Subject:
|
Re: How many things need to stack up before we throw this jerk out?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 12 Jul 2003 03:11:26 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
264 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Petrucelli wrote:
> > Well from all 3 Economics classes I have taken through high school and
> > college all three teachers/professers have stated that a President and
> > Congress's effect on the economy shows up about 10 years after the fact.
> > Sort of a catch 22, the government gets credited or blamed for their
> > predeccessors actions. By the time what they themselves have done comes to
> > fruition someone else gets the credit or blame.
>
> We have to be careful about that kind of assertion, though, because it's
> after-the-fact and is succeptible to tremendous spin.
Oh absolutely.
> Additionally (though not
> conclusively) I've heard the point put forth most vehemently by conservative
> pundits, who conveniently interpret the results in a way that favors >Republican administrations.
Well I have heard the same thing from liberals favoring Democratic admistrations
that is why I tend to accept it moreso than not.
> Additionally, the Reagan tax cut preceded a huge deficit that can't be
> readily blamed on Carter. Should we blame Ford and Nixon instead? Also, if
> the economy makes a massive recovery in 2005, is Dubya going to say "Thank
> Bill Clinton" or
No.
> is he going to claim success of his reward-the-rich stimulus package?
Well duh.
> I admit that I haven't had too much formal education in economics, but I
> haven't heard much to support the 10-year-delay other than wishful thinking.
> That's not a refutation, of course, but I'd like more detail.
> For example, why do they pick 10 years? And on what basis do they identify
> the causative relationship?
Unfortunatly I really never figured that part out. Maybe they (the teachers)
never explained it. They did explain that most people are completly ignorant of
this tendancy and how in good economic times people are far less likely to vote
whereas in bad economic times people vote by the droves. Go figure.
-Mike Petrucelli
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
81 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
