The Economic Consequences of Mr. Bush

"The Economic Consequences of Mr. Bush" is the title of an article published in Vanity Fair. It's well worth a read. Here is a taste:

I can hear an irritated counterthrust already. The president has not driven the United States into a recession during his almost seven years in office. Unemployment stands at a respectable 4.6 percent. Well, fine. But the other side of the ledger groans with distress: a tax code that has become hideously biased in favor of the rich; a national debt that will probably have grown 70 percent by the time this president leaves Washington; a swelling cascade of mortgage defaults; a record near-$850 billion trade deficit; oil prices that are higher than they have ever been; and a dollar so weak that for an American to buy a cup of coffee in London or Paris—or even the Yukon—becomes a venture in high finance.

The article does not paint a pretty picture about the ability of a new president to extricate us from G.W.'s mess.

What is required is in some ways simple to describe: it amounts to ceasing our current behavior and doing exactly the opposite. It means not spending money that we don’t have, increasing taxes on the rich, reducing corporate welfare, strengthening the safety net for the less well off, and making greater investment in education, technology, and infrastructure.

These are all things that are unpopular but need to be done whether the next president is a Republican or a Democrat. It will also take a willing Congress. The article goes on to wonder what could have been accomplished in the USA with the probable $2 trillion dollars we have spent on Bush wars. Putting our economy back on track is going to take years.