Response to SoCal and Archea
3 major interpretations of growth years under Clinton on CB, 1) the success is owed to Bush Sr, 2) [most absurd] Clinton ran it down to the ground to get results, and 3) success is owed to GOP Congress.
Let's do look at Scandinavia; they grew just as fast as everyone else in W. Europe. From what I understand, the diversion of resources away from investment doesn't occur until the govt spends the money. It's the size of govt that matters. With taxes resources don't move. And again, Clinton held spending under control. The taxes were used for deficit reduction.
When the govt runs a deficit, it borrows lots of money and kicks up the interest rate; then the interest rate becomes a tax anyway.
The Fed was designed to insulate the moneyprinters from political pressures. The president appoints the chair only once every 14 years. Reagan appointed Greenspan.
Bush Sr's adm said that "it doesn't matter whether you make computer chips or potato chips" which ticked off traditionally-Republican Silicon Valley, and allowed Clinton to wrest it from the GOP.
__________________
太初有道
|