Thread: Is the Republican economic policy to blame for the looming recession?

Haven't read the other replies yet, and I'm sure they'll make my post look as insipid as "I agree!", but...

The economic cycle is kinda outside the direct control of the president, so I don't blame him for any inevitable recessions. But I do blame him for spending recklessly on fruitless projects and for shifting the tax burden away from the rich, both of which (I think, but I'm not an economist so I'm probably wrong) will make any incoming recessions hit us much harder than otherwise.

Originally Posted by Cremaster77

So, I've seen repeated claims on this forum that Clinton's tax hikes were to blame for the economic downturn that occurred right as GWB took office. Not only that, it's been claimed that the economic prosperity that occurred during Clinton's two terms were a mirage created by artificially inflated Internet stock prices.

So here we are, at the end of GWB's two terms. A recession is looming. Unemployment is up. Inflation is up. The housing and financial markets are way, way down. The relative economic prosperity that came after GWB's record tax breaks can easily be attributed to an artificially inflated housing market. So the question is, do we blame GWB and Republican economic policy for this looming recession as some here would blame Clinton for the last one?

First of all its a democrat recession since they have been in power since Jan 2006 when the economy was good..........

Originally Posted by Navy Pride

First of all its a democrat recession since they have been in power since Jan 2006 when the economy was good..........

Did you blame the Republican Congress for the last recession, or did you blame Clinton's cock?

Originally Posted by Navy Pride

First of all its a democrat recession since they have been in power since Jan 2006 when the economy was good..........

....Oh....so I guess then we can blame Republicans for 9/11. Considering they were in power in 2001. Yay for simplistic views of national issues!

Originally Posted by Kandahar

Presidents have very little control over the day-to-day (or year-to-year) state of the economy. They can certainly affect the economy in the long term by implementing policies that are sustained over many decades (such as free trade being a MAJOR source of our prosperity), but a minor tax cut or minor minimum wage hike has almost NO impact on the economy in a given year.


Anyone - liberal or conservative - who thinks that our presidents should be tinkering with the economy to prevent recessions or prolong expansions, needs to study economics. Booms and busts will ALWAYS happen, no matter what policies

Man, you said it sista. I just don't get how so many people think a 2% cut in taxes here or a 3% increase there will make or break the economy. Fact is that when top marginal rates where 70-90% we had larger economic growth measure by GDP than we have now or during the Reagan years. There is just no possible way you can argue that taxes have such a major impact on the economy if taxes of 90% result in higher GDP growth than when they are 30-35%. The economy is so much larger and independent than that.

Originally Posted by Navy Pride

First of all its a democrat recession since they have been in power since Jan 2006 when the economy was good..........

So remind me again, who was in control of Congress when the economy was going down at the end of Clinton's term? So that was a Republican recession?

Man, NP, you make this too easy.

Did you hear McCain claim in the South Carolina debate that we are not in or heading for a recession? ....yeah.....the economy is great and people in this country as doing fabulous...... If THAT doesn't make you question McCain's intelligence and judgement....ay yi yi.....

Man, you said it sista. I just don't get how so many people think a 2% cut in taxes here or a 3% increase there will make or break the economy. Fact is that when top marginal rates where 70-90% we had larger economic growth measure by GDP than we have now or during the Reagan years. There is just no possible way you can argue that taxes have such a major impact on the economy if taxes of 90% result in higher GDP growth than when they are 30-35%. The economy is so much larger and independent than that.

You don;t get it! Fact is, most small businesses are 1 perentage away from utter failure. I know, my father owns a small business, If you want, I can give you all the facts and figures of what raising the minumum wage has done for us.

Originally Posted by DarkWizard12

Its funny that this only started happen when the president signed the bill to progressively raise minimum wage.

Yet oddly enough, despite the fact that the minimum wage was raised 3 times in the Clinton years, and taxes were higher...

GDP growth was stronger, job growth was far stronger, the median household income went up every single year, and the poverty rate went down every single year.

Originally Posted by DarkWizard12

You don;t get it! Fact is, most small businesses are 1 perentage away from utter failure. I know, my father owns a small business, If you want, I can give you all the facts and figures of what raising the minumum wage has done for us.

So, because your father's business was so inefficient and uncompetitive that it could only pay its employees the Federal Minimum Wage, and it is now at risk of going under because of just a miniscule increase in wages.

From an economic perspective thats a good thing. Businesses that are that inefficient are a long term drag upon economic growth. When they go under, the labor resources they were consuming is freed up for use by far more efficient companies with better business models.

Think about it this way. The minimum wage was not increased for 10 years. Yet worker productivity went up every year during that time and inflation reduced the cost of that wage every year. If a business is so inefficient that after ten years of declining labor costs relative to productivity and production that a slight increase in wages puts it as risk of bankruptcy, then its a business that in the end is a leach upon the economy as a whole.