Current Events — HabitableZone

Current Events » in reply to The key point in the above link...

And you're implying...
azstrummer — (archived)

that no other political theory out there beside Reagan's wanted Americans working? That implication just doesn't hold up.

It sure seems to me that policies of the Reagan administration or any administration for that matter, have a major impact on the long term economic health of a country. It's just one small blip on the vast forces working in tandem.

However, those policies certainly do affect the economy in small ways but usually not immediately. Often the effects of the actions are not seen until many years and possibly decades later. By that time, lots of other factors water down any measurable effect. For any president to act like the the immediate changes in the economy that happen right after their tweaking are their doing, is simply irrational.

This applies to administrations of all parties. I don't give Bill Clinton credit for the economic upturn he experienced during much of his term nor do I cast dispersion on Jimmy Carter for the recession that derailed his power.

It's very much like the global warming debate. There's just way too many factors to consider in our complex economy to give weight to any one of them just as not all changes in our climate should be attributed to human factors.

Now that's not to say that presidential actions can't have profound effects on our nation's wealth and workforce but often it's the non-economic actions that make much more of a difference. A tax cut or cutbacks in a federal agency pales in comparison to other factors. Take the Iraq and Afghanstan wars for instance. Not only is the expense huge during times of war but the national labor distribution is distorted with the increased output of the defense industry and redeployment of military personnel from their normal civilian jobs. Oil and energy prices can go through huge fluctuations depending on the target of the war and disruptions to supply.

Natural disasters and terrorist acts and the responses to them can play a huge role in the economy.

Bottom line is one cannot really pin success or failure on Reaganomics, Clintonomics, Kennedynomics or any of them without analysis that we're just not capable of doing given all the factors affecting the years after they went into affect. I guess the rule of thumb is generally to ignore any bad effects you see in the years following a leader you like and highlight the ones that seem to indicate the policies were a success.

Art

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (97 posts)