ARE YOU NEW HERE? NOT LOGGED IN? PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO REGISTER FOR AN ACCOUNT AND LOGIN TO REMOVE THIS WINDOW
Welcome to PatsFans.com. Do you have an account? If not - please take a moment to register for our forum and experience a much smoother experience with fewer ads, along with no longer having to see this notification window. Also learn about how you can receive a free Patriots T-Shirt from the Patriots Official ProShop by CLICKING HERE. Please enjoy your stay here, and Go Pats!
It seemed to me that you were trying to say that the economy did not begin to recover until Clinton came along.....that the Bush recession lasted well into 1992. That's the picture I thought you were painting.
I did say, "Clinton raised taxes modestly but cut the deficit to end the Bush I recession," in a short list of how recession were ended. Whether or not we were technically in a recession was not my point. My point was that Cinton's policies helped our economic situation (which wasn't great), just a Roosevelt, Reagan, Bush I, and (hopefully) Obama's spending policies will help our economic situation.
DONATE TO PATSFANS.COM
RECEIVE A FREE PATS T-SHIRT AND SAVE 15% OFF WHEN YOU BUY FROM THE OFFICIAL PROSHOP!
Free T-Shirt & Save 15% Off!
Like Our Site? Please help support our site and server costs by DONATING TO PATSFANS.COM and receive a FREE PATRIOTS T-SHIRT and SAVE 15% off EVERY purchase you make from PatriotsProShop.com. You'll also receive added benefits to your account including Removing All Ads During Your Experience Here At Our Forum.
NEEDED YEARLY SITE DONATIONS: 345 | CURRENT # OF SUBSCRIBED SUPPORTERS: 98
There's also a strong correlation between national health care and economic freedom. Meanwhile, many of the countries with the highest standard of living do not rank highest in economic freedom, e.g., countries like Japan, Norway, France, Canada, and Sweden.
One could do the same thing with American states. Look at NH in New England. Quicker out of regional recessions, which we suffer less adversely than neighboring, more highly taxed states.
A healthy system of free and fair enterprise (with strict limitations on "monopoly" enterprises) is by far the most prosperous system for the people. It encourages high quality, competitive pricing, ingenuity, hard work, little waste, conservation of resources, and fair distribution.
On the opposite end of the spectrum is a faceless, nameless, totally impersonal bureaucratic hodgepodge of red tape, needless limiting of scope, a "one size fits all" (it never does) approach, shoddy work, irresponsibility ("not my job", "go see X, Y, or Z because it's their responsibility", "who, me?? no, not me!!", etc.), no motivation for innovation or cost cutting or efficiency, and so forth.
A humane free enterprise system will beat a bureaucratic nightmare every single time. Why do you think you've never bought a Russian product in your life, besides maybe vodka or now gasoline??? It's the bureaucracy!
"All that is required for evil to triumph is for good to do nothing."