you owe.

Falling interest rates and renewed confidence in the economy created a recovery path back then. This time around I don't see any easy fixes. Michigan will have to knuckle down and compete.

Raising taxes on businesses, workers, and homeowners won't help. Blanchard was lucky and got away with it during the last recovery. The State got fat and over-promised future benefits to government employees. Now the bills are due.
I was out west during the Engler administration and all I heard was how stingy he was and how Michigan had been gutted to the bone. Then I came back and saw all the glorious, taxpayer funded monuments to government. Before I left it was modest schools and hole in the wall government offices and ballots weren't filled with hundreds of dollars of feel-good referendum projects. We paid farmers to produce food instead of promising not to develop their land. If Engler was truly so stingy I can't imagine what kind of tax-and-spend utopia MI would have become without him.

[fallingwater]

I found this blog interesting because my mother and I were just rehashing the 80's. I was about 8 yrs old then. I remember my dad going to Texas for work. He left with 8 other guys and they all shared a one bedrm apt. All of them sending most of their paychecks back home. We ended up on welfare and got that free cheese while he was gone. LOL. It was damn good cheese by the way. I was a kid and didnt know much about what was going on. The diff now I think is the real estate market. My mom said she never saw people loose their homes like they do now. I have been laid off 3 times since 9-11. I worked in logistics for over 10 yrs, 9-11 happens..BAM I'm done. I went into retail basically for survival. I figured it was temporary but 4 yrs later, Im still in it. Or was I should say. I actually got laid off from Lowe's Home Improvement! I have exhausted my unemployment. They made me take stupid classes. I had to pay for daycare while going to the classes.

My husband is still working but things are slow and to be honest, its damn scary. I dread Christmas. My husband put his resume on the job websites and gets calls at least once a month from some out of state job. But we have a house we owe too much on and no we didnt do any crazy refinancing, it just lost value. How do I compete with so many foreclosures going for 30 grand less than what I owe? Also how do you move when you are living from paycheck to paycheck?

Also did anyone notice that China is now making cars and wants to sell them in the U.S.? They will be at the Auto show in Jan. A small car will sell for 3 grand. Im sure the quality will be as good as the toys they make but how will the U.S. auto makers compete with cars that cost 3 grand brand new? I think this state is gonna be dead for a long time even if a dem gets in office.

[Bydand]

I think the 3k mark is a bit low for a car made in China. While the labor costs are almost non-existent, the material costs there are very high. Honda makes some vehicles over in China now and the production costs are almost identical to those same models that are produced in Japan right now. Latest figures that I could find give the costs of production at 2% labor and 85% materials for the Hondas. The totally Chinese vehicles I have been able to find that are looking at the US market are the Chery and the Geely. The Chery was hoping to sell 250,000 cars in the US market this year, I have yet to hear of a dealer. (Driving Today: Chery-Chery Bang-Bang (broken link)). They are targeting a price around $20,000

The Geely is is targeting $10,000 or under, but nowhere does it give a $3k price tag for any of the Chinese manufactures. Much of what you find is a couple of years old at best though, so it is hard to think that they could cut the cost to a third of their projections. (China’s Geely makes its mark in Detroit - Autos - MSNBC.com)

[magellan]

Originally Posted by Bydand

I think the 3k mark is a bit low for a car made in China. While the labor costs are almost non-existent, the material costs there are very high. Honda makes some vehicles over in China now and the production costs are almost identical to those same models that are produced in Japan right now. Latest figures that I could find give the costs of production at 2% labor and 85% materials for the Hondas. The totally Chinese vehicles I have been able to find that are looking at the US market are the Chery and the Geely. The Chery was hoping to sell 250,000 cars in the US market this year, I have yet to hear of a dealer. (Driving Today: Chery-Chery Bang-Bang (broken link)). They are targeting a price around $20,000

The Geely is is targeting $10,000 or under, but nowhere does it give a $3k price tag for any of the Chinese manufactures. Much of what you find is a couple of years old at best though, so it is hard to think that they could cut the cost to a third of their projections. (China’s Geely makes its mark in Detroit - Autos - MSNBC.com)

The Chery QQ3 will retail for about $7000:

2008 Chery QQ: Sneak Peak! (http://ezinearticles.com/?2008-Chery-QQ:-Sneak-Peak!&id=101043 - broken link)

http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en-commons/thumb/d/d3/300px-CarCheryQQ.jpg (broken link)

[Bydand]

Originally Posted by magellan

The Chery QQ3 will retail for about $7000:

2008 Chery QQ: Sneak Peak! (http://ezinearticles.com/?2008-Chery-QQ:-Sneak-Peak!&id=101043 - broken link)

http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en-commons/thumb/d/d3/300px-CarCheryQQ.jpg (broken link)

Very nice. I thought that Bricklins vision for Chery was a bit optimistic at first. Selling SUV's that would compete with the offerings of BMW for $20,000 and targeting 250,000 units sold the first full year. Shoot Subaru doesn't sell that many yet I don't think.