Ever notice how cons always come up with EXCUSES when their economic theories don't work?

Question

FDR drastically increased taxes and spending. The economy grew like it never grew before EVEN if you don't include the WWII years.

Con excuse: Well he came from a depression. Even though the economy thanked for four straight years after 1929, it was bound to come up.

Reagan saw less growth then FDR, JFK/LBJ, and Clinton.

Con excuse: Well, it was because he was coming off a recession. So yes I can see how I'm a hypocrit by pointing at the depression FDR had to deal with as a good thing, but the recession Reagan had to deal with as a bad thing.

The economy grew every single month Clinton was president.

Con excuse: It was all the dot com bust. That's it. The over 22 million jobs that were created were all in IT and they all disappeared after the bust. I have no proof of this but I will assume this to be true.

Answer 1

Ever notice how every question containing the word "cons" is so biased that it's really not a question. It's a rant disguised as a question. This is Yahoo! Answers and not a chat room or message board. Go read #1 of the DONT's in the Yahoo! Answers Community Guidelines: http://answers.yahoo.com/info/community_guidelines.php
.

Answer 2

First, for all the unwarranted praise you shower on FDR, the fact was that 1932 was one of the worst in terms of GDP, having shrunk 44% since 1929, so it was bound to rise, but it took until 1941 for the GDP to even get back to 1929 levels. It probably would have recovered faster if he hadn't unconstitutionally meddled in private business. As for "theories", supply side economics is a better predictor than any of the Keynesian theories, which have never predicted reality. You also praise the JFK expansion, but don't credit his supply-side tax cuts for helping. Why did you omit this fact? Didn't reality fit with your premise? He cut the top rate from 91% to 70% (bigger cut than Bush's, percentage-wise), and it significantly "rewarded" the rich (more than Bush's tax cuts) more than anybody else, per leftist thinking. And don't forget that Clinton inherited a roaring economy (thanks to Reagan) as opposed to the economy in recession that Bush inherited (look up the Dot Com Recession of 2000). Also, when I look at your sources, the data quite clearly shows that the economy grew much more under Reagan than it did under Clinton. How do you explain the discrepency between the data and your claims?

Answer 3

Yeah, I remember Reagans trickle down theory. The only trickle was from Big Business to the Big CEO's. The guy on the bottom of the totem pole didn't get a taste. The poor got poorer and the rich got richer and it ain't stopped yet. Bill Clinton knew that the way to grow the economy was to allow the regular Joe to make good wages and keep working. Cons think the way to grow the economy is to allow Big Business to reap out enormous profits and keep it for themselves. And in case boo don't know, when Reagan took office, things were starting to boom. Construction was up and the average Joe was making good money. Six short months later, constructions jobs all over the USA were shutting down because Reagan wanted to do away with the unions who at the time were caring the rest of the work forces. The cost of living index went through the ceiling and unemployment sky rocketed. And unless you lived in the Reagan work force years, you wouldn't have no idea. He was a regular Joe and Union hater who was Gov of Calif when I was living there. The first thing he did was put a state income tax on all military persons serving in Calif. What a thanks for serving your country. The cons just don't understand how hard it is for the reg Joe to survive under their watch. Why, because most of em were born with a silver spoon in their mouths.

Answer 4

This is the standard fair for the Republicans. They run up a deficit and then cry about the budget. Then they cut all the programs that help people in order to "cut the deficit." It is a plan to eliminate government with the exception of a police force and army. Meanwhile they steal money from Social Security and then tell us that there is not enough money to pay out benefits. It is how they plan to eliminate all the good things that FDR did and put us back to the age of the robber barons. Take a look and see how the rich are paying less in taxes (15% on investments) while the working class pays 30% OR MORE. Democrats need to take back the government and put it back on track to helping all its citizens and not just the fat cats.

Answer 5

Clinton was riding the economic policies of George Bush Senior, if Allen Greenspan would have lowered the interest rate earlier it would have come around earlier. You are giving Clinton way too much credit. We are living in the policies that Clinton created. When a President makes economic policies you can not see the effect of them immediately.

Answer 6

clinton rode Reagan's economy when clintons economy started to come in GW took office and what was that called again??? A recession.


Way to go clinton, he was better at hiding cigars. What an A*SS

Answer 7

Hmmm, I never heard a Conservative make excuses for FDR. Then again, we are still battling his plans for fighting poverty!:
http://www.socialstudieshelp.com/Lesson_89_Notes.htm

This is for Reagan: http://www.heritage.org/Research/GovernmentReform/images/bg1414tab1.gif

Clinton only grew "hot and bothered" in office:
http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/1998/resources/lewinsky/timeline/

You just posed a similar question. Fishing for answers again I see.

Answer 8

Wocka, Wocka, Wocka.

Answer 9

That's why their called cons, a better name is "politician"!!!

Answer 10

You should check your numbers, your statements are full of inaccuracies.