What happens when you oppose Bu$hCo too vigorously

limerickman

Naw, Bill, - your goverment's statistics show that Clinton's management of your economy was superb.
Enron, MCI - don't figure in your goverment stat's.

Historical low unemployment (3.5%)
Historical budget surplus ($200 billion - leaving office)
Historical trade suplus ($30 billion suprlus of exports/imports).
Strong US currency (trading at parity with Euro and stronger than sterling and Yen).
Historical expansion in GDP/GNP.

__________________
.."But finally the last thing I’ll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the sceptics. I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can’t dream big. [I]I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets" - this is a hard sporting event and hard work wins it - Armstrong 2005 TDF
morelike hypocrisy.

limerickman

................so why has your country got historically high budget deficits now?

And if Liberals like spending, Clinton handed Bush a budget surplus.




....that explains the budget deficit - all those hospitals and schools he's building must be damn expensive.

__________________
.."But finally the last thing I’ll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the sceptics. I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can’t dream big. [I]I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets" - this is a hard sporting event and hard work wins it - Armstrong 2005 TDF
morelike hypocrisy.

darkboong

Then the Republicans took control of both houses and all of those trends reversed. Weirdly we see their supporters claiming that it is the fault of the Democrats, despite the fact the Republicans are in the driving seat... Odd.

__________________
Free Beer !

Durangodave

I disagree with Bill on just about everything.

But, Clinton's economy benefited from an orgy of capital spending on all kinds of tech-bubble speculation. Some was valid, a lot was pure crap. That in turn fueled wild stock speculation (remember the book "Dow 30000."?)

It generated a LOT of revenue for the gov't , but ultimately it was not sustainable. It created lots of throwaway jobs, too.

Clinton got lucky, really. I don't recall him having to prove his good management by navigating any real difficulties.

__________________
"I must (deride me not) be somewhere where I can, without disaster, bicycle." Henry James, 1896

limerickman

As Napoleon said - give me a lucky general, all the time.

Luck plays a part, no doubt.
But Clinton/Gore created a climate in which trade/commerce could expand.
His goverments macro-economic policies allowed the US economy to thrive.

__________________
.."But finally the last thing I’ll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the sceptics. I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can’t dream big. [I]I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets" - this is a hard sporting event and hard work wins it - Armstrong 2005 TDF
morelike hypocrisy.

limerickman

They can try to blame whomever.


What they cannot ignore is that their own goverment stats show that practically every economic indicator has moved from surplus to deficit under this Bush goverment.

__________________
.."But finally the last thing I’ll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the sceptics. I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can’t dream big. [I]I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets" - this is a hard sporting event and hard work wins it - Armstrong 2005 TDF
morelike hypocrisy.

Felt_Rider

I happened to be in an economics class at the end of Clinton's term.
The professor spent the whole semester showing how he was predicting a down turn of the economy because of Clinton.

Disclaimer: I do not profess to be an economics guru and was only a student, but I thought it was interesting while in the class and then seeing how his predictions were coming true after Clinton's term. We were studying primarily from Jude Wanniski's information.

Wanniski Example

As a conservative I have not been content with GW or his staff based on economics. He spends more than most Dems. even without all the hardships America has faced in the last couple of years. (9-11, Katrina and so on)

Durangodave

What economic policy did Clinton actually implement that's markedly different from Bush? (Other than avoid a costly and useless war.)

__________________
"I must (deride me not) be somewhere where I can, without disaster, bicycle." Henry James, 1896

limerickman

there was a confluence of issues and policies which came together under the Clinton regime which ensured very strong economic performance.

First and foremost was Clintons initiative to bring down the federal budget deficit inherited from GH Bush's administration.
This required an increase in taxes but the tax increase collected was ringfenced in order to drive down the deficit - and only the deficit.
The Fed under Greenspan endorsed this prudent economic policy.

In terms of general fiscal policy, Clinton increased indirect taxation but managed to carefully control public spending especially in the period 1993-1995.
This caused major pain was goverment offices closing down - but this sent a clear message that Clinton would not waiver when it came to controlling public spending.

In addition, the settlement of GATT (General Agreement on Trade and Tariffs)
was an issue which Clinton's admin played a crucial role in the WTO talks
(world trade organisation).
This allowed international trade to be "freed up" and was the precursor to the term "Globalisation".
America under Clinton was well placed to provide goods and services which the rest of the world were willing to buy.

The conclusion of NAFTA in the Clinton years also ensured that US trade in the Americas (Canada, Latin America) allowed US companies easier access to those markets.

__________________
.."But finally the last thing I’ll say to the people who don’t believe in cycling, the cynics and the sceptics. I'm sorry for you. I’m sorry that you can’t dream big. [I]I'm sorry you don't believe in miracles. You should believe in these athletes, and you should believe in these people. I'll be a fan of the Tour de France for as long as I live. And there are no secrets" - this is a hard sporting event and hard work wins it - Armstrong 2005 TDF
morelike hypocrisy.

darkboong

There have been material changes in the spending. *Income* tax cuts, significant cuts in social services, massive increases in military budgets (War budget is actually excluded from military spending, and hence the budget deficit).

The policies *should* change with time too. If a crisis emerges a leader should be willing and able to adapt. Tony Blair *and* GWB clearly aren't able to do that, they have been repeating the same crapola for 6 years now.

__________________
Free Beer !

BillM

If this is too complicated for you then I understand. Yes the numbers looked good under Clinton...but reality was it was a lot of smoke and mirrors and false reporting of financials in the corporate world.

This all came to light....right after he left.

BillM

Sadly..both sides share a lot of blame.

Why do you guys pay more attention to our country than your own?

THAT is odd.

BillM

Why do I get the impression that if Bush said the world was round...you'd argue that it was flat?

BillM

Dave...I'd bet we agree on more than you think....I haven't yet seen anyone ask my opinion on anything...they simply make assumptions.

For example...I think Bush is an idiot.....I just think John Kerry would have been even more of an idiot.