What with all those chads in Florida, and a minority of the popular vote, George Bush may consider himself lucky to have been elected in the first place. But few can envy him the task of economic management that lies ahead, a challenge which may decide the fate of his administration.Mr Bush's team may not quite be "one of the strongest cabinets any president's been able to assemble", as the President-elect proclaimed this week, but it looks competent enough. Unfortunately, neither competence nor the skills of the revered Alan Greenspan at the Federal Reserve may suffice to prevent the world's key economy, and its "consumer of last resort" over the past few years, from sliding into recession.Mr Bush does have one considerable weapon at his disposal, the large US budget surplus, which is projected to increase through the coming decade. Not since the Eisenhower/Kennedy era has an incoming president enjoyed the luxury of deciding how to spend money, rather than how to save it.And with the threat of recession, the business leaders must have argued yesterday, the case for Mr Bush's proposed $1.3 trillion tax cut becomes stronger. Mr Greenspan's deft touch with interest rates is all very well. But, as has been remarked, running an economy by monetary policy alone is rather like driving a car with the brake and accelerator alone.
It's fine when the economy is purring along - but when the engine starts to sputter, the driver is much better off if he has the gears of fiscal policy to use as well.But massive questions remain. Will the projected surpluses that are supposed to finance the tax cuts melt away in an economic downturn? And even if the money is there, should it not be devoted to longer-term projects, such as shoring up social security, instead of providing a quick fix for today? And do counter-cyclical tax cuts actually work as they are supposed to? The future of this precarious Bush restoration will depend on the answers. Bill Clinton, his name for ever attached to the longest period of unbroken growth in US history, may consider himself lucky to be out of it.. We have become accustomed in recent years to the idea that spin is all. None the less, the suggestion that the Dome has been a success is breathtaking, even by modern standards of public impudence.
We have become accustomed in recent years to the idea that spin is all. None the less, the suggestion that the Dome has been a success is breathtaking, even by modern standards of public impudence. Yes, some visitors told market researchers outside the Dome that they had enjoyed themselves. But let's not forget that this unprecedented white elephant cost a fortune, its contents were breathtaking only in their banality and the number of visitors was about half the original prediction. Indeed, for the same outlay, it would have been better to have handed each visitor £15 and sent them home again.It is all very well for the Dome's defenders to bleat about the "record" six million visitors lured to an attraction and to complain about "unrealistic" expectations. But if the break-even point was unrealistic, the Dome should not have been built.
[...]