TOPICS:
AUG 01, 2004 05:02 PM
AUG 01, 2004 05:35 PM
AUG 01, 2004 05:46 PM
AUG 01, 2004 06:02 PM
I don't think these findings are particularly meaningful for a lot of reasons. The main one I see is that for the time period in question, presidents of both parties have been anything but consistent in their economic policies. Kennedy was a supply-side tax cutter like Reagan, Nixon imposed economic controls that the Soviets would have been proud of, Clinton was an unrepentant free trade booster, and George W. "I never met a tariff I didn't like" Bush spends like a drunken sailor. The only president of the last 40 years who has been mostly consistent with his party on economic matters was Reagan, and he had a great deal of success because of it. The problem with Republicans is that they aren't very good fiscal conservatives, so it's a good thing we've had Democrats that are. 
AUG 01, 2004 06:18 PM
mrpenbrook said:
I don't think these findings are particularly meaningful for a lot of reasons. The main one I see is that for the time period in question, presidents of both parties have been anything but consistent in their economic policies. Kennedy was a supply-side tax cutter like Reagan, Nixon imposed economic controls that the Soviets would have been proud of, Clinton was an unrepentant free trade booster, and George W. "I never met a tariff I didn't like" Bush spends like a drunken sailor. The only president of the last 40 years who has been mostly consistent with his party on economic matters was Reagan, and he had a great deal of success because of it. The problem with Republicans is that they aren't very good fiscal conservatives, so it's a good thing we've had Democrats that are.
exactly. funny for a party that likes to tout its fiscal conservatism like it's some sort of badge honour. modern repubs are always saying one thing and doing another. like you said, bush spends like a sailor on a binge and that's what got him "elected?" i don't think so...
AUG 02, 2004 10:25 AM
AUG 02, 2004 04:35 PM
will_hunter said:
Both parties are equally hypocritcal.
This one goes down in the annals of "erudite first posts". 
AUG 02, 2004 06:27 PM
TheFuckOffKid said:
Gilane said:
But I would really have prefered to see his source material and spread sheets. Without that, it bears little more weight than my asserting that Dems are better for the country fiscally.
Specifically, I went to the charts attached to the President's Economic Report, released in February. There I downloaded like a madman and then distilled the mess into a few key stats.
I think the point is, you too can do what he did.
No, the point is I'm too god damned lazy & busy to do all that work. 
On a good day I might randomly sample a little to verify that it looks like he didn't lie or completely screw something up.
...
Which is not to say that your wrong.
JeffreyLebowski
Mexico
OLD SKOOL
AUG 01, 2004 04:22 PM