Bush Acknowledges The Collapsing Us Economy

[Harry Sacks]

Bush acknowledges the collapsing US economy

The US administration aims to spend $286 billion on the development of the American transport system

US President George W. Bush released a remarkable statement a short time ago. The remark has not been highlighted in the world media yet, although there is every reason to do so. Bush virtually acknowledged that the USA was experiencing a serious economic crisis. Moreover, the US government was taking immense efforts to avoid a massive outbreak of social uneasiness, the American president believes.

One may come to this conclusion from the newly-signed law about the development of the US transport system. The implementation of the law will cost tax-payers too much money. The US government plans to spend $286 billion on the implementation of the law during the forthcoming six years. Furthermore, Bush had to cut the costs of the law, which originally made up $400 billion. The US Treasury, however, will have to spend only $12.3 billion during ten years to guarantee the energy security and independence within the scope of the recently passed energy policy law. NASA's annual budget makes up $16 billion. Therefore, the sum of $400 billion makes a huge sum of money even from the point of view of American financial standards.

Passing such highly expensive laws is usually accompanied with heated debate, numerous changes and so on and so forth. This time, however, a bill was transformed into a law a lot earlier than usual. As it was supposed, 24 billion dollars were supposed to be used for governmental subsidies to the states, which will be fulfilling the projects of the law. Adversaries of the law said that congressmen and senators would most likely spend the money inappropriately, trying to insinuate their electorate. In addition, many protest against the unwillingness of the US Congress to control the state spending at the moment, when the budgetary shortage is to exceed the record-breaking $333 during the current year.

The law envisages 6,300 special projects in all states: bridges, highways, landscape accomplishment, snowmobile tracks, etc. Is it all so bad with the US infrastructure? George W. Bush released the key statement, which dotted all i's at this point: the law is meant to generate more jobs and give an incentive to the economic development of the USA.

The triumphant leader of the world's strongest superpower would never utter such words. The above-mentioned statements from the American president do not characterize the USA as a great empire. Quite on the contrary, the White House is desperately looking for measures to find employment for crowds of unemployed American citizens and hungry migrants, which threaten to enrage the rest of the States.

There were 9.3 million unemployed American citizens registered in the USA in 2004. The foreign trade shortage of the USA made up $617.73 billion in 2004, which became the record-breaking index for the USA. To crown it all, the US state debt reached unimaginable $7.22 trillion in 2004 too.

All optimistic reports about the rising US economy carry the short-term efficiency only - they are presumably destined to save the demising US dollar. Quarterly changes in the number of the unemployed by 100-200 thousand people do not change the general situation.

The USA has already faced such hard periods in its history. Taking a look back at the previous experience of the USA and estimating the new initiative of the American government, one may thus infer that the law about the transport system is like the last glimmer of hope for the US administration to keep the nation under control.

When massive unemployment put the USA on the brink of survival during the Great Depression of the thirties, the government started funding the development of the transport infrastructure - it became the only way out of the crisis. Highways, on which the government spent billions and billions of dollars, rescued the entire nation. It is worth mentioning that the value of the US dollar used to be lower during that time.

Here is another example, which bears some similarity to the present-day USA. When Adolf Hitler came to power in 1933, Germany was suffering from massive unemployment and helpless economy. Hitler mobilized thousands of the unemployed to build autobahns, which Germany is proud of still. The road construction gave a very powerful impetus to the revival of the German industry. Huge state investments triggered the industrial development, and Germany turned into one of the strongest European superpowers.

The White House is going along the same path now. However, there is a certain aspect, which distinguishes the USA from the above-mentioned examples. Both Hitler's Germany and the USA of the Great Depression period were raising their economies up from the bottom. Nowadays, the USA enjoys the peak of its triumphant development, which is currently being damaged with the flaws of the American economic system. The USA obviously has something to lose.

http://english.pravda.ru/world/20/91/368/15972_economy.html

[paying_some_b*stards_mortgage]

Hmmm, interesting but I'm not sure that "Pravda" is exactly impartial - you capitalist lap-dogs...

[sp1]

More fule to the GBP longs against USD.

Coil that spring as far as the crowd will take it.....

Work it baby work it!

Patiently the realities will be pricied in but tby that time there will be so much emotion and ego invest in the participants with GBP longs that when they finally feel the owrold has turned upside down its a new reality then they'wll sell thier GBP at the bottom fueling fires of thier losses when the USD fundamentals come home to roost.

Just my current view.

[Once in a lifetime]

US President George W. Bush released a remarkable statement a short time ago.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Iran here we come..!

[homeless]

the usa is gonna keep upping they intrest rates to hold it all together.

expect to see 10% rates in the usa before 2 years is out, all to prop up the dollar

[Karen]

I might be an American, but I hate Bush as much anyone else with 2 brain cells.

GWB admiting anything negative before he has no choice does not sound like him.

How reputable is English Pravda?

[Harry Sacks]

I might be an American, but I hate Bush as much anyone else with 2 brain cells.

GWB admiting anything negative before he has no choice does not sound like him.

How reputable is English Pravda?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

PRAVDA (MOSCOW, U.S.S.R.)

The Past. Pravda ("Truth") began as an underground paper in St. Petersburg in 1912. Lenin was one of the founders, and he and his associates were often forced into hiding in order to continue publication.

During the Revolution, when Lenin was in Zurich trying to get back into Russia, the paper printed morale-building editorials, one of which contained the Marx-inspired words, "Proletarians of all countries, unite."

Among Pravda's early editors were world-famous communist leaders--Stalin, Beria, Shepilov, Molotov. Stalin said, "The press is the only instrument whereby the party can speak daily and hourly with the workers in its own language."

In 1945, David Zaslavsky, a Ukrainian called "the poor man's Shaw," was editor of the paper. He began an anti-American campaign in which he said that American freedom of the press was nothing but a capitalist string. "If the string is long . . . freedom . . . is relatively great; if short . . . negligible. Hearst, for instance, sometimes unchains his pet hoodlums . . . to freely assault the Soviet people." He further said that the Russian newsman was "free because he is immune to outside pressure . . . an official worker who gets wages but . . . does not sell himself." He also attacked Clare Boothe Luce, calling her the "political widow of Goebbels" and "full of hysterical Fascist fulminations." He said, "This honorable dame does not love us. She hates us with Africa, rather than American, passion."

During the Khrushchev era, Pavel A. Satyukov was editor. When that regime fell from power, Alexei Rumyantsev took over for a brief time during which he wrote editorials urging freedom of thought for intellectuals. Mikhail Zimyanin, who replaced him, took a harder line.

The Present. By American standards, Pravda is small, often running only 6 pages. It portrays the Soviet regime as fighting for "a scientific approach to the management of the economy, for an improvement in the farms and methods of economic construction, and for raising the level of party and state discipline and of each official's personal responsibility for his job."

It has a large circulation, somewhere around 8 million, and prints editions in 30 plants around the country. Matrices are sent by air to these plants to ensure fast delivery of the news to far-flung districts. The House of Pravda, which also prints other papers and magazines including the famous humor magazine Krokodil, owns schools, a Palace of Culture, and apartment houses.

The number-one paper in the Soviet Union, Pravda is restrained and never sensational. It is noted for its special articles on cultural subjects, science, and literature. Letters from readers--about 1,000 a day--seem to be carrying more open complaints about shoddy consumer goods, public wrongs, difficulties with bureaucracy. The masses are loyal to Pravda, partly because the paper often prints material written by factory workers, farmers, and soldiers.

Pravda is managed by an editorial collegium named by the presidium of the Communist party. Its editor is usually an individual high in the party. The staff is large, the majority well educated.

[Harry Sacks]

I might be an American, but I hate Bush as much anyone else with 2 brain cells.

GWB admiting anything negative before he has no choice does not sound like him.

How reputable is English Pravda?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hey Karen,

I think they're fairly impartial, read this and decide for yourself

http://english.pravda.ru/mailbox/22/101/399/15983_Iran.html

[Elizabeth]

Bush acknowledges the collapsing US economy

The US administration aims to spend $286 billion on the development of the American transport system

US President George W. Bush released a remarkable statement a short time ago. The remark has not been highlighted in the world media yet, although there is every reason to do so. Bush virtually acknowledged that the USA was experiencing a serious economic crisis. Moreover, the US government was taking immense efforts to avoid a massive outbreak of social uneasiness, the American president believes.

...

http://english.pravda.ru/world/20/91/368/15972_economy.html

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

This is so totally weird. Has bush become a neo-socialist or something? First there is the protectionism which is distinctly against the grain of free market capitalism, and then there is FDR style new deal activity? What is going on? Next he will be introducing universal health care!

[whiterabbit]

the usa is gonna keep upping they intrest rates to hold it all together.

expect to see 10% rates in the usa before 2 years is out, all to prop up the dollar

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No way 10% although I wish they would. What's interesting is although short trem rates are up in the US long term ones aren't as can be seen by the fact you can still get a very low fixed rate mortgage in $$$. Obviuosly the banks think rates will not go up too high for very long.

[Yankee]

That law wasn't passed to create jobs for unemployed Americans. It was passed to fill the pockets of special interests.

What we need in America is more mass transit and smart growth planning.

That Pravda article was totally weird.

[Withnail]

That law wasn't passed to create jobs for unemployed Americans. It was passed to fill the pockets of special interests.

What we need in America is more mass transit and smart growth planning.

That Pravda article was totally weird. 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Agreed. The last thing America needs to do is to try and prop up the crumbling interstate system.

That was a 20th Century paradigm and we're now in a different (and in some ways much worse) era.

[sp1]

Be careful. While i know nothing of pravada . It reminds me of the potential that it may be one of soros and co funden media out fits. Sure his open societies are alurtisan but with american and market axpansionism at the core of one of thier motives...