Like Tree2Likes

Clintonomics - what were the economic policy inputs (not the outcomes)

Closed Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 1 2
  1. #11

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652

    So after that rather long post there now seems to be 5 planned / un-planned "policies"

    1) No major wars
    2) Imported deflationary pressure from low cost countries like China allowing interests to be kept low
    3) Getting defeated on health care reform
    4) Tax hike on higher income band
    5) Leaving at the right time


  2. #12

    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Back in California (finally!).
    Posts
    2,079
    Quote Originally Posted by East_coast:
    So after that rather long post there now seems to be 5 planned / un-planned "policies"

    1) No major wars
    2) Imported deflationary pressure from low cost countries like China allowing interests to be kept low
    3) Getting defeated on health care reform
    4) Tax hike on higher income band
    5) Leaving at the right time
    Well, I think you should actually add 'balanced budget' as a policy, since it was, and it turned out successfully. I think all can agree that balancing the budget was an issue that could only happen in a bipartisan situation. If either the Dems or the Reps control the Presidency and Congress, a balanced budget would never happen, for obvious reasons.

    Let me also add a nuance to Football's inightful post. We are now in a period of 'deleveraging' as households and businesses are in the process of reducing their liabilites. That is a good thing, but of course it has had a recessionary effect on the economy. Obama has had to step in (so he would argue) with fiscal stimulus to make up for the slacking demand. In effect, the additional $5 Trillion of federal budget deficit increase has replaced the $5 Trillion or so reduction in personal and corporate liabilities as a result of the great deleveraging. The US is a mid-tier country in terms of its total personal and government debt as a percentage of GDP.
    Last edited by Freetrader; 03-08-2011 at 12:02 PM.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    猴山
    Posts
    23,652

    Ok so the below seems to be it

    1) No major wars
    2) Imported deflationary pressure from low cost countries like China allowing interests to be kept low
    3) Getting defeated on health care reform
    4) Tax hike on higher income band
    5) Transfer of national debt to personal debt
    5) Leaving at the right time


  4. #14

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    4,043

    When Clinton took office one of his political advisers James Carville said this:

    Why does a dog lick his dick? Because he can.

    Why don't we balance the budget? Because we can't.

    Then Treasury Sec. Bentsen got Clinton with Greenspan and his warning worked on Bill C. IF he didn't go the right way on spending his deficit by the time he went for his second term would be so high he would not be able to win.

    Not sure you have to have a balanced budget now but the gov't needs to do some right things.

    As far as Social Security and medicare despite taxes being paid I am not sure the money does not just go to general revenues and not into any fund where money is held and invested. So the problem is that these "entitlements" (making the terms sound bad ) were based by the elected officials as things they'd just pay out of taxes as they went along.

    The use of the term entitlement used to be how they characterized labour unions and their leaders. They wanted things they didn't earn was the accusation.

    Now if there is a sense of entitlement in western societies today it is no longer the unions as their power has pretty much fully been deplete. The entitlement culture is rampant in the C-level suites of corporate America where ridiculous sums of money are being earned with no link to value creation whatsoever.

    I see it in executives and it is disgusting - even those I used to work with are now at the trough.


  5. #15

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    7,441

    Interesting comments and the budget graph.

    More interesting is on each side of Clinton are the Reagan and Bush eras which were war mongers (maybe not so much Reagan) and had heavy debts.