Just wanted to direct folks to !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world, which is a brand new community for exactly these kinds of discussions. Cheers folks!
Whether the economy its better under Republicans or Democrats is not open to speculation.
If you’re not trying to create rage-bait, the answer lies in fact-based data which the World Wide Web, I’m sure, has readily available for your review.
Here’s the first result my search engine offered me:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._economic_performance_by_presidential_partyNote that that link is a Wikipedia article. At the bottom, you’ll find the sources you’re looking for:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._economic_performance_by_presidential_party#ReferencesHere are a few more articles my search engine produced for me:
May 2022: https://newrepublic.com/article/166274/economy-record-republicans-vs-democrats
February 2021: https://www.newsweek.com/us-jobs-income-gdp-growth-startlingly-higher-under-democratic-presidents-analysis-1566313
September 2020: https://blogs.cfainstitute.org/investor/2020/09/08/republicans-or-democrats-who-is-better-for-the-economy/
I’m not what one would call an economist and in fact confusingly look down on several aspects of the very concept, and I am not saying this because I favor one side of politics in any way, but one completely objective observation I can attest to is how basic supermarket food as well as fast food cost less when a fiscal Republican is in power, to the point where I wonder how many Democratic voters are the ones wearing the pants in the household (not judging those of us who don’t wear the pants). For this reason, for the same reason I appreciate the Democrats trying to remove the burden of buying food completely, I cannot give them the credit for actually doing it.
Well I’m not wearing pants, but that’s because I work from home and only have to look dressed in Zoom!
I have to say that I consider moving hard left over my adult life to be maturation. When I was younger, I did believe that Republicans were fiscally conservative, I did believe they cared anbout family values, I did believe their claims about small government and trickle down . But over time I realized they really weren’t anny of those and I was just getting trickled upon. Over time, their claims have been getting farther from the truth, and their policies more spiteful and mean, more harmful. Most importantly I focus on building a better future, yet Republican policies tend to rob the future to enrich someone now. Republican policies make life harder on most people in order to ease the lives of wealthy. Republican ideas of family and family values differ from any Christian ideal I’m familiar with, and really aren’t connected to reality
Republicans, but the damage the Democrats does is long lasting and not always fixable.
Do you 'member when Clinton’s budget had a surplus? Do you 'member when Obama got us out of a recession? I 'member when Democrats fixed what the Bush family did to the economy. Twice. I 'member when Biden fixed what Trump did too.
No, I don’t. I remember finding it rather difficult to keep food on the table and a roof over our heads when Obama was in.
That’s because of Bush, dude. If you are not a Russian bot and actually interested in learning something, read this.
If you aren’t interested in learning anything and want to treat politics like it’s a team sport, then wear that jersey at home and keep it to yourself.
Did you get arrested or fired during those years? I’m trying to figure out how you were failing so hard when the rest of the country was in a pretty good place.
Ok, I’ll bite: give me more detail. What specific economic and fiscal policies made it harder to make ends meet under Obama as compared to Bush or Trump? And WHEN exactly did was this occurring? Because it can’t have been like a light switch.
My prediction:
- unable to answer cogently
- the beginning of the Obama admin, which was more or less just handling and recovering from the Great Recession that occurred due to policies enacted by W, and (if you forgot) started under Bush to boot.
Lmao how high are you?
If by “the economy” youre referring to the stock market, then typically Republican controlled Congress leads to higher returns for corporations and bigger gains in the market.
If you mean general prosperity then its Democrats.
The stock market is only a piece of the economy pie.
Agreed, the stock market is just an easily measurable metric.
When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure. - Goodhart’s Law.
Republican admins yield increased concentration of wealth.
Democratic admins yield increased general economic indicators and decreased negative metrics in a statistically significant fashion.
It is truly trivial to find reams of data to back this up. You can even pull tons of raw data and do the analysis yourself to prove it out, if you’re handy with statistics/data science and have a bit of experience with R or Pandas or whatever.
Public perception is actually hilariously and frustratingly skewed and inaccurate on this question. The data does not lie:
- 50:1 ratio of jobs created under Democratic va Republican administrations since 1989, and 2.5:1 since 1945
- GDP, stock indices, and unemployment rates perform better under Democratic admins, and government budget deficits tend to be lower; conversely, 10 of the 11 recessions in the US between 1953 and 2020 were under Republican admins.
There’s like, a TON of sources to back this up. I just grabbed a couple. Corroboration is easy to find on all of these points.
Yeah but when the repugnant pundits make their proclamations on the news and in public address, they simply quote all this data but reverse the parties. Just lie. Simple as that. And their sheep believe every word.
The lying political figures should be lined up at a wall and shot.
Generally-speaking, I don’t think that it’s a great metric of presidencies.
A president has a limited impact on the economy. They often receive credit or blame from voters based on whether GDP is growing or shrinking during their term, where the factors that cause that may have little to do with them.
Some of the things that they might do may also have a long-term effect (or even a negative short-term effect, but positive long-term effect).
For example, suppose that a sitting president somehow does something that causes 50% of Americans to stay in education four years longer and acquire a useful skillset there. That will probably reduce economic activity during their term; people who would have been out in the workforce are not. But say that the skillset that is acquired is a useful one, something that causes them to be able to much-more-effectively provide something that is in demand. That could greatly increase long-term economic activity.
Or for another example: deficit spending can increase economic activity. American economic activity increased substantially over World War II. But it did so because of wartime spending. That doesn’t suggest that a desirable policy would be to put everyone possible to work making tanks and start invading Germany.
Understanding how these things work requires mental effort, which most of the sheeple prefer to put toward playing their iPhone games and watching their TV shows.
Critical thinking, patience and research? 99.99% avoid such things the way they do disease and sewage. So that’s where we are now as a society.
Of course the only reasonable answer is all the way at the bottom.
I tell you, the worst part of Lemmy is the users.
People. What a bunch of bastards.
