Why do Cons revile, and why do Libs lay claim to the economic record of, Bill Clinton?

Question

Bill Clinton:

expanded free trade

deregulated the financial services sector

continued Reagan's deregulation of other sectors

created huge corporate tax loopholes

signed welfare reform

moved the pegs back a notch re Reagan's personal income tax cuts, which I didn't support, but he didn't exactly undo them


All 'n all, Bill Clinton's economic record was probably more free market oriented than that of Bush '41.

The big picture is that any differences among Reagan and everyone since pale by comparison to the differences between this bunch and the presidents from FDR through Carter. And the results really can't be argued-with.

What I can't understand is why only one Democrat candidate today wants to take up that mantle, and how it isn't Bill Clinton's wife doing it, it's his Energy Secretary.

uinvee the big bubble of the 1990s was from the Fed, but it had to prevent deflation - - - - - the 1980s tax cuts and the tariff reductions and eliminations spurred so much investment and so much of an increase in productivity that real prices would have declined otherwise.

amazing yes Clinton reaped the benefits of his predecessors but he furthered their efforts on many fronts and undid about 2% of it.

And the corporate tax loopholes, most of those were created through regulation - - he did that on his own. The IRS did not have to intepret the 1997 legislation as pro-business as they did.

heddon Bush '43 did inherit a slowing economy that sank into recession - - but that was Fed induced - - - the Fed accommodated too much, came off the brakes too early, in '94 and again in '97, and then it overshot between '99 and '00.
]
But hindsight is 20/20 - - the Fed overshot in '87 too, and in '93 and '97 it wasn't trying to help Clinton, it was trying to avoid overshooting like it did in '87.

And univee this isn't a "war economy" - there's just no basis for that. You're not coming at this as a finance / economics guy venturing into the politics section.

Forget you care about politics, clear the brain, stop watching the talking heads on Sunday mornings, and watch CNBC and Bloomberg for a few weeks. Put the Times down. Read the Journal. I'm not telling you to read Forbes - read Barron's though.

univee you know what I'm saying - yes there's a war, no, it's not spending ON that war that's driving the economy.

Answer 1

If i had to choose, I would have monica back anyday.

Answer 2

Most of those folks who call themselves cons don't recognize that Clinton was a conservative Democrat. To these folks all democrats are this thing they cringe in fear from: the dreaded libs. They buy into the Rush Limbaugh world, where you are either a supporter of republican extremism, or you are a traitor.

That said, Clinton should not be given too much credit for the great economy of the 90's. His policies were helpful, but they also led to the laxity that permitted a great deal of corporate and white collar crime,culminating in the bursting of the tech bubble.

What really boosted the social economy of the nineties was the cessation of the nuclear arms race.

But good as that wave of non-military spending was for people, it was not appreciated by corporate America, who make better money promoting war and endless fear. So they worked hard to bring us the mess we have now.

Those who think we have a 'red hot economy' now are the folks who are glad we're back on the war economy.

Allegiance to this economy is a kind of treason against the peaceful potentials of humanity.

_________

this is not a war economy? Well dog my days, how silly of me.
Then it's a peacetime economy... amazing. How DO we manage that during war-time? We are a brilliant people and I congratulate you on the keeness of your perceptions...

Answer 3

Of course it can be argued. Clinton sat there and reaped the benefits of the Reagan and Bush 1 years, then called it his own. Plus, the boom had a big bust. Remember the dot com fiasco?? I recall my taxes going up too.

Answer 4

Bill rode the coat tails of Bush #1 economic success. Bill's legacy on economics was the mess he left Bush 2nd. And it was a mess. I think you are looking back in rose colored glasses. Take them off and put your real glasses back on.

Answer 5

I think you are deluding yourself. In his eight years, he raised taxes and got a BJ. That's it.