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.

Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: KyrosL who wrote (50094)	2/22/2008 12:58:11 PM
From: Sam	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541921

Nice post. I was going to post a similar analysis, but without the graphs and only going back to Reagan. Yours was much better. We had divided government in the first few years of Reagan's presidency, and the deficit and the debt soared, due in good part to Reagan's "leadership" and the way he bowled over some the leadership Democrats with his tax cut and voodoo economics. Even plenty of people in Reagan's own administration knew that their math and their "Rosey scenario" assumptions were crazy, but went along with it anyway to be "team" players. That was the beginning of the end of US wealth. Whatever the Reagan cheerleaders like to believe, contrary to the real numbers and facts.

To: KyrosL who wrote (50094)	2/22/2008 5:44:34 PM
From: Bearcatbob	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541921

"Finally, Clinton's national debt reductions were achieved NOT because of split government from 1995 to the end of his term but because he managed to enact the tax increases of 1993 while the Democrats had control of both branches of government! " You make a good argument - but when the facts dispute your thesis you simply attribute it to a separate factor. When split government returned the stock market took off and yielded a boom in investment and capital gains tax receipts. Do think that raising taxes is what caused the internet bubble? A good data point would be spending as a percent of GDP over time.

To: KyrosL who wrote (50094)	2/26/2008 1:34:09 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 541921

The huge increases in national debt as a percent of GDP occurred during the Reagan and George Bush years, when we had a split government! But the big entitlement programs that make up a majority of the increased spending where put in place with both congress and the president where Democrats (except the most recent expansion which happened with both where Republicans). The Republicans (even when they would want to, which isn't always the case) don't have the ability to cut this spending in any meaningful way. Also the greatest amount of fiscal discipline in recent decades happened with a Democratic president and a Republican congress (the Clinton/Gingrich years) Another point to consider (whether your looking at my examples or yours) is that the sets are probably too small to make meaningful conclusions. Your talking about two presidencies, my first point is about two or three, and my 2nd point is about just one. With such small samples the particular individuals involved, and the circumstances they face, probably matter more than their party or whether or not we have divided government.