Why do conservative administrations mean deficits?

Question

Reagan, Bush Senior and Junior all have massive deficits

Answer 1

the only thing conservatives conserve is their own money

Answer 2

Um, they don't necessarily. What you assume is that the President has the power to change the economy. He doesn't. The economy is changed based on public convidence and interest, and whether people are willing to spend. It has as much to do with the international community as anything else, it's just that most people are too focused on one nation that they forget to see the large picture.

For example, people think Clinton was the reason for the good economy of the '90s, and Bush is to blame for the bad economy now. That's not true. The good economy started at the end of Reagan's term, and continued on through H. W. Bush's and Clinton's terms, getting stronger and stronger. The economy was heading down starting late 1999. With 9/11/2001 it was amazing the economy didn't crash all-together. But, the right move was made to close the stock-markets, which is what saved the economy. It prevented people from selling right away, and gave people a chance to think about what was going on and how to react. That chance to think is what has allowed the economy to be as good as it is today. But it had nothing to do with the President, so don't think that. It had nothing to do with Bush. That was something the markets choose to do, along with the Federal Reserve.

You also have to consider that the stock market goes through natural ups and downs. If it kept going up, inflation would go up so high, that eventually a gallon of milk would cost $20 (and that eventually would be something like 20 years). Then the market would crash, and the result would be horrible. Actually, the world saw that once: in the 1920s you had the great economy that just kept going up and up, then it all came crashind down, exactly as I just explained. And it lasted from the '30s through the '40s. What the Federal Reserve learned from that is that it is important for the economy to take down-turns once in a while, so the Federal Reserve will actually try to get a down-turn if the economy gets too strong (remember, you don't want the economy too strong, and you don't want it too weak, because either way could spell certain disaster).

Answer 3

Yeah, it's sad. But let's not ignore the other half of reality. We've had deficits under every president during my lifetime, except for a short period when Bill Clinton was up against a young Republican congress. Democrats are at least as accomplished in overspending as Republicans. Granted, G.W. Bush has been the worst in history, but Lyndon Johnson was pretty horrific too, and Jimmy Carter simply chose a different method to bring out economy to its knees. There have been very few economically tolerable administrations in recent history.

However, please don't blame it on conservatives. I know a lot of old-line conservatives that would now say they'd be happy to have Clinton back if they'd known what Bush would be like. These are the same ones who said they hated him when he was president. Bush is far from what a conservative is about.

Answer 4

They can call themselves conservatives because they successfully hijacked the Republican Party--but that don't make it so. Bushco Inc is a Corporatist operation from the get go. What it means to be a Conservative today is having to hide your head in shame for letting Bush get this far. And Tropical? Bush does NOT spend like Democrat, he spends like a Drunken Sailor. Democrats Tax and Spend. That's how Bill Clinton was able to cut the deficit every year of his first 5 years in office and deliver surpluses the last 3. Every Republican starting with Reagan has just spent--with no concern about where the money would come from.

Answer 5

A better question should be why does goverment mean deficits? The answer is quiet simple actually, there are too many programs in our gorverment meant to try and help people. Welfare being the biggest waste of money. But there are also many programs to help other needy people on a national level. I think these programs should not be federally funded, but funded by individual states, and therefor have the possibility to be voted on by the public instead of simply put into action.

You question by it's very nature is biased against conservatives, but instead of getting rid of iberal minded programs designed after socialist/communistic veiws, and making these people that mostly won't lift a finger to help themselves fend for themselves they try and work with them while taking care of much more urgent and pressing matters like. Killing terrorist that would sooner slit your liberal throat than smile at you, or building a new fence on the national borders to attempt to keep said terrorists, and drug trafficers out of the country.

I like how everything gets blamed on the adminitration, while people that know, are aware that the president and his admin only have so much power, and that the senate/house and supreme court are given the rest. Most of the time I hear about some BS going on politically I'm hearing it from the supreme court, or the sentate. I could fill 3 pages with just a list of the out right kindergarten behavior.

Answer 6

That's not necessarilly true at all. President Reagan gave us one of the longest runs of econmic growth and peace. G.W. Bush inherited a slumping economy and it's not something that turns around quickly. If you go look at the numbers things have been very good as of late with unprecidented economic growth. Lower unemployment then the last administration. Deficits are not necessarilly a bad thing since it is money owed to outselves. Cut taxes, more people are hired, inreases tax revenue which pays down hte deficits....it just takes time.


And to the person at the top, the top 50% of wage earners pay 96% of the country's income tax.

Answer 7

They don't. Usually it is the other way around with Tax and Spend liberal administrations. But we have some massive spending going on with the upgrading of our national security, and of course the war(s).

Answer 8

They are conservative. Less Aggressive Thus not taking risks in investments.At the same time they don't prefer levying heavy taxes. Whereas liberals do.

Answer 9

Why do liberal administrations mean high taxes?