Ground Floor: The fine art of statistical spinning was used by both George W Bush and John Kerry last week to underline their economic views when the August non-farm payroll figures were published.
This rollercoaster set of numbers showed that jobs rose by 144,000 in August while the unemployment rate fell to 5.4 per cent. The increase in jobs was the biggest since May and the unemployment rate is at its lowest in almost 3 years.
So it was hardly surprising that George W was gung-ho about his policies, telling the party faithful that the economy was "strong and getting stronger".
Kerry, on the other hand, was quick to point out that the number wasn't strong enough and that Bush had fallen short of his predictions for job gains because, although the US has created 1.4 million jobs this year, the employment figures still show a net loss of around a million since Bush took office.
However, the markets don't care much once jobs were created and company chief executives are reporting a greater sense of optimism about the US economy.
The Business Roundtable (an association of chief executives) published a survey in which 89 per cent of the executives polled anticipated sales increases over the next six months, with only 9 per cent expecting no change and a mere 3 per cent thinking that they'd decrease.
Some 49 per cent of the executives expected to increase capital spending and 40 per cent thought that they'd also hire more staff. On average, they expected GDP growth to be 3.4 per cent for the year as a whole and the overall thrust of the report was that they viewed the economy as fundamentally healthy.
Their economic outlook index increased from 95.6 in the last survey carried out in June to 101.7 now. Most of the increase has been in service producing industries, something which has been more and more prevalent in Western economies over the past number of years but, at the same time, the increase in manufacturing jobs (22,000) was the biggest since May.
All of this is heady stuff for the Bush campaign, where defensiveness over past poor performance has given way to bullishness about the future. It looks rather like the Democrats might once again lose an election that they could have won simply because the Republicans can spin the numbers so much better.
And if things weren't difficult enough for Kerry, Bill Clinton's hospitalisation for heart surgery hasn't helped. Say what you will about Bill, but he has the ability to work a crowd in a way that Kerry simply can't.
My feelings towards Clinton, the man, are somewhat less positive than towards the Clinton presidency, but I was at his recent book signing in Eason on O'Connell street, where he managed to charm the crowd despite the conveyor-like proceedings of the signing. Somehow I can't imagine the same number of people turning up for a Bush event - certainly not in the numbers that justified Eason closing the doors to shoppers for the duration of the signing.
Clearly management felt that the coup of bringing the ex-president to the store, and the profit from the sale of the book (which was very competitively priced at €30 against a sterling cover price of £25 - an implied rate of €0.83), would be worth it. Estimates of the numbers in the queue varied, but 1,000 people would have grossed €30,000 for Eason, which would seem like a good mornings work.
But while the Americans debate the merits of Bush versus Kerry on the economic front, the European Commission has finally called for a relaxation of the 3 per cent of GDP deficit limits. EU Monetary Affairs Commissioner Joaquin Almunia has proposed adapting guidelines to each country's economic circumstances.
Hardly rocket science but, in the bureaucratic halls of Brussels, certainly a change in the rigid mindset that has guided European monetary policy.
Of course, the budgetary rules seemed sensible in the early 1990s but now they are unsuitable and restrictive - not to mention unworkable since not only France and Germany but also Italy, the Netherlands, Greece and Portugal all look set to exceed the limits for 2004.
Meanwhile, there have been further changes in France, with the charismatic Nicolas Sarkozy (the man who made loans tax deductible) resigning from his finance portfolio to have a tilt at the leadership.
Mr Sarkozy (48) has suggested that President Chirac should make way for a younger man - and that younger man is, of course, himself.
The Americans have to love him. He has publicly stated that France's precious 35-hour working week is putting a huge strain on the economy, reckoning that it costs the government and business approximately €16 billion a year as well as leaving the economy much less flexible than its competitors.
Mr Sarkozy believes that if people want to work more than 35 hours a week they should be allowed to do so. While I certainly don't think we should all be falling under the wheels of 40-, 50- or 60-hour weeks (and I know many people who work them), curtailing the working week in the way of the French has been very damaging for them.
At least Mr Sarkozy has ideas, regardless of whether or not people agree with him. In Germany, once such a dominant European player, ideas are in short supply. Like France, German job creation is low and consumer demand is stagnant.
And how do the mandarins at the European Central Bank (ECB) feel about this? According to ever-hopeful ECB president Jean-Claude Trichet, conditions for recovery remain in place. He's looking for a stronger upswing in 2005.
Oh good, because revised estimates for this year's growth are a fairly benign 2.2 per cent. Just as well Mr Trichet isn't sitting on the board of the US Fed, where they are somewhat concerned that growth has slowed, despite the optimism of the Roundtable executives.
If US economic performance had been as lacklustre as Europe's over the past four years, George W wouldn't even be standing on the podium by now. Voters would long since have booted him out.
