It Really is Bush's Fault

Discussion in 'Politics' started by SwingVoter, Feb 7, 2010.

  1. SwingVoter
    Offline

    SwingVoter VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,246
    Thanks Received:
    123
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Richmond, Virginia
    Ratings:
    +129
    just looking at some budget data

    8 years under Clinton - gov't receipts rose from 1.2 trillion to 2 trillion, 8 years under Bush, just 2 to 2.1

    8 years under Clinton - spending rose from 1.4t to 1.9 trillion, under Bush 1.9 trillion to 3.4 trillion

    8 years under Clinton - 20 million jobs created in the private sector, 1.5 million in all government sectors, under Bush, 600,000 jobs created in the private sector, 2 million in government

    moreover, Clinton's 93 tax increase was followed by a huge economic expansion, Bush's 2001 tax cuts were followed by job losses, and then very anemic private sector growth from 04 to 07

    so what's the problem if we repeat this with Obama raising taxes, and then GOP Congress blocking spending bills, divided government and constant fighting on the Hill led to great economic results in the 90s, because it made government impotent and inactive, while taking it out of the business of borrowing massively, think how much worse off we'd be if we were carrying another trillion or two of debt from the 90s

    GOP limits government by blocking Dem spending bills, not by actually running government, and as long as they keep promising to cut taxes while not cutting medicare, pensions, defense, or social security, best to keep them out of the White House, but well represented in Coingress
     
  2. RetiredGySgt
    Offline

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,599
    Thanks Received:
    5,914
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +9,030
    Clinton's Tax increases did not create a single Job, that occurred after the Republicans took over Congress and CUT taxes. Further Clinton did not save a dime, the Republicans in Congress did that.

    By the way, dumb ass, President's do not create jobs unless they hire more people in the Government. Their actions and words CAN cause jobs to be lost though.
     
  3. SwingVoter
    Offline

    SwingVoter VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,246
    Thanks Received:
    123
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Richmond, Virginia
    Ratings:
    +129
    which is what Bush did, while blowing up the budget with Medicare Drug, and crushing small business with Sarbanes-Oxley

    Clinton eliminated 270,000 fed positions, one reason why spending grew much more slowly than it did under borrow-and-spend Socialist Bush

    also 5.5 million jobs created, virtually all in private sector, in 93-94 as tax increases were enacted
     
  4. SwingVoter
    Offline

    SwingVoter VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,246
    Thanks Received:
    123
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Richmond, Virginia
    Ratings:
    +129
    you need a history lesson old man

    Republicans did not cut income taxes at any point during Clinton's presidency, only capital gains in his 2nd term, after 10 million private sector jobs had been added since his tax increase had gone into effect
     
  5. Truthmatters
    Offline

    Truthmatters BANNED

    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Messages:
    80,182
    Thanks Received:
    2,223
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +2,233
    The 1993 budget reduction act is credited by the CBO with creating the major share of the deficit reductions of the 1990s.

    That bill was written by a dem majority congress and passed without one single R vote.
     
  6. SwingVoter
    Offline

    SwingVoter VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,246
    Thanks Received:
    123
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Richmond, Virginia
    Ratings:
    +129
    Clinton econ advisor Laura D'Andrea Tyson created a fury when she said the performance of the economy does not depend on level of taxation. But she was right. As long as you don't go crazy with 60% marginal rates, very little evidence to show higher taxes on high earners do anything but reduce deficits.

    At the same time, capital gains tax increases have not shown to have the same effect as increases on salaried income, and state governments that raise taxes aggressively just send revenue to other states as people move away.
     
  7. MIPS
    Offline

    MIPS Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2010
    Messages:
    963
    Thanks Received:
    156
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +156
    President Clinton presided over an inflationary economic bubble which popped right after he left office, President Bush presided over an inflationary economic bubble which popped right before he left office. Neither of these Presidents deserve credit for any sort of economic achievement, although both were accessories to the government interventions that caused the post bubble economic pain neither is singularly responsible for it.

    If you want to find the most culpable culprit you need to look in the halls of the Federal Reserve not the Oval Office in the White House, since the Federal Reserve has far more power when it comes to influencing the state of the economy than the President does.
     
  8. Truthmatters
    Offline

    Truthmatters BANNED

    Joined:
    May 10, 2007
    Messages:
    80,182
    Thanks Received:
    2,223
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +2,233
    There is going to be recessions in any eocnomy.

    You can not avoid them in a caplitalistic state.

    The economy expands and contracts.

    The idea is to make it a more shallow expansion and contraction so that people are not distroyed every couple of years.

    That can be done with regulation.

    Every time we deregulate we get fucked.
     
  9. SwingVoter
    Offline

    SwingVoter VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,246
    Thanks Received:
    123
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Richmond, Virginia
    Ratings:
    +129
    the economy added as many jobs in 93-94 when Greenspan was raising rates 50 points a clip, as it did in 97-98 when he was cutting them because of the Asian Contagion

    I know the Paul-heads go Cuckoo for Cocoa Puffs anytime the Fed, Greenspan, or Bernanke get mentioned, but the Fed isn't really the problem, massive borrowing created by President and Congress is
     
  10. SwingVoter
    Offline

    SwingVoter VIP Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2008
    Messages:
    1,246
    Thanks Received:
    123
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Richmond, Virginia
    Ratings:
    +129
    I agree if that regulation is a mandatory balanced budget in any year in which GDP growth is positive
     

Share This Page