Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Help me with a freeper please! How did clinton help create jobs?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
YEM Donating Member (553 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-05-04 01:12 PM
Original message
Help me with a freeper please! How did clinton help create jobs?
Anyone have a good answer for this? I need a quick answer. Did Clinton do anything that helped Job creation?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
thinkingwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-05-04 01:17 PM
Response to Original message
1. by cleaning up the country's finances
Businesses are eager to hire when demand increases. Demand increases when consumers feel comfortable spending what they have. Consumers feel comfortable spending what they have when they believe their job is secure and they're likely to make more in the future.

Note the circle? It either spirals upwards with hope or downwards with despair but it is the same circle.

Clinton influenced the circle by infusing it with hope, which was generated by fiscal responsibility at the top for the first time in decades.

It worked. It will work again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-05-04 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #1
9. Basically, he jacked up taxes on the rich
and created more revenues, which took government pressure off the money supply and freed it up for private enterprise. Companies started up, expanded, and otherwise managed to create jobs. A jobs boom, even though the pay didn't increase, created a spending boom in the consumer marketplace that makes up 2/3 of the economy, and the demand for increased goods and services created even more jobs.

THAT is how he did it, that tax hike on the rich. That's how Kerry will do it, too, as he's already said.

The dirty secret in Washington is that everybody knows the only way to keep this country solvent is to force the rich and the coporate to pay their fair share. It flies in the face of right wing dogma, though, so they will never do it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
thinkingwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-05-04 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #9
17. but was it a tax increase
or was it that he repealed or let lapse tax cuts that had been stupidly put in place?

(I'm asking because I seriously don't remember...I wasn't as politically aware back then.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
crispini Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-05-04 01:17 PM
Response to Original message
2. He started his term with an aggresive
effort to cut the federal deficit, targeted with domestic programs in specific areas designed to enhance job creation. Wish I was at home, I'd give you plenty of excerpts from "My Life" about his first 100 days program.

Fact is nowadays Democrats are the good stewards of fiscal responsibility, not Republicans. And a large federal deficit means higher unemployment due to its strain on the economy. Too much $$$ going into debt service when deficit is high... it's like throwing away money.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack from Charlotte Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-05-04 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #2
15. Correct. And by displaying fiscal toughness the bond market soared...
(Bonds up mean interest rates down) Interest rate plunged. People refinanced houses and bought new houses at a record pace. Lower interest rates meant car sales soared, too. Lower interest rate meant business could borrow and hence expand for very little interest expense. Increased business activity caused tax revenue for the gov;t to explode.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack from Charlotte Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-05-04 02:40 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Here's a graph of Unemeployment and presidents
Even a friggin' Republican can probably figure out these trends....




Let's see.... The elected Bush was unlucky for 4 years. Clinton was very, very, lucky for 8 years and the AWOL/moron was just unlucky, like his Daddy.

Hey. Let's keep electing the unlucky guys since their luck is bound to change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demnan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-05-04 01:17 PM
Response to Original message
3. By paying down the national debt
Clinton enabled the investment boom which happened in the 1990s, thus jobs were created in the Internet sector.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lurkerguy Donating Member (32 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-05-04 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #3
13. Outsourcing
I don't think I will get flamed for saying this but here goes.
Actually the boom of the 90’s was due in large part to the cheap prices of computers. Why were they cheap? In a word, outsourcing. The outsourcing of chip manufacturing in the 90's led to cheap computer prices which led to everyone and their mother buying a computer which led to BOOM. Companies were undoubtedly working more efficiently than ever due to all their employees being able to reap the benefits of technology. Outsourcing? On Clinton’s watch? Blasphemy!
But in all honesty, a huge part of the “technology boom” of the 90’s was due to the plummeting prices of computers. Why were the computers cheap? Outsourcing… did I say that out loud?
If anyone has another serious take on why the computer prices plummeted leading directly to a tech boom then I am more than willing to hear it.
If not and you just want to flame me for a pro-outsourcing post then I can take that too, haha.
Disclaimer: I do not think the current rash of outsourcing is going to lead to any significant boom.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cally Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-05-04 01:19 PM
Response to Original message
4. Yes....YES
Clinton reduced the deficit which decreased long term interest rates. That allows more investment, increases productivity, and increases jobs. He also changed government investment and tax policy to favor technology. Some of the technology boom during his terms is because of that. Bush immediately started favoring the old time industries like oil and older financial industries which don't generate as much job growth. Clinton helped small start up firms wiht tax breaks and also favored minority small industries. All create jobs more than the old time, monied, stale industries. Clinton was helped because of the technology boom during his years in the Presidency, but he did much to encourage that boom and to re-direct Federal monies to new businesses.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lancdem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-05-04 01:20 PM
Response to Original message
5. His 1993 economic plan
helped reduce the deficit, which was a major drag on the economy. There's more, but that's the truncated version.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ComerPerro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-05-04 01:21 PM
Response to Original message
6. You Enjoy Myself
I am not sure what exactly created the jobs, but I know that Bush is down 2 million jobs since taking office...

So Bush better do something, right?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-05-04 01:23 PM
Response to Original message
7. By ending the projected "forever deficit", long term rates that are the
Edited on Tue Oct-05-04 01:25 PM by papau
basis for the business "hurdle rate" used by a corporation - or person - to determine if they want to make a capital investment - come down a bit. It's the old why shouldn't I just leave it in the bank - or buy a 10 year bond - question - that an investment decision must "hurdle" before it is approved -


Companies began to use lower hurdle rates as interest rates began to be lower than the would otherwise have been for the same economic activity (you always have lower rates when economic activity begins to suck - so W has low rates - no matter what else is happening - so the Clinton "lower rates" refer really to just a tiny bit lower than they would otherwise be - and the feedback loop of a bit more capital investment than there would otherwise be, followed by more activity generating more capital investment , led to more jobs.

Some folks would call it keeping your eye on the ball.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-05-04 01:24 PM
Response to Original message
8. What the hell ...
...are all these 'help me with a freeper' posts about? And why are you arguing with a FReeper in the first place? It has been proven time and again that they don't care about facts and always resort to the tactic of attacking Clinton instead of defending Bush* Why? Because they know the facts are against them when it comes to defending the worst president in American history: George Walker Bush*.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-05-04 01:30 PM
Response to Original message
10. He gave TARGETED tax breaks for companies who put the money INTO their biz
to grow it. I think that is also the most under-rated action he took.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dicknbush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-05-04 01:35 PM
Response to Original message
11. HE CREATED LOTS OF WORK FOR .....
RIGHT WINGED WACKO LAYWERS WHO WERE INTERESTED IN STAINED DRESSES. HE ALSO CREATED LOTS OF WORK FOR FICTION WRITTERS WHO POSED AS REPORTERS!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ellen Forradalom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-05-04 01:38 PM
Response to Original message
12. Fiscal responsibility.
By balancing the budget, interest rates went down; therefore credit was more readily available for investment. This includes mortgage rates, explaining the sharp rise in homeownership during the Clinton years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
proud patriot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-05-04 02:22 PM
Response to Original message
14. well one example is the COPS program
:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun Nov 03rd 2024, 07:30 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC