Politics and Policy   Okay, it's always a bit dangerous to try to post any analysis on the stock market, because it often swings pretty widely. That's why I've often thought little of pundits who crow about a short-term swing one way or the other, and indicate that whoever was President at the time somehow gets the credit. But with today's continued fall of the stock market, closing at under 13,000 (12958.44, to be exact), it seemed an appropriate time to consider how wall street has performed generally under various U.S. Presidents. (Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3683270/) It's not that hard to make a rough calculation. I just researched the starting and ending Dow Jones Industrial Averages for the past five Presidents. Here are the results: President Starting Ending Difference Ratio Carter 959.03 950.69 -8.34 -0.87% Reagan 950.69 2,235.36 1,284.67 135.13% Bush I 2,235.36 3,254.03 1,018.67 45.57% Clinton 3,254.03 13,176.79 9,922.76 304.94% Bush II 13,176.79 12,958.44* -218.35 -1.66% *Of course, the ending date for George W. Bush is today's closing numbers, because we have no idea what the closing numbers for the DJIA will be fourteen months from now. A couple of obvious things pop out from such a chart. The first is that the DJIA tripled during the eight years of the Clinton presidence. The second is that only two Presidents had negative numbers - Carter and George W. Bush. Under four years of Carter, the DJIA average lost 0.84% (less than 1%). Under almost seven years of George W. Bush's administration, the loss has been almost twice that amount -1.66%. It seems rather ironic, since the Republicans have long deamonized Carter as being inept at economics. The second thing which pops out of the chart is how well wall street did during the Clinton administration. While Republicans proclaim the "economic miracle" of the Reagon Revolution (DJIA increased 135.13% during his tenure); they seem loath to give any credit to the 304.94% increase in the DJIA during Clinton's Presidency. Of course, defenders of Pres. Bush will argue that his numbers are skewed by the "War on Terror". I think that they are, but in the wrong direction. The economy almost always experiences a surge due to wartime spending, which is usually paid for with borrowed money. WWII, Korea, the Cold War, Vietnam all saw huge economic growth related at least in part to spending for war or defense. And the spending for the current war in Iraq is certainly a large enough volumn that it should push up the numbers above their natural level, at least until the debt has to be paid. But if that is true, then the economy under the Bush administration has even more problems than we realize. Perhaps it is not best to allow a party which proclaims that they hate government, to give them the government to manage? It seems that they can't even do business right, even though they profess that to be their strong suit.   Check out the other “Politics and Policy” Articles (click the link below): Politics and Policy Articles   Sponsors   This store brought to you by George W. Bush - A Village In Texas Buy From Art.com George W. Bush "Bushisms" Buy From Art.com George W. Bush - My Daddy Buy From Art.com George W. Bush - Making the World Safe Buy From Art.com George W. Bush, Rolling S... Buy From Art.com Bushisms- Good Question Buy From Art.com Bushisms- Budget Buy From Art.com Bushisms- Food On Your Family Buy From Art.com Lookit Poppy! Buy From Art.com Chickenhawk Buy From Art.com Dick Cheney Buy From Art.com        Copyright 2006-2007 - Brookridge Associates Inc. All rights reserved.