Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : G&K Investing for Curmudgeons -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Apollo who wrote (9647)	12/18/2000 1:36:11 PM
From: LindyBill	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 22706

educate the Thread on the significant and substantive contributions Clinton/Gore made to our economic prosperity To give the Devil his due, a large part of our prosperity is due to the passing of the Free Trade acts. No Republican President could have got these through a Democratic Congress. Clinton's fight for Free Trade is the major positive act of his administration.

To: Apollo who wrote (9647)	12/18/2000 2:29:23 PM
From: Uncle Frank	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 22706

>> I strongly agree with Sandy's comments, also quite pointed, that if Clinton could have get his pants zipped, Gore would have waltzed in. Clinton is still incredibly popular, Apollo. If Gore had allowed Slick Willie to campaign for him, he would have waltzed in. Heck, he might have even carried Tennessee. Instead he chose to put his fate in the hands of Bill Daley. cuf

To: Apollo who wrote (9647)	12/18/2000 2:43:50 PM
From: FaultLine	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 22706

if Clinton could have get [sic] his pants zipped, Gore would have waltzed in. (sounds a lot like a Bushism doesn't it...) But seriously folks ([n a stentorian Rush voice], I have in my hands, a Business Week [sounds of paper snapping], containing an interview wherein President Clinton describes his economic program. Carefully read his lips... businessweek.com "I think that the role of the Fed was very important. [Federal Reserve Board Chairman] Alan Greenspan saw something fundamentally different was happening. When evidence [showed] that we didn't have a lot of inflation, he didn't kill the recovery. But he did something else very important. Because he had such personal credibility, he explained to the country, to the business community, to the Congress, what was going on in a way that continually elevated confidence." On the role Clinton policies played: "The policies that we've had for open markets contributed. Anybody that's been responsible for that, Republicans or Democrats, deserves some credit. The importance of the [Administration's] '93 [deficit-reduction] bill is that all the business writers were writing in late '92 about an anemic recovery. We decided we had to do something dramatic to change the psychology." On the national mood today, vs. 1991: "People were frustrated. They didn't see a better future. Today, people feel confident and hopeful about the future. They [don't] really believe we've repealed the laws of supply and demand. But they know we've changed something [by] getting rid of the deficit. We doubled our investment in education and training. We continued to invest more in research. That will also give some balance and life to this economic cycle." On continuing income inequality: "The government should have policies which help close the gap. What we ought to do is raise the minimum wage and increase the earned income tax credit, increase the child-care tax credit and make it refundable -- do things that put money into the pockets of people in the lower 20% income group." === No doubt some of this seems "squishy" but, as you Reganites must admit, the nation can respond to a strong perception of good leadership. --cfl