Greenspan on Bill Clinton

[il Padrino Ute]

Originally Posted by ChinoCoug

he also did whatever it took to balance the budget, cut welfare rolls by more than half, and move people out of poverty than Reagan + Bush I combined.

Yawn.

That is exactly what I was talking about. Clinton did it all for himself and for nobody else. Being a pure politician is not a compliment. Had Dems been in charge welfare would have increased exponentially.

But did he really do it? If he did, why is the left screaming about the disparity between the rich and poor?

If you want all to be wealthy, it's done by a combination of allowing the market to happen and keeping the government out of it. The liberal way doesn't work.

[ChinoCoug]

Originally Posted by il Padrino Ute

Yawn.

That is exactly what I was talking about. Clinton did it all for himself and for nobody else. Being a pure politician is not a compliment. Had Dems been in charge welfare would have increased exponentially.

But did he really do it? If he did, why is the left screaming about the disparity between the rich and poor?

If you want all to be wealthy, it's done by a combination of allowing the market to happen and keeping the government out of it. The liberal way doesn't work.

Clinton's been moving people off welfare since he was governor of Arkansas. Dems since RFK have been wanting to do it.

The disparity widened after Bush came in and cut rich people's taxes.

BTW, Greenspan didn't really give a hud about Clinton's progressive goals. The chapter was entitled "A Democrat's Agenda." He talked about Clinton's job training programs and middle-class tax cut in passing, but he said he appreciated that Clinton put them off until after the budget was balanced.

He said Clinton was always trying to pass more of the tech wealth to the middle class, but it didn't seem like a big deal to Greenspan.

Bill understood market forces, and I don't think Hillary does.