The error of broad-brushing economic statistics

Putting all the blame or credit on one leader is incorrect. You have to look at what specific policies they drove and actually implemented and what the effects were.

Should Clinton get all the credit for the 90’s? Absolutely not. Clinton should send thank-you’s to the 90’s Republicans who prevented him from implementing many of his policies. He should also thank the PC business / Internet boom which drove the phenomenal growth of the decade. He benefited from the Internet bubble and the massive productivity gains and business growth, while Bush was impacted negatively by the bursting of the Internet bubble. Clinton didn’t create the technology boom and Bush didn’t burst the bubble, but the stats of both are impacted by them.

And the problems at the end of Bush’s term were largely from the race-baiting housing bubble driven by Democrats — the very thing they are doing again!.  Sadly, they were able to exploit people’s ignorance on the matter, with the help of the Democrats and their media allies who ignored or lied about the root causes.  That not only led to us getting Obama, but they pretended that a President couldn’t make real changes in one term.  Ugh.

6 thoughts on “The error of broad-brushing economic statistics”

  1. We had to hear about how Bush’s economy was SO bad that Obama couldn’t clean it up in only one term. I never hear two questions answered:

    1) Reagan cleaned up Carter’s mess in 3 years, so whiskey tango foxtrot?
    2) If Obama just needed more time, why was everything WORSE in 2012 than in 2008? Gas up, home values down, credit rating devalued, unemployment worse, taxes higher…it goes on and on.


  2. Obama is the first president to be able to totally insulate himself from the economic problems that he both inherited and caused by his wrong headed policies. He has convinced the majority of uninformed or low informed voters that he is really trying hard to fix things, and b/c they are not well informed, they are accepting his excuses and the fact that he is always just campaigning, not governing.


    1. Hi Nicky — thanks for visiting and commenting! Yes, that’s what he’s done. It is worse than his ignorance of economics, it is the malice to deliberately cut the wrong things to make people suffer more and not question the unsustainable spending increases.


  3. Can I start my R&D rant? Please? Pretty please?

    What’s that, you say? Okay, here goes:

    ANYONE who has any inkling of how long it takes to build a business, create new products, or develop new technology, understands that you have to look backwards in time about ten or twenty years to figure out the real source of prosperity. (Likewise, we will feel the repercussions of the medical device tax in the decades to come, as new products are not used in clinical trials, put onto the market, exported to other countries, etc.) It takes about fifteen years to bring a drug to market. If you cut back on R&D today, you’ll feel the effects sometime around 2025 or 2030.

    Reagan deregulated the phone industry; it’s now cheaper to own a cellular telephone with free nationwide long distance, texting, and voicemail than it was to have a rotary phone that called the house next door. (My dad said that his car phone cost $700 to $900 per month, and no, that’s not adjusted to inflation. These days, he pays about a tenth of that.)

    Google was a small business “back in the day”. Is there another google in someone’s garage, or did the potential innovators decide that it’s better to be part of a government union than to be someone’s whipping boy in the private sector?

    ObamaCare penalises companies that hire fifty or more people. Years from now, there will be fewer good-sized businesses out there, and the current ones will have entrenched their positions, free from smug little competitors trying to take them down.

    We will be suffering for decades because of Obama. I’m not even addressing the disaster that his debt will bring upon the nation – just his policies.


  4. Out here in the country, the government didn’t even build the roads. Each property owner built and maintained the road adjoining his property. I am not sure when the government took that over, but my late father, born in 1925, could remember working on the roads when he was young. (Usually a group of neighbors worked together)
    Today of course, a group of neighbors would force a different group of neighbors to maintain their roads. Oh wait, that is how it is done today.And no, I don’t mean the wealthy property owners are paying the highway department employees. I mean the government is taking money by force from taxpayers to maintain roads for those who don’t pay taxes.
    I think the president is confused about who built what. (OK I don’t really think he is confused)


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s