Which Political Party is Better For America's Economy?

Question

Back it up with facts no spin, and one internet source to support your point of view.

Answer 1

Republicans. Lower taxes means more money left in the economy and in the hands of those who can best utilize it.

Answer 2

This is quite clear, overall the Republican party is much better on economic issues.

Low taxation, limited regulation, limited government (although both parties have been expanding it lately) are all great things for an economy. Everytime we have had tax cuts our economy has followed by an economic boom.

Look at what our stock market & economy has done in the last 6 years even with 9/11 and the war on terror going on. It is remarkable how well things are going.

Despite what the media and Democrats may say, the economy is doing great and could be doing so much better if we lowered taxation even more and cut government spending.

After looking at some of the other answers on this question I can see a lot of people need to educate themselves on economics and history.

By the way, every dollar the government taxes you it is that much less power & less freedom you have. Also, the government taxing someone else does nothing for you unless of course the government is taxing one person and giving it to you. Low taxes for everyone is good, punishing people through the tax code is not what the tax code is for. The tax code is simply suppose to be for raising enough revenue for the government to fund essential services, nothing more & nothing less.

The income tax should be eliminated and a consumption tax implemented. At a minimum, if the income tax stays in place it should be a flat tax that is applied equally to everyone. Everyone should be paying taxes and have a stake in the system. Currently over 40% of Americans pay no federal income tax and the bottom 50% pay only about 2-3% of taxes. The current tax system is stacked against those that produce and that is another thing that puts a major drag on the economy.

I hope many of you choose to educate yourself more on this topic as it is very important to the success & future of our great nation.

Yet one more comment..... I saw a post saying something about a "living wage". The market sets wages, not the government. The government can not tell what a particular job is worth. Should we set a "minimum wage" at $20? $30? Why not $50? The reason this can't be done is because some jobs simply are not worth that and only a free, open market can set these wages. I think people can live quite well in this country if they work hard, save their money, invest, and do not undertake in frivalous spending or buy things they can not afford. There is no better country in the world to be "poor" than in the United States. Our "poor" people have cars, cable TV, computers, and cell phones. I think that is enough proof that we have "living" wages already.

Answer 3

I don't require an Internet site to support my views. Most of these sites are too highly prejudiced one way or another. There is no need for debate on this one....the economy would be stronger with the Republicans because they represent big business. The fact that they cannot get out of their own way is too bad for America, but then again, the Democrats can't seem to get out their own way either.

Answer 4

Historically, the republican party has had the more positive effect on the economy. This is due to their habit of cutting taxes which results in increased spending by the population. More spending = more business = growing economy. People laughed at Reganomics when it was first proposed but you cant laugh at the results. It also results in higher tax revenues being collected by the federal government, so there is more money for running the country. As far as sources look at the Government Accounting Office report for 1983-1990. This is the time period in which Regans tax cuts had the most effect on the US economy and before the tax increases of the new administration (Clinton) had time to kick in. After that you begin seeing a slow decline in GNP.

Answer 5

This changes from time to time. In the 90's Clinton's balances of the budget created a huge surplus and actually decreased a huge deficit... Reagan's tax cuts and lowered interest rate actually worked and stimulated the economy after a huge recession.

In the end a lot of economics are really dictated by luck as much as who is in power. Clinton experienced a very peaceful time and no real disasters. Reagan came in a time when we just started recovering from the Vietnam War and the market became more confident because of it.

Answer 6

notice how all the conservatives are saying that the republican party is best for the economy, and everyone else says "neither" are best for the economy. No one here is saying the democratic party is best. This means that all the liberals are just blatantly denying the truth AGAIN by pulling out the "neither" card. Just admit it liberals, you're not smart to spend your own money, so you want gov't to be your "mommy". grow up you bunch of mindless commies.

Answer 7

It makes no difference. Both Republicans and Democrats have good and bad times with the economy. The stock market tends to have a natural up and down time of around ten years.

Answer 8

In short, it is whichever combination of president and legislative majority that spends the least amount of money.

eg:
House - Republican
Senate - Democrat
President: Democrat

All bills will originate in the house and if the House majority is wide enough Senate amendments will never get through. If no bills make it to the president, nothing gets signed.


When the deficit disapears shortly thereafter, confidence will be restored in the dollar in international markets, investment will go up, and purchasing power will go up. Domestic businesses will be encouraged to invest more, create more jobs, etc...


One problem with this is that they tend to just add "pork" until there is enough money for the representatives to change their vote.

Answer 9

Both sell out money whore parties are great for corporate interest,
which ones are better for the people? Neither.
It's too bad we will never see a third party administration in EVER.

LOL!..look at these people....How great was NAFTA and steady corporate deregulation for the bottom line?

Tax cuts!? HA! I love how Repubs think they are in the "rich crowd" and actually benefitted from Repug tax cuts for the rich since Reagan! It's hilarious.

Since all these supposed "tax cuts" were implemented, only the rich got extraordinarily rich while it never trickled down, it only contained.
Meanwhile, the average person has financially been doing worse and worse over the decades.
All you need is simple observation of the economic trend.
The large portion of society pays more, works longer, harder, for less, we are a debter society and the only ones who have benefitted are the minority.
That may look good on paper how well the "economy" is doing,
but the real story of the human toll is something different all together.

Answer 10

Generally it's Republicans that are better for the economy. Democrats tend to raise taxes which always hurts the economy, and the last two tax cuts that helped the economy were by Republicans. Of course the first Bush raised taxes, and John Kennedy lowered them, so it works both ways. The bottom line is, lower taxes leave more operating capital in the hands of the people and businesses, which increases business and actually winds up giving the government MORE money than they would have gotten if they left the taxes high or even raised them more.

Answer 11

Green. It's the only one with plans for a sustainable economy.