Excluding the time Clinton was in office and only count the 20 years that Reagan,Bush I, and Bush II were in office the DJIA LOST a combined 15%.
Wrong.
On Reagan's inauguration day, January 20, 1981, the DJIA closed at 950.68. On the day Bush I left office the DJIA was at 3,241.95, that's an almost 250% increase.
On the first trading day after Bush II entered office the DJIA closed at 10,578.24, the day he left it closed at 8,228.10. That just over a 22% drop.
A 250% increase combined with a 22% drop doesn't equal a 15% drop, but rather about a 212% percent increase.
And then the increase during Clinton's presidency has a lot to do with what happened when Reagan was president. Rerun the Clinton years with 70% tax rates, an active cold war, and regulation of prices in transportation and energy, and you wouldn't get a DJIA moving like it did historically.
Have you forgotten that in 1993, Al Gore had to cast the tie breaking vote to implement Clinton's tax increase. Not one Republican voted for this measure.
That reflects very well on Republicans.
Even to the extent that Clinton deserves credit for the economy doing well on his watch (and you greatly exaggerate that idea), it wasn't because of tax increases, but rather despite them.
The economy was in the range of $7tril a year. Clinton's tax increases where in the range of tens of billions of dollars a year. Not large enough to derail an economy that had many positive trends, some dating back to the early 80s, and others (like the explosion of the internet) that where new.
|
