Why do we let Liberals claim Bill Clinton's economic record as their own?

Question

Leave aside that Clinton got a lot of help from the Fed... even without that help, the economy would still have been fairly strong throughou the 1990s - many people inaccurately remember the late 1990s money bubble as reflecting the whole decade, but from '92-'97 things basically hummed along pretty well.

But why?

"Triangulation." That's why.

Clinton expanded on Reagan's deregulation efforts, especially in the financial services sector, and did almost nothing to undo Reagan's personal income tax cuts. Clinton opened wide corporate tax loopholes. Clinton expanded free trade zones. Clinton signed welfare reform.

Republicans will argue that the GOP Congress forced his hand but this is true only with welfare reform.

What's left of the Democrat party largely opposed these measures and would undo some of them now.

Why do we let them take credit for the gains achieved precisely by moving in the opposite direction from the economic policies they propose?

Answer 1

Every president gets help from the Fed.

Does it matter who gets the credit if in the end American people are the ones who benefit economically? Democrats and Republicans alike need to react to the dynamics of the economy at a given time and shouldn't let politics get in the way of building our nation's wealth.

Answer 2

You have raised an awful lot of debatable points.
Let me start with saying this. I think Reagan certainly laid down the foundation for the good economic times of the 1990s. And, Clinton did an excellent job of administrating government affairs during that period to keep the economy percolating.
I will explain, but first I must take issue with what you call Reagan's tax cut. Reagan didn't cut taxes. He only shifted the tax burden off of business and onto individual tax payers. As a result of Reagan's tax restructuring, the term he used, my taxes more than double as an operator of a sole proprietorship. To ease the tax burden, I was forced to incorporate, after which my tax burden was less than prior to the restructuring.
But that was actually a good thing. When business, whether big business or small business, pays less taxes, the economy expands, creates more jobs, and generates more taxes.
Let's get back to why Reagan laid the foundation to the 1990s. Reagan ended the cold war. The cold war was an incredible drag on the US treasury. It was expensive and a major contributor toward government deficit spending, just like Iraq today.
Reagan spent tons of money on some very hi tech weapons. These weapons rendered everything in the Soviet arsenal obsolete. The USSR actually went bankrupt trying to keep up with US weapon production. Ergo, no more cold war.
The benefit to these new weapons is that it took less manpower to have an effective armed force. This allowed for cuts in the military budget and taxpayer savings that were realized during Clinton's years. With the government demanding less money from the economy, the economy expanded at a rapid rate.
Another plus during the Clinton years was trimming welfare entitlements.
That's my opinion. Reagan laid down the foundation and Clinton managed it well. If the cold war had continued into the 1990s, we would never have had that era of prosperity.

Answer 3

I agree that Clinton, as more of a moderate, is not your average Democrat. I would give him more credit concerning the balanced budget against a Republican Congress, which only happened through his use of the veto pen. I also agree he is far from a saint. Democrats in general are more to the center than they were 20 years ago, thanks to the Republican majority in Congress & Bill's example

Speaking of now, what is the alternative? The last 6 years should prove beyond a doubt we needed a change in direction. I would also suggest moving only toward the middle & not the extreme. If nothing else, Bush has lost his blank check from the Republican Congress.. He has been forced into diplomacy due to public anger & well earned mistrust. And the Party who never said no to him will have to suffer the consequences. Reagan must be turning over in his grave.

Answer 4

The reality is that no president should get the full credit (or full blame) for the economic situation under his tenure. There are too many variables that are not under his control, and the biggest variable of all is luck.

Even though George Bush is trying mightily to screw up the economy, it still seems to be on pretty solid footing.

Answer 5

Was the economy that good under Bill Clinton? It's obvious Bill was just riding a wave someone made. I feel the repercussion of a false sense of security and unsafer view of who we are is a far more lethal wave that was created by the dems... WISE UP!

Answer 6

THE ONLY REASON CLINTON'S TIME SEEMED SO PROSPEROUS WAS BECAUSE OF ALL THE MONEY MADE ON THE INTERNET STOCKS THAT TURNED OUT TO BE OVERLY PRICED. THE INTERNET BUBBLE WAS A SCAM TO FOOL INVESTORS INTO LOSING BILLIONS OF DOLLARS ON WHAT WAS THOUGHT WOULD BE A GREAT INVESTMENT, BUT IT TURNED OUT TO BE A SCAM. INTERNET STOCKS WERE OVER PRICED AND EVENTUALLY WHEN THE TRUTH CAME OUT MORE THAN HALF OF THE INTERNET COMPANIES FOLDED THUS MILLIONS OF INVESTORS LOST THEIR SHIRTS. ANOTHER CLINTON FALLACY

Answer 7

The president always gets the credit.

Everyone knows that the Republican controlled congress did everything when Bubba was president.

But he gets the credit because he is the president, regardless of how pitiful he really was.

Answer 8

The Reagan years led to the 1991-92 recession. Clinton's economy was his own. Reagan deregulation led to the 90s corporate crime. Nice try, con!

Answer 9

The real question is why we don't pin the recession that started in 2000 on his rear end? Why we don't pin the corporate corruption the happened in the 90's on him and George Bush's justice department had to clean up?

Answer 10

Ray-gun was the worst economic evil ever loosed on the American society. Ray-gunomics and deficit spending destroyed the economic future of many families who were inching their way toward the middle class rungs. The rich got richer, and the trickle down scam never trickled. Home prices shot through the roof. Inflation soared to new heights. Defense companies made billions through bogus contracts such as Star Wars. Ray-gun became a gun runner and blamed the whole ordeal on Ollie North.

Clinton's targeted tax cuts stimulated small business growth which reinvigorated the dying middle class. Now Bush policies are destroying the hopes of others attempting to climb up to the middle class economic rungs.