ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
SpiritBlooms wrote:
Joker wrote:
The Economy was a lot better under Reagan then it is under Obama.
Obama's economy issues were inherited. Reagan's were not.
What? So the economy boomed under the leadership of President Carter?
As for President Reagan, his image is hyped a bit. The best thing he did was support the idea that the iron curtain should dissolve.
I lived under both economies, and Carter's, while bad, was not this bad. There was no global economic meltdown such as we've seen in the past decade. That happened under Bush. But apparently people have short memories when it comes to their own parties' shortcomings. Since the ripples of the Bush era meltdown are still being felt, short memories indeed. Reagan's fixes for the economy did not help the poor one iota, they only helped the wealthy. Same with Bush's. Most of the new jobs under Bush were minimum wage, while outsourcing became a flood of jobs out of the country. That did not happen under Carter.
But the president isn't the only one responsible for the economy, so any discussion of how the economy was under any president is only part of the picture. There was growth in Carter's era, until the energy crisis, in which he used the same strategy as Nixon had, but had a Congress that wouldn't cooperate - just as Obama has today, with the horrible economic problems he inherited.
I definitely am no fan of President GW Bush's but the President Carter economy was far from being great. At least President Reagan did improve the overall economy. President Clinton was good for the economy, too, and he's a Democrat. It depends more on the President than the party.