Clinton. Only because her husband has the experience with how to balance the budget.
2007-09-21 06:16:14
·
answer #1
·
answered by Ohsassyone 3
·
4⤊
13⤋
Ranked best to worst, strictly on economic policy:
1. Ron Paul.
2. Republicans other than Ron Paul and John McCain.
3. John McCain.
4. Democrats other than Kucinich.
5. Kucinich.
Although Ron Paul is worse than all of the other Republicans on foreign policy, and foreign policy would eventually effect the economy. If he lets the Islamic fascists nuke New York City, that might have an economic impact.
2007-09-21 08:26:47
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
6⤋
By, speaking as an economist, we have to understand about the very large gap between the rich & poor, not only in America, but all over the world.
The gap is caused by the dollar having a "floating" value since 1971. Which simply means it is NOT tied to anything of lasting value. { Housing valuations vary wildly, as we can recently see.}
Ron Paul has written several books on the economy of America and why it worked so well in the past causing the USA to surpass every country in the world in standard of living.
How do I happen to know about this?
I've been a self employed business man for 30 years, studied & learned about Ron Paul during this period, and upon reading his books concluded that he can & will benifit the American people, by a great degree economically if he is nominated & then elected president.
But don't take my word for it. If you have the time, study American history, the Gold standard, & Ron Paul's views {He is the "Ranking" member of the Congressional finance committee!} and imo, understands economics much better than ANY of the other candidates.
Please think about what affects your life style more than anything else?
Answer:::MONEY!!!
Thank you.
********************************************************
2007-09-21 06:57:16
·
answer #3
·
answered by beesting 6
·
3⤊
4⤋
I listened to the dem debates in Iowa, and I was startled to discover that Richardson and Dodd were both more savvy about things than any of the leading players. In Dodd's case I hesitate because he is really too much of a beltway insider, though if his intent is pure, that would make him an ideal operator.
That said, I don't think the economy will be savable by anyone in any party.
There is a giant paper tootling to be paid, and the rats are streaming into hamlin.
We've got a big down stretch to go through before we can have a recovery.
Hell, you can't even have a recovery if the paid economists keeping lying every other day and telling you there is no problem.
2007-09-21 06:18:16
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
6⤋
I am still trying to decide. I want to vote for the person who would pay attention more to the people on the homeland and not always on another country's problems. I want to vote for the person who will create a much better healthcare plan than we have. There are SO many people without health insurance and it is NOT fair that the government does not take care of its own people.
I want to vote on the person that will create more jobs.
Suggestions are welcomed.
2007-09-21 06:20:12
·
answer #5
·
answered by Soda 4
·
5⤊
3⤋
ron paul -because he wants fair free trade deals -not these so called deals which basically export a lot of our jobs to cheap labor only benefiting the giant corps -he would end corporate welfare(make them pay their fair share ) and at the same time reduce individuals taxes across the board to help make the middle class in this country grow again instead of decreases each year- also he would remove many govt restrictions on business -opening doors for small businesses to find more niches to compete with big corporations or to provide goods and services they dont - I think with paul there would really be a new economic boom in this country -where even the corps who would be paying more taxes wouldnt mind because their bottom lines would be that much stronger and growing
2007-09-21 09:09:24
·
answer #6
·
answered by rooster 5
·
1⤊
5⤋
Rough crowd here.
John McCain. Experience & change. He co-authored the Campaign Finance Reform Bill. He knows the military and how it works. He has been in office for ever. He gave years of his life in service not avoiding it. He knows how to work with each party not against. He can delegate authority. Stands up for his ideals. NO matter what. Not worried about being popular.
He has some stuff I am not sure I agree with but by far the only one both aisles with integrity.
Thank you.
2007-09-21 06:57:57
·
answer #7
·
answered by Mele Kai 6
·
5⤊
4⤋
Ron Paul has the best.. why? our economy is sinking into debt... We borrow about 3 million dollars from China and Saudi Arabia everyday to pay for this and the war... Taxes only seem to increase on the middle class and the poor.. Our dollar is already worth so little and inflation will only make things worse.. Ron Paul has not only addressed this issue but layed out a plan to fix it...
2007-09-21 06:30:39
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
6⤋
Mitt is the best choice. He's a born businessman that kept the 2002 winter Olympics alive, helped many major businesses thrive, and bridged a $2 billion budget gap during his power of government in Mass. without imposing new taxes. You can pretty much count on him to improve our tax system.
2007-09-21 06:18:42
·
answer #9
·
answered by Captain Galactic 6
·
4⤊
4⤋
Any Republican will be good. Most of the Democrats would be bad, with a couple (Hillary, Obama) being disastrous.
Bottom line: Any time you raise taxes or mandate greater expense burdens (such as healthcare), you hurt businesses and force them to make tough choices (layoffs).
2007-09-21 08:07:37
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
4⤋
Clinton was the best president for the economy. We had a surplus when he left. Bush has been the worst. He created a larger deficit than all 42 other presidents combined. But I'm sure you already knew that.
Hopefully, Hillary together with her husband will be able to considerably reduce the humongous deficit this Houdini has created. I don't think anyone can totally get rid of it at this point.
Only idiots ignore the fact that higher taxes will be necessary to pay for this war. Bush just wants to leave it for the next president to clean up the mess. That's so evil.
2007-09-21 06:25:44
·
answer #11
·
answered by The Wiz 7
·
1⤊
9⤋