You must be registered to comment and vote on comments.
What factors will determine whether 'Obamanomics' is remembered favorably?
Obama will be remembered as the president, assisted by Pelosi and Reid, that bankrupted the country and blamed it on everyone else. They know that raising taxes on the high income earners is only symbolic. EVERYONE knows that the additional revenue will be spent before it is collected and is a pittance compared to the debt and deficit. The obama apologists and those in denial will hail obama as a king, a hero or a messiah, but they cannot truthfully claim he has been anything other than a failure.
If obama can set the debt reduction effort on a downward trajectory while making material reductions in spending he will be deemed a success.
Obama is the worst President in American history and by comparison makes his mentor Jimmy Carter look good.
From reactionaires, it is the same old refrain... "Obama is bankrupting America; his policies will result in hyper inflation,; they are creating a dependency class. Only the wealthy create jobs and prosperity." Poppycock!!! If the austerity fairy is the answer then why is it not working in Europe or anywhere else? How does retrenchment create anything but misery? It certainly doesn't create jobs or business expansion. If low taxes stimulates recovery, we should there. We have the lowest taxes in fifty years. It is time to focus on the one thing that will stimulate investment and job creation--demand by consumers. In an economy that is 70% consumer driven, it is the solution. Banks and businesses already have the capital to invest--what they require is the incentive--demand for their products and services. No business will invest in expansion until it is convinced it can successfully market what it sells. Slashing government spending will only have a depressing effect on demand. Doubt that--look at the European experience! Try applying a little economics instead of junior high accounting.
"Banks and businesses already have the capital to invest--what they require is the incentive--"_______ Nothing would be a better incentive than repealing job/economy killing Obamacare, but we blew that chance.
The inclination to add "nomics" after each president's name is ridiculous. The term "Reaganomics" was a derisive term (also called Voodoo economics by George HW Bush) for Reagan's campaign promise to simultaneously increase military spending, cut taxes and balance the budget. He did increase military spending and cut taxes. Predictably, that raised the deficit through the roof rather than producing a balanced budget or anything close to it.
cstoney48 - Taking money out of the private economy or borrowing us further into debt will not fix the economy. It will lengthen the recession and doom our children and grandchildren to higher taxes that will be spent by insatiable politicians instead of paying off debt.
The European countries are not suffering because the government is instituting austerity programs. They are suffering because the governments overspent and the austerity programs are too little too late.
Never has a government spent its way out of debt. Econ 101 could teach you that. Liberals forget that the government can only get money from one place - taking it from us.
pitythetools said: "Never has a government spent its way out of debt. Econ 101 could teach you that." Don't bother to play that silly Econ 101 shibboleth--what you contend is not economics and is simply not true. It is middle school bookkeeping. World War II finally ended the Great Depression because for the first time America would spend whatever it took to defeat the Axis. Budgets and deficits were no longer a concern. It worked too. Until Dec. 7, FDR was never really sold on the scale of the stimulus needed to reverse the downward spiral of depression. He was never as much a Keynesian as liberals wanted to believe nor as conservatives accused him of being. The current crisis in Europe has been exacerbated by the retrenchment of conservative governments and their unwillingness to stimulate their economies. The austerity fairy has and will continue to fail them. Stagnation and misery will be their legacy.
Interesting historical interpretations. The "anti-inflation monetary policy" during the Reagan years was implemented by an independent Federal Reserve chairman appointed by Jimmy Carter - Reagan had zero influence over it. Also, the Social Security reforms Reagan supported were a balanced approach that included a big tax increase. Finally, part of the 'deficit cutting initiatives' Reagan supported were tax increases. Reagan knew that increased taxes were less damaging than big deficits and acted accordingly. In today's Republican party, he would be called a RINO.
An admiral quality of former President Clinton was a series of undisclosed meetings held in New York with key Corporate and Finance leaders/organizations. He understood what drives the U.S. and separates the U.S. from other economies. Subsequently in one of his final speeches at the World Economic Forum held in Seattle, he was booed off the stage when he stated [paraphrasing] he was convinced that capitalism was the only way third world countries would evolve out of poverty. Regretfully, President Obama, as bright as his credentials suggest, does not grasp the concept nor the ability to implement similar policies necessary to build and enduring wealth for the country.
Your comment is being reviewed for inclusion on the site.
Comments will be reviewed before being published.
The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.
425 Portland Av. S.
Minneapolis, MN 55488
© 2013 StarTribune. All rights reserved.
StarTribune.com is powered by Limelight Networks