Presidents significantly influence the economy as does the Congress and the Federal Reserve.
I blame the democratic congress.
Exactly! When I hear Republican candidates talking about “managing” the economy, it makes my teeth hurt.
They may not control it, but they should understand it. McStain says he doesn’t understand it. What a MORON. What a dangerous, liberal, Mr. Tuddball, MORON. ARGGGGG!
No President has been able to alter the economy more than superficially...not that that prevents them from trying. Sometimes their actions are timed well (FDR) as to seem as if they pulled off a miracle, but most of the time the results backfire. PR spins all gains due to a President’s “decisive action” while any losses are because of Congress or the opposing Party. It’s so formula it’s cliche’.
The real game is every years submitted budget from the President(’s staff), Congresses treatment of it and eventual signing off or veto until said Prez gets his way (or not). This year’s has a 3.5 TRILLION dollar budget with yet another record-setting deficit. Those grandkids better bone up on those scout skills like foraging, shooting and making fire.
A POTUS may not be able to "control" an economy but a POTUS can certainly contribute to its success!
Isn’t it unRepublican for the government to control economy?
Just in time for Hillary's presidency, "The President can't do anything about the economy"...another instance of the double-standard is saved for the Clinton's.
I was just watching the Fox Business Block and saw Forbes's support for McCain. Troubling was, however, the many pundits on that show who use the phrase, "Who is better suited to run the economy?" when referring to McCain or Romney. Since when does a president run an economy? For that matter, when does a congress run an economy? -- a much better question but still misses the mark (but perhaps hits the Marx).Individual people run an economy -- these people are consumers, suppliers, and many times fill both roles. Government officials place hurdles in an economy and make it more difficult for the people to 'run it'. A best case scenario is that a congress removes hurdles but it typically does not do this because the electorate is dumb enough to believe that government is responsible for job creation, GDP growth, and the health of the economy that THE ELECORATE are, in fact, really running themselves. The only thing a president can do is make it harder for the congress to add to or clear the hurdles on the 'run track'.
For Fox to perpetuate such language is a disservice. For people like Steve Forbes, himself, to allow for the king of language to be used without correcting it on the spot, just shows how dumbed-down we've become and just how much proper education we'll need to get us back to where we should be.
10 posted on 02/02/2008 12:12:06 PM EST by LowCountryJoe (Do class-warfare and disdain of laissez-faire have their places in today's GOP?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies | Report Abuse ]
. Since then we are playing a runaway game with paper money that we will eventually lose. The founders of this great country knew that paper money was a trap and we should return to gold as a standard. Other wise we will be overtaken.