|
|
Post by chad sexington on Jun 19, 2011 3:26:35 GMT -5
Oh, but it would still be Obama's fault, because he ruined it for his successor. /sarcasm Oh I see, so Obama can't blame Bush for ruining the economy, but republicans can blame Obama. I see... The economic crisis under Bush was the result of Clinton's tax policy, while Clinton's economic boom at the end of the nineties was due to Reagan's trickle-down theory finally bearing fruit! |
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Jun 19, 2011 10:55:40 GMT -5
So, under that logic, we should be seeing the fruits of Bush's tax cuts any day now.
|
|
|
|
Post by booley on Jun 19, 2011 12:08:27 GMT -5
Oh I see, so Obama can't blame Bush for ruining the economy, but republicans can blame Obama. I see... The economic crisis under Bush was the result of Clinton's tax policy, while Clinton's economic boom at the end of the nineties was due to Reagan's trickle-down theory finally bearing fruit! Wait a minute, then doesn't that mean that boom in the 80s was because of Carter or maybe even LBJ? Just how much can we skew this time line before it just becomes silly? |
|
|
|
Post by wisechild on Jun 19, 2011 12:18:13 GMT -5
To complicate things even further, Bush Senior didn't win reelection because of Carter, not because he was a bad campaigner.
(And Perot decided to play spoiler.)
|
|
|
|
Post by Vene on Jun 19, 2011 13:03:27 GMT -5
Oh I see, so Obama can't blame Bush for ruining the economy, but republicans can blame Obama. I see... The economic crisis under Bush was the result of Clinton's tax policy, while Clinton's economic boom at the end of the nineties was due to Reagan's trickle-down theory finally bearing fruit! Don't forget to simultaneously claim the economy didn't go broke until Obama was in office and things were awesome under George the Lesser. The economic crisis under Bush was the result of Clinton's tax policy, while Clinton's economic boom at the end of the nineties was due to Reagan's trickle-down theory finally bearing fruit! Wait a minute, then doesn't that mean that boom in the 80s was because of Carter or maybe even LBJ? Just how much can we skew this time line before it just becomes silly? No, the 1980s boom was the result of Reagan. |
|
|
|
Post by Amaranth on Jun 19, 2011 15:36:17 GMT -5
The economic crisis under Bush was the result of Clinton's tax policy, while Clinton's economic boom at the end of the nineties was due to Reagan's trickle-down theory finally bearing fruit! Wait a minute, then doesn't that mean that boom in the 80s was because of Carter or maybe even LBJ? Just how much can we skew this time line before it just becomes silly? Of course not. It takes eight years for a Democrat's failings to be realised, but a Republican's successes take no time at all. It's part of Asspulnomics. |
|
|
|
Post by ltfred on Jun 19, 2011 17:41:34 GMT -5
The economic crisis under Bush was the result of Clinton's tax policy, while Clinton's economic boom at the end of the nineties was due to Reagan's trickle-down theory finally bearing fruit! Wait a minute, then doesn't that mean that boom in the 80s was because of Carter or maybe even LBJ? There was no boom in the 80s. The last boom decade was the 1960s. The 70s were still pretty good. The 80s and after have been a disaster. Compare with any relevent metric; unemployment, poverty or GDP growth. The 60s were far more prosperous than even the Clinton era (significantly less disasterous). |
|
|
|
Post by Mlle Antéchrist on Jun 19, 2011 23:35:06 GMT -5
Someone (I think it was Vene) posted some charts a while back in another thread, which showed a rise in debt, drops in savings & average income (adjusted for inflation), and narrowing of the middle class starting during Reagan's reign. It was pretty damning.
|
|
