• Register
  • Help
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 38

Topic: Presidents and Prosperity

Share/Bookmark
  1. #1

    Presidents and Prosperity

    sponsored links


    ***Advertisments***
    According to Forbes magazine:

    Presidents and prosperity

    Rank President
    1. Bill Clinton
    2. Lyndon B. Johnson
    3. John F. Kennedy
    4. Ronald Reagan
    5. Gerald R. Ford
    6. Jimmy Carter
    7. Harry S. Truman
    8. Richard M. Nixon
    9. Dwight D. Eisenhower
    10. George H. W. Bush

    Imagine that. Three liberal democrats at the top of the list and two more at six and seven. Poor old W didn't even make the list.

  2. #2

    Re: Presidents and Prosperity

    Quote Originally Posted by robgb
    According to Forbes magazine:

    Presidents and prosperity

    Rank President
    1. Bill Clinton
    2. Lyndon B. Johnson
    3. John F. Kennedy
    4. Ronald Reagan
    5. Gerald R. Ford
    6. Jimmy Carter
    7. Harry S. Truman
    8. Richard M. Nixon
    9. Dwight D. Eisenhower
    10. George H. W. Bush

    Imagine that. Three liberal democrats at the top of the list and two more at six and seven. Poor old W didn't even make the list.
    but was the prosperity achieved during their presidency ?

    if so how?

  3. #3

    Re: Presidents and Prosperity

    Is this personal prosperity for those on the list or prosperity for us, the downtrodden masses?

  4. #4

    Re: Presidents and Prosperity

    Quote Originally Posted by Joseph Burrell
    Is this personal prosperity for those on the list or prosperity for us, the downtrodden masses?
    I think if it was about personal gain, the republicans would top the list. No, it's about the prosperity of the country. Seems economically we're better off under a liberal president.

  5. #5

    Re: Presidents and Prosperity

    Kerry's personal worth is WAY more than Bush's. I could be wrong, but I suspect you'd have a hard time naming a couple of Republicans in office today who have more $ than Kerry.

    On another note, an assumption you're making is that the prosperity of the country at any given time is fully attributable to whomever is holding office at that time. To say this is debatable is an understatement. The effects of a given president's economic policies may take years to surface. One could make a strong case that the the boom years during the Clinton presidency were more the result of Reagan and Bush's efforts than anything Clinton did.

  6. #6
    Moderator/Developer Brian2112's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Out of my Mind
    Posts
    1,858

    Re: Presidents and Prosperity

    Quote Originally Posted by glennm01
    On another note, an assumption you're making is that the prosperity of the country at any given time is fully attributable to whomever is holding office at that time. To say this is debatable is an understatement. The effects of a given president's economic policies may take years to surface. One could make a strong case that the the boom years during the Clinton presidency were more the result of Reagan and Bush's efforts than anything Clinton did.
    One could make this case, but it would be silly. By this logic, the Reagan years should be credited to Carter.

    The private sector has the greatest impact on the economy; however, presidents can create conditions for the economy to prosper. Clinton did so when he presented a real deficit reduction plan, that (as history clearly shows), worked.

    Another thing to note is that under democratic administrations, the stock market is (on average) 12% higher than under republican administrations. The “tax and spend liberal” label has lost all credibility when a simple search of history turns up the fact that under republican administrations, we have spiraling deficits. I could be a popular president too if I wrote billions of dollars in hot checks. The labels mean nothing. If anything, the democrats are the fiscally conservative now.
    "So what if some parts of life are a crap shoot? Get out there and shoot the crap." -- Neil Peart
    Hint:1.6180339887498948482 Φ

  7. #7

    Re: Presidents and Prosperity

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian2112
    Another thing to note is that under democratic administrations, the stock market is (on average) 12% higher than under republican administrations.
    Interesting. I'm assuming that this number looks at the entire history of the stock market. Check this out though:

    http://www.frbsf.org/econrsrch/wklyl...8/el98-19.html

    In summary, this study basically found that there is no significant difference to how the stock market has performed since WWII with regard to which party was in office.

    Looking only at the data following WWII is probably statistically more meaningful anyway, since the Depression consumed a pretty big chunk of the stock market's "life" before that and probably unfairly skewed the numbers in favor of the Dems. That is, Hoover, a Republican, had only been in office for a few months when the market crashed, so I don't think one could fairly blame his economic policies. Of course, Coolidge, his predecessor was also a Republican...so some would say that the Republicans' policies brought about the Depression. I would argue that it was Wilson's (a Democrat) creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913 that really brought about the Depression, but that's another topic... Bottom line, looking at the post-WWII economy, both parties appear to be pretty even regarding their impact on the markets.

  8. #8

    Re: Presidents and Prosperity

    Quote Originally Posted by Brian2112
    The private sector has the greatest impact on the economy; however, presidents can create conditions for the economy to prosper.
    Quite true. And the way to create favorable economic conditions is for the government to GET THE HECK OUT OF IT! But the idea that pro-active Presidential policies are responsible for economic improvement is shaky in the extreme. Not to mention it denies credit to whom the credit is due: the private sector.

  9. #9

    Re: Presidents and Prosperity

    Quote Originally Posted by glennm01
    On another note, an assumption you're making is that the prosperity of the country at any given time is fully attributable to whomever is holding office at that time. To say this is debatable is an understatement. The effects of a given president's economic policies may take years to surface. One could make a strong case that the the boom years during the Clinton presidency were more the result of Reagan and Bush's efforts than anything Clinton did.
    That's a pretty weak claim, considering the soaring deficit that Reagan and Bush left us with. The Clinton boom years were because Clinton did away with the supply-side economics voodoo left by Reagan and Bush and took a more responsible approach. The Republicans in Congress voted against him (saying his economic plan would be an unmitigated disaster), but he prevailed (thanks to a Democratic majority at the time) and the result is the greatest decade of prosperity this country has ever seen.

    But I'M not the one making the "assumption" about presidents and prosperity. Complain to Forbes if you don't like it.

  10. #10

    Re: Presidents and Prosperity

    Quote Originally Posted by robgb
    That's a pretty weak claim, considering the soaring deficit that Reagan and Bush left us with. The Clinton boom years were because Clinton did away with the supply-side economics voodoo left by Reagan and Bush and took a more responsible approach. The Republicans in Congress voted against him (saying his economic plan would be an unmitigated disaster), but he prevailed (thanks to a Democratic majority at the time) and the result is the greatest decade of prosperity this country has ever seen.

    But I'M not the one making the "assumption" about presidents and prosperity. Complain to Forbes if you don't like it.
    Rob that's BS. Did you read the article?

    "The key to Clinton's success, says Alice Rivlin, a Brookings Institution scholar who served as his director of management and budget, was adhering to the "pay/go" agreement first forged by President George H. W. Bush and a Democratic Congress".


    "Growth and employment surged in [Reagan's] second term as well, making 1985-1989 the fourth-best presidential term for the economy of the past 60 years."

    Now I don't care what you say, that's pretty good for a president that also build up the military. Reagan knew the deficits would happen and he pleaded with Congress to cut spending, which they didn't.
    Michael Peter

    If music be the food of love...
    play on

    William Shakespeare

    homepage

Go Back to forum
Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •