Bush was the worst president in modern history.

Ironic!

Are you alleging that tax cuts do stimulate the economy?

 

Scroll

 

Inane non sequitur response says volumes.

 

Yes scroll speaks volumes. Apparently you haven't been reading voluminous post in here on how lowering taxes stimulate economic growth. Scroll

 

Seriously, you don't have a clue......the GNP has to be 4% or Trump's tax scam of $1.5 trillion is added to the national debt....it's only at 2.6%...and with Trump tearing up all trade agreements, the GNP is going to go down, not up. Don't get Sessions' amnesia this year when you can't buy any food or most anything else that isn't made here....which is 80% of what you buy....unless you live at McDonalds like Trump does.

 

And Bush tried to prevent that, it was the democrats in congress who refused to listen to him.

 

Well, the worst next to the one that got impeached by the House (Hillary's husband.)

 

Correct. Good post.

Yes, religion/faith responsible for 9/11. Religion/faith have worn out their welcome in the 21st century.

 

False....Bush deregulated the real estate industry, and gave millionaires $3 trillion in tax cut welfare, and invaded Iraq and Afghanistan which cost $5 trillion....all that added up to the global crash of 2007, and destroyed Clinton's balanced budget in Bush's first six months.

• d

Subprime mortgage bubble[edit]

• The precipitating factor was a high default rate in the United States subprime home mortgage sector. The expansion of this sector was encouraged by the following factors.
  
  • Low interest rates.
  • The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA),[10][11][12][13] a US federal law designed to help low- and moderate-income Americans get mortgage loans.[14]
  • Many of these subprime (high risk) loans were bundled and sold, finally accruing to quasi-government agencies (Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac).[15] The implicit guarantee by the US federal government created a moral hazard and contributed to a glut of risky lending.
  • Securitization. Many mortgages were bundled together and formed into new financial instruments called mortgage-backed securities, which could be sold as (ostensibly) low-risk securities partly because they were often backed by credit default swaps insurance.[16] Because mortgage lenders could pass these mortgages (and the associated risks) on in this way, they could
  and did adopt loose underwriting criteria (due in part to outdated and lax regulation).
• Lax regulation also led to predatory lending in the private sector,[17][18] especially after the federal government overrode anti-predatory state laws in 2004.[19]

The accumulation and subsequent high default rate of these subprime mortgages led to the financial crisis and the consequent damage to the world economy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Financial_crisis_of_2007–2008

 

https://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2008/10/20081009-10.html

 

Clinton "surplus" was never sustainable. Military spending was way overdue for a massive increase after declining in real terms by more than 30% during the Clinton presidency. And tax relief was overdue as well. President Bush's bid mistake was signing on to Medicare pt. B.

 

False, Clinton deregulated the financial market....

 

After the JFK tax cuts we enjoyed 5% GDP which doubled from the previous 2.5% and the same is possible with this tax cut. We will know by this time next year.

 

Worked for JFK. His tax cuts took the GDP from 2.5% to 5%.

 

Please provide the credible nonpartisan empirical evidence PROVING that to be the case.

 

Source?

Sounds like BS.

I'll wait.

 

Excellent example of ignorance of history.

 

It's like you guys can't goggle things for yourself or maybe just don't want to because you are afraid of what you'll find.


"That summer, Kennedy adopted the plan and put the full force of his persuasive powers into getting a big tax-rate cut through Congress. In September 1963, the bill passed the House. It was under consideration by the Senate when Kennedy was assassinated that November. That shocking event moved the Senate and the new president, Lyndon Johnson, alike to push through Kennedy’s bill as a memorial to the slain leader. In February 1964, the Kennedy tax-rate cut won Congressional approval and became law. As Kennedy’s tax-rate-cut, strong dollar economic policy was being articulated and then implemented in the latter half of the presidency, the nation embarked upon an eight-and-a-half year, uninterrupted run of growth at just over 5% per year. Rarely have campaign promises, especially one so bold as to double the long-term rate of economic growth, been so comprehensively fulfilled.

http://time.com/4511870/john-f-kennedy-and-ronald-reagan-tax-policy/

 

It was a republican bill signed by Clinton....Cons caused the 1929 crash too.


The sticking point was the effort by Gramm to gut the Community Reinvestment Act, a 1977 anti-redlining law which requires that banks make a certain proportion of their loans in minority and poor neighborhoods. Gramm blocked passage of a similar deregulation bill last year over demands to cripple the CRA, and bank lobbyists were in a panic, during the week before the deal was made, that the dispute would once again prevent any bill from being adopted.

Gramm and other extreme-right Republicans saw the opportunity to damage their political opponents among minority businessmen and community groups, who generally support the Democratic Party. Gramm succeeded in inserting two provisions to weaken the CRA, one reducing the frequency of examinations for CRA compliance to once every five years for smaller banks, the other compelling public disclosure of loans made under the program.

The Clinton White House threatened to veto the bill if CRA provisions were substantially weakened, in response to heavy pressure from the Congressional Black Caucus and the Reverend Jesse Jackson, whose Operation PUSH has made extensive use of CRA in its campaigns to pressure corporations and banks for more opportunities for black businessmen. But eventually the White House caved in to Gramm, accepting his amendments so long as the program remained formally in place.

The Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, which the deregulation bill would repeal, was not adopted to protect consumers, although one of its most celebrated provisions was the establishment of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, which guarantees bank deposits of up to $100,000. The law was enacted during the first 100 days of the Roosevelt administration to rescue a banking system which had collapsed, wiping out the life savings of millions of working people, and threatening to bring the profit system to a complete standstill.

As a recent history of that era notes: "The more than five thousand bank failures between the Crash and the New Deal's rescue operation in March 1933 wiped out some $7 billion in depositors' money. Accelerating foreclosures on defaulted home mortgages—150,000 homeowners lost their property in 1930, 200,000 in 1931, 250,000 in 1932—stripped millions of people of both shelter and life savings at a single stroke and menaced the balance sheets of thousands of surviving banks" (David Kennedy, Freedom from Fear, Oxford University Press, 1999, pp. 162-63).

The separation of banking and the stock exchange was ordered in response to revelations of the gross corruption and manipulation of the market by giant banking houses, above all the House of Morgan, which organized huge corporate mergers for its own profit and awarded preferential access to share issues to favored politicians and businessmen. Such insider trading played a major role in the speculative boom which preceded the 1929 crash.

And there is a much more recent experience than 1929 to serve as a cautionary tale. A financial deregulation bill was passed in the early 1980s under the Reagan administration, lifting many restrictions on the activities of savings and loan associations, which had previously been limited primarily to the home-loan market. The result was an orgy of speculation, profiteering and outright plundering of assets, culminating in collapse and the biggest financial bailout in US history, costing the federal government more than $500 billion. The repetition of such events in the much larger banking and securities markets would be beyond the scope of any federal bailout.

https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/1999/11/bank-n01.html

 

That ^^ is absolutely ridiculous from the World Socialist Web Site. GLB did not repeal the entire Glass Steagal Act. Glass Steagal applied in totality to banks insured by the FDIC. GLB repealed only sections 20 and 32 which prohibited member banks from affiliating with organizations dealing in securities.

Source - "Lehman Brothers - A Crisis of Value" - Dr. Oonaugh McDonald - Manchester University Press - 2015

 

Oh so someone held a gun on Clinton and made him sign it.....poor Willy!

 

BZZZT Wrong!

Correlation does not equate to causation.

And not at all surprising that the author of that alt right disinformation is this disingenuous clown who has ZERO credibility when it comes to economics.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligence...s-wrong-pseudo-economist-lawrence-kudlow.html

Looks like what you found just did your credibility more harm than good so you struck out on that try.

Want to give it another go only this time using CREDIBLE non partisan sources?

 

Bush was a good and decent man, but a poor president. Clinton was the opposite. Neither left much of a legacy unless WMD, the ensuing war, and getting impeached are a "legacy".

 

The Bush/Cheney legacy is one of massive deficits caused by taxcuts for the wealthy, the disasters of 9/11 and Katrina, illegal warmongering and GOP deregulation resulting in economic collapse. Clinton's legacy was impeachment for a BJ, peace and prosperity and 23 million jobs.

If I was forced to choose between those two the latter is infinitely preferable.

 

That Kudlow is not an economist obvious. The only people that still believe in the massively failed "trickle down, supply side economics" are the massive rich that benefit from the deception. America ran off the Laffer curve years ago, now tax cuts only create deficits.