Trajan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-31-04 03:47 PM
Original message |
On the one hand: The 'Clinton Miracle' was the result of Reagan tax cuts |
|
Edited on Sat Jul-31-04 03:59 PM by Trajan
According to the GOP sycophants ....
But on the OTHER hand: The 'Clinton Miracle' was the dot.com bubble, an evil, econo-structural freakstorm of financial success for the Middle and Lower Classes ... and utter doom for ... er ... someone ....
So: what is it ? .... Reagan Tax Cuts ? ... or Freaky Financial Bubble ? ...
Make up your fucking minds, GOP Liars ....
I think it was due to the OPTIMISM that prevails in a Democratic administration .... as usual ... The Tax cuts were WAY too old, the dot.com bubble was a sideshow ... It was Clinton and his EXCELLENT stewardship of the economy that made ALL boats rise in the heady 90's ...
We miss you, Billy ...
|
eaprez
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-31-04 03:49 PM
Response to Original message |
1. The Problem I have with Reagan getting credit.. |
|
Edited on Sat Jul-31-04 03:52 PM by eaprez
...for the economy of the 80's is....while he was taking credit for it..he was blaming the Dems for the deficit because they controlled the house/senate --- well if the deficit was their fault then the booming economy was also their "fault" since they had control. They always try to have it both ways. Trouble is NOW that dog don't hunt because they control everything and they've really screwed things up....so now they blame the bad economy on Clinton, or the war or 9/11...but never, EVER do they blame the deficit on the tax cuts they all voted for.
|
Trajan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-31-04 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
5. You got that right .... |
|
They try to have their cake and eat it too ...
First: The GOP raked Clinton over the coals in the early 90's: saying his Tax Increase on the rich was going to KILL THE ECONOMY .... Gramm, McConnell, Armey, and Gingrich were ALL OVER it: flaying Clinton for ruining america ...
Then ? ... They forget all that: and give the credit to Reagan .....
What are they ? ... LIARS !
|
demosincebirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-31-04 03:49 PM
Response to Original message |
|
And so was the surpluses on the nineties.
|
Trajan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-31-04 03:58 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
|
Heck; Im not saying it ... THEY are ....
Why are they saying it ? ...
Because they are LYING LIARS WHO LIE LIKE OTHER PEOPLE BREATH ...
Fuck the lying GOP, and their lying supporters ...
|
tabasco
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-31-04 03:49 PM
Response to Original message |
3. Tell repugs to vote Democratic for GOOD LUCK ! |
|
Because all these great and wonderful things they do NEVER seem to yield benefits until there is a Democrat in office. AMAZING !
|
yardwork
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-31-04 03:51 PM
Response to Original message |
4. They're totally inconsistent. |
|
Reagan recession = all Jimmy Carter's fault.
Slow recovery during Reagan second term = Jimmy Carter's mess was bad!
Increased debt and riots under Bush I = all the fault of 1960s policies.
Instant recovery under Clinton = Bush I policies coming to fruition.
Continued record-breaking strong economy under Clinton = A bubble.
Instant recession/depression under Bush II = all Clinton's fault.
The Republicans are total failures and all they do is blame all the problems they cause on other people. Jerks.
|
Trajan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-31-04 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #4 |
|
You got it in a nutshell ...
Liars, nothing but liars ....
|
salin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-31-04 03:57 PM
Response to Original message |
7. okay... so bush tax cuts were sold as being able to deliver |
|
IMMEDIATE impact... but Reagan's somehow took 6 plus years for the benefits to materialize? And what... the bush1 recession was due to Carter's policies 10 years earlier?
These folks are on crack!
|
Trajan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-31-04 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #7 |
|
and you know what I mean: like a plumber's crack ...
What are they ? ... LIARS ! ....
|
salin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-31-04 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #9 |
10. that image... along with the burning pants |
|
is evoking pain in my head...
|
Trajan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-31-04 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
|
Lying liar ....
DONT bend over ... ew ...
Chuckles .... sorry: didnt intend the distinct visual ..... just the righteous indignation ... which is WHOLLY deserved by the LYING LIARS of the GOP ...
|
OKNancy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-31-04 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
12. Clinton cut taxes for the poor and raised |
|
taxes on the wealthy, in a nutshell. I like old Bartcop. Here is a page about the CLinton miracle: ( some on DU may not agree with #1 and #2 on the list ) http://www.bartcop.com/clintonmiracle-larry.htm
|
Trajan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-31-04 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
|
Clinton offered modest, focused tax CUTS for the Lower and Middle Classes, and look what happened ....
Demand Side WORKS ....
Supply Side JERKS ! ...
|
salin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-31-04 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
Warpy
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-31-04 04:14 PM
Response to Original message |
|
Clitnon's economic policies were pure Goldwater conservatism. The rich got richer and the working class barely managed to stay even.
Eighty percent of the people in the US didn't see a damned thing from the Clinton "boom." Whether it was tax cuts to the rich or the dot com speculation bubble that fueled it is irrelevant.
It was a boom only for the minority.
|
Trajan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-31-04 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
16. I dont believe that ... |
|
Poverty reached all time lows ... Middle class income reached all time highs ....
No system is perfect ... Clinton's was as good as it gets, and the anecdotal evidence is simply mountainous ....
|
nyhuskyfan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-31-04 04:25 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
|
From personal experience, I work in a field that typically pays 30-50 thousand a year (more for the top of the line jobs) and requires a year or two of internships or low-paying graduate internships before full-time jobs become available. I tried to get into the business in 1992-93 and there were very, very few jobs available in the field and I was very lucky to get one of them. By 1998, employers couldn't even get resumes for their jobs. College graduates were all jumping right into better-paying jobs and didn't want to bother with internships or graduate assistant positions. So employers in our field started just hiring people right out of college for full-time positions and couldn't find any interns or grad assistants.
Now, we're back to the way it was in 1992-93. Jobs are impossible to come by and people who finish internships end up signing up for second and third internships.
|
lancdem
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-31-04 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #15 |
|
Incomes for most Americans went up during the '90s and the percentage of people in poverty declined.
|
bandy
(545 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-31-04 04:32 PM
Response to Original message |
19. I remember reading ...way back a ways |
|
that when Clinton came into office the economy was in such bad shape that he was bewildered as to what to do. Bush 1 had this country in shambles. Clinton supposedly met with Greenspan and between the two of them they came up with a solution. They came up with a plan that obviously worked cause look what * had to give to his friends. Wish I could remember when and where I read this but it escapes me.
|
kentuck
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-31-04 04:44 PM
Response to Original message |
20. It expired the day Clinton left office.... |
|
That's why the economy went into recession and we started losing jobs, etc...We had to have a 'booster shot' of tax cuts... Yeah, they can put forth a truly circular argument...
|
Trajan
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-31-04 05:00 PM
Response to Reply #20 |
22. I think it is all about optimism .... |
|
The Democrats simply make the most people feel good about the future ....
The GOP always makes their narrow cadre feel great: while the rest of use fear dislocation and loss ...
Since 2/3's of the economy is consumer-driven, it only makes sense to provide the GREATEST 'stimulus' to the greater number ....
Demand side works : FDR, Truman, JFK, LBJ knew it ... and Clinton knew it too ...
|
Media_Lies_Daily
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Jul-31-04 04:58 PM
Response to Original message |
21. Let's see if I understand this...Reagan is responsible for tax cuts... |
|
...during his two terms in office, but if I remember correctly, the economy went downhill during those eight years. The only thing that saved the economy was the over-funded Defense Industry...they were able to hire a lot of people and a lot of cash went back into the economy.
Then Poppy takes over, and gets us into Desert Storm, another war fought against Iraq for falsified reasons. As soon as that war is over, the Pentagon cuts just about every military program in sight. That causes the loss of a lot of jobs and the cash flowing into the economy drops to a trickle. Then Poppy utters the immortal words, "Watch my lips, no more taxes". Well, then he has to raise taxes to keep the government going and all of the social services programs.
By the time Clinton came into office, the economy was nearly DOA. Eight years later, the economy is the hottest thing anyone has ever seen, unemployment is down, jobs are plentiful, no inflation in sight (except what Greenspan was seeing), and life is generally pretty good.
Clinton leaves office as the last legally elected President, and in comes FratBoy with the huge tax-cut for the wealthy. The economy stops still. You know the rest of the story.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 09:08 AM
Response to Original message |