In Markos's main page entry (
link) about the Think Progress evaluation (
link)of the playbook Frank Luntz is sending out to Republicans (
really big zip file link), Lawnorder had what I think is the right answer to Republicans blaming the economic downturn on 9/11. He/she posted graphs showing that the October 2002 march to war in Iraq sent the stock exchanges into an even deeper tailspin than did 9/11 (
link). Those downward spikes around October 2002 looked familiar to me so I hunted around and found the graph they reminded me of. It was from the Economic Policy Institute's October 25, 2004 snapshot (
link) and shows even more clearly that the inexorable march to war that started in late 2002 interrupted the normal recovery cycle and tanked the economy. Graph on the flip:
This graph shows the employment to population ratio, one of the most reliable indicators of the employment situtation and the overall health of the economy. The zero point of this graph is March 2001, the beginning of the recession. 9/11 comes at the six months point. Notice that although there is a drop after 9/11 (red line) that drop is not totally out of line with what would happen in an average recovery (blue line). Notice that the recession that started in March 2001 closely follows the normal curve, that it had actually already started trending upward before about October 2002, when it suddenly went down and sideways. That down and sideways movement at the 18 months point, that is inconsistent with the average recovery curve, shows what really tanked the economy. It wasn't 9/11 but rather was Bush's insistence on invading Iraq. That march to war interfered with the normal recovery pattern just as the employment to population ratio was beginning to trend upward, and the results are as plain as the nose on your face: