Tuesday, January 31, 2012

Comparing Obama and Reagan’s economic records

James Pethokoukis and Joe Weisenthal have been arguing over who presided over the more impressive recovery: Barack Obama or Ronald Reagan?
This is, I think, a mostly useless exercise. Obama and Reagan presided over different kinds of recessions that began at different times and ended in different ways. Imagine you had two doctors, one who had treated a patient for a drug overdose, and another who was treating a patient who recently suffered a heart attack. Would flatly comparing the speed of the two patients’ recoveries tell you anything about the doctors? Of course not. So too with Obama and Reagan. But if you do want to compare the two presidents, here are some things to keep in mind:  nastavak...

1 comment:

VR said...

Under the Reagan recovery the economy was able to be cleansed in the traditional and conventional way so that the recovery was robust, healthy and sustained.

The Obama recovery is being financed by a mountain of debt. The US economy will never again be the same because it now has the overhang of an extraordinary levels of debt which have to be serviced and are in fact growing.

This recovery is not an honest recovery based on sound principles but is rather a recovery which will be paid for by our children and grandchildren.

The inflation rate officially listed at about 2% is ex food and energy. I can't live without either one. So the real inflation rate is closer to 10%. Gasoline prices are 2.5 times as high as when Obama took office.

Obama is a disaster. He hates business (the creators of jobs).